|
The handicapped vs TSA debate
Anyone have opinoin, experience or any thing about Alzheimers?
How do they screen them? What if they dont remember their name? Anyone? Thanks. |
A few years ago, a co-worker of mine was traveling with his wife who had a fairly advanced case of alzheimer's and her aid. He's a very assertive person. For some reason, the aide got marked SSSS and they wanted to screen her separately. He refused, saying that his wife and her aide cannot be separated even for a minute. After some discussions, they also flagged his wife as SSSS. This was in HHMD days and so they go to her and say "raise your arm". She does nothing. So they yell it. Still nothing. My co-worker says "she has alzheimer's: she's not going to be able to respond to your commands". Their response was "so how can we screen her?". My co-worker said: "that's not my problem: it's yours. You need to figure it out. And you need to figure it out before our flight leaves". They did, but I suspect that somebody less assertive wouldn't have had the same result.
|
Originally Posted by RichardKenner
(Post 17653446)
My co-worker says "she has alzheimer's: she's not going to be able to respond to your commands". Their response was "so how can we screen her?". My co-worker said: "that's not my problem: it's yours. You need to figure it out. And you need to figure it out before our flight leaves". They did, but I suspect that somebody less assertive wouldn't have had the same result.
If I was trying to do a medical examination on somebody and their family member said "that's not my problem, you need to figure it out" I would be most taken aback by that attitude, and possibly ask them to leave, depending on circumstances. Now, I know that they are totally different situations, but the cowoker's first priority should be his wife, and easing her experience through this security nonsense, not making some sort of chest-thumping showdown with perceived authority, where his wife will likely be the one who suffers, and no policy change will result. |
Originally Posted by cardiomd
(Post 17653718)
I dislike these kind of stories... I'd not call that assertive, it is more being an a$$, screening a handicapped individual is indeed his problem too if he wants to travel with her. I do not approve of this kind of attitude. You can work together to help the screener do whatever nonsense they need to do in a minimally offensive fashion to your family member.
If I was trying to do a medical examination on somebody and their family member said "that's not my problem, you need to figure it out" I would be most taken aback by that attitude, and possibly ask them to leave, depending on circumstances. Now, I know that they are totally different situations, but the cowoker's first priority should be his wife, and easing her experience through this security nonsense, not making some sort of chest-thumping showdown with perceived authority, where his wife will likely be the one who suffers, and no policy change will result. The TSA receives billions of dollars of tax payer money. It can spend some of that figuring out how to screen handicapped people. |
Originally Posted by cardiomd
(Post 17653718)
I dislike these kind of stories... I'd not call that assertive, it is more being an a$$, screening a handicapped individual is indeed his problem too if he wants to travel with her. I do not approve of this kind of attitude. You can work together to help the screener do whatever nonsense they need to do in a minimally offensive fashion to your family member.
If I was trying to do a medical examination on somebody and their family member said "that's not my problem, you need to figure it out" I would be most taken aback by that attitude, and possibly ask them to leave, depending on circumstances. Yet TSA requires that people walk through a WTMD without considering people who rely on canes, walkers or wheelchairs. They require people to stand in the NoS with their arms up (or for a patdown with their arms out) without thinking about people who can't stand at all, who can't raise their arms, or who have poor balance. They expect everyone to be able to remove their shoes while standing. Confronted with an ostomy bag or an adult diaper or a defibrillator (which turned into a back brace and then into a money belt) or someone with autism or Alzheimer's, far too many of TSA's finest stand there frozen, not knowing what to do next. And that is clearly because TSA HQ has not considered (or has not adequately communicated) a procedure for dealing with these things which are, in fact, not all that unusual. Heck, even at Subway last week I saw a sandwich-maker adjust to a deaf-mute customer who was pointing to what he wanted instead of answering verbal questions. It's not rocket science. *We won't mention the nurse who was so insistent on changing my dressing that she dislocated my hip. She obviously had a deadline to meet, and it probably would've dislocated anyway. :mad: I was drugged to the gills by the time my surgeon got to her, but RadioBloke said the chewing-out was pretty impressive. |
Originally Posted by RadioGirl
(Post 17659219)
Yet TSA requires that people walk through a WTMD without considering people who rely on canes, walkers or wheelchairs. They require people to stand in the NoS with their arms up (or for a patdown with their arms out) without thinking about people who can't stand at all, who can't raise their arms, or who have poor balance. They expect everyone to be able to remove their shoes while standing. Confronted with an ostomy bag or an adult diaper or a defibrillator (which turned into a back brace and then into a money belt) or someone with autism or Alzheimer's, far too many of TSA's finest stand there frozen, not knowing what to do next. And that is clearly because TSA HQ has not considered (or has not adequately communicated) a procedure for dealing with these things which are, in fact, not all that unusual. [/SIZE] We do not expect everyone to remove their shoes. And again, there are some people on this site who are no friends of TSA but always leave their shoes on while screened. As far as medical devices, we actually screen thousands of people with such devices as you describe every day. It is actually rare the screener who doesn't know what to do - but that does happen. But it seems the only real mistake what what you claim in your post, as I have pointed out. |
Originally Posted by SATTSO
(Post 17659460)
TSA does not require people to walk through a WTMD.
