Freaking out passenger forces plane back to gate
 

Was leaving PHI last night and we were taxiing for takeoff. Suddenly the pilot stomps on the brakes and gets on the PA, "Sorry folks, someone has decided they don't want to fly with us tonight. We're going back to the gate." It was a huge pain. They had to unload nearly all the luggage while they looked for this woman's luggage. We were late to our destination, people missed connecting flights, it was a mess. While most of us didn't hear any commotion, the pilot told me afterwards that the woman had a panic attack and was "freaking out." He just decided to take her back to the gate to avoid further problems.

I've flown a lot over the years, and I've never seen this happen before. Maybe while still at the gate when the door is open, but nothing like this. Is this a common occurrence witnessed by others? I'm hopeful they have some blacklist system for banning people like this from flying again.

Why ban the PAX? Sure it was a pain in the butt for many, but at least it was on the ground and not in the air where they might of had to divert. Bottom line it was basically a medical emergency which happen regularly and most folks learn to deal with it like other PITA parts of air travel.

Panic attacks are generally involuntary and nasty when triggered.

Who are 'people like this'? People who get ill on board planes? People who inconvenience you? While it is a shame that no-one on board was able to help her through the attack, if it was caused by being on board, you may find she bans herself, so she doesn't need to go through that again.

I don't know, maybe I'm just still raw from last night and I'm being unreasonable. I got the impression from talking to a couple of people sitting next to her that if she wasn't let off the airplane immediately she was going to start running up and down the aisle screaming, "we're all going to die!" That's certainly not preferable either I know. But to me I guess it's like a disruptive passenger, bordering on being a threat. I would think airlines have the ability to ban those kinds of passengers if they want. I just wasn't sure if they'd consider somebody like this in the same category. I do know the FAs did a good job of trying to shield her because some people were going to have words with her on her way out.

Just be glad it wasn't you who felt this way....

If it was up me I would have let the woman off the airplane as per what occurred but left her luggage on board. Her luggage could have been returned to her at a later date.

The delay in searching for her luggage afterwards clearly caused further disruption to countless passengers / staff. Or am I being too harsh?

I believe that it is a security measure that if the passenger is removed from the flight, so are their luggage.

I don't know what airport PHI is supposed to be (PHL?), but if this was an international flight, there would have been a positive baggage match requirement for flight.

My understanding is that domestic flights are no longer subjected to that requirement, but without knowing the details its hard to say.

As someone who has had panic attacks (not on planes thank goodness), no you can't control how or when you react - my problem spot is heights and I work in a tall building. I'll go months being okay and then all of a sudden I can't handle being on the 4th floor of a building - unable to breathe, feel like I'm going to pass out, I usually get very quiet as I'm trying to focus and calm myself (doesn't always work). A friend though starts hyperventilating, then screaming, grabbing other people, and gets very demanding - she is a very quiet person normally; her reactions during panic attacks are completely different than her normal personality. Very probable this woman either had no idea she would react this way or thought she had worked through the problem (there are lots of fear of flying courses/therapy programs out there).

As to the luggage, I don't know about you but if somebody is to the point of screaming "we're all going to die" and forces her way off the plane, then I definitely DON'T want her luggage remaining onboard with me. For an international flight, it would be required to remove her luggage, for a domestic flight it would be the smart thing to do as well.

No kidding. I've had panic attacks and I can't think of many things that are worse. Thankfully it's never happened to me in a metal tube 30,000 feet in the air but that exact scenario is probably one of my greatest fears. I feel for the passengers who were inconvenienced but I feel even worse for the woman.

I have the same problem re: heights and it took me a long time to get over the fear of flying (I still don't like the 'taking off' experience). Similarly, I can't stand on narrow train platforms so tend to take buses /cabs instead of using underground systems. I've just had to learn from past experience and try and mitigate the risk of a panic attack. Takes me so much longer to get to work as a result.

And planes might be a trigger for some - e.g. let's assume a few years back the women heard her husband died in an accident right before boarding a plane and it created a near phobia for flying.

