Regent is adult-oriented but does not prohibit children, and is very upscale. They have Eastern seabord and Alaskan cruises of varying lengths, and are generally all-inclusive - pay once, cry once. The dining experience is relatively elevated, there is no upcharge for specialty dining, and many shore excursions are included. Pasengers skew wealthier and well-travelled. Ships are smaller but uncrowded. Might be a solid choice for travel with a mature child who can generally amuse herself.

Anonymous wrote:I know most cruises like this are adult-only, but DH is headed overseas for a year, totally screwing up next year's plans. I'd like to salvage it with my youngest, who is VERY interested. She's 12 going on 50, so we have no interest in or need for kids clubs or anything like that. Prefer North America, maybe the Great Lakes or Canada?

Alaska inside passage cruises are gorgeous and there is so much to do. Are you specifically interested in very small boats like Viking? Oceana might be a good one to look at. They are a little bigger boats but still not a mega ship. They are not a kid line so she would be likely be one of just a few but if she’s not looking at a kid’s experience it should be fine. Oceana is around the same price range as Viking. A pp recommended Silversea. They are supposed to be fabulous but are much more expensive.

If more adventurous NatHab and Lindblad are great options for teens.

I have heard great things about UnCruise Adventures in Alaska. Very different from typical cruising, but supposedly great for young-but-mature minds and adults alike. Good luck!

Anonymous wrote:NP. I was just going to post a question along these lines. My young adult DD wants to go on a Viking-like cruise with me on a European river. I told her she’d be the youngest by far on the boat.

Any suggestions for a 20something and late 50something?

We took our kids on a Viking cruise on the Danube: ages 26; 24; 21 and 18. We all had a blast. They were obviously the youngest people, but who cares. My kids can converse and enjoy people of all ages, and if they want to go to a disco, the great thing about river cruises is that you can move freely into the cities and towns.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm interested in this post but don't understand the goal.

Is it a treat vacation to make up for the dad's absence?

Are there any time limitations on the number of days?

What is the child interested in?

I would consider rail if the issue is avoiding driving. And spend way more time and $$ in the wonderful destinations.

Not op but IMHO this post is out of line. WTF is your problem?

Not the pp, but I’m not sure why you find this so offensive. Seem like reasonable questions to me.

I am the PP who was called out of line. The father's year of working abroad was introduced by OP, so I assume it is somehow relevant to the goals of the vacation but I don't understand why.

You asked "Is it a treat vacation to make up for the dad's absence"? Why is that relevant and how is it not an out of line personal question?

I don't think it's offensive to suggest tangential opportunities. Some people are capable of flexible thinking.

I did not criticize your off-topic train suggestion. I am fine with that. It was your rude personal intrusion. No need to threadjack anymore, I will not respond to this topic again.

PP. There seemed to be some extraneous info that was important to OP about the dad. Because it was mentioned. And some people have emotional goals for vacations like bonding, beautification/makeover, etc. Cruises are often targeted at indulgence-type travel goals...spa cruise, unlimited gourmet or food cruise. That's why I asked about whether it was a treat cruise. The lines vary in what they specialize in. That's actually what cruises do best...unlimited or convenient access to treats/food/massages. But if the goal was just to go to certain cities, there are other ways to structure the trip.

Final thought, I live in the Great Lakes region and would not recommend an ordinary cruise boat visit. The skies are beautiful but the coastlines aren't very dramatic. I think Alaska or Maine to Canada would be much more interesting.

People choose cruises for different reasons. Many choose on itinerary, especially in places like the Mediterranean , where you can visit a new place every day with no or few sea days. The small luxury lines are growing rapidly with travelers with diverse and sophisticated needs. The idea that it’s only the “Getting my 15 drink a day package on carnival to Bahamas!” Cruiser is mistaken.

And by the way, a very small number of cruises have “specialty” itineraries, and most of those are chartered by promoters. It appears you don’t have much experience cruising. Lines vary greatly. Definitely not for everyone but there is probably a perfect cruise line for someone with an interest.

Now please tell me how a train trip could possibly interest this family. Ridiculous suggestion.

Hmm...there are some scenic rail trips that go through natural beauty areas and mountains during leaf peeping season. You can also take a pretty nice trip to Canada originating in NYC. If you were interested in the US big parks out West, there are scenic Amtrak routes to some of those. If you're interested in cultural amenities, fine lodging, gourmet dining, shows, and city excursions you can do all that with a land-based itinerary that builds off of rail. To me, a cruise is more about transport convenience and not having to move your luggage from place to place. So rail is analogous. Floating theater, restaurants, pools can be convenient but the land-based equivalents are superior in my experience. For everyone hating on my ideas, just leave them alone and make your own suggestions to OP. Apparently you don't have anything better to do than pick on my opinions.

