Photo:AP
I will admit to having distinctly mixed feelings related to the rescue of the Kaufman family on their yacht ‘Rebel Heart.‘ I am obviously pleased that Lyra received medical attention. I am saddened that the boat that was their home was lost. I am impressed by the skill, expertise and the resources marshaled by the California Air National Guard, the US Navy and the US Coast Guard. All these responses are fairly obvious and non-controversial. The larger question is harder to answer. KJ Dell’Antonia writes about it in the Motherlode blog in yesterday’s New York Times. The blog post is titled, “Judge the ‘Rebel Heart’ Sailboat Parents, or Envy Them?” In some respects the answer may be, both.
Her post, which is worth reading in its entirety, ends:
I’m far too anxious about everything from expanses of water to my retirement savings to ever make the kinds of choices that the Kaufmans have made, but when I read about their journey, and even about its ending, I envy them all the things that let them do it, from the courage to take physical risks and defy expectations it took to set out, to the skill, confidence and sheer willingness to work and endure that let them get as far as they did. Those are the parents Lyra and Cora have; those are qualities they themselves will gain. If blind optimism and a certain sense of hubris are also part of the package, well, there are worse faults, and maybe one of them is spending more time dreaming of adventure than experiencing it, particularly if it includes sheltering our children from experiencing any risk at all.
In spite of our bedtime reading, we are not a family who sails across oceans. I’m glad, though, that there are families like the Kaufmans out there; happy for their rescue, and hopeful that they’ll find a way back to sea when they choose. I can see my colleague’s point about the foolhardiness of the venture, but I appreciate those who venture boldly forth just the same.
I fully understand those who object to going to sea with a one year old. The problem is that I am not sure if there is any specifically “safe” age to set off across an ocean. As a parent of two sons myself I am not sure if there is any safe age or even safe place. I am reminded that this summer in West New York, a bus driver distracted on a cell phone, clipped a light pole with his bus. The pole fell, crushing a beautiful 8 month old baby girl in her stroller.
It would be absurd to say that the child should have been out to sea in a sailboat where there are no distracted bus drivers talking on cell phones. It would equally wrong to say that children should not be taken offshore because it is too unsafe. There are risks everywhere. Just taking a child in an automobile is a very real risk. National Highway Safety Administration data shows that on average 6 children die every day in the United States in car accidents and close to 700 are injured.
Diane Selkirk writing in Slate.com addresses the risks and rewards.
Adventure sailing with young children can be risky. It’s also the best way I know how to parent.
My husband and I sailed for three-and-a-half years, over 12,000 miles, and through 10 countries before pulling into a foreign port and having a kid. We kept our adventures land-based for a while, not setting off on our daughter Maia’s first extended cruise until she was 3. At 12 years of age, Maia’s now put in more sea hours than shopping hours and is more familiar with the stars in the sky (in both the Northern and Southern hemispheres) than the ones in the tabloids. She’s graceful and self-assured, in no small part because of her unconventional childhood.
The issue of the rescue itself is not just about about the child becoming ill. Anyone of the four people aboard the ‘Rebel Heart‘ could have become sick or been injured. Two years ago we posted about Derk Wolmuth who was sailing his sailboat, Bela Bartok, in a Singlehanded TransPac race between San Francisco and Kaua’i, Hawaii when he suffered a life-threatening bout of septic shock. Because he was not far from shipping lanes, he was picked up by a passing ship bound for California.
A related question is the cost of the rescue. Should taxpayers pay for the cost? Oddly, in many cases, including that of Derk Wolmuth and the Bela Bartok mentioned above the cost of the rescue was primarily the cost of diverting a passing ship to pick him up, which was picked up by the ship’s owner. The AMVER (Automated Mutual-Assistance Vessel Rescue) system operated by the US Coast Guard does a great job routing ships to assist sailors in distress, and has been doing so for more than fifty years. In cases like Wolmuth’s, the taxpayers pay very little.
Unfortunately, Rebel Heart was in an area of the Pacific well outside of most sea lanes, so, apparently, routing a ship to the yacht was not a practical option. Calling on the California Air National Guard pararescuers and the US Navy USS Vandegrift was the fastest way to get aid to the family. Using a 453 foot long guided missile frigate to rescue a 36′ sailboat may seem like overkill, but the speed of the frigate meant that they could get help to the sick infant faster than any other means.
And yes, the taxpayers will pay for the rescue. Nevertheless, taxpayers have already paid close to $200 million for the construction and upkeep of the frigate. Taxpayers spent over $10 billion dollars for the 50 other frigates of this class, as well. These frigates are among the lower cost vessels in today’s Navy. If the USS Vandegrift was available for the rescue, as a taxpayer, I am pleased to see her used in this humanitarian mission. Given the trillions of dollars the US government has spent in recent years, one needless war comes immediately to mind, the cost of the fuel to rescue this family doesn’t seem all that high. Perhaps we should think of it as training mission.
