It would not have been insubordination for the TSOs to follow the existing policy which exempts liquids for baby food and let the parent through with the non-chilled water.

Instead, the OP was politely and graciously bullied by two power-tripping TSOs who violated their own SOP, which does allow liquids in this case.

There's always going to be some discretion/leeway in policies in any organization. One of the many major problems with TSA is that they have been told to err on the side of paranoia instead of on the side of the passenger, the vast majority of which are not terrorists. I'm not talking about anything insane here, I'm talking about using the following logic:

-- This woman has a baby, powdered formula, (presumably sealed) bottled water, and a reasonable explanation as to why she needs it. There is an explicit exception in the rules for baby formulas and other liquids for babies. Woman (and baby) are not otherwise engaging in suspicious behavior, not triggering SPOTters, etc. Do we a) assume the factory-sealed non-leaking water bottle is an explosive and confiscate it (but then throw it in the bin next to our checkpoint)?, or b) ETD the bottle and after the negative ETD test allow the woman to proceed with her baby and the components of formula?

Of course, TSO chooses a).

Another example of this failure to err on the side of the passenger and failure to use logic was the detention and referral for arrest of the special-ed teacher carrying a leather bookmark. Stopping and thinking for a heartbeat would have prevented that scenario. Same with the nipple ring incident. And the amputee who was told to remove his leg but refused a chair.

Instead, we get bullies and power trippers.

IMO any time any TSO confiscates any item that is not explicitly on the prohibited items list, including confiscating an exemption/exception item when the exemption applies, they should be made to fill out a full report justifying the confiscation, which is copied to the local FSD and the passenger.

TSA touts its layers of security, but they use those layers only to further screw the passenger. E.g., SPOTter sees "suspicious" behavior so passenger gets SSSSelected for SSSSecondary SSSScreening. It never once crossed the TSA braintrust's mind to use those layers to aid passengers and give them increased benefit of the doubt.

Others have discussed the actual issue of the TSA not allowing the water through security, so no need for me to rehash.

And while I don't want to start a discussion about the safety of using such a device on a plane ....

There is a bottle warmer that is basically an insulated "sleeve" type wrap that perhaps could have been used to warm the water in the terminal. (There are some with the cigarette lighter type that work on AA)

Also, often a shop at the airport will have storage stock of water that hasn't yet made it to the fridge.

In a pinch I also found it useful to order a cup of hot water on the flight, or restaurant or even the tap, and emmerse the water bottle in that.

Very helpful suggestions, MiteMom. ^

Whilst I agree the liquid ban is a real PITA, technically water is water not baby food and water is banned. Everywhere. There seem to be some really OTT reactions on this board! The guys were just doing their jobs, the same way I do mine and you do yours. I bet all of us can seem to be a 'bullying PITA' sometimes.

For context, here is what started the whole liquid ban. Very sobering stuff.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7330330.stm

Chill! To the OP, at least you will be prepared for next time. Have you thought about using the water fountains? It's tap water which should be just fine.

The screeners could have done a liquid (strip) test on the water and allowed it to go, at least at the airport where I work. We're pretty lenient, though! But even at my airport, I had a cranky lead who once ordered me to tell a family that they had to either surrender their baby's sippy cup full of water, OR go back out of the checkpoint and dump it (and reassemble their numerous belongings, and wait in line AGAIN). I didn't argue with the lead; I just took the family down to an ETD table out of earshot, then I went up to the podium and asked a supervisor (higher rank than a lead) if it would be OK to run a strip test on the cup. He said "sure" -- problem solved. The lead later admitted he had been out of line, but chalked it up to his adjustment problems after getting moved to the daylight shift when he's a night person. :rolleyes:

Personally, I dislike making people give up/take out stuff, in most cases, and try to avoid it as much as possible as long as I can be sure the substance isn't a threat (by running a strip test or ETD). For instance, if someone comes through with VitaminWater, Gatorade or similar sports drinks, I'll ask, "Are you transporting this due to a medical condition?" while nodding my head vigorously up and down. Even the people who are too slow to grasp the verbal hint usually pick up on the visual cue and begin nodding themselves, finally stammering, "Yes ... why yes I am ..." in which case, I tell them we need to run a quick test on their item to clear it, and then they can be on their way ... ;)

Much more sobering to realize that the plot was just in the imaginations of the plotters. They had procured no chemicals, plane tickets, or passports. Unless something new comes out in the trial they couldn't have pulled it off even if given a free hand. The water ban is is a paranoid overreaction.

