Kicked off my cruise for peeing near the pool

Nice day for swim. / Photo by A. Tinworth - Flickr
When Karen Del Zoppo’s husband suffered a heart attack two years ago, he sustained severe anoxic brain damage, which left him with the mental state and motor skills of a two-year-old.

Del Zoppo didn’t want that to stop the family from enjoying a vacation. As a registered nurse, she’s more than capable of caring for her mentally handicapped husband. So she recently booked a getaway for the couple and her brother and sister-in-law — a western Mediterranean cruise that left from Venice, Italy.

And that’s when the incident happened.

Before I get to the details, a warning: This case is not for the squeamish and it contains some adult themes. If you are easily offended, please stop reading now.

After checking into the cabin, Del Zoppo and the rest of the party went to the pool and enjoyed a few drinks after the long flight. At one point, her husband stood, walked to the edge of the pool, and relieved himself.

I did run to my husband to attempt him to stop, but he gently pushed me aside to finish his basic need.

Please be aware, he did not pull his bathing suit down, but covered his penis by pulling it out of the top of the bathing suit, and held his hand around it, and nothing could be seen except the stream by the pool’s edge.

The passengers who witnessed Del Zoppo’s accident were outraged.

One irate passenger who saw this told me that my husband was an animal, and belonged in a cage, and not on this cruise. He continued to repeat this incident to anyone who would listen, and made an incident report.

Things did not end well. A Holland America representative suggested her husband might be a threat, because passengers saw her husband pushing her away while he tried to do his business. But she says they weren’t aware of his condition.

Anoxic brain damage happens when the brain doesn’t get enough oxygen for several minutes or longer, and the damage is said to be permanent. In other words, while her husband looks like an adult, he is very much a child.

My husband cannot even make a fist, and lacks motor control in his hands. He can’t even open a soda bottle or jar for me. His equilibrium is also abnormal.

He has never been anything but friendly. Even the security guards that were posted at our room, said he was no problem and extremely pleasant.

But Holland America had made its decision: It said her brother and sister-in-law could stay, but insisted they disembark immediately, before the ship set sail. They returned to the States, and were told they couldn’t get a refund for their portion of the cruise.

“I am beside myself with this treatment that we encountered, and the loss of a great deal of my hard-earned money,” she told me.

She wants me to help her get a refund.

Holland America’s cruise contract, which passengers must agree to before boarding, is clear about its liability: it has none.

Section 6 of its contract spells it out, saying guests may be removed from a cruise for any reason, including,

(a) you are or become in such condition as to be unfit to travel or dangerous or obnoxious to other passengers or employees; (b) you are inadmissible under the immigration or other laws of any country included in the Cruise, Cruisetour or Land Trip itinerary or fail at any time to possess required travel documents; or (c) you fail to abide by the rules or orders of the Master or other ship’s officers.

And what are your remedies if you’re kicked off the ship? You have none.

If transportation is denied after departure, you and your baggage may be landed or transported to any port or location that we select, without any resulting liability for refund, payment, compensation or credit on our part. If you are disembarked or any other actions are taken for any reason pursuant to this paragraph A.6, you will not be entitled to any refunds or damages.

I have mixed feelings about this one. Yes, I could talk to Holland America about this involuntary disembarkation, and it might review the incident and offer her something — a cruise credit or a partial refund of the $11,000 she spent. Based on my past experience dealing with Holland America, I would say it’s unlikely.

But the cruise line was well within its rights to remove the passenger, at least as far as its cruise contract is concerned. Should it have done so? That’s debatable.

Update: (10 a.m.) The debate appears to be over. I just received a note from Holland America that while it stands by its decision to disembark the couple, it has decided to give them a refund. It says the decision was made last week. I am contacting the customer now to confirm.

Update: (1:30 p.m.) And here’s the confirmation from the customer to my question of whether Holland America had offered a refund.

Yes, they are. I kept posting on their facebook page. I think they weren’t too happy with it! I’m so GLAD!
THANK YOU!

  • MarkieA

    I’d be shocked, too if someone peed in me! Sorry, had to do it :)

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100001823466572 Jen Armstrong

     Okay, you don’t have to be mean. For your information, I have a master’s degree and I know how to use my “thinking cap,” thank you! I was unaware how annoying the wife had been. I was simply commenting on the fact that the husband’s brain injury made him to act like a child, so perhaps the childrens’ program might have been an appropriate option. And for the record, I have a physical disability myself and that is what sparked my interest in this case.

