TSA denies screening for young boy with pacemaker
Aug 21, 2016, 6:41 am
#16
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 948
They are marked as quotes, they shouldn't be the essence of what the child said they should be verbatim what the child said. No child will utter those phrases and she used them to round up the anti-TSA crowd, the same way you did by writing "TSA denies screening for young boy with pacemaker" even though nobody suggests he was denied screening or kept of the airplane.
Aug 21, 2016, 6:50 am
#17
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,110
I don't think a pacemaker is especially strange, given the amount of pacemakers, ICDs, DBS, SCS, VPS and different pumps people have these days so the TSA would probably see a few a day at any major airport (even if most of them won't be in children - that's pretty rare).
The screening with a metal detector was unacceptable to the parent, and he was offered another screening. I don't see him being turned away, I don't see them denying him access to the airport or actually I don't even see the "TSA denies screening" at any point.
They refused to do exactly what she said, but they aren't required to.
Europe has always had more sane security checks than the US, that is hardly news for anyone and couldn't come as a surprise for someone who asks for the usual at a TSA checkpoint. The point of the TSA checkpoint is to do the searches they require.
No pacemaker manufacturer recommends it?
But you also have people who've done studies on it, like http://content.onlinejacc.org/articl...icleid=1132369
There is currently a lawsuit in Pennsylvania regarding the issue. There is one incident reported where a pacemaker stopped working after going through a metal detector - and there was never any follow up to determine if the pacemaker was malfunctioning or not.
I don't believe her son said what she says are verbatim quotes. Following that, I'm assuming she might've lied about the rest, too.
The screening with a metal detector was unacceptable to the parent, and he was offered another screening. I don't see him being turned away, I don't see them denying him access to the airport or actually I don't even see the "TSA denies screening" at any point.
They refused to do exactly what she said, but they aren't required to.
Europe has always had more sane security checks than the US, that is hardly news for anyone and couldn't come as a surprise for someone who asks for the usual at a TSA checkpoint. The point of the TSA checkpoint is to do the searches they require.
No pacemaker manufacturer recommends it?
But you also have people who've done studies on it, like http://content.onlinejacc.org/articl...icleid=1132369
There is currently a lawsuit in Pennsylvania regarding the issue. There is one incident reported where a pacemaker stopped working after going through a metal detector - and there was never any follow up to determine if the pacemaker was malfunctioning or not.
I don't believe her son said what she says are verbatim quotes. Following that, I'm assuming she might've lied about the rest, too.
So there is no evidence that she was not truthful.
Last edited by essxjay; Aug 21, 2016 at 10:03 am Reason: reference to deleted remark
Aug 21, 2016, 7:14 am
#18
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
There isn't. But the way the story was told does give cause for some disbelief.
To me it seems like the kind of story a kid in my third or fourth grade class could write when recounting an experience. It would not be verbatim accurate, but the intention would be there to communicate the real story as accurately as the kid could.
I'm still in disbelief that the FT profanity filters allowed a posting of a word whose root is the four letter vulgarity for feces, an allowance that takes place when attaching that word to "storm".
To me it seems like the kind of story a kid in my third or fourth grade class could write when recounting an experience. It would not be verbatim accurate, but the intention would be there to communicate the real story as accurately as the kid could.
I'm still in disbelief that the FT profanity filters allowed a posting of a word whose root is the four letter vulgarity for feces, an allowance that takes place when attaching that word to "storm".
Last edited by TWA884; Aug 21, 2016 at 10:34 am
Aug 21, 2016, 7:44 am
#19
Original Poster
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,526
Why would the mother of a child with a pacemaker want the child to use a metal detector? Something doesnt add up, as usually it's pacemaker users who are told not to use metal detectors.
The mother of the child in the story seems to have embellished the story in such a way that I would be surprised if she does herself any favors in making her story to come across as credible as a story could be without such embellishments. It almost reads like something a kid would right in third or fourth grade when asked to tell a story of what they may have experienced.
The mother of the child in the story seems to have embellished the story in such a way that I would be surprised if she does herself any favors in making her story to come across as credible as a story could be without such embellishments. It almost reads like something a kid would right in third or fourth grade when asked to tell a story of what they may have experienced.
The worst offenders were a manager named Ms. <redacted>, who refused to allow Chille alternate security screening because he is not allowed to use a metal detector with his heart implant.