See also:
Don’t judge the sailboat rescue parents
In Defense of Rebel Heart, Cruising Families and Choosing a Life Less Ordinary
Boat and baby both need operations and maintenance energy. In this case it seems likely there were not enough human resources to perform sufficient work on each. Baby becomes prone to otherwise harmless fungus or whatever, boat cannot be fixed. “Save boat, or save baby?” is not really a choice.
A third crewmember for the long passage might have avoided the whole brouhaha.
Possibly. It is hard to know what happened without more information. There have been suggestions that the baby’s previous salmonella infection returned, though it is not clear that that was the case. It was also widely reported that the boat had lost the use of its engine and had some sort of steering failure. More crew might have made a difference or not. It is hard to tell based on what we know now.
I read the blog for the family (google “rebelheartblog”). The ship’s captain (husband) has a Coast Guard license, but his maximum length sailing was 4 days at sea in his Hans Christian. This is not nearly adequate time to be the senior crewman on a 4 week voyage from Mexico to Polynesia. Nor did he have mechanical experience to fix the boat’s engine, and he was burning through his fuel very quickly. This time of year winter approaches in the southern hemisphere and the typhoons are expected to be severe.
The husband participates on sailing forums, and more experienced blue water sailors *discouraged him* from making this voyage. So did members of his own family. Most nuclear families with such young children will sail hugging the coast of continents, within a day’s sail of a hospital. The dangers of such a long trans-ocean voyage are rarely attempted with such small children, especially ones who have not yet completed their vaccination cycles — while planning to expose them to foreign locations. Babies get sick – and when they get sick it can get dangerous very quickly.
The 1st mate (wife) had minimal sailing experience and did not know all the equipment by name, or how to fix anything. She didn’t have time to learn, because she was busy 24/7 watching her 13 month old and 3 1/2 year old. If you read her blog, she was completely miserable out there and had previously suffered from Post Partum Depression. There were no sunny afternoons of reading or relaxation for her. It really wasn’t much different than being cooped up in a studio apartment with the door to the outside locked, but the door to the roof open. Neither of the children yet knew how to swim in emergency conditions and both required constant attention.
The younger child and 1st mate had recently recovered from salmonella poisoning, and had weaker constitutions making them vulnerable to other viruses and fevers. The captain’s on-board pharmacy and first aid skills obviously inadequate to the child’s medical conditions.
They were 900 miles away from the nearest hospital, which is about the same distance as San Diego from Seattle. The only reason they felt confident in making this journey is because they knew the DoD would pay for a rescue if they ran into trouble. I envy them the same way I would envy parents who took a 13 month old on a trek to summit Mt Everest, skydiving over the Grand Canyon, or racing in the Dakkar Rally.
Mr Kaufman should have sailed as a junior crew member for a few long term voyages on a Hans Christian with an experienced trans-ocean captain, and Mrs Kaufman should have done the same (without the kids). Once the kids were teenagers and had considerable short duration sailing experience, then a full family trans-pacific adventure would have been a lower risk adventure that they could have all enjoyed.
I think we can all agree that the Kaufmans made several serious mistakes. Enthusiasm appears to have trumped experience. I do not think that it is fair or even necessarily true that “the only reason they felt confident in making this journey is because they knew the DoD would pay for a rescue if they ran into trouble.” I doubt that anyone could have predicted that the navy would choose to send a frigate to the rescue.
I will leave the question of seaworthiness of the vessel to those that are more knowledgeable.
The rash on the baby may have indicated either that the Salmonella poisoning had progressed to a life threatening septicemic involvement or merely a reaction to the antibiotic given to the child as treatment. Was the child still taking the antibiotic? That aspect is not clear to me. Was the physician that cleared the child a family practitioner, pediatrician or infectious disease specialist? Whatever the answers to these questions are there should in my opinion have been a bit more circumspection on the part of the parents.
Good stuff and well said! I concur with your viewpoints.
These two mostly marina bound sailors are typical of thousands of others found in marinas and anchorages in the USA. Unfortunately they confused their dockside affability and a touch of marine knowledge with seamanship and acted on their ego driven conclusions. Mr. Kaufman’s so called USCG captain’s document does not reflect nautical passage making ability and is not based on real experience or skill. (The document which does not have the word “captain” written anywhere on it, is obtainable by passing a simple test and is unlike the real document that professional seaman aspire to . It does not reflect the holder’s seamanship and is simply a means to allow the holder to be called captain. )
I think that these irresponsible idiots should be grounded and that their children be put under the supervision of some reputable agency until the parents come back to planet earth.
