I certainly think charging the rescuee is appropriate.  The bigger issue in my mind is also the risk to the rescuers.  It is not unheard of for rescuers to be injured and killed in the process of a rescue.  It is for that reason that a person who takes on significant risk should pay a significant part of the resuce bill.  A casual hiker who “gets lost” shows less premeditation of ignoring known risk than a “serious” mountain climber or mariner.  This girl and her family were highly aware of the potential for things going badly as evidenced by the years of training, equipment on the craft, etc.  They really should pay for their calculated risk.  And what would the girl’s family feel if a rescuer lost his/her life in the course of the rescue?  What would the family of an injured or dead rescuer feel because another family decided to challenge the ocean and the weather?  Responsibility demands an even playing field for decisions made and executed.

NABNYC:

Its hard to argue my point after what you’ve said but i’ll try

If we were to ask them to pay for the rescue it could be millions and in the end they couldn’t pay it back anyway so where would we get to. Then what might happen is that pearents in this case are forced to choose to pay for the rescue or not? Obsurd in my view but it could end up getting like that if you had your way.

BTW, Does anybody know the costs of this rescue?

Maybe some sort of insurance could cover extra ordinary situations and rescue costs? Extreme or Adventurer sports insurance lol. I bet their is but i’m sure it won’t cover the costs of the rescue.

I think this decision was properly between this girl and her parents.  If 16 year olds are not considered old enough to sail, then the law should be changed to prevent it.  But if they are legally allowed to sail, then how far, and on what ocean, seems like an issue of parental discretion, not one to be dictated by the government. 

Beyond that, yes, when people engaged in activities which are outside of what most people do, and are highly risky, then those people should pay for the expense of rescuing them if it becomes necessary.  I would absolutely including mountain climbers in there.  How much money has been wasted every year by rescue teams trying to find climbers on mountains in this country?  I personally don’t want to pay a penny towards it.  These mountain climbers, solo-sailors, and the like, are engaging in competitive activity for their own benefit, way beyond what most people do, and should be expected to assume the risk of something going wrong.  It is not the same as a car wreck on the freeway, since most people must be on freeways to live their lives.  Not so for being a sailboat in the middle of nowhere, or hanging off a snow-covered mountain in the middle of a blizzard.  So yes, I believe in individual freedom to choose to participate, but also believe in individual responsibility to pay for extroardinary costs that may result from their decision.

Why should they be expected to foot the costs? It would bankrupt them and they wouldn’t end up paying it back anyway? Say you when walking in the hill somewhere without a map and got lost because of the weather and had to be rescued is that not more irresponsible than her? This girl will have had the best equipment and training in an emergency and how to be rescued.

Are we now going to have to pay for our own rescues? How the hell did people manage to sail the Atlantic, take the first steps at the poles and on the moon. I know these people couldn’t be rescued if things when wrong but we need people to step up to the plate and challenge the concept that “This cannot be done”. It can.

She and her family should be responsible for any penny spent to rescue her.  But beyond that, I disagree.  Parents allow their children to sail and surf all the time, and things can go wrong, kids drown.  Kids drive cars, go on school trips, play football and track.  Things can happen.  I’m not a water person, so this does not appeal to me.  But I can’t say it’s any riskier than many other common activities, and I cannot say that this girl was not qualified and competent to make the trip.  It’s a judgment call for her and her parents.  But I just don’t think the public should be expected to pay for the rescue if things go wrong.

I have a hard time with those who justify virtually anything.

Gambling? So what if I win and its my money
Underage sex? She wanted it and needed the money
Navigating alone as an in experienced kid
Well, it was her choice, and if she was lost, she died doing what her parents wanted her to do.

Sad indeed, the ability to assign risk to others while selfishly reaping any benefits of success. The fame, the money the glory.

Who ever got anywhere without a little danger?

She knew the risks and so did the family, so what.

****************

By rich roe, July 19 at 5:11 pm

Well, said. Seems in this over paranoid world, at least here in the
u.s.a., ‘vulnerable’ children or teenagers seem to be a much
better zoo animal to just be watched and remain that way, and
given no chance of seeing or touching nature.

She was in an AMERICA’S CUP type sailboat.

To circumnavigate the world by herself   ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

To add insult to injury to public ignorance,

Why did they outrig this girl in racing sailboat ?????

To circumnavigate the world single handedly?????????

I can tell you why , but I believe most on TD are
capable of figuring this out for yourselves…

A good book on the subject of teenage
singlehanding sail boat around the world is

  THE DOVE…

I can’t remember the kids name,  but a damn good read ! !

My skepticism and cynicism lends me to suspect

that the mast was rigged to break ! !

A sixteen yr old girl in a 60ft. sloop,
meant to singlehand it around the world ! !

Then there was the guy that recently wen to Antartica
and decided he was going to climb a bad ass mountain,
then got stranded for three days and it took some help
from the govt. to rescue him..

  I believe that I just might have let him freeze to
death…. a mountain in Antartica….go figure ! ! ! !

  However, he is probably the smart one, for he too will
capitolize on daytime TV rescue show.

I bet she text messeges all she cares..

The fact that they put her in 60ft sloop says a lot.

Anyone familiar with sailing could understand that even
the most experienced of sailors would have a task with
single handing a 60ft sloop.  Most sailboots of that
size are in the yaul or ketch configuration.

  I doubt she was ever in much danger, or that rescue
was ever very far from hand.
This will make one of those good weekday afternoon TV
rescue reality shows.

Thoughtful and well written article.
Next, several things that should be mentioned include the fact that because of
boat mechanical problems, both Miss Abby and her parents knew -KNEW that
she would entering the Indian Ocean during a dangerous season. 
Consequently, the 30 foot waves should have been anticipated.  Abby should
have been forced to quit before she proceeded to that area.  Second, The
Sunderland’s said they could not afford an expensive oceanic search.  Why not? 
Why isn’t there Maritime laws requiring that a bond be posted for anyone,
particularly a young solo sailor before that person engages on a treacherous
adventure.  Adventures are great, but someone must pay for consequences.  It
was really unfair for the Sunderlands to expect France, Australia, anyone else to
pick up the tab for their personal adventure.  The little episode endangered
lives and cost hundreds of thousands in currency.  This episode reminds me of
the 13 year old who recently climbed Mt. Everest.  Include the blind person who
also climbed Mt. Everest.  It was not possible without the funds, expertise, and
aid of sherpas, guides, etc.  Kind of ridiculous isn’t it?

How was Abby expected to deal with the pirates that infest the areas near Africa and SE Asia?  Those pirates have captured large freighters and tankers staffed with dozens of men.  How would her father react to the news that his daughter had been captured, raped and murdered by a gang of pirates?  More preaching about how he values his daughter?

I would strive to keep my ADULT daughter from sailing into such waters.

I guess the floggers are tired of flogging Polanski and need some new bad people to flog.  On, floggers!  Flog, flog!

I am all for reasonable risk-taking by young people. Due to injuries sustained as a teenager while riding horses five and a half days a week, I now have severe osteoarthritis and degenerative disk disease.

And that’s fine with me. I think when we try to raise kids in bubbles, we’ll just have other types of risk-taking, such as drunk driving and sniffing the freon from the air-conditioner.

That said, this was over the top. Did anyone catch that her mother couldn’t even go to meet her because SHE’S HAVING ANOTHER BABY? Jeez, do you think this kid was maybe trying to get some attention? Isn’t sailing locally enough of a risk for a 16-year-old? Why does risk-taking have to involve piles of money, a website, the involvement of the public, and media exposure?

Agree with Egomet Bonmot

The shouldn’t have rescued her, she wanted to feel, to know what survival in the open sea meant? They should have left her there with the broken mast and trying to survive just long enough to feel what thousands of sinking sailors had felt before her. Hey rich girl, you knew what you were dealing with here.

Thomas Hardy:  “The death of a child is never really to be regretted, considering how much he has escaped.”

One rich 16-year-old tries to sail around the world and garners literally thousands of column inches of hand-wringing & invective from blogs and columnists.  Parental abuse!  Neglect!

    What about the tens of thousands of poor and minority kids, just a year or two older, who are gulled out of shopping malls daily by army recruiters and given a trip to the killing fields of Afghanistan?  Talk about your misplaced emphasis.

    Army teens don’t have blogs, sponsors, homing beacons or French fishing boats at their disposal.  Still, we’d rather spend two solid weeks debating ROTC at Harvard than, say, the Army recruitment office in my local poor & minority mall, which just this week installed a Duke Nukem-style videogame in the thoroughfare ten steps away from their doors, complete with nifty plastic assault rifles attached.

    Those parents were wrong wrong wrong, people.  She could have drowned!

No mention of the Colorado Balloon Boy. I think his family is one of the closest comparisons to Abby’ ShoeCity’ Sunderland’s. In both cases, you have a family willing to put a child at risk to generate publicity and maybe [god help us] a TV Reality show. The biggest difference I see is that the Sunderlands have money.

It is wonderful when children have dreams of greatness and conquering challenges. Parents are supposed to encourage the dreams, without ignoring the risks. Another comparison might be the mother who sent her 13 year old daughter off to party with Polansky. I think both mother and daughter had dreams of making the Big Time. Risky behavior is just that, and it doesn’t always involve sex.

to Malcontent ....

Actually, what the comparison would be that your grandpa should have entered you into the Indy 500 at that age.  That’s closer to the danger level of such a trip.

Used to pay loose attention to some of the around-the-world sailboat races.  It wasn’t that uncommon for a race to loose several boats in exactly this fashion. 

Our society says that this girl was years away from being able to responsibly decide whether or not to drink a beer.  How she’s at the same time is responsible enough to decide to take such a dangerous trip seems very odd to me?

Should at least the age to attempt death-defying stunts be at least the same as the drinking age?  If not higher?  Of course, I think a drinking age of 21 is ridiculous, but 18 for both makes at least some sense.

After all, 18 is the age we set as a society for when a young person can but their own life at risk by joining the army.

Of course, none of this would be a problem if no one paid any attention to these stupid ‘records’ for being the youngest to do something.

****************

Not many kids are allowed by their parents to crawl, or in this
case, sail out of the vulnerable stages of life. At 16 I would
surmise that she had an idea of what life was about for
everyone. She’s luckily a lot better off than most kids who
never get out of the vulnerable stage of life.

In the end, reckless or not, she was lucky and as was noted,
she was prepared.

“Chance favors the prepared mind.”  Louis Pasteur

“Those things that don’t kill us only makes us stronger”. -
Nietzsche(?)

Think pieces are great, but really…

“Ask Lloyds of London to quote you insurance policies for a solo voyage round the world.”  (I didn’t)

“The captain of the French fishing boat that rescued the girl will never bask in the light of international celebrity.”  (I can’t name him)

“To my knowledge the legality of Abby Sunderland’s aborted voyage hasn’t been considered by officials.”  (but I made no calls to “officials” to check.)

And Caswell neglects to mention a salient detail in the Jessica Dubroff tragedy:  Her plane was overloaded at takeoff by pro-grade video cameras and batteries installed at the request of media.  If the equipment hadn’t been on board, there very likely wouldn’t have been a crash.