The Kaufman's

[kpgraci]

The Kaufman’s and their decision to take an infant on an around the world sail got them into trouble with the press when they had to call the navy for rescue after they lost steerage. I have mixed feeling about a baby on a sailboat, I doubt I would take a newborn on an around the world trip via any mode of transportation so they lose points with me on that issue. As far as calling the navy, it reminds me of the debate when extreme hikers or rock climbers get in trouble and call for rescue at the tax payer’s expense. The main complaint is ‘it cost millions’ to conduct the rescue, but as I recall the military is always training, which costs’ ‘millions’, the coast guard is always flying their choppers, the navy always sailing; a diversion to a rescue mission sounds to me like excellent training, someone needs to make real decisions, device a plan, allocate resources, the crews have something less mundane than a training mission to execute. I really don’t think there is much if any additional ‘cost’ to a rescue than any other mission. That being said we can’t have everyone calling in frivolously, each case needs to be evaluated after the fact and if abused monetary or criminal changes should apply. Babies on extended sails, not a big fan.

 

[RECESS]

My only concern is infants cannot communicate symptoms they have to you so you can help them. We always took my son camping since he was 5 weeks old and he has grown up on our sailboat. We always have been able to get to a hospital if need be. They rolled the dice. I am not going to stand in judgement of them. I would probably have waited until the kids were a little older to cross the Pacific.

 

[woodster]

personally i am not sure what i would do ...take off or not take off ....but i do think that we are all victims of our own trapings.....if the mother and father were OK with doing this trip then i feel it was up to them because there children were in there charge exclusively..as they are the parents.....how would all feel if the trip had turned out to great success as opposed to what happened...we don't even know if the mother was a medical person at this point....as far as condemning this i don't think it will change a thing...being an American the last time i check ...we are still allowed to make our own choices ..good or bad...so having said that.....i think for them now they have a hard job to do in picking up all the peaces and getting back to life as they know it...i have always tried to live and let live not kicking some one when they are down and also lived by the rule that if you can't help some one then leave them alone...(because usually i don't have a dog in this fight).....i just hope it all ends well for them and they recover from the past events and grow stronger for it .....

regards

woody

 

[sd1953]

My kids are grown. Their mother and I divorced years ago. She was NOT into boating, swimming, diving... she was not into the water (her quote was, "you could drown doing that!"). So I never contemplated taking kids on boats. But...
This would be wrong ONLY IF:
kids on land never got sick and died...
kids on land never had accidents and died...
kids on land never got kidnapped and killed...
kids on land never had allergic reactions and died...
Trying to pass judgement on these parents is only possible if you wrapped your kids in bubble wrap and never let them out of their rooms. The world is broken and bad stuff happens. Kids who travel and see the world grow up with a better understanding of other people and cultures. And a sense of adventure. And a love for the world they live in. And a sense of history for having stood in the footsteps of the great (and infamous).
To my mind the questions are about what happened... they lost steerage and communications? The boat was taking water? The kid was sick? Related items? Really bad karma? Taking their kid, that was brave, not foolish.

 

[kloudie1]

With Ken on this one.. Don't think I'd take itty bittys out that way. My sons were on board my old Spirit 23 for day sailing and some overnights from the time they were a month old.. but all within a few miles of medical attention. At the same time, we can't know the Kaufman's constraints for the trip timing; I certainly will not fault them for a well prepared try.. They've paid dearly for that decision. I agree with the training issue; good to get real practice instead of another dull drill.

 

[Charlie Jones s/v Tehani]

Bear in mind that the kids were born aboard. That was their home.

And Rebel Heart has been sunk now. So not only did they have all the problems, they now have no home

 

[Winkfish]

I understand some not wanting to take their kids for a long cruise, but they're not the Kaufmans. I know a family, mother was the sailing director at our yacht club for a couple of years, father was retired coast guard. They had 3 kids ranging from 3 to 11ish. Came to the yacht club having lived aboard their boat, with kids, for several years sailing around the Caribbean. They just recently left to go do that again. They were amazingly capable sailors, their kids were well behaved, very bright, and had a wonderful view of life.

I wouldn't do that at this point, because I don't have the experience, and I'm not at a point in life with my family that we can do that (I can dream!!). But would I fault these people for doing it? Absolutely not. It's not my place (or anyone's) to do so.

 

[RECESS]

I don't know if fault is the right word, but qualified criticism is a good thing. It helps others to reason what they might do in the same situation. I understand the kids may have born on the boat, but that really does not mean it is a good idea to subject them to a Pacific crossing as an infant. This infant was rescued near death. I am sure the outcry would have been much louder had the rescue not been successful.

 

[MrBill_FLL]

What bothers me more than taking kids offshore, is the number of reported problems after 2 weeks out.

water leaks, lost com, steering, then illness.

Seems like a lot went wrong pretty quick.

That make me question all their judgment.

 

[Gunni]

You take your chances. In this case you take a non-verbal 1 year old baby who cannot possibly have any passage-making experience, another small child, a short-hand mommy/daddy crew and your chances for trouble increase exponentially. Too many imprudent assumptions.

 

[Skipper]

If things I type have already been said, please forgive.

I don't understand the hopelessness of the boat's problem. It's a Hans Christian 36. One of if not the most seaworthy sailing vessel in the size. And expensive. I saw online where the engine problem was "the vessel took on water every time the motor was turned on. It’s now slowly moving using only the sails."

If the raw water system has been breached, it's gotta be the easiest thing on an engine to fix. Water hose? HE gasket? Exhaust hose? Even a bad shaft packing can be changed in the water if nesessary. And, there isn't a raw water pump on any sailboat that can overwhelm multiple bilge pumps.