There is already a thread in here on the "plot" you referenced. Much interesting discussion there already.

Actually have one of those. It has some sort of chemical gel that goes through an exothermic reaction, generating enough heat to warm the bottle. I decided not to bring the device since I actually think the TSA might have a legitimate concern that this could be used for nefarious purposes (and, more importantly, I didn't want it taken away).

My UA flight did not have in-seat power.

The FA told me that it was against regulations to give up hot water in sufficient quantity to immerse and warm a bottle in an airsick bag (the only container large enough to fit).

Actually, I 'm not sure that we'll be OK for the return flight. We'll obviously purchase water in the terminal (assuming we have enough time). If not allowed to warm the bottle in-flight, we will have one cranky baby on this evening flight. Could be bad for our seat-neighbors.

How 'bout let's try a little context *check*, shall we?:

Flying Toilet Terror Labs: Was the Plot Feasible?

Isn't there power in the loo? I don't actually remember.

Nowhere in the job description for a screener is the word "authority" mentioned (the word is used in the FSD's job description). One can only be insubordinate to another who has authority. No such authority here.

If one begins to patch together bits and pieces of posts we've seen recently, one begins to believe that perhaps there is some rebellion in the ranks. That would be insubordination and I applaud all that.

No kidding! :D

Actually (plain) water for baby food is not exempt. Nursery water (water fortified with vitamins/fluoride) is *supposed* to be exempt. You do have to tell the TSO that it is nursery water to have it exempted. Liquid baby formula, baby food, and juices are exempt for those travelling with children. I don't want to argue the semantics or the senselessness of the policy, but it is what it is.


Bring the water that you need with you, and tell the TSO that it is *nursery water*. Fortified water for infants is an exemption. If the TSO gives you a hassle ask for a supervisor.

I've never been ordered by a boss to treat people the way the TSA orders its employees to treat people. Confiscate baby medicine from mothers? Confiscate water from parents intending to mix it with powdered formula?

Successful implentation of such policies requires the cooperation of 44,000 very special people.

So once again TSA is attempting to practice medicine without a license by dictating that traveling parents must use liquid, not powdered, formula.

If and when the residue from liquid-formula containers is found to be toxic to babies, I hope some smart lawyer finds a way to hold the idiot TSA leadership and management personally liable in a massive class action suit. I'd like to see their pensions and homes stripped to pay the damages, and then see them condemned to work menial labor at minimum wage to pay off the rest of it until the day they are carted to the cemetery.

I guess I fail to see what the problem is with buying a bottle of chilled water airside. Surely you are not saying that it is going to remain cold if stored in an uninsulated bag for over an hour while you wait to mix it with formula -- if you can manage that, I want your diaper bag. IME, it only takes about 30 minutes for the average bottle of "chilled" water to come back to room temp, way less if you put it under your shirt.

Travel with small children requires thinking outside the box, and this is no exception. I've kept milk cold in hotels by opening the window and putting it out on the ledge, and I've warmed bottles by holding the bottle under my arm or between my thighs -- not real comfy, but effective. And I learned a LONG time ago that if you want to be able to easily warm bottles in restaurants and on planes, you carry a wide-mouth plastic mug in the diaper bag. A bit of boiling water in the mug, and voila, warm milk. The onus is on you the parent to make accomodations for your child's needs -- expecting the airline, fellow passengers (or God forbid, TSA!) to do it for you will only result in frustration on someone's part.

Do I think it's stupid that TSA won't allow sealed bottled water through the checkpoints? Yes, I do. Do I try to take it through anyway? No, I don't, because water is NOT an exception to the current rules, so I don't waste my time and energy trying to argue about it.

PS: You can buy GLASS nursettes of premixed Enfamil formula for travel use if you have issues with that whole "lining of the can" question. Similac has premeasured 8 oz. plastic bottles that only need the addition of a nipple before use, too.