Austistic teen kicked off plane.....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:May you all (ok, lots of you) walk a thousand miles in that mom's shoes before you judge.

People aren't really judging her. Things happen, but the mom could have handled things more tactfully. So could the airline. But bringing it to the media and suing the airline are absurd, and FAR more worthy of "mom-judgment" than the original requests/threats/etc.

+ 1. This will follow the daughter and mom for the rest of their lives. Hiring a lawyer is stupid and looks crass and money-grabbing. Also, we also don't know exactly what the mom said to the flight attendant. But once the word "violence" is used, the pilot had ever right to bring the plane down.

Except it wasn't.

From her account: "I again asked if he could make an exception for our daughter who faces autism. He said, no he could not give her the rice from first class. I asked if I could get some chips or something salty for her. He said they had no chips. Juliette was beginning to cry. Frustrated I said, after she has a melt down and tries to scratch in frustration, will you help her then? He said he would see what he could do. He came back scowled at me and gave her a hot meal. I thanked him and offered to pay for it. He did not answer and went back to First Class.

You're telling me THAT was a reason to land a plane and kick them off??? That's the story, right there. Baffling and ignorant and stupid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:May you all (ok, lots of you) walk a thousand miles in that mom's shoes before you judge.

+1

Perhaps in the Flight Attendant's shoes too.

The shoes that walked up to First Class, grabbed some hot rice, and brought it to a family in need? OK, I'll walk in those shoes. Cake walk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:May you all (ok, lots of you) walk a thousand miles in that mom's shoes before you judge.

People aren't really judging her. Things happen, but the mom could have handled things more tactfully. So could the airline. But bringing it to the media and suing the airline are absurd, and FAR more worthy of "mom-judgment" than the original requests/threats/etc.

+ 1. This will follow the daughter and mom for the rest of their lives. Hiring a lawyer is stupid and looks crass and money-grabbing. Also, we also don't know exactly what the mom said to the flight attendant. But once the word "violence" is used, the pilot had ever right to bring the plane down.

Except it wasn't.

From her account: "I again asked if he could make an exception for our daughter who faces autism. He said, no he could not give her the rice from first class. I asked if I could get some chips or something salty for her. He said they had no chips. Juliette was beginning to cry. Frustrated I said, after she has a melt down and tries to scratch in frustration, will you help her then? He said he would see what he could do. He came back scowled at me and gave her a hot meal. I thanked him and offered to pay for it. He did not answer and went back to First Class.



You're telling me THAT was a reason to land a plane and kick them off??? That's the story, right there. Baffling and ignorant and stupid.

Why do you believe someone's press release? She (mom) has every incentive to lie, especially now that they've retained counsel. They will tell their side of the story. Only after years of depositions and possibly a settlement will we find out the real story.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:May you all (ok, lots of you) walk a thousand miles in that mom's shoes before you judge.

People aren't really judging her. Things happen, but the mom could have handled things more tactfully. So could the airline. But bringing it to the media and suing the airline are absurd, and FAR more worthy of "mom-judgment" than the original requests/threats/etc.

+ 1. This will follow the daughter and mom for the rest of their lives. Hiring a lawyer is stupid and looks crass and money-grabbing. Also, we also don't know exactly what the mom said to the flight attendant. But once the word "violence" is used, the pilot had ever right to bring the plane down.

Except it wasn't.

From her account: "I again asked if he could make an exception for our daughter who faces autism. He said, no he could not give her the rice from first class. I asked if I could get some chips or something salty for her. He said they had no chips. Juliette was beginning to cry. Frustrated I said, after she has a melt down and tries to scratch in frustration, will you help her then? He said he would see what he could do. He came back scowled at me and gave her a hot meal. I thanked him and offered to pay for it. He did not answer and went back to First Class.

But... many people from the flight have made statements now that back her account.


You're telling me THAT was a reason to land a plane and kick them off??? That's the story, right there. Baffling and ignorant and stupid.

Why do you believe someone's press release? She (mom) has every incentive to lie, especially now that they've retained counsel. They will tell their side of the story. Only after years of depositions and possibly a settlement will we find out the real story.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:May you all (ok, lots of you) walk a thousand miles in that mom's shoes before you judge.

