FlyerTalk Forums

FlyerTalk Forums (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/index.php)
-   United Airlines | MileagePlus (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/united-airlines-mileageplus-681/)
-   -   UA Pilot Diverts to Remove Autistic Child From Plane for Safety Reasons (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/united-airlines-mileageplus/1678775-ua-pilot-diverts-remove-autistic-child-plane-safety-reasons.html)

Cargojon May 13, 15 10:24 am


Originally Posted by NewportGuy (Post 24808435)
Agree. The Mother doesn't seem to get that the special needs of her "special needs Daughter" are her responsibility. Not mine, not yours, and not United's. I don't get why the press doesn't ask questions, like why the Mother didn't prepare for her daughter's need on the ground. Get hot food to carry on, or arrange for hot food on the plane in advance. You can't drop this stuff on a flight crew after you reach cruising altitude.

Lol this possibly the dumbest thing I've read on here in a long time. Special needs not the sole responsibility of those afflicted with them or caring for them. You are saying in effect that wheelchair ramps are the problem of the person in the wheelchair... What you have said completely flies in the face of the ADA.

I think it is you that doesnt get that accessibility is a societal problem.

Baze May 13, 15 10:38 am


Originally Posted by Cargojon (Post 24809415)
Lol this possibly the dumbest thing I've read on here in a long time. Special needs not the sole responsibility of those afflicted with them or caring for them. You are saying in effect that wheelchair ramps are the problem of the person in the wheelchair... What you have said completely flies in the face of the ADA.

I think it is you that doesnt get that accessibility is a societal problem.

Don't remember reading anywhere in the ADA that hot food needs to be made available. There are certain things the ADA does require, like wheelchair access but it says no where that hot food has to be made available. And that is what I got out of the persons statement you rudely called the dumbest thing you ever read. For things beyond the scope of the ADA the caregiver most definitely does need to be prepared and shouldn't expect everyone around them to go beyond the scope of the ADA.

mrboom May 13, 15 10:45 am

It does not take a village to raise a child. It takes proper parenting. This incident is clearly not a societal issue, as suggested.

The ADA argument is ridiculous since the mother and her lack of parenting skills are the root cause.

DiscHandler May 13, 15 10:47 am


Originally Posted by OccasionalFlyerPerson (Post 24808600)
You edited out the part of my post where the young woman's father herself admitted that she'd had a 'meltdown'. Also, just because Hedlund expressed concerns about what may have happened which are not realistic does not in any way mean that her descriptions of what did happen should be ignored. Even passengers such as Chris Hall who don't think Juliette was disruptive enough to justify being thrown off the plane admit that she was making noise. Which is very far from your description of Juliette remaining calm and composed at all times.

Yes, by the time of the video, they were quiet and behaving well. But, you claimed that Juliette had been calm the entire time. This clearly is not the case.

I stand by my conclusion that you have dramatically misrepresented her behaviour on the plane.

Agreed, I don't know how you take a point in time video and assert that was the behavior the entire trip. I also like how certain people totally ignore the father's comment. Some of the axe-grinding in these threads is amazing.

MSPeconomist May 13, 15 11:10 am


Originally Posted by satman40 (Post 24808490)
The mom has milked her Secial Situation for years, this was prepared,

A normal person limits their liability, unless they want attention for themself..

Do they'd still make thermos jugs...because hot meals at 35,000 feet are limited and delivery service is not good.

She was no MD, A mail order PhD, play it for your newsletter

The mother doesn't even have a mail order PhD. It's a Ed.D. which is completely different.

Neil35 May 13, 15 11:16 am

Do we know the name of the hero who gave up that first class meal which bought them time until everyone was safe on the ground?

SuzanneSLO May 13, 15 11:19 am

In some accounts, the Mom states that the family had dinner before the flight but that the daughter was unwilling to eat anything. If Mom decided that daughter should not get on the plane until she had a meal, would United have accommodated them on a later flight from Houston? -- Suzanne

JBord May 13, 15 11:54 am


Originally Posted by SuzanneSLO (Post 24809747)
In some accounts, the Mom states that the family had dinner before the flight but that the daughter was unwilling to eat anything. If Mom decided that daughter should not get on the plane until she had a meal, would United have accommodated them on a later flight from Houston? -- Suzanne

Sure, based on availability. The mother was a platinum, she could do a free same day change.

If she weren't Platinum, it wouldn't have been as easy. But UA re-accomodates for medical and safety issues all the time. If the mother would have calmly explained the issue to an agent, and that there was a possible safety issue, why wouldn't UA work with her? They were willing to re-accommodate the family once in SLC by purchasing them a new ticket on DL.

Although I will caveat this by saying this is where you risk getting some pretty poor customer service from UA, and Houston is one of the locations I've experienced it. So it may not have been easy or fun for the family.

