Originally Posted by
bhrubin
The "airlines tried and could not" accommodate this woman--you say that as if their attempt to try and their failure is something of a fait accompli. The fact is that the airlines bear responsibility for her death to some degree because they tried and could not deliver on their contract--her payment and their ticketing for her seats/itinerary. The could not deliver--and they therefore bear some responsibility.
Hogwash. This woman didn't die because the airlines didn't take her home, she died because of a pre-existing medical condition for which she failed to seek proper treatment while in Hungary. Treatment was available where she was. She didn't seek it, preferring to risk her own life in order to seek treatment on the other side of the planet.
Originally Posted by
bhrubin
The media reports include nothing about her having gained a significant amount of weight while in Europe--she was already morbidly obese before departing from the USA as noted in all reports.
Her refusal to take treatment in Hungary is not an issue whatsoever in this case. People are entitled to seek treatment in their home countries, and not doing so isn't actionable!
Yes, people are entitled to seek treatment wherever they wish, and doing so isn't actionable.
However, when a person chooses to ignore or deny themselves care that is available where they are, they take upon themselves the responsibility for any negative health consequences.
Originally Posted by
bhrubin
IMO, most people herein are looking to make excuses for the airlines and their FAs and pilots who acted badly here, exempting the airlines for the fact that (1) the airlines accepted the ticketed contract knowing her weight in ADVANCE, (2) the airlines either didn't try to accommodate the passenger or couldn't accommodate the passenger, either of which didn't fulfill the contract as per the ticket, (3) the FAs and pilots acted discriminatorily in various ways (trying to prevent a missed connection by the LH pilot is laughable as an excuse not to try to accommodate the passenger when numerous connections are missed for reasons of far less significance and import in any week for every airline, and the FAs on DL and KLM were similarly discriminatory in their behavior, I suspect, and (4) the passenger ultimately died as she was not able to return to seek the medical care she wanted and for which she had contracted airline transport to receive.
It's a pretty cut and dry contracts case for the USA and EU. The airlines failed to deliver on their contracts, and they likely had issues of discrimination as part of that failure, and those failures resulted in the woman's death. No wonder they settled.
Whether or not the airlines failed to deliver on their contracts is one issue, and whether or not they discriminated against this woman is a second issue. Neither of those issues had any bearing whatsoever on the woman's death.
Medical treatment was available where she was, so lack of transportation, no matter what the cause - failures, discrimination, or any other factor - did not contribute to her death in any sense.
She died because she had a pre-existing condition and failed to seek out the available treatment where she was. She risked her life by postponing treatment until she could get home, and lost the gamble. None of that is the fault of the airlines.
Failure to deliver and discrimination are completely separate issues. The airlines may well be guilty of one or both of those things, but even if they are, neither of those things makes them the least bit culpable in her death.