I think that rule has been abolished given that all luggage is (should be) screened before loading. I asked to be offloaded* from a flight from Chicago to Dublin about 18 months ago. My luggage traveled on my original flight and was waiting for me when I arrived the next day.

* We'd sat on the plane (at the gate) on a very hot day for a couple hours without AC, then sat on the tarmac for more than an hour as a severe storm pummeled the area, then spent about an hour taxiing around waiting for a gate so the plane could be inspected because the winds were so strong, then spent time waiting for the mechanics and refueling trucks to arrive. Once I'd sat on the plane for 7 hours without going anywhere, I'd had enough. Another 7 hours on that plane would have caused me to run up and down the aisles screaming.

Im sure the passenger isn't flying anytime soon

Sorry, typo. It was Philly. Maybe the luggage thing was at the request of the pax and not by rules.

I don't mean to sound unsympathetic, because I'm not. Following a serious car accident a few years ago, I also struggled with anxiety attacks for over two years that required medication to get under control. That being said, I also worked over twenty years in the medical field and I can tell you that then, as well as now, anxiety attacks are not considered a medical emergency. Yes, it's something that can seriously suck for the person having it, but there has never been a documented medical case of someone dying from one. Yeah, if you have one and freeze up behind the wheel of your car, you could die in an accident, but the attack itself does not kill. On an enclosed airplane, a passenger spinning out of control could create safety issues for other pax. Maybe that's why the pilot decided to let her off.

Here's a follow up question: What if this woman had demanded to get off 10 minutes after wheels up? Do you turn around, or do you physically restrain her (if necessary) for the duration of the normally scheduled flight?

I was once on a Continental flt. from ORLY (Paris) to Newark, the plane was building up speed on the take-off runway and came to an abrupt stop. There were a few FA's going back to NY but they "suddenly realized" they were needed in Paris. [We got to the gate, they disembarked and we then took off--there was NO delay unloading luggage. Most FA's (know) to have carry-on only.]

It depends on exactly what's going on at that time. The decision to continue or return would be made by the Capt. again based on the situation. Sorry if this isn't what you're looking for.

And my personal o2 based on the op it was the right thing to return & get her off.

I couldn't agree with you more on both points. From someone who suffers from claustrophobia, my reaction to a situation in which I'm enclosed can vary greatly depending on where I am, where I'm going, who I'm with and the circumstances of the situation. Sometimes I am just fine, other times if I feel I am beginning to panic, I quietly do my breathing exercises and find a focal point to calm myself down. For some people though, they can't deal with it this way and the panic attack builds up. Next thing you know, you're doing something drastic and unsafe just to remove yourself from the anxiety-ridden situation.

Wow, I never knew why that happened to me. Glad to be able to put it in context, but I have exactly the same symptoms with exactly the same frequency. The catalyst is always different. Must be mild, because I am always able to focus and calm myself down, but it is not fun. Had it happen with other people in the room and my reaction almost caused them to freak out.

Mike

Not just the op was inconvenienced, but EVERYONE on that plane and perhaps people on the ground too down the line. All because she could not pull her s**t together like a rational adult. I am with the OP on this one.

You're a kind hearted soul, aren't you :rolleyes:

I don't think there is anything unreasonable about banning her. She was unreasonable enough to think she wouldn't have a problem flying once, but if she should happen to forget that and try to do it again that would be a way to remind her it's not a good idea. To that effect, I'd say the airline is helping her.

What if the reason for her panic attacks is the fact that her deceased husband was on one of the 9/11 planes - or the month before got shot down in a war zone? Would you still ban her?

Its been a rule since lockerbie, if the pax leaves so do the bags.

Its definitely cheaper to burn a little gas back to the gate then burning gas to divert. I do have some sympathy for people who suffer from panic attacks. My wife is one of them. Its not pretty.
We don't know this woman's story. It could have come on suddenly, without warning. People dont get banned from airlines for having medical conditions. They do, however, need to get treatment for their condition so it doesn't happen again.