Your opinions are off topic as they are not what OP asked about. Also, they are awful. “You can take a train to Canada!” WOW, really?

And your claim rail is analogous is false. What train waits for you with your luggage while you go on excursions? Exactly none. You’re not a real poster, I think.

That's right. I'm a bot. A bot whose first cruise was around the Meditterranean on a multi-port itinerary: Genoa, Palma De Mallorca, Barcelona, Tunis, Malta, Sicily, Naples/Pompeii. Also did a Greek Isles Cruise. And others.

Nothing like only 4 hours in Barcelona, 1.5 hours at Olympia, 30 minutes at the Parthenon, limited time at Pompeii, etc. to convince me that it's kind of sad to be on forced march cruise ship excursions. PP above is right...just the debarking and embarking process is a miserable time suck. These excursions are pretty expensive not to give you quality time with the places you went to such expense to see.

You are completely missing the point. OP asked about a cruise. You're like the person who comes into the thread asking "Where do I get the best steaks" and replying with "Eat fish it is much healthier".

You're not completely wrong about the debarking process in tender ports (when docked it is no different than a hotel, you just walk off) but that is the flip side of being in a new place everyday. Certainly it is FAR less difficult than packing up and heading the the train station or the airport, and traveling during the day when you could be doing something else.

And you don't have to book the ship excursions if you think they are too expensive, you can take the same private ones as the land people if you find them more cost-effective. And they all have limited time. Port times are usually 8-12 hours on a med cruise which is plenty of time for a great day.

Cruising Great Lakes, Atlantic Coast, and Canada sounds like a desire to mostly see ocean/lake scenery, maybe nature/animals, and coastline. It's not really the best way to see the ports in those places...just one way.

I have no desire to take a cruise in those places because those destinations don't appeal to me as I have been to most already. But they do appeal to some and I offered suggestions because that was what the OP asked about.

That's my final thoughts on the subject. My apologies to OP if I inadvertently offended OP.

Good of you to apologize for that, and I respect you for it. Not sure if OP agrees with me or not but now it is over.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm interested in this post but don't understand the goal.

Is it a treat vacation to make up for the dad's absence?

Are there any time limitations on the number of days?

What is the child interested in?

I would consider rail if the issue is avoiding driving. And spend way more time and $$ in the wonderful destinations.

Not op but IMHO this post is out of line. WTF is your problem?

Not the pp, but I’m not sure why you find this so offensive. Seem like reasonable questions to me.

I am the PP who was called out of line. The father's year of working abroad was introduced by OP, so I assume it is somehow relevant to the goals of the vacation but I don't understand why.

You asked "Is it a treat vacation to make up for the dad's absence"? Why is that relevant and how is it not an out of line personal question?

I don't think it's offensive to suggest tangential opportunities. Some people are capable of flexible thinking.

I did not criticize your off-topic train suggestion. I am fine with that. It was your rude personal intrusion. No need to threadjack anymore, I will not respond to this topic again.

PP. There seemed to be some extraneous info that was important to OP about the dad. Because it was mentioned. And some people have emotional goals for vacations like bonding, beautification/makeover, etc. Cruises are often targeted at indulgence-type travel goals...spa cruise, unlimited gourmet or food cruise. That's why I asked about whether it was a treat cruise. The lines vary in what they specialize in. That's actually what cruises do best...unlimited or convenient access to treats/food/massages. But if the goal was just to go to certain cities, there are other ways to structure the trip.

Final thought, I live in the Great Lakes region and would not recommend an ordinary cruise boat visit. The skies are beautiful but the coastlines aren't very dramatic. I think Alaska or Maine to Canada would be much more interesting.

People choose cruises for different reasons. Many choose on itinerary, especially in places like the Mediterranean , where you can visit a new place every day with no or few sea days. The small luxury lines are growing rapidly with travelers with diverse and sophisticated needs. The idea that it’s only the “Getting my 15 drink a day package on carnival to Bahamas!” Cruiser is mistaken.

And by the way, a very small number of cruises have “specialty” itineraries, and most of those are chartered by promoters. It appears you don’t have much experience cruising. Lines vary greatly. Definitely not for everyone but there is probably a perfect cruise line for someone with an interest.

Now please tell me how a train trip could possibly interest this family. Ridiculous suggestion.

Hmm...there are some scenic rail trips that go through natural beauty areas and mountains during leaf peeping season. You can also take a pretty nice trip to Canada originating in NYC. If you were interested in the US big parks out West, there are scenic Amtrak routes to some of those. If you're interested in cultural amenities, fine lodging, gourmet dining, shows, and city excursions you can do all that with a land-based itinerary that builds off of rail. To me, a cruise is more about transport convenience and not having to move your luggage from place to place. So rail is analogous. Floating theater, restaurants, pools can be convenient but the land-based equivalents are superior in my experience. For everyone hating on my ideas, just leave them alone and make your own suggestions to OP. Apparently you don't have anything better to do than pick on my opinions.