Also, they still had the sails :-O

The news said the boat was not capable of steering "itself". AP out due to dead batts? Or was there a real steering problem? If it aint the rudder and just the mechanism, fix it. Or put the E-tiller on top of the rudder post.

Although, I can sit here and second-guess all day (it's raining), but the reality is that I don't know what happenned. And in the end, the kid was sick and had to be removed. You have to make the decision to go with your sick kid, or stay with your boat. It's likely he made the right decision in that category. Should have never brought a baby in the 1st place for a crossing, but diff conversation.

It just makes me ill that the Navy had to intentionally sink the boat. Especially when it was likley quite salvageable. But, 900 miles offshore and abandonded is not a good way to leave a 20,000lb item floating about.

 

[Don S/V ILLusion]

You take your chances. In this case you take a non-verbal 1 year old baby who cannot possibly have any passage-making experience, another small child, a short-hand mommy/daddy crew and your chances for trouble increase exponentially. Too many imprudent assumptions.

Talk about "imprudent assumptions"...

These people have been sailing offshore for the past 7 years. Have you more experience such that you are qualified to sit in judgment?

I was brought up on a boat and sailed across the Pacific as a child and I am not going to second guess their judgment.

That internet experts like to do that speaks volumes about their "imprudent assumptions" while sitting behind a keyboard as though that qualifies them for anything beyond lazy or bored browsers while supposedly working.

From what little we know, they have more offshore experience than most. From my experience, having a baby onboard is far safer than teenagers.

This should be the place to pass along factual information and constructive advice; not act like some pretender know-it-all.

Plus, we don;t really care much what someone's opinion is as to their safety or judgment.

 

[gettinthere]

I'm also curious about what happened to the boat. 900 miles in 2 weeks, total loss of power, water intrusion when running engine, one torn sail.
All this for an experienced, skilled captain? Not exactly in the Roaring 40s either. Curious.

 

[kjretlaw]

The Story is so riddled with inaccuracies; I'd hold harsh opinions until some more fact come out. :Liar:

As for costs the services are always spending training dollars and real life training (vs combat) is always the best. The Navy get the save, but it was the 129th Rescue group out of Moffit Field that launched the MC-130 and HH-60's, the 4 man pararescue team jumped in at 1900 with a 14' Zodiac. They jumped in on Thursday and stayed till Sunday when the Navy arrived to pick them all up. Waiting to find out why the HH-60's didn't make it out. Job Well done to all!! :dance:
Speculation, mine, is the Navy was out looking for drug runners

Costs; 4 personnel parachutes, 1 Zodiac w/25 HP outboard 2 cargo cutes
Experience gained; priceless in the lives saved and lessons learned.

As for the parents, like all parents and sailors it's their call.
But being I used to be in Air Force Rescue I'd rather go rescue this family then the 2 days we looked for some fool trying to wind surf to the Bahamas.

 

[william24424]

Easier way...

I've crossed the atlantic by boat several times, and I have twin 2 year olds. I wanted my family with me in Europe, so I bought them a plane ticket. Perhaps, the kids missed out on a great adventure, however, I believe there are some lessons to be learned about keeping it simple.

 

[capta]

I raised a child circumnavigating (she was 3 months old when we took off) and she turned out to be a great person.
That someone would presume to say that raising a child on a sailboat is in anyway wrong, especially dangerous for the child or akin to abuse, angers me beyond words.
How many of you criticizing the Kaufmans right now, are actually even raising your own children, or are both parents working and you are expecting day care, after school care and the school system to do it for you? How many of you are so caught up in chasing the almighty dollar that you just don't spend the time you would like to with your kids?
I was with my daughter 24/7/365 until she was at an age when her education became a necessity, and she went off to a Swiss boarding school. How many of you can say that? Which would you think was actually a better and safer way to raise a child, boat or not?
That there were other problems involved in this case, such as an inexperienced captain and crew ill prepared for a voyage of this nature, that neither had the knowledge to repair what had to be a minor engine problem and the fact that both mother and child had been seriously ill a week before departure does not mean taking an infant to sea is a bad idea or abusive.
BOAT KIDS ROCK, and most grow up to be incredibly interesting people, if not a bit Bohemian.

 

[kito]

Child abuse is right! Those kids should be in day care for 9 hours a day. Put in front of a tv for another 5 hours and then sent to bed. The nerve of those parents spending so much time with their kids! Those kids should be raised like normal spoiled lazy brats.

 

[RECESS]

I raise my own child, he is with me 24/7. Still would not take him on a Pacific crossing as an infant. To each their own.

 

[25yearslater]

Here is something to reflect on. At what age does a child develop self awareness and thereby remember? I haven't met anyone who remembers anything at 3 years or less. This leads me to the question who were they doing this for. Only one answer, themselves. What their motivation was is anyone's guess. The greatest indicator of being an adult is the conscious choice to put the needs of another ahead of personal want. Perhaps if more people understood this there wouldn't be continuing stories of The Kaufmans, Abby Sunderland or Jessica Dubroff.

 

[justsomeguy]

Here is something to reflect on. At what age does a child develop self awareness and thereby remember? I haven't met anyone who remembers anything at 3 years or less. This leads me to the question who were they doing this for. Only one answer, themselves. What their motivation was is anyone's guess. The greatest indicator of being an adult is the conscious choice to put the needs of another ahead of personal want. Perhaps if more people understood this there wouldn't be continuing stories of The Kaufmans, Abby Sunderland or Jessica Dubroff.

I distinctly remember my dad holding me up on the gunwale of the Aquarama on Lake Erie.

My mom says I was 6 months old at the time.

It probably scared the ---- outta me.