Last edited by TWA884; Aug 21, 2016 at 9:24 am Reason: Redact employee name
Aug 21, 2016, 7:45 am
#20
Original Poster
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,526
They are marked as quotes, they shouldn't be the essence of what the child said they should be verbatim what the child said. No child will utter those phrases and she used them to round up the anti-TSA crowd, the same way you did by writing "TSA denies screening for young boy with pacemaker" even though nobody suggests he was denied screening or kept of the airplane.
Aug 21, 2016, 9:47 am
#22
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
Aug 21, 2016, 10:06 am
#23
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: PDX
Programs: TSA Refusenik charter member
Posts: 15,978
Not every compound word is filtered but that may be one for profanity bots. I'll let IB know. Thanks for the heads up.
</modhat>
Aug 21, 2016, 1:40 pm
#24
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,110
5
Why would the mother of a child with a pacemaker want the child to use a metal detector? Something doesnt add up, as usually it's pacemaker users who are told not to use metal detectors.
The mother of the child in the story seems to have embellished the story in such a way that I would be surprised if she does herself any favors in making her story to come across as credible as a story could be without such embellishments. It almost reads like something a kid would right in third or fourth grade when asked to tell a story of what they may have experienced.
The mother of the child in the story seems to have embellished the story in such a way that I would be surprised if she does herself any favors in making her story to come across as credible as a story could be without such embellishments. It almost reads like something a kid would right in third or fourth grade when asked to tell a story of what they may have experienced.
I don't think that's what she wanted. Based on my reading she was expecting the boy to be screened using ETD as TSA had done in the past based on her account.
And why did it take 18 TSA and other people to handle a young boy? I think we have all seen video or read about TSA employees surrounding people to intimidate the traveler, and I think we have all seen cases where TSA makes screening as difficult as possible when TSA practices are questioned.
Getting all worked up over quote marks and the exact words used is a waste of time. Unless someone recorded the conversation it's all speculation. I think what many could agree to is that based on all information available to TSA at that moment this boy presented such a low level of risk as to not even register on the threat scale.
I'm not saying to not screen but ganging up and making things difficult, actually increased chances of a real threat getting through that checkpoint. TSA should recognize this but seems incapable of doing so.
Lastly, TSA has such a dismal PR rep that senseless things like this undermine all efforts to improve TSA's reputation with the public, business, and legislators. TSA is broken!
Last edited by Boggie Dog; Aug 21, 2016 at 2:15 pm
Aug 21, 2016, 2:18 pm
#25
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 948
5
I don't think that's what she wanted. Based on my reading she was expecting the boy to be screened using ETD as TSA had done in the past based on her account.
And why did it take 18 TSA and other people to handle a young boy? I think we have all seen video or read about TSA employees surrounding people to intimidate the traveler, and I think we have all seen cases where TSA makes screening as difficult as possible when TSA practices are questioned.
Getting all worked up over quote marks and the exact words used is a waste of time. Unless someone recorded the conversation it's all speculation. I think what many could agree to is that based on all information available to TSA at that moment this boy presented such a low level of risk as to not even register on the threat scale.
I'm not saying to not screen but ganging up and making things difficult, actually increased chances of a real threat getting through that checkpoint. TSA should recognize this but seems incapable of doing so.
Lastly, TSA has such a dismal PR rep that senseless things like this undermine all efforts to improve TSA's reputation with the public, business, and legislators. TSA is broken!
Aug 21, 2016, 3:01 pm
#26
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,110
Aug 21, 2016, 3:36 pm
#27
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
Only by imagining that something that may be possible somewhere sometimes in the world also explains what happened in this situation.
Confirmation bias?
I don't take issue with the following:
I don't think that's what she wanted. Based on my reading she was expecting the boy to be screened using ETD as TSA had done in the past based on her account.
And why did it take 18 TSA and other people to handle a young boy? I think we have all seen video or read about TSA employees surrounding people to intimidate the traveler, and I think we have all seen cases where TSA makes screening as difficult as possible when TSA practices are questioned.
Getting all worked up over quote marks and the exact words used is a waste of time. Unless someone recorded the conversation it's all speculation. I think what many could agree to is that based on all information available to TSA at that moment this boy presented such a low level of risk as to not even register on the threat scale.
I'm not saying to not screen but ganging up and making things difficult, actually increased chances of a real threat getting through that checkpoint. TSA should recognize this but seems incapable of doing so.
Lastly, TSA has such a dismal PR rep that senseless things like this undermine all efforts to improve TSA's reputation with the public, business, and legislators. TSA is broken!
Confirmation bias?
