Has anybody with a toddler & pregnant gone through the airport body scanners?

[Anonymous]

So...anyone gone through these new procedures with a toddler? Wondering how it would go with my squirmy 2 year old.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So...anyone gone through these new procedures with a toddler? Wondering how it would go with my squirmy 2 year old.

...who, I might add, I was 4 weeks pregnant with when I flew cross-country

[Anonymous]

Diane Rehm had a show about the scanners this morning. Like another poster said, there are two types -- one uses x-ray and the other uses milliwave technology. The Ph.D. on the show that's the head of some department at Columbia said that while x-rays are known to expose people to radiation, which does cause cancer, there is no known risk to the milliwave ones. However, it's hard to tell the difference between the two machines and there's about a 60/40 split in terms of which type the airports have. Possibly the TSA person would know, but I don't know that I'd rely on them.

I'm flying with my 10-month-old tomorrow, and we'll be opting out of the scanners. I don't think there's a good understanding of the effects on small children to exposure such as this, and the risk isn't worth it, even if I have to get felt up by some stranger in the process. If I were pregnant, I'd also opt out.

[Anonymous]

We'll be opting out to. Too many unknowns for me.

[Anonymous]

I flew out from Dulles on Saturday and there were not asking people to go through the full body scans. I am 21 weeks pregnant and would have opted out if it had come up. There is no health risk from the putdown, while there is an unknown risk from the scan. Seems like a no brainer to me...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Also, only passengers who can stand still long enough for the screening are eligible, so unless your toddler is less squirmy than mine, DC will not be eligible. TSA does not separate parents and children, so you would also not be eligible. The alternative is a patdown.

This wasn't my experience at National Airport (flying to FL and then internationally). I am not pregnant, but was flying with a 4 month old (strapped into a Bjorn). I had to take off the Bjorn, but held my infant. We walked through the normal scanners (not full body). Did not get a pat down or scanned otherwise at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We'll be opting out to. Too many unknowns for me.

THen you may as well not even fly. According to the science, going through one of those scanners =the same amount of radiation as two minutes of flying.
So really, if it is radiation you [general] are concerned about, you shouldn't be flying.

Voodoo logic people.

[Anonymous]

PP here. I should add - it really wasn't an issue at all and wasn't like I was "opting out" of anything. They just directed me to the regular scanner and that was that.

I think the media has blown this issue WAY out of proportion.

[Anonymous]

A thanks in advance to all the people who opt out tomorrow based on little understanding of the science and hold up the security lines even more on the busiest travel day of the season.

Thanks!

[Anonymous]

We are not opting out because of the scientific risks. We are opting out because the scans are invasive and ridiculous - a clear violation of privacy. A government overreach. Like much of what the TSA and Homeland Security does.

As other people have written on here before, many countries have much more effective, far less invasive security techniques for airlines. And the enforcement officers are professional and polite. Those of us who opt out of the scanners this weekend are protesting the insane and farcical situation known as American airport security.

(The ban on liquids, anyone? Taking off your shoes? Magical thinking.)

[Anonymous]

The scientific risks--or rather uncertainties--are frightening though. See this letter written by UCSF scientists in April and posted here.

http://www.npr.org/assets/news/2010/05/17/concern.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We'll be opting out to. Too many unknowns for me.

THen you may as well not even fly. According to the science, going through one of those scanners =the same amount of radiation as two minutes of flying.
So really, if it is radiation you [general] are concerned about, you shouldn't be flying.

Voodoo logic people.

PP here. I suggest you check out the UCSF letter, which was written by top cancer and imaging specialists. That is what TSA says (equal to two minutes of flying) but the evidence supporting that isn't there. If the radiation from the scanners were distributed evenly throughout the body TSA's point would be well-taken (and then I wouldn't be concerned), but that's not how the scanners work.

[Anonymous]

flying pregnant and with a toddler, and on the fence about what to do. again i ask, has anyone gone through the new machines with a toddler? could you hold toddler, or did you have to do the patdown?

[Anonymous]

PP, I haven't flown with my toddler recently but will be... I'm interested to see the responses. I feel extremely uncomfortable with the possibility that they might have to pat down my two year old.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We are not opting out because of the scientific risks. We are opting out because the scans are invasive and ridiculous - a clear violation of privacy. A government overreach. Like much of what the TSA and Homeland Security does.

As other people have written on here before, many countries have much more effective, far less invasive security techniques for airlines. And the enforcement officers are professional and polite. Those of us who opt out of the scanners this weekend are protesting the insane and farcical situation known as American airport security.

(The ban on liquids, anyone? Taking off your shoes? Magical thinking.)

Many countries that you speak of, like Israel, do not have the same passenger volume as we do. Are some of these measures ridiculous? You bet. But the truth is, security is something we need to at least try to achieve, to work on.

Let's say we do it ala Israel? Would privacy advocates be comfortable with the interviews, questioning, and guns? And how exactly would we achieve that with the sheer number of people who come through our airports? HOw much in resources and time could we realistically devote?

Seriously. I would like to hear some real, workable solutions. A scan takes care of everything--there is no sneaking anything on. Quick, efficient, and most likely, safe. Certainly less invasive than being groped and questioned.

As for the toddler question--I have no idea. A friend flew with a 6 year old and made it through the scan okay. Don't know how it would work with younger children.