Balance and context. They are neither heroes or villains.
I have not issue with their lifestyle. I was raised outside of the box too, and if done responsibly most kids will gain more than they lose from a life outside the mainstream. But, I would like to think that most cruisers and other adventurers are more like my parents than like these two. My parents took their biggest risks without their kids and saved their greatest adventures for when we were not just tag-alongs, but self-reliant contributors. Respect for the forces of nature. Respect for knowledge, skills and experience. Three steps at a time rather than 50. You let the kids do the bunny slopes before pushing them down a double black diamond. Either crossing the Pacific is a big deal and you treat it as such. Or, if it can be done by a crew of one without open water experience, then it’s really not that much to brag about, right? Can’t have it both ways.
The analogy to my life of running: The crew had done a few decent one-hour 10Ks, on the city streets of Chicago in nice moderate temperatures. Pushing it to the next level, their next step was to attempt to run the Everest Marathon at 11,300 to 17,000 feet across rough mountain trails in unpredictable weather – with two toddlers strapped to their backs. That’s not bravery; that’s irresponsible stupidity mixed with incredible arrogance and disrespect for those who put in the time and effort to be prepared.
ONE and THREE. What memories could they possibly have of this trip? Great points from more reasonable sailors above regarding the inexperience, lack of vaccines and sticking close to coasts. As a volunteer child advocate I would LOVE to be the voice of these children in a courtroom and request a judge order parenting classes for this couple. I wasn’t even aware of the salmonella and the depression…but let’s just say Mom and Dad got sick. Who would have helped the children? It’s indefensible.
I am a mom, the wife of a sailor, and the person responsible for getting kids out on the water at the small non-profit that I run with my husband. I came across this article on the computer after he and another captain had shared the link back and forth along with their own personal comments.
First, our two children have an amazing life that includes boats. From tall ships to kayaks, they have both spent more hours in their childhoods (both under 7) than many do in an entire lifetime. And I am so grateful to have had the opportunity to share this with them. But when we are on a boat – even for just a few hours, we have a plan in place to make sure that we can manage common issues (bathrooms & snacks) as well as emergency issues (injury or illness). When the trip exceeds what we consider ‘reasonable expectations’ for ourselves or our kids, we don’t go. It’s unfortunate, but sometimes life doesn’t work the way you want… our kids are more important than our fun times on the water.
Outside of mommy-hood, I spend my workdays figuring out how to get kids on boats to learn about the water, to learn boat handling skills, and to get them to generally have the best experiences of their lives. In the summer, hundreds of kids have a great time on the water – because I have planned out the ‘plannables’ and planned for the ‘unplannables’. Our routes and our days are planned for the best experiences possible, but we are careful to plan within their limits as well as with an exit strategy in mind. A bad day on the water for a child is generally my fault and resulted from a misstep that I could have avoided. I’ll be honest, my odds have been pretty good. And when things aren’t up to my safety standards, we don’t go out. It is unfortunate, but safety is my first priority. I will gladly deal with an unhappy child/parent rather than an injured child.
Looking at this situation with my professional position in mind as well as a mother, I am disgusted by the apparent lack of forethought and consideration that went into this plan. It takes all of 15 minutes to say to yourself – “if XX gets sick, what will we do?” “If I get injured, what will we do?” – maybe it means you have a stock of benadryl & advil… maybe it means you have antibiotics… maybe it means you stay closer to shore… maybe it means you wait 10 years until your wife has the experience and your children are more capable…
While I LOVE the idea of an upbringing full of risk taking and amazing experiences, I also see my role as the adult to be the one who knows what to do next and who balances fun with keeping my kids alive for the next adventure. I haven’t spoken to this family, so I am admittedly just going on here-say – but from what has been shared it seems like there was a lot of risk taking without the reality check that a responsible adult (and surely a parent) needs to make before bringing a child onto the water. My staff and friends laugh when I say it (as I do frequently), but life is all about choices. From what I can see, these parents chose adventure over the safety of their family. In this scenario, a child was sick. What if the father (the only experienced boater) was injured, was lost at sea, etc – what then? The scenarios ARE endless, but there are some key issues that could have been considered more carefully. I am so glad the children are both safe, but we should all see this as the unexpected outcome for what surely had the makings of being a deadly experience for that family.
I simply couldn’t depart your website prior to suggesting that I extremely loved the standard information a person provide on your visitors?
Is going to be back ceaselessly in order to check up on new posts