I don't take issue with the following:
5
I don't think that's what she wanted. Based on my reading she was expecting the boy to be screened using ETD as TSA had done in the past based on her account.
And why did it take 18 TSA and other people to handle a young boy? I think we have all seen video or read about TSA employees surrounding people to intimidate the traveler, and I think we have all seen cases where TSA makes screening as difficult as possible when TSA practices are questioned.
Getting all worked up over quote marks and the exact words used is a waste of time. Unless someone recorded the conversation it's all speculation. I think what many could agree to is that based on all information available to TSA at that moment this boy presented such a low level of risk as to not even register on the threat scale.
I'm not saying to not screen but ganging up and making things difficult, actually increased chances of a real threat getting through that checkpoint. TSA should recognize this but seems incapable of doing so.
Lastly, TSA has such a dismal PR rep that senseless things like this undermine all efforts to improve TSA's reputation with the public, business, and legislators. TSA is broken!
Aug 21, 2016, 4:36 pm
#28
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 396
The mother and child, seem very aware that metal detector screening is not an option. The mother and child also seem aware that AIT IS an option; from the facebook post "Instead of the typical smile and use of the other machine or swiping his hands for explosives..."
"Other machine", to me, suggest the AIT.
TSA does not prohibit children from utilizing the AIT. The son could have easily been screened via the AIT.
From TSA.gov
Implants & Internal Medical Devices
Inform the TSA officer that you have ... a pacemaker, ... .
Screening
Advanced imaging technology can facilitate your screening and reduces the likelihood of a pat-down. You should not be screened by a walk-through metal detector if you have ... a pacemaker. Consult with your physician prior to flying.
If you choose to not be screened through the advanced imaging technology or you alarm the walk-through metal detector, you will undergo a pat-down screening instead.
Advanced Imaging Technology
If your child is able to remain standing in the required position for 5 seconds, he or she may be screened through the advanced imaging technology. If a child 12 and under goes through the machine and alarms, they have an opportunity to go through again or the TSA officer may use other procedures to resolve the alarm to reduce the need for a pat-down.
"Other machine", to me, suggest the AIT.
TSA does not prohibit children from utilizing the AIT. The son could have easily been screened via the AIT.
From TSA.gov
Implants & Internal Medical Devices
Inform the TSA officer that you have ... a pacemaker, ... .
Screening
Advanced imaging technology can facilitate your screening and reduces the likelihood of a pat-down. You should not be screened by a walk-through metal detector if you have ... a pacemaker. Consult with your physician prior to flying.
If you choose to not be screened through the advanced imaging technology or you alarm the walk-through metal detector, you will undergo a pat-down screening instead.
Advanced Imaging Technology
If your child is able to remain standing in the required position for 5 seconds, he or she may be screened through the advanced imaging technology. If a child 12 and under goes through the machine and alarms, they have an opportunity to go through again or the TSA officer may use other procedures to resolve the alarm to reduce the need for a pat-down.
Aug 21, 2016, 6:54 pm
#29
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 38,410
There isn't. But the way the story was told does give cause for some disbelief.
To me it seems like the kind of story a kid in my third or fourth grade class could write when recounting an experience. It would not be verbatim accurate, but the intention would be there to communicate the real story as accurately as the kid could.
I'm still in disbelief that the FT profanity filters allowed a posting of a word whose root is the four letter vulgarity for feces, an allowance that takes place when attaching that word to "storm".
To me it seems like the kind of story a kid in my third or fourth grade class could write when recounting an experience. It would not be verbatim accurate, but the intention would be there to communicate the real story as accurately as the kid could.
I'm still in disbelief that the FT profanity filters allowed a posting of a word whose root is the four letter vulgarity for feces, an allowance that takes place when attaching that word to "storm".
I guess the filter is set to go after some profanity inside words. The missing letters are the profane word for vagina. The link has the same censoring--it's the Wikipedia page talking about it.
Last edited by Loren Pechtel; Aug 21, 2016 at 7:00 pm
Aug 21, 2016, 7:02 pm
#30
Moderator: Travel Safety/Security, Travel Tools, California, Los Angeles; FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: LAX
Programs: oneword Emerald
Posts: 20,631
Moderator's Note:
Trying to stop this is basically impossible. In IT circles it's known as the S....horpe problem. You either filter profanity that is in words, but you should be embar***ed to do that. Other than that you have to list every likely permutation and you'll never get them all.
Thank you,
TWA884
Travel Safety/Security co-moderator