People aren't really judging her. Things happen, but the mom could have handled things more tactfully. So could the airline. But bringing it to the media and suing the airline are absurd, and FAR more worthy of "mom-judgment" than the original requests/threats/etc.

+ 1. This will follow the daughter and mom for the rest of their lives. Hiring a lawyer is stupid and looks crass and money-grabbing. Also, we also don't know exactly what the mom said to the flight attendant. But once the word "violence" is used, the pilot had ever right to bring the plane down.

Except it wasn't.

From her account: "I again asked if he could make an exception for our daughter who faces autism. He said, no he could not give her the rice from first class. I asked if I could get some chips or something salty for her. He said they had no chips. Juliette was beginning to cry. Frustrated I said, after she has a melt down and tries to scratch in frustration, will you help her then? He said he would see what he could do. He came back scowled at me and gave her a hot meal. I thanked him and offered to pay for it. He did not answer and went back to First Class.



You're telling me THAT was a reason to land a plane and kick them off??? That's the story, right there. Baffling and ignorant and stupid.

Why do you believe someone's press release? She (mom) has every incentive to lie, especially now that they've retained counsel. They will tell their side of the story. Only after years of depositions and possibly a settlement will we find out the real story.

Except the other passengers are backing her up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:May you all (ok, lots of you) walk a thousand miles in that mom's shoes before you judge.

People aren't really judging her. Things happen, but the mom could have handled things more tactfully. So could the airline. But bringing it to the media and suing the airline are absurd, and FAR more worthy of "mom-judgment" than the original requests/threats/etc.

+ 1. This will follow the daughter and mom for the rest of their lives. Hiring a lawyer is stupid and looks crass and money-grabbing. Also, we also don't know exactly what the mom said to the flight attendant. But once the word "violence" is used, the pilot had ever right to bring the plane down.

Except it wasn't.

From her account: "I again asked if he could make an exception for our daughter who faces autism. He said, no he could not give her the rice from first class. I asked if I could get some chips or something salty for her. He said they had no chips. Juliette was beginning to cry. Frustrated I said, after she has a melt down and tries to scratch in frustration, will you help her then? He said he would see what he could do. He came back scowled at me and gave her a hot meal. I thanked him and offered to pay for it. He did not answer and went back to First Class.



You're telling me THAT was a reason to land a plane and kick them off??? That's the story, right there. Baffling and ignorant and stupid.

Why do you believe someone's press release? She (mom) has every incentive to lie, especially now that they've retained counsel. They will tell their side of the story. Only after years of depositions and possibly a settlement will we find out the real story.

But... many people from the flight have made statements now that back her account.

[Anonymous]

jinx

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:May you all (ok, lots of you) walk a thousand miles in that mom's shoes before you judge.

People aren't really judging her. Things happen, but the mom could have handled things more tactfully. So could the airline. But bringing it to the media and suing the airline are absurd, and FAR more worthy of "mom-judgment" than the original requests/threats/etc.

+ 1. This will follow the daughter and mom for the rest of their lives. Hiring a lawyer is stupid and looks crass and money-grabbing. Also, we also don't know exactly what the mom said to the flight attendant. But once the word "violence" is used, the pilot had ever right to bring the plane down.

Except it wasn't.

From her account: "I again asked if he could make an exception for our daughter who faces autism. He said, no he could not give her the rice from first class. I asked if I could get some chips or something salty for her. He said they had no chips. Juliette was beginning to cry. Frustrated I said, after she has a melt down and tries to scratch in frustration, will you help her then? He said he would see what he could do. He came back scowled at me and gave her a hot meal. I thanked him and offered to pay for it. He did not answer and went back to First Class.



You're telling me THAT was a reason to land a plane and kick them off??? That's the story, right there. Baffling and ignorant and stupid.

Why do you believe someone's press release? She (mom) has every incentive to lie, especially now that they've retained counsel. They will tell their side of the story. Only after years of depositions and possibly a settlement will we find out the real story.

Except the other passengers are backing her up.