  • LGandaB

    Someone needs to call social services (on Staten Island?) and they need to investigate whether Karen Del Zappo is competent to act as the caregiver for her husband.  As a teacher, if the parent of one of my students was behaving in the manner of Karen Del Zappo, it would be my legal responsibility to call social services.  She is not demonstrating sound judgment or mental competence, and her husband may be at risk. 

  • kme nae

     i understand where you were coming from – i think – but just because an adult acts like a child – for whatever reason – doesn’t make it appropriate to put them in children’s programs.  Acting “like” children and being a child are two very different things, especially when adults have the strength and body of well, adults.  The wife’s poor behavior aside, a child’s program is no place for any adult with a brain injury.

  • ExplorationTravMag

    I know – you’re just going with the flow…

  • y_p_w

    While it sounds to me that the request may be reasonable even though it seems to be universally accepted that she royally screwed up.  It certainly wasn’t a good idea to bring her husband on this trip if it were indeed considered a “no children” cruise.  She may have also sounded like a total ass trying to badmouth the cruise line.

    Regardless of all her faults, I actually think it’s reasonable for HAL to refund their portion of the fare.  She wasn’t able to use the portion and I it wasn’t an intentional act such as someone picking a fight with another passenger.  Whether or not one feels sympathy for the cruise line for dealing with her should probably be considered separately from whether or not the request was reasonable.

  • davidglass

    The disdain in this forum for those who are handicapped is appalling.

  • davidglass

    The disdain in this forum for those who are handicapped is appalling.

  • davidglass

    Listening to you, one would get the impression that urine is as toxic as plutonium.

  • davidglass

    Listening to you, one would get the impression that urine is as toxic as plutonium.

  • y_p_w

    I don’t see anything that faults her husband for the condition she has. All of the barbs are directed at Karen Del Zoppo for apparently bringing her husband on this cruise when she should have known that there was a high likelihood that he could do something that might not be well received by their fellow passengers.

    My take is that I feel that the cruise line could take a stand like the terms on the back of an event ticket – that “The bearer can be ejected for any time and any reason with the only recourse a refund of the purchase price.”  Kick them off, tell her never to bring him back, and give them their money back.  While it seem like she should have known better, it seems reasonable to me if they were forced off for that kind of transgression that at least a partial refund should be equitable.  A lot of the responses here indicate a wish that she not receive a refund as a punishment for her judgement and subsequent attitude of entitlement.  Perhaps she has been a total jerk about it, but simply being a jerk isn’t necessarily grounds for refusing an otherwise reasonable request.

  • TerryWarg

    David, THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE HANDICAPPED HUSBAND! It has to do with the rude, beligerent, lying behavior of his wife! You are COMPLETELY missing the point and obviously have no idea what Karen and her “friends” did on the Holland America Facebook page.

  • TerryWarg

    It’s not that she should not have brought on the cruise, it’s that knowing his condition SHE did not properly supervise or care for him.

  • TerryWarg

    You DO know that there is no chlorine in the pools onboard David. Children who are not potty trained are NOT allowed in the pools, even in swim diapers, and that is a rule of the Center For Disease Control, not Holland America. Would you like swim in someone’s untreated urine. But again you miss the enitre point…this is NOT about the husband it’s about HER behavior towards the crew and other passengers.

  • TerryWarg

    You DO know that there is no chlorine in the pools onboard David. Children who are not potty trained are NOT allowed in the pools, even in swim diapers, and that is a rule of the Center For Disease Control, not Holland America. Would you like swim in someone’s untreated urine. But again you miss the enitre point…this is NOT about the husband it’s about HER behavior towards the crew and other passengers.

  • davidglass

    I don’t care to search for or read the Holland America FB page. From what I can tell Holland America had a disabled passenger on one of its cruises and immediately kicked the disabled person off rather than work with the wife and try to accomodate his disability. Then tried to keep her $11000 payment. She is just fighting to right the wrong that was done to her and her husband.

  • davidglass

    Yea, disabled people shouldn’t go on cruises or out in public right Terry? Ever heard of the Americans with Disabilities Act?