Originally Posted by SATTSO
(Post 17659460)
Nor require those who can not to stand in the positions you describe for AIT screening or pat down screening.
Originally Posted by SATTSO
(Post 17659460)
We do not expect everyone to remove their shoes. And again, there are some people on this site who are no friends of TSA but always leave their shoes on while screened.
Originally Posted by SATTSO
(Post 17659460)
As far as medical devices, we actually screen thousands of people with such devices as you describe every day. It is actually rare the screener who doesn't know what to do - but that does happen.
Sharon Cissna. Jean Weber's mother. Thomas Sawyer (again). Cathy Bossi. Ryan Thomas. Drew Mandy. Stephen Walker Lenore Zimmerman. Ruth Sherman. Linda Kallish. Those are just the ones with media coverage that I found in a few minutes of searching (thanks, Lisa S). Most of them are from the last year or 18 months. I haven't started on the thousands of complaints here on FT, on other blogs or in comments on the news articles. Even if only half of those are true, there's a real issue here. Oh, yeah, and 75% of amputees surveyed: The Amputee Coalition of America survey found:
|
Originally Posted by RadioGirl
(Post 17659883)
I know someone who was required (not requested, not volunteered, but forced) to get out of his wheelchair and stagger, then fall through the WTMD at LAX while TSA screeners ignored his protests that he couldn't walk well enough to do that, and while his wife tried to catch him before he fell. (She was held back by two of your colleagues.) There have been similar incidents reported by the media, including the child who was required (not requested, not volunteered, but forced) to remove leg braces and crawl through the WTMD. Does it happen to every wheelchair or walker passenger? Of course not. But that it happens AT ALL, and more than once, indicates that some of your colleagues cannot cope with people who cannot walk through the WTMD.
The fact that TSA is replacing the WTMD with body scanners says otherwise. There's been more than one person reporting that TSA screeners got upset when passengers couldn't hold their arms out long enough for a patdown. There is an assumption that all passengers will be able to stand and raise their hands, either in the body scanner or for a patdown. Does it happen to everypassenger who has trouble raising their arms? Of course not. But that it happens AT ALL, and more than once, indicates that some of your colleagues cannot cope with people who cannot raise their arms. Do screeners regularly make a point of letting people know that they can keep their shoes on, or is it up to the passenger to insist on it? Are there signs or other information at the checkpoint to let people know? The point is, the "all shoes off" policy starts from an assumption that everyone can do that; any exemptions require the passenger to be assertive, which many infrequent, elderly passengers are unlikely to be. Thomas Sawyer. Sharon Cissna. Jean Weber's mother. Thomas Sawyer (again). Cathy Bossi. Ryan Thomas. Drew Mandy. Stephen Walker Lenore Zimmerman. Ruth Sherman. Linda Kallish. Those are just the ones with media coverage that I found in a few minutes of searching (thanks, Lisa S). Most of them are from the last year or 18 months. I haven't started on the thousands of complaints here on FT, on other blogs or in comments on the news articles. Even if only half of those are true, there's a real issue here. Oh, yeah, and 75% of amputees surveyed: Yeah, it happens. Rare? Not nearly rare enough, not with the numbers quoted by the ACA. And every single damn time, your management says "blah blah highly trained blah blah respect and dignity blah blah we'll try harder blah blah working with disability groups" yet it keeps happening. Sorry, TSA still does not require any of those things you state it does. But let me ask you, how often do you travel through a TSA checkpoint? |
Sorry, TSA still does not require any of those things you state it does I don't think so. Luckily I'm not disabled and never had to see just what the TSA does or doesn't do for any particular disabilities, but I've read tons of news stories about TSA stupidity with disabilities. Enough to believe that regardless of "policy" the TSA does what is easy and expedient for them, and what they think they can get away with, which includes forcing people out of wheelchairs and off crutches, removing prostheses, fondling urine and fecal devices, etc. |
Originally Posted by SATTSO
(Post 17660145)
Sorry, TSA still does not require any of those things you state it does. But let me ask you, how often do you travel through a TSA checkpoint?