Maybe, but other passengers may come forward and say the opposite. I've been a lawyer too long. I never believe the initial story. I was one of those rare voices here that said "Why are we believing anything that Rolling Stone publishes" when the UVA story first came out. There's always two sides to a story. A pilot doesn't just decide to reroute and land (very expensive for the airline plus emergency landing fees, gas, fuel, complaining passengers) without reason. Even if ALL the passengers said mom was reasonable, maybe the flight attendant said "violent" to the captain in which case he had every right to bring the plane down. You're damned if you do and damned if you don't. I'll wait until the full story comes out to pass judgment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If the Mom wanted hot food, she should have bought a ticket that enabled her to hot food. Buying a cheap ticket and then demanding the perks of a more expensive one is a big cause of the issue. It's like buying a Southwest ticket and demanding that your child sits in 23B because it's their favorite number. The answer to this woman is "no" and she feels like she does not have to accept that answer, she's wrong. Her needs do not magically come before everyone else needs, why is that hard to understand?

+1

[Anonymous]

WTH? Dad charged $88 at the gate to be sure of seat next to his four year old.

http://insider.foxnews.com/2015/05/12/dad-delta-charged-me-88-fee-sit-next-4-year-old-daughter

[Anonymous]

In this scenario, there is the potential for permanent harm. Scratching an eyeball, passing a blood borne disease (AIDs, hepatitis), possibly getting hit/poked etc. are all real risks for an innocent passenger sitting nearby. This risk is increased if the nearby passengers themselves have disabilities. Perhaps they can't move out of the way quickly. Perhaps they have pre-existing injuries that could be re-injured. Perhaps being around this girl's episode will set off an episode for them. The airline does have a responsibility to minimize the risk of physical harm for all its passengers.

What is the acceptable risk for another passenger? 50% chance of being hit/scratched? 25% 10% 5% Would you feel differently if you knew the girl had a communicable disease?

I feel sorry for the family. It is hard to parent a child with SN. But I don't think the airline should be faulted for taking preventive steps to minimize passenger risk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:May you all (ok, lots of you) walk a thousand miles in that mom's shoes before you judge.

People aren't really judging her. Things happen, but the mom could have handled things more tactfully. So could the airline. But bringing it to the media and suing the airline are absurd, and FAR more worthy of "mom-judgment" than the original requests/threats/etc.

+ 1. This will follow the daughter and mom for the rest of their lives. Hiring a lawyer is stupid and looks crass and money-grabbing. Also, we also don't know exactly what the mom said to the flight attendant. But once the word "violence" is used, the pilot had ever right to bring the plane down.

Except it wasn't.

From her account: "I again asked if he could make an exception for our daughter who faces autism. He said, no he could not give her the rice from first class. I asked if I could get some chips or something salty for her. He said they had no chips. Juliette was beginning to cry. Frustrated I said, after she has a melt down and tries to scratch in frustration, will you help her then? He said he would see what he could do. He came back scowled at me and gave her a hot meal. I thanked him and offered to pay for it. He did not answer and went back to First Class.



You're telling me THAT was a reason to land a plane and kick them off??? That's the story, right there. Baffling and ignorant and stupid.

Why do you believe someone's press release? She (mom) has every incentive to lie, especially now that they've retained counsel. They will tell their side of the story. Only after years of depositions and possibly a settlement will we find out the real story.

Except the other passengers are backing her up.

Maybe, but other passengers may come forward and say the opposite. I've been a lawyer too long. I never believe the initial story. I was one of those rare voices here that said "Why are we believing anything that Rolling Stone publishes" when the UVA story first came out. There's always two sides to a story. A pilot doesn't just decide to reroute and land (very expensive for the airline plus emergency landing fees, gas, fuel, complaining passengers) without reason. Even if ALL the passengers said mom was reasonable, maybe the flight attendant said "violent" to the captain in which case he had every right to bring the plane down. You're damned if you do and damned if you don't. I'll wait until the full story comes out to pass judgment.

The flight attendent is wrong, in that case. One airline employee gave the wrong information to another airline employee. The airline is legally responsible for the actions of its employees, which led to a violation of the ADA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:WTH? Dad charged $88 at the gate to be sure of seat next to his four year old.

http://insider.foxnews.com/2015/05/12/dad-delta-charged-me-88-fee-sit-next-4-year-old-daughter

The way to deal with that is to sit the 4 year old and then ask the person next to the 4 year old if they want to change or if they prefer to babysit. They'll change.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:May you all (ok, lots of you) walk a thousand miles in that mom's shoes before you judge.