  • TerryWarg

    I am not going to debate you, but you are 100% wrong…Even Mr. Elliot has admitted he was mislead and did NOT HAVE THE FACTS before he made this post. Nothing more to say. Here is what Mr. Elliot had to say,
    “I’m a little ticked off about how this one played out. Del Zoppo contacted me several times, asking me to help her. I furnished her with HAL executive contacts and suggested she send a brief, polite appeal. I asked her to keep me updated.
    I requested her permission to write about this case, so she knew a story was in the works. If HAL decided to give her a refund last week, and notified her of the decision then, why not let me know?
    I’m also troubled by the tone of her interactions with the other HAL Facebook users. She was nothing but polite with me. But reading the responses from her and her family — I don’t know, let’s just say I can understand why HAL would be throwing the book in her face.”
    That said, the debate about taking mentally disabled people on a cruise is one worth having. So in retrospect, I’m glad I wrote about this. Just wish I’d had the latest information when I did.”

  • Steve_in_WI

    On the other hand, the more of her posts one reads, the more one is likely to sympathize with HAL and not with her.

  • kme nae

     What you fail to understand is that Karen had an obligation to HAL to disclose her husband’s medical and mental needs/issues.  (i personally doubt she gave them ALL the information they needed.)  They require that of ALL passengers who are in situations where extra care or sudden care might be needed.  Remember folks, they are embarking on a ship heading into the OCEAN, they aren’t going to a hotel that has complete medical facilities just down the road.  There are only so many situations that HAL can pre-plan for or have equipment/staff/medications, etc., to handle.  It is unreasonable to think that any cruise line would be able to handle any and all medical and/or mental health issues – and who of us would want to or be able to afford to cover the costs to make them able to be prepared for such situations?  Passengers have to take responsibility for their OWN health and help the cruise line in any way possible.  i am certain that if Karen would have been totally upfront with HAL in the beginning regarding her husband’s brain injury and the complications that it created with his behavior, etc., that HAL would have been able to advise her properly about taking him on a cruise.  They may have had valuable information for her that would have eased her burdens, they might have had resources they could have offered or referred her to for assistance, or they might have advised her that a cruise wouldn’t be a good fit for him and saved her from this fiasco in the first place.  Bottom line, she didn’t give HAL the chance to do THEIR job for HER husband but she wanted them to reward her for HER not doing HER job for her husband.

    As for this being about disabled people, davidglass, think again.  This isn’t about being disabled – this is about PROPERLY informing a company of the limitations of a passenger who will be on a OCEANLINER and acting with grace and dignity when an issue arises that affects all the other passengers.  HAL ultimately had to have these people escorted off the ship by guards.  That speaks volumes to the behavior that went on and what the crew and Captain had to deal with while they were still on board.  Can you imagine what might have happened had they been at sea?!  Simply reading the fb posts by Karen on HAL’s page it is absolutely obvious that she was out of control on that ship.  HAL needed to consider the other 1800 or so passengers and THEIR dream vacations.  THOSE people weren’t acting in such a manner as to be escorted off the ship.  Karen was.  To be rewarded for that by getting her money back is a slap in the face to all the passengers and crew on that ship.  i wish HAL would have stood firm and not rewarded her for her outlandish behavior.  Let me repeat, it had NOTHING to do with disabled people.  It had everything to do with out of control people. 

    (Go on board a HAL cruise – or most any other, i assume – and you will see how the disabled are treated.  The crew goes out of their way to accommodate folks with special needs and they do it with enthusiasm.  i know – i’ve been there, done that.  We had nothing but gracious help all along the way.  And yes, there were certain things that we were unable to do, but we accepted that without issue and moved on and enjoyed our cruise!)

  • kme nae

     You don’t want to know the facts, you just want to have an opinion that HAL did them wrong?!! 

    “From what I can tell……”  and you go on – but from what you can tell from WHAT?!!!  You are refusing to consider the story or the facts, so that statement is ludicrous!

    Let me help you since you don’t want to do the work of finding the facts yourself:

    Fact:  woman has husband with brain injury that, according to HER, causes him to be unable to complete simple tasks or have the awareness of when/where it’s appropriate to relieve himself.  Woman also states that husband is like that of a 2 yr old child.

    Fact:  woman books cruise for said “2 yr old” husband but does not inform the cruiseline of husband’s limitations and/or lack of ability to understand appropriate behavior.

    Fact:  woman has a gps watch for husband because he wanders off and apparently she is unable to watch him 24/7 (understandable – don’t get me wrong – but if that is an issue, than it must be addressed when on a cruise ship for heaven’s sake!)

    Fact:  woman loses sight and control of husband on board while he wanders to the pool, pulls down his pants and pees into the pool.  When woman attempts to stop him, husband pushes her aside and continues to urinate into the pool.

    Fact:  crew on board attempt to deal with the situation but it gets to the point where the woman and husband are escorted off the ship by guards.