I have not met you, but I am certain that you would not do the things mentioned in the examples above as you seem to exhibit the professional side of the TSA that we want to see. Please accept the fact that not all of your colleagues are as you are. |
Originally Posted by SATTSO
(Post 17659460)
TSA does not require people to walk through a WTMD. Nor require those who can not to stand in the positions you describe for AIT screening or pat down screening. We have some FT members who know this for a fact, people who hate TSA. But they wouldn't agree with your statement.
I've personally witnessed the screeners at certain airports (including DCA) try to force handicapped folks through an AIT and berate them for not "assuming the position". (last time I saw it happen at the DL/CO pier at DCA I was the beneficiary as I avoided the opt-out and was able to use the WTMD instead). That it happens at DCA of all places speaks volumes. This may well be a training failure, it may be inconsiderate screeners, lazy screeners, or it may be malicious. We'd never know because the policies and their derivation are SSI (or classified). The words "Trust me, I'm from the government" doesn't exactly inspire confidence in this day and age. It is actually rare the screener who doesn't know what to do - but that does happen. |
Originally Posted by mre5765
(Post 17659065)
No it is the TSA's problem. What if one was in a cast that prevented him from raising his arm? What if was paralyzed?
The TSA receives billions of dollars of tax payer money. It can spend some of that figuring out how to screen handicapped people. To understand they work to make passengers safe. NOT to insult and assult them. |
Originally Posted by mre5765
(Post 17659065)
No it is the TSA's problem. What if one was in a cast that prevented him from raising his arm? What if was paralyzed?
The TSA receives billions of dollars of tax payer money. It can spend some of that figuring out how to screen handicapped people. Saying "that's not my problem, figure it out" to some low wage screener (have you ever TALKED to these guys??? they are universally not the sharpest tacks) or expecting him / her to magically know what grandma is capable of, is ridiculous. I'm a doctor, and sometimes people surprise me with what they can or can't do -- the screener is not going to know how to coach a person with Alzheimers disease -- the aide / family member might have much more experience with that. The screener has no idea what is wrong with her. I wasn't there, so I can't say exactly what went on. But as a general rule, it would be better to offer to help grandma raise her arm, or tell the screener he/she is hard of hearing or incapable of the motion, or otherwise helping out, rather than saying "it's your problem, you figure it out." |
To work in a field like TSO's do they should learn the basic about different disabilitys.
They should know a bit biology. That is just common sence. It is a bit like you get a medical treatment from the mailman. Helping out is one thing. But to take over somebodys job is totally different. TSA should be able to screen without asking for help. Otherwise get a new job. I would never help a screener to lift my mothers arms or tell her to spread it. I am not going to help out my aging alzheimers mother to get molested and insulted. She has always protected me . Now it is my turn to return it. There has been several stories about people travelling with people with disabilitys and elderly. When their companion has tried to help they have been told to shut up , back off, dont interfere with the scrfeening process. There is something called dignity. TSA has not know what that word means. |
Originally Posted by tanja
(Post 17661352)
To work in a field like TSO's do they should learn the basic about different disabilitys.