People aren't really judging her. Things happen, but the mom could have handled things more tactfully. So could the airline. But bringing it to the media and suing the airline are absurd, and FAR more worthy of "mom-judgment" than the original requests/threats/etc.

+ 1. This will follow the daughter and mom for the rest of their lives. Hiring a lawyer is stupid and looks crass and money-grabbing. Also, we also don't know exactly what the mom said to the flight attendant. But once the word "violence" is used, the pilot had ever right to bring the plane down.

Except it wasn't.

From her account: "I again asked if he could make an exception for our daughter who faces autism. He said, no he could not give her the rice from first class. I asked if I could get some chips or something salty for her. He said they had no chips. Juliette was beginning to cry. Frustrated I said, after she has a melt down and tries to scratch in frustration, will you help her then? He said he would see what he could do. He came back scowled at me and gave her a hot meal. I thanked him and offered to pay for it. He did not answer and went back to First Class.



You're telling me THAT was a reason to land a plane and kick them off??? That's the story, right there. Baffling and ignorant and stupid.

Why do you believe someone's press release? She (mom) has every incentive to lie, especially now that they've retained counsel. They will tell their side of the story. Only after years of depositions and possibly a settlement will we find out the real story.

Except the other passengers are backing her up.

Maybe, but other passengers may come forward and say the opposite. I've been a lawyer too long. I never believe the initial story. I was one of those rare voices here that said "Why are we believing anything that Rolling Stone publishes" when the UVA story first came out. There's always two sides to a story. A pilot doesn't just decide to reroute and land (very expensive for the airline plus emergency landing fees, gas, fuel, complaining passengers) without reason. Even if ALL the passengers said mom was reasonable, maybe the flight attendant said "violent" to the captain in which case he had every right to bring the plane down. You're damned if you do and damned if you don't. I'll wait until the full story comes out to pass judgment.

The flight attendent is wrong, in that case. One airline employee gave the wrong information to another airline employee. The airline is legally responsible for the actions of its employees, which led to a violation of the ADA.

I guess I missed a step. How is getting kicked off a flight a violation of the ADA?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If i knew hot food would help calm my child I would purchase some right before getting on the plane (asking wherever I was ordering it from make it piping hot) and give it to her on the plane. Or I would pony up the cash and buy a first class seat. This isn't rocket science. IF the parent really knew her child she would be prepared. This isn't a special needs issue, it's a stupid parent issue.

Yeah, maybe, but haven't we all made bonehead parenting mistakes. My issue here is the mom's actions when she realized her daughter needed food. She informed the flight crew that her daughter had the potential to become violent, that the triggers for violence were present and that mom could not control her and prevent the violence. The flight crew then had to make decisions. From what I can see, the flight crew made two decisions: to take action to try to prevent the daughter from becoming agitated (or maybe more agitated - can't tell what her state was before the food), which was to give her food and to prevent injury or harm to passengers if the efforts to prevent problems were not successful (which was to divert). In this case, the girl was fine in the end, but once the decision is made to divert, there is no going back.

United was in the position of predicting and did the best they could. They are damned now because the girl was fine, but had they not diverted and the girl become violent, then they would have been damned for that decision. No one has a crystal ball.

Thing is, when the mom had a problem, she really should not have said that her daughter might become violent and she was unable to control/prevent it. We all live in the post 911 era. Given that mom travels a lot, she should know better. Sounds to me like mom was really tired after a trip across country to Disney and acted poorly.

And, I'm not convinced this is a training issue either. If someone tells the flight attendant that their child has the potential for violence, the triggers are present and they cannot prevent nor control their child, what more did the flight attendant need to know?

They need to be aware of the American with Disabilities Act which requires businesses open to the public to make their facilities and services available and usable by people with disabilities. I am aware that they need to balance accommodations with the safety of other passengers, but in this case, the girl was not causing any problems. The mom asked for warm food. That's not a crazy demand. It's a small request.

Kicking the girl off the plane because she *might* become disruptive is a huge violation of the ADA. The airline has a huge problem and is going to get their ass handed to them.

NO they will not and you are absurd. First as much as an airline can accommodate ADA they cannot predict, assume, and or care for someone with violent behavior. Just because an individual has a mental disorder, incapacity, etc,. does not mean that safety rules for ALL will be bent. But go ahead and spin it how you want....you will argue BS until you are blue in the face.