Anonymous wrote:I don't understand how they can divert a flight because of a potential behavioral problem, that didn't happen. They don't divert flights when adults or other children are complaining, crying, annoying, drunk, talking too loudly, etc.

Anonymous wrote:http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/05/11/oregon-family-says-were-kicked-off-united-flight-due-to-autistic-daughter/

The mother asked for warm food.
The flight attendant said it was only for 1st class.
The teen started to get fussy.
The flight attendant gave her food.
The teen stopped fussing.
The plane made an emergency landing and the police got on the plane and made the family leave.
The family quietly exited the plane.

I vote the flight staff made the wrong decision to divert the plane and force the family off.

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand how they can divert a flight because of a potential behavioral problem, that didn't happen. They don't divert flights when adults or other children are complaining, crying, annoying, drunk, talking too loudly, etc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mental note to self, next time you want a meal from first class...

This is why we only fly first class with our autistic daughter. Worth it!

Anonymous wrote:Mental note to self, next time you want a meal from first class...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With this woman being a prominent activist, I have to wonder if part of the issue is her embarrassment over being the cause of the plane re-routing. Why not turn it into a lawsuit?

A pilot has the responsibility of every single passenger on the plane sitting squarely on their shoulders. This includes the teen and her parents, and every other passenger.

They cannot assess which way a scenario will go. If autistic child HAD had a meltdown and injuries happened, this pilot and United would be lauded for their quick attention in getting the plane safely to the ground.

But it didn't happen, and now they're being called into question.

A plane is not a car. You can't suddenly pull over to the side of the road to see if a meltdown is going to happen, and swerve back into the lane if it doesn't. The pilot made a decision to re-route based on the information he got, which is, from my understanding, that this child would hurt herself or her family if she didn't get something.

A pilot has no idea if that something will actually solve the problem. What if that escalates the issue, rather than solves it? He just has the responsibility of that passenger to address, which means diverting was also to protect her. The fact that the meltdown didn't happen is moot. There aren't do-overs in flying. The safest, quickest and allowable course of action (taking into consideration that you can't just land at any old airport or take any old flight path for kicks), was to divert. They don't have oodles of time to wait for a resolution, if the best option is readily available at that moment.

People are getting too focused on the sandwich issue, and not the deeper POTENTIAL safety issue. I guarantee they wouldn't do that if the sandwich hadn't been the answer.

So it all comes back to the shitty flight attendants. The pilot SHOULD have an idea that something WILL ACTUALLY SOLVE THE PROBLEM because mom was clear all the way through that a hot frickin' sandwich would solve this potential problem. People are focused on the sandwich because it was THE issue. And so easily provided that United looks like the pricks they are.

Believe it or not, those flight attendants are not actually there just to warm up sandwiches and pour coffee. They are there to get your ass out of the plane alive should there be a problem. They are there to give first aid, use the portable defibrillators and calm panic should any situation arise that they need to do so. It's their job to monitor the health and safety of everyone on the plane. The coffee is just something they do to keep everyone safe and comfortable when nothing else is going on.

They are assessing the safety of hundreds of people. Again, the sandwhich is moot. There was a safety concern. Just because mom said the sandwhich would solve the situation- what if it didn't? There was a threat to passenger safety (even had the girl scratched herself), and that requires immediate attention.

But what if mom was right and it did solve the problem? With minimal to no effort on the behalf of the flight attendants who are there to keep us all safe. So instead of taking mom's word for it that a potential problem would be thwarted with minimal effort, the flight attendants chose to actually escalate the situation and create a problem where none actually existed. What I read, mom was trying to explain what could happen. The flight attendants made sure that they created an environment to give the potential problem the greatest chance of actually happening rather than trying to solve the problem, thereby keeping everyone safe. And up in the air.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With this woman being a prominent activist, I have to wonder if part of the issue is her embarrassment over being the cause of the plane re-routing. Why not turn it into a lawsuit?

A pilot has the responsibility of every single passenger on the plane sitting squarely on their shoulders. This includes the teen and her parents, and every other passenger.

They cannot assess which way a scenario will go. If autistic child HAD had a meltdown and injuries happened, this pilot and United would be lauded for their quick attention in getting the plane safely to the ground.

But it didn't happen, and now they're being called into question.

A plane is not a car. You can't suddenly pull over to the side of the road to see if a meltdown is going to happen, and swerve back into the lane if it doesn't. The pilot made a decision to re-route based on the information he got, which is, from my understanding, that this child would hurt herself or her family if she didn't get something.

A pilot has no idea if that something will actually solve the problem. What if that escalates the issue, rather than solves it? He just has the responsibility of that passenger to address, which means diverting was also to protect her. The fact that the meltdown didn't happen is moot. There aren't do-overs in flying. The safest, quickest and allowable course of action (taking into consideration that you can't just land at any old airport or take any old flight path for kicks), was to divert. They don't have oodles of time to wait for a resolution, if the best option is readily available at that moment.

People are getting too focused on the sandwich issue, and not the deeper POTENTIAL safety issue. I guarantee they wouldn't do that if the sandwich hadn't been the answer.

So it all comes back to the shitty flight attendants. The pilot SHOULD have an idea that something WILL ACTUALLY SOLVE THE PROBLEM because mom was clear all the way through that a hot frickin' sandwich would solve this potential problem. People are focused on the sandwich because it was THE issue. And so easily provided that United looks like the pricks they are.