Yes. If I were running an airline her personal situation would certainly receive my sympathy, but unless she was willing to pay for the overnight stays, meals, and alternate transport due to missed connections each time she decided to book a flight at the risk she might panic once she got there then I don't think I'd be taking that risk. Maybe I wouldn't ban her for the first offense - but certainly if it happened twice she's outta there.

I think it would be harsh to ban her but I wouldn't blame the airline for insisting she gets some kind of help with whatever's causing the problem before she gets on one of their aircraft again.

What's the difference? You'd ban her and if she gets help and can demonstrate she is better you lift the ban. Same thing.

Never saw the Final Destination movie series have ya?

If they left baggage on the plane, someone who wanted to bomb a plane could use that loophole. I think the key is for the passenger to believe that their luggage could very well be on a plane with them.

All luggage is supposed to have advanced screening, so (for domestic flights at least) positive bag matching is not required. A few years ago I had a bag leave without me (there was a huge backup at security), to DCA no less.

And there's various operational issues where your bag may miss your flight and take another one.

On the other hand, they still frown on "voluntary" separation -- you don't fly with your bags due to conditions under your control, rather than from actions of the airline. So out of an abundance of caution, they may remove your bags if they have reason to be suspicious of you.

As for the original issue, the point is that when you're travelling with hundreds of strangers, eventually someone is going to have a medical condition that requires immediate attention. It's just part of flying, just like weather and mechanical cancellations/diversions.

As much as I hate to miss connecting flight onwards, etc.
I agree I do not want her luggage sitting somewhere in the same airplane with me.
I feel so sorry for you and the fellow passengers who had to endure this event.

This is very funny. I've never heard of this.

Exactly the same scenario happened to me
in year 2000 on a CO flight from Brazil to Newark.
It took at least 2 hours to offload the containerized luggage.

We never knew the exact reason for the pax change of heart,
pilot said "passenger doesn't want to go, we dont want him onboard".

I don't think the pilot handled it very well. He should have simply said "we have a medical emergency" rather than "someone has decided they don't want to fly with us tonight".

I can sympathize with her, but unless this was the woman's first panic attack, she may have been able to have some medication on hand. Then again, she may not.

If I were the airline, I would ban her until she produces a doctor's note stating that her condition has been addressed and she can fly safely.

The discussion here shows that there is still a massive amount of ignorance about mental disorders. "Pull her sh** together"? Wow!

It's a goddamn disorder that can attack suddenly without any notice. How would YOU pull your sh** together if you slipped in the plane lav and broke your hip, or had a stroke during a flight?

How do we know if this was first attack, or she was taking or not taking meds. You can have an attack even if you are taking meds.

Actually, the US never implemented total baggage reconciliation :eek: The rest of the world did, but it was not implemented on US domestic flights. I'm not sure if it was brought in post 911 when it was realised terrorism can occur in the US too or not.

Relying on advanced screening however does not allow for operational mistakes. Hence why in Europe, total baggage reconciliation is still the norm. If you have a bag which misconnects, it gets additional screening before it is allowed to fly unaccompanied.

I think words from the last statement, "banning people.." isn't necessary, it really is an inconvenience but sometimes we don't know that a reason behind more than what we know, but I know its out of our business but a little understanding from everyone of us would help. :)

I say you get one free pass for the first panic attack. After that either take drugs to feel happy or sleepy, or drive. If it happens a second time the airline should require a medical release for you to fly with them again.

How about a little understanding of logistics and cost? How about understanding that the needs of the one do not outweigh the needs of the many? I find it difficult to feel understanding at this high a price...especially for an irrational panic. People could miss interviews...be late on the first day...miss the death of a loved one...miss a connection..ruin a holiday not to mention the costs to the airline and schedule.

No, there is too much damage.

Big picture.

^ Agreed. There is so much that needs to go into account when they decide if they should go back for one passenger or not. People need to learn how to suck it up.