Proactively explaining a medical situation is likely to have a better outcome than making a threat in an airplane 35k feet above the ground.

JVPhoto May 13, 15 12:00 pm


Originally Posted by Neil35 (Post 24809734)
Do we know the name of the hero who gave up that first class meal which bought them time until everyone was safe on the ground?

Wonder if they emailed CS saying they didn't get their meal choice and were offered 3,000 miles.

HkCaGu May 13, 15 12:18 pm


Originally Posted by JBord (Post 24808348)
How is this reasonable?

I didn't say training was reasonable. I said I could see it reasonable that (from her perspectives) she is now legally demanding training as a result of interaction with FAs.


Originally Posted by BlueMilk (Post 24809139)
In this case the accomodation requested (rudely or not) was to sell a leftover business class meal. If the request was reasonable, then the accomodation should have been made without fuss.

And unfortunately it was made, with fuss.

Cargojon May 13, 15 12:18 pm


Originally Posted by Baze (Post 24809495)
Don't remember reading anywhere in the ADA that hot food needs to be made available. There are certain things the ADA does require, like wheelchair access but it says no where that hot food has to be made available. And that is what I got out of the persons statement you rudely called the dumbest thing you ever read. For things beyond the scope of the ADA the caregiver most definitely does need to be prepared and shouldn't expect everyone around them to go beyond the scope of the ADA.

See below. In actuality they are required to provide a reasonable accommodation. And the "passenger safety" argument is invalidated by their failure to do so.

This is where UA fails and this is why they were wrong. Taken from http://www.ada.gov/qandaeng.htm


Q. What are public accommodations?

A. A public accommodation is a private entity that owns, operates, leases, or leases to, a place of public accommodation. Places of public accommodation include a wide range of entities, such as restaurants, hotels, theaters, doctors' offices, pharmacies, retail stores, museums, libraries, parks, private schools, and day care centers. Private clubs and religious organizations are exempt from the ADA's title III requirements for public accommodations.

/snip/

Q. Does the ADA allow public accommodations to take safety factors into consideration in providing services to individuals with disabilities?

A. The ADA expressly provides that a public accommodation may exclude an individual, if that individual poses a direct threat to the health or safety of others that cannot be mitigated by appropriate modifications in the public accommodation's policies or procedures, or by the provision of auxiliary aids. A public accommodation will be permitted to establish objective safety criteria for the operation of its business; however, any safety standard must be based on objective requirements rather than stereotypes or generalizations about the ability of persons with disabilities to participate in an activity.

JBord May 13, 15 1:00 pm


Originally Posted by Cargojon (Post 24810149)
See below. In actuality they are required to provide a reasonable accommodation. And the "passenger safety" argument is invalidated by their failure to do so.

This is where UA fails and this is why they were wrong. Taken from http://www.ada.gov/qandaeng.htm

Are you saying that a hot meal qualifies as an auxiliary aid, or that UA should have policies and procedures that accommodate the request for a hot meal?

I'm certainly not a lawyer, but I think UA made reasonable accommodations. They provided a hot meal. I'm not sure how they could have reasonably been prepared for that. And it isn't like they left the passengers stranded in a desert. They landed in SLC and put them on a flight to their destination.

You seem to be saying the only reasonable accommodation was to do whatever the parents asked, continue the flight despite a verbal safety threat. I'm struggling a little to understand how UA could have anticipated this without the mother warning them prior to boarding the plane.

planemechanic May 13, 15 1:05 pm


Originally Posted by Cargojon (Post 24810149)
See below. In actuality they are required to provide a reasonable accommodation. And the "passenger safety" argument is invalidated by their failure to do so.

This is where UA fails and this is why they were wrong. Taken from http://www.ada.gov/qandaeng.htm

I think you may wish to view this page, from the US DOT:

http://airconsumer.ost.dot.gov/publi...s/horizons.htm


Planning Your Trip

The New Traveling Environment

THE AIR CARRIER ACCESS RULES SWEEP aside many restrictions that formerly discriminated against passengers with disabilities:

A carrier may not refuse transportation to a passenger solely on the basis of a disability.

Air carriers may not limit the number of individuals with disabilities on a particular flight.

All trip information that is made available to other passengers also must be made available to passengers with disabilities.

Carriers must provide passage to an individual who has a disability that may affect his or her appearance or involuntary behavior, even if this disability may offend, annoy, or be an inconvenience to crew-members or other passengers.

There are a few exceptions:

The carrier may refuse transportation if the individual with a disability would endanger the health or safety of other passengers, or transporting the person would be a violation of FAA safety rules.

phltraveler May 13, 15 1:13 pm


Originally Posted by Cargojon (Post 24810149)
See below. In