They should know a bit biology. That is just common sence. The dough is connected to the sauce which is connected to the cheese. Sometimes there's anomalies like sausage or mushrooms. They're trickier to clear. |
Originally Posted by RadioGirl
(Post 17659883)
Do screeners regularly make a point of letting people know that they can keep their shoes on, or is it up to the passenger to insist on it? Are there signs or other information at the checkpoint to let people know? The point is, the "all shoes off" policy starts from an assumption that everyone can do that; any exemptions require the passenger to be assertive, which many infrequent, elderly passengers are unlikely to be.
|
Originally Posted by cardiomd
(Post 17661123)
What if, indeed? That's exactly my point, instead of saying "figure it out" the family member should explicitly say what he can and can't do, and help out any way that is needed.
|
Originally Posted by SATTSO
(Post 17659460)
As far as medical devices, we actually screen thousands of people with such devices as you describe every day. It is actually rare the screener who doesn't know what to do - but that does happen. But it seems the only real mistake what what you claim in your post, as I have pointed out. I would think the proper response would be to figure out or think about ways to ensure it NEVER happens, rather than berating those who point out that this behavior occurs. Contrary to your belief, folks dislike the TSA BECAUSE of things like this, not because they have some inborn need to bash the TSA. |
Originally Posted by nachtnebel
(Post 17661594)
What is rare? Can you give us a percentage and then translate that into thousands of passengers? Even a ballpark number. Because it does happen.
And as long as there aren't, these problems will continue. These need to be taken as seriously as "red teams". |
Originally Posted by tkey75
(Post 17661430)
They get all their biology training right off the application for the job.
The dough is connected to the sauce which is connected to the cheese. Sometimes there's anomalies like sausage or mushrooms. They're trickier to clear. Never thought about it before. But I guess "they learn" as they go. And that is very unprofessional. |
Originally Posted by RichardKenner
(Post 17661749)
I don't see how he, or anybody else, can even give an estimate on this because there's absolutely no way to measure it.
In my opinion, that's a large part of the problem. An organization like the TSA has to be "dual prong". On the one side, they have a legitimate interest in security. But on the other, they have to treat passengers with dignity and respect their privacy. For the first prong, there are "red teams" that can be used to generate statistics of how well they detect WEI. But there aren't any "mystery passengers" sent through the checkpoint every hour with various types of disabilities or other special needs to see how well TSOs handle them. And as long as there aren't, these problems will continue. These need to be taken as seriously as "red teams". What you suggest is work and expense. It is far easier to claim that the abuse is rare. Without supporting numbers. |
There is a saying "what goes around comes around".
Wonder what TSA would say if their loved ones gets treated with disrespect and humiliated. |
Alas, I'm too young to vividly remember...
How were people with wheelchairs or metal prosthetic body parts/implants screened before 9/11? HHMD? |
Originally Posted by RichardKenner
(Post 17661557)
In my experience, there are two types of elderly passengers: those who won't do anything they're asked to do and the group you describe. they say "if we have to do this to be safe, I'll do". If TSO's are saying "everbody take your shoes off!", they'll feel they have to do it. If, instead, what's said is: "please remove your shoes if you feel it's safe to do so", there'll be a very different result. But that's not what's said. And as long as it isn't, it'll continue to cause these sorts of problems.
The generation that took on the '60s learned to question authority. They learned to stand up for their rights - many risked arrest. Today's generation suffers from helicopter parents & overarching "protection". They are taught that they must be protected.... and are far less likely to stand up for themselves. I could go on, but that's really Omni/PR territory. |
Originally Posted by mahohmei
(Post 17662276)
Alas, I'm too young to vividly remember...
How were people with wheelchairs or metal prosthetic body parts/implants screened before 9/11? HHMD? Cause you never heard of any wrong doing. Security at that time were mostly very polite. Not invasive, very polite. People were not treated as criminals or sex objects. I used to respect security not any more. |
Originally Posted by SATTSO
(Post 17659460)
As far as medical devices, we actually screen thousands of people with such devices as you describe every day. It is actually rare the screener who doesn't know what to do - but that does happen.