    Fact:  woman starts ranting on HAL’s fb page about how they were treated, but did NOT give any details – was vague and misleading – and never answered any direct questions by anyone attempting to understand just what happened.

    Fact:  woman posts picture of husband on HAL’s fb page and makes jokes and disparaging remarks about him peeing in the pool.  Then lashes out at other fb users when they suggest that she is being disrespectful to her husband by humiliating him in such a way.

    Fact:  HAL indicated on their fb page that their guest relations folks would be in contact with woman in order to discuss a solution to her concerns.  Woman continues badgering other fb users and grows more and more abusive as the days go by, still refusing to be upfront with anyone regarding what occurred on the ship.

    Fact:  HAL issues a refund to woman and woman goes on HAL’s fb page to gloat about “being right”, etc. instead of having grace and dignity in light of receiving a refund she did not deserve.

    Fact:  Four or five days AFTER refund, article by Christopher Elliott appears on HAL’s fb page and online asking if he should help woman get a refund and detailing – incompletely and inaccurately – the events that lead up to her leaving the ship.

    Fact:  People who don’t wish to find out all the facts but wish to spew their own uneducated opinions based on…….what again?……feel they are entitled to say what they want and it shall be taken as “the truth” because that’s how it is in their own little world.

    Fact:  The majority of the posters here were willing to read all the details and make informed comments that reflect the fact that the woman was wrong in ever attempting to bring her husband on a cruise in the first place, given his issues and her limitations in caring for him and that she behaved poorly once on board and should not have been rewarded for that behavior.  It’s also been noted that HAL went above and beyond in their willingness to extend a refund to her.

  • Mel65

    Wonder which one davidglass is related to, Mr. or Mrs. Del Zoppo.

  • Raven_Altosk

    And what accommodation should be offered for a grown man who exposes himself and urinates in the pool? The wife obviously couldn’t control him. 

    So please, you n00b, enlighten us…

  • pauletteb

    I wouldn’t use ANY pool with that kind of policy. Ugh!

  • y_p_w

    The ADA isn’t an unlimited license to allow anything under the cover of a disability.  There are limits.  If someone is physically unable to perform a task that’s necessary for safety, the ADA won’t force a service provider to accommodate such a disability.

  • y_p_w

    Most people are freaked out about the possibility of swimming in or drinking water that has any kind of waste in it, but it’s really not all that bad.  It’s the “ick factor”, which is more psychological than anything.  I drink water that was stored in lakes and reservoirs stocked with fish for recreational fishing.  Guess what those fish do?

    I’ve gone backpacking and drank water collected from streams.  I treated it with disinfection tablets, but otherwise I’m sure there were particles of this and dissolved that which came out of the ends of some animal.  It’s not as bad as most people think.  Humans have been conditioned to believe that human and animals wastes in water are inherently “dirty” even if the water has been properly treated.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=779693678 Jason Merrell

    You know, Mr. Elliott, that every time you advocate for someone who doesn’t deserve advocacy, you do all consumer advocates a disservice…and you do all honest consumers a disservice.

    This lady screwed up, royally.  Taking a fully grown man with a severe mental handicap – we’re not talking Down’s Syndrome here, we’re talking a man with the mind of a TODDLER.  What if he gets angry?  Clearly he isn’t aware of much – what if he decides to hold some kid’s head under water?  Throw somebody over the railing?

    This is a slam dunk on HAL’s side; it sounds like you and she essentially extorted the refund from the cruise line, here and on Facebook.

    I’m a travel agent, and I would never have done that.  Of course, I wouldn’t have booked the cruise had I known this man’s condition.

  • http://twitter.com/johntbaker John Baker

    ADA wouldn’t apply to a foriegn flagged vessel departing form a non-US port although a European equivalent might. Regardless ADA only states that the service provider must make reasonable accomodations. Adversely effecting the entire population of a cruise ship for one individual whose caretaker can’t supervise him is not reasonable.

    Disabled people should be able to cruise as long as they travel with caretakers that make sure that their disability does not adversely impact others. In this case, his caretakers failed him, allowed him to do unacceptable things in public and demonstrated that they couldn’t control him. This caused him to be removed from the ship not the fact he had a disability.

  • http://elliott.org Christopher Elliott

    I didn’t advocate for her. Every Monday, I ask readers if I should advocate for someone with a borderline case, which is what this was. I didn’t contact Holland America on her behalf.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000071700559 Deb Kelly

    Obviously you are a relative of the Del Zoppo’s.  The only disdain on this forum is for his very mentally capable wife, Karen. 

