I understand where you are coming from and where you are going.
The real issue here is the seven burst of the ship's whistle to allow the muster drill to be performed without incident.
When a crew member responsible for the drill evacuation reported the passenger not present during the muster drill, the staff took reasonable measures to allow correction.
I would imagine an officer was present and made order to attend the muster drill and warned her of two choices before being removed from the ship.
The passenger did have a choice at that point.
I would expect the Captain was not to be challenged by a passenger claiming not to have heard the ship's whistle for the life boat drill, which I see as the issue.
Her credibility was compromised after she made claim of not hearing the whistle.
The husband had no say so in the matter after crew confirmed his attendance at the muster drill.
The key card will register on the master system as to entry/exit times from cabin.
Any medical claim from that point forward was not acceptable.
A report was made on the incident and then the Captain used his authority to remove the couple without any further delay.
This is a case of supreme authority by a Captain overruling any challenge.
If a report was made to an officer concerning her medical condition prior to the muster drill or she visited the infirmary, this may have a completely different outcome.
This was a control issue and the passenger was in no position to disobey a direct order without suffering the ultimate penalty.
I must say this is extreme and I will always choose the offer, which serves in my best interest.
In this case is was a direct order.