If someone asks, I am more than happy to explain what it is. But when I try and explain that it is a medical device which per TSA own rules does not need to be removed, and I am shouted at, or called difficult, then it does more than just annoy me. If I present myself and say that I have physical issues, I shouldn't be disbelieved or it shouldn't be assumed that I am not telling the truth. But I have had that happen on several occasions. |
I raised holy hell at a screener at the WTMD at T5 @LAX last summer when they made my Mom walk through the metal detector. I said she's in a wheel chair and should be screened in the wheel chair. She wobbles like a webelo and she does fall down. The wheel chair person didn't understand English and I was really pissed off at all of them, and my Mom was too. The kid at the WTMD looked like he was brand new. No excuse. In a wheel chair, stay in a wheel chair. They can clear both at the same time.
I am my Mom's advocate. Her health and her mobility are important to her and anything that threatens that I will go after like a terrier. And I have a disability that's hidden and prevents me from using the scanners. I get the pat down and then tell them I can't raise my right arm without severe pain and discomfort and to deal with it. |
Originally Posted by SATTSO
(Post 17660145)
Sorry, TSA still does not require any of those things you state it does.
The Transportation Security Administration has apologized to a boy allegedly forced to take off his leg braces during screening at Philadelphia International Airport. Bob Thomas, a Camden, N.J., police officer, says it happened in March when he and his wife were flying to Orlando, Fla., with their 4-year-old son, Ryan. The boy wears leg braces because he is developmentally delayed. Thomas says a screener told the family the boy had to take off his braces. Davis said the agency has no reason to doubt the family's story. She says there are other ways to screen people with leg braces. I've said before, your official policy doesn't mean squat. The only thing that matters is what the screener does at the checkpoint on the day. Do you dispute that Thomas Sawyer had his ostomy bag emptied all over his clothes? There's no point in talking about what "should have happened" or what happened to other people with ostomy bags, or what you would have done if you'd been there. But what actually happened to Thomas. Do you think he said "oh, well, that wasn't the official procedure so I guess it's okay?" Do you dispute that Cathy Bossi was forced to remove a breast prosthesis? Do you think that the statement by TSA later, "that shouldn't happen" made it okay? The list I provided, with hyperlinks, are all real incidents. They happened. You can keep saying "it doesn't happen" or "it shouldn't happen" but it doesn't change the truth.
Originally Posted by SATTSO
(Post 17660145)
But let me ask you, how often do you travel through a TSA checkpoint?
Anyway, so what? I've never been raped, or murdered, or shot, or kidnapped, or mugged. Should I believe those things never happen to anyone unless they happened to me? |
Originally Posted by RadioGirl
(Post 17664730)
Let me break that down for you. 4-year-old boy FORCED to remove braces by TSA screener.
|
Originally Posted by RichardKenner
(Post 17664874)
Part of the problem here is that "forced" is a very imprecise word and can mean different things to different people. Technically, to "force" somebody to do something means threatening something bad if the thing isn't done. But what is the threat in this case? Jail time? A fine? Not being allowed through the checkpoint? A secondary search? Or maybe it's just that somebody official making a request is viewed as "forcing". It's hard to know how to interpret many of these anecdotes without knowing more about the details of the "forcing".
A developmentally delayed child was forced to remove his leg braces at the airport to prove he wasn't a security risk. "Unfortunately, it's no joke," writes Daniel Rubin for Philly.com. The child, Ryan, was en route to Disney Land to celebrate his fourth birthday when TSA officials ruled he must clear customs without his leg braces, on his own two feet. TSA apologized for the incident. TSA spokeswoman Ann Davis says the agency's regional security director apologized to the Thomases on Friday. |
Originally Posted by RichardKenner
(Post 17664874)
Part of the problem here is that "forced" is a very imprecise word and can mean different things to different people. Technically, to "force" somebody to do something means threatening something bad if the thing isn't done. But what is the threat in this case? Jail time? A fine? Not being allowed through the checkpoint? A secondary search? Or maybe it's just that somebody official making a request is viewed as "forcing". It's hard to know how to interpret many of these anecdotes without knowing more about the details of the "forcing".
If TSA says you must do something and you don't wish to do it then forced is the correct word. |
Originally Posted by RichardKenner
(Post 17664874)
Part of the problem here is that "forced" is a very imprecise word and can mean different things to different people. Technically, to "force" somebody to do something means threatening something bad if the thing isn't done. But what is the threat in this case? Jail time? A fine? Not being allowed through the checkpoint? A secondary search? Or maybe it's just that somebody official making a request is viewed as "forcing". It's hard to know how to interpret many of these anecdotes without knowing more about the details of the "forcing".