    She is an opportunist who can not control her husband’s actions and untimately used him as a pawn to get her money refunded.

     

  • TonyA_says

    They should have 4 crew members (hired for $50 from a third world country) cover the view on all 4 sides with a white sheet so no one can see him pee. Finally the 5th crew member must follow him around with a bed pan. The rest of the party (3 people) should be given free passes to the bar for bringing a handicapped person on board (they deserve a break let the crew take care of him. :-)

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000071700559 Deb Kelly

    That’s such an ignorant comment.  Do you even know what you’re talking about?

    Disabled people who have caretakers that can TAKE CARE of them should and CAN go on cruises.

    This man’s caretaker, his wife, obviously can NOT handle him.  He pushed her away when she tried to stop him from urinating in the pool?

    He’s not a small man…we all saw his picture on FB that his wife so openly displayed to us.

    So you have a grown man with the mind of a 2 yr old (his wife’s description, not mine) peeing in the pool and pushing his wife away.

    That’s a little bit more than “disabled”.

    If he were just “disabled” the cruiseline would not have posted security guards  outside their stateroom.

  • Raven_Altosk

    LOL.

    Nicely done, Tony. Nicely done. :D 

  • Raven_Altosk

    Five bucks says she gave him booze before this incident, too.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=779693678 Jason Merrell

    Honestly, what’s the difference?

  • Rosered7033

    The difference may be in trying to ascertain whether the incident happened as related to him, or whether there is more to the story, and if there is more (usually the case), then whether the claim is valid.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_HWP67QRCBJFBYMFHZ7JP5QNQQU CherylW

    I am sorry for Mrs. Del Zoppo but that is disgusting.  I would be just as disgusted if her 2 year old son was peeing in the pool!  2 of my daughters have been lifeguards for over 10 years now and they say it is unbelievable what people think they can do in a pool, or swimming area.  If her husband honestly can’t control himself in any way then she shouldn’t be traveling without a companion to help her.  As a paying customer on the cruise I would absolutely expect the cruise line to kick both of them off the ship!

  • bigsparky

    Denying a disruptive passenger is not the issue as I see it. He was a danger to others and himself. (falling overboard etc.) The issue I see is the policy to steal the money paid for a trip.  Granted, the exclusion was at the last minute but why can’t the cruise lines (and air lines) find an “excuse” to deny boarding to everyone, tell the staff they are not needed for 5 or 7 days and just pocket the millions. In my state, if I were renting an apartment and gave notice and moved out 3 weeks early, the landlord can’t immediately re-rent and collect double rent. Why do we let cruise lines and airlines do this?

  • http://twitter.com/Red_Fury Stacey

     What do they do when a bird poops in the reservoir?  Or a bug lands in it?  Or mosquitoes lay eggs in it?  It is truly unfathomable that the people of PDX think an open reservoir would be ‘polluted’ by a few ounces of sterile water with some salts.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000071700559 Deb Kelly

    “The issue I see is the policy to steal the money paid for a trip” “Why do we let cruise lines and airlines do this?”

    #1.  “Steal” is a strong word.   Expecting and requiring that people  be civil and act in a way as to not disrupt other PAYING passengers is perfectly acceptable. 
    Rules are in place for a reason and everyone agrees to those rules when they purchase a ticket.  If you take “issue” with that, don’t go.

    #2   We “let” airlines and cruise lines do this so that ALL of us can be safe on our vacations.

    #3.  If you don’t like the policy you don’t have to travel…it’s a choice.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_HMW3OTJSBDWWRKIEKEKWWM7BEA bc

    The only reason it was drained is because of “public perception” and I agree, it was a ridiculous decision. However, a pool and someone doing this in other people’s presence would be very off putting and again they would likely drain it for the perception of being clean.

  • kanehi

    Passengers don’t know if this man had anoxic brain syndrome.  A two year old might be tolerated but a grown man peeing in the pool is another matter.  I wouldn’t use the pool if I saw someone peeing in it.  A full grown man’s bladder is much much bigger than a two year old!

  • 46Shasta19

    I don’t think this couple should be vacationing while her husband has such a difficult problem.  I too would be offended.  I think this falls under the ‘Just because you can do not mean that you should’.

  • scapel

    I would be interested if the man had done inappropriate things before at home or when out and about. If so the nurse should have been on alert. She could have asked for help from the staff. If her husband was indeed unmanagable then he should have been removed from the ship.