Believe it or not, those flight attendants are not actually there just to warm up sandwiches and pour coffee. They are there to get your ass out of the plane alive should there be a problem. They are there to give first aid, use the portable defibrillators and calm panic should any situation arise that they need to do so. It's their job to monitor the health and safety of everyone on the plane. The coffee is just something they do to keep everyone safe and comfortable when nothing else is going on.

They are assessing the safety of hundreds of people. Again, the sandwhich is moot. There was a safety concern. Just because mom said the sandwhich would solve the situation- what if it didn't? There was a threat to passenger safety (even had the girl scratched herself), and that requires immediate attention.

But what if mom was right and it did solve the problem? With minimal to no effort on the behalf of the flight attendants who are there to keep us all safe. So instead of taking mom's word for it that a potential problem would be thwarted with minimal effort, the flight attendants chose to actually escalate the situation and create a problem where none actually existed. What I read, mom was trying to explain what could happen. The flight attendants made sure that they created an environment to give the potential problem the greatest chance of actually happening rather than trying to solve the problem, thereby keeping everyone safe. And up in the air.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With this woman being a prominent activist, I have to wonder if part of the issue is her embarrassment over being the cause of the plane re-routing. Why not turn it into a lawsuit?

A pilot has the responsibility of every single passenger on the plane sitting squarely on their shoulders. This includes the teen and her parents, and every other passenger.

They cannot assess which way a scenario will go. If autistic child HAD had a meltdown and injuries happened, this pilot and United would be lauded for their quick attention in getting the plane safely to the ground.

But it didn't happen, and now they're being called into question.

A plane is not a car. You can't suddenly pull over to the side of the road to see if a meltdown is going to happen, and swerve back into the lane if it doesn't. The pilot made a decision to re-route based on the information he got, which is, from my understanding, that this child would hurt herself or her family if she didn't get something.

A pilot has no idea if that something will actually solve the problem. What if that escalates the issue, rather than solves it? He just has the responsibility of that passenger to address, which means diverting was also to protect her. The fact that the meltdown didn't happen is moot. There aren't do-overs in flying. The safest, quickest and allowable course of action (taking into consideration that you can't just land at any old airport or take any old flight path for kicks), was to divert. They don't have oodles of time to wait for a resolution, if the best option is readily available at that moment.

People are getting too focused on the sandwich issue, and not the deeper POTENTIAL safety issue. I guarantee they wouldn't do that if the sandwich hadn't been the answer.

So it all comes back to the shitty flight attendants. The pilot SHOULD have an idea that something WILL ACTUALLY SOLVE THE PROBLEM because mom was clear all the way through that a hot frickin' sandwich would solve this potential problem. People are focused on the sandwich because it was THE issue. And so easily provided that United looks like the pricks they are.

Believe it or not, those flight attendants are not actually there just to warm up sandwiches and pour coffee. They are there to get your ass out of the plane alive should there be a problem. They are there to give first aid, use the portable defibrillators and calm panic should any situation arise that they need to do so. It's their job to monitor the health and safety of everyone on the plane. The coffee is just something they do to keep everyone safe and comfortable when nothing else is going on.

They are assessing the safety of hundreds of people. Again, the sandwhich is moot. There was a safety concern. Just because mom said the sandwhich would solve the situation- what if it didn't? There was a threat to passenger safety (even had the girl scratched herself), and that requires immediate attention.

Anonymous wrote:You can't threaten that your kid will get violent to get what you want and then be surprised that the flight attendants take precautions in case your kid gets violent. Landing the plane was probably an overreaction, but the mother didn't handle the whole situation well either.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With this woman being a prominent activist, I have to wonder if part of the issue is her embarrassment over being the cause of the plane re-routing. Why not turn it into a lawsuit?

A pilot has the responsibility of every single passenger on the plane sitting squarely on their shoulders. This includes the teen and her parents, and every other passenger.

They cannot assess which way a scenario will go. If autistic child HAD had a meltdown and injuries happened, this pilot and United would be lauded for their quick attention in getting the plane safely to the ground.

But it didn't happen, and now they're being called into question.

A plane is not a car. You can't suddenly pull over to the side of the road to see if a meltdown is going to happen, and swerve back into the lane if it doesn't. The pilot made a decision to re-route based on the information he got, which is, from my understanding, that this child would hurt herself or her family if she didn't get something.

A pilot has no idea if that something will actually solve the problem. What if that escalates the issue, rather than solves it? He just has the responsibility of that passenger to address, which means diverting was also to protect her. The fact that the meltdown didn't happen is moot. There aren't do-overs in flying. The safest, quickest and allowable course of action (taking into consideration that you can't just land at any old airport or take any old flight path for kicks), was to divert. They don't have oodles of time to wait for a resolution, if the best option is readily available at that moment.

People are getting too focused on the sandwich issue, and not the deeper POTENTIAL safety issue. I guarantee they wouldn't do that if the sandwich hadn't been the answer.

So it all comes back to the shitty flight attendants. The pilot SHOULD have an idea that something WILL ACTUALLY SOLVE THE PROBLEM because mom was clear all the way through that a hot frickin' sandwich would solve this potential problem. People are focused on the sandwich because it was THE issue. And so easily provided that United looks like the pricks they are.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Emergency landing the plane was a WAY over reaction. They could have just had security waiting at the destination to school those parents/bar them from future flights if they felt the request for hot food was so threatening.

It's a ridiculous over reaction and makes the airline look terrible.

United has made dumb decisions in the past. That doesn't mean this is w dumb decision, what if the girl had had her threatened meltdown, with screaming and scratching? How would meeting the family on the ground address that?