If TSA says you must do something and you don't wish to do it then forced is the correct word. |
Originally Posted by RichardKenner
(Post 17664874)
Part of the problem here is that "forced" is a very imprecise word and can mean different things to different people. Technically, to "force" somebody to do something means threatening something bad if the thing isn't done. But what is the threat in this case? Jail time? A fine? Not being allowed through the checkpoint? A secondary search? Or maybe it's just that somebody official making a request is viewed as "forcing". It's hard to know how to interpret many of these anecdotes without knowing more about the details of the "forcing".
As doober points out, in the context of the story it sounds like the alternative "not being allowed through the checkpoint". Note that his father was a police officer, was furious when he complained to the supervisor (who was not helpful, btw) and followed up with a call to the airport manager. Do you believe that a police officer would view a "request" by a TSA screener as "forcing" and comply without question, then be furious enough to complain to a supervisor? Or that he would be angry enough to call the manager if the alternative had been a secondary search? I know that in the case of my friend's father - for which you only have my account, not news coverage or acknowledgement by the TSA - both the elderly disabled gentleman and his wife argued strenuously that he couldn't walk through the WTMD on his own, but the LAX screeners insisted that he if didn't, he wasn't going to get to his flight. And as they were on their way home to Australia, "not flying" was not an option. Unacceptable. |
deleted
|
Originally Posted by RichardKenner
(Post 17664874)
Part of the problem here is that "forced" is a very imprecise word and can mean different things to different people. Technically, to "force" somebody to do something means threatening something bad if the thing isn't done. But what is the threat in this case? Jail time? A fine? Not being allowed through the checkpoint? A secondary search? Or maybe it's just that somebody official making a request is viewed as "forcing". It's hard to know how to interpret many of these anecdotes without knowing more about the details of the "forcing".
Whatever is happening here, it is not as simple as deciding not to go to Burger King because the staff is rude and instead opting for McDonald's. |
Originally Posted by littlesheep
(Post 17665273)
How dumb to you have to be to understand that someone in a wheelchair is NOT ABLE TO WALK or can only walk with such difficulty that he requires a wheelchair. That's is why he is IN A WHEELCHAIR. See? Can't walk ---> therefore is in wheelchair. In wheelchair ---> means can't walk.
Seriously! Is there anyone who could possibly not understand this basic fact? I'm still waiting for Risk Based security. |
Originally Posted by littlesheep
(Post 17665273)
How dumb to you have to be to understand that someone in a wheelchair is NOT ABLE TO WALK or can only walk with such difficulty that he requires a wheelchair. That's is why he is IN A WHEELCHAIR. See? Can't walk ---> therefore is in wheelchair. In wheelchair ---> means can't walk.
Seriously! Is there anyone who could possibly not understand this basic fact? 1. "Difficulty" is in the eye of the beholder. Some folks can walk, but fatigue easily, and use a wheelchair in order to navigate large distances ... like, say, airport concourses. So, the reason why a given passenger presents him/herself at a checkpoint seated in a wheelchair may not be obvious. 2. Regrettably, a small number of folks grab a wheelchair and use it simply because they can, and because such folks are given certain advantages like line-jumping, even though they have no qualifying disability. The chief effect of such folks is to cast suspicion on others with a legitimate need for accomodation. Of course, none of that excuses TSOs for treating those seated in wheelchairs with disrespect. TSOs have procedures to follow in such situations, and they should follow those procedures without harassing the passenger. |
deleted
|
Originally Posted by littlesheep
(Post 17665273)
How dumb to you have to be to understand that someone in a wheelchair is NOT ABLE TO WALK or can only walk with such difficulty that he requires a wheelchair. That's is why he is IN A WHEELCHAIR. See? Can't walk ---> therefore is in wheelchair. In wheelchair ---> means can't walk.
Seriously! Is there anyone who could possibly not understand this basic fact? Bolding mine. To answer that; someone hired off a pizza box??????? |
Originally Posted by doober
(Post 17664897)
The child was forced to remove the braces:
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 4:56 am. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.