Your opinions are off topic as they are not what OP asked about. Also, they are awful. “You can take a train to Canada!” WOW, really?

And your claim rail is analogous is false. What train waits for you with your luggage while you go on excursions? Exactly none. You’re not a real poster, I think.

That's right. I'm a bot. A bot whose first cruise was around the Meditterranean on a multi-port itinerary: Genoa, Palma De Mallorca, Barcelona, Tunis, Malta, Sicily, Naples/Pompeii. Also did a Greek Isles Cruise. And others.

Nothing like only 4 hours in Barcelona, 1.5 hours at Olympia, 30 minutes at the Parthenon, limited time at Pompeii, etc. to convince me that it's kind of sad to be on forced march cruise ship excursions. PP above is right...just the debarking and embarking process is a miserable time suck. These excursions are pretty expensive not to give you quality time with the places you went to such expense to see.

Cruising Great Lakes, Atlantic Coast, and Canada sounds like a desire to mostly see ocean/lake scenery, maybe nature/animals, and coastline. It's not really the best way to see the ports in those places...just one way.

That's my final thoughts on the subject. My apologies to OP if I inadvertently offended OP.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm interested in this post but don't understand the goal.

Is it a treat vacation to make up for the dad's absence?

Are there any time limitations on the number of days?

What is the child interested in?

I would consider rail if the issue is avoiding driving. And spend way more time and $$ in the wonderful destinations.

Not op but IMHO this post is out of line. WTF is your problem?

Not the pp, but I’m not sure why you find this so offensive. Seem like reasonable questions to me.

I am the PP who was called out of line. The father's year of working abroad was introduced by OP, so I assume it is somehow relevant to the goals of the vacation but I don't understand why.

You asked "Is it a treat vacation to make up for the dad's absence"? Why is that relevant and how is it not an out of line personal question?

I don't think it's offensive to suggest tangential opportunities. Some people are capable of flexible thinking.

I did not criticize your off-topic train suggestion. I am fine with that. It was your rude personal intrusion. No need to threadjack anymore, I will not respond to this topic again.

PP. There seemed to be some extraneous info that was important to OP about the dad. Because it was mentioned. And some people have emotional goals for vacations like bonding, beautification/makeover, etc. Cruises are often targeted at indulgence-type travel goals...spa cruise, unlimited gourmet or food cruise. That's why I asked about whether it was a treat cruise. The lines vary in what they specialize in. That's actually what cruises do best...unlimited or convenient access to treats/food/massages. But if the goal was just to go to certain cities, there are other ways to structure the trip.

Final thought, I live in the Great Lakes region and would not recommend an ordinary cruise boat visit. The skies are beautiful but the coastlines aren't very dramatic. I think Alaska or Maine to Canada would be much more interesting.

People choose cruises for different reasons. Many choose on itinerary, especially in places like the Mediterranean , where you can visit a new place every day with no or few sea days. The small luxury lines are growing rapidly with travelers with diverse and sophisticated needs. The idea that it’s only the “Getting my 15 drink a day package on carnival to Bahamas!” Cruiser is mistaken.

And by the way, a very small number of cruises have “specialty” itineraries, and most of those are chartered by promoters. It appears you don’t have much experience cruising. Lines vary greatly. Definitely not for everyone but there is probably a perfect cruise line for someone with an interest.

Now please tell me how a train trip could possibly interest this family. Ridiculous suggestion.

Hmm...there are some scenic rail trips that go through natural beauty areas and mountains during leaf peeping season. You can also take a pretty nice trip to Canada originating in NYC. If you were interested in the US big parks out West, there are scenic Amtrak routes to some of those. If you're interested in cultural amenities, fine lodging, gourmet dining, shows, and city excursions you can do all that with a land-based itinerary that builds off of rail. To me, a cruise is more about transport convenience and not having to move your luggage from place to place. So rail is analogous. Floating theater, restaurants, pools can be convenient but the land-based equivalents are superior in my experience. For everyone hating on my ideas, just leave them alone and make your own suggestions to OP. Apparently you don't have anything better to do than pick on my opinions.

Your opinions are off topic as they are not what OP asked about. Also, they are awful. “You can take a train to Canada!” WOW, really?

And your claim rail is analogous is false. What train waits for you with your luggage while you go on excursions? Exactly none. You’re not a real poster, I think.

DP here. I mean taking a scenic train through Canada doesn’t sound all that different to me than a river cruise though the Great Lakes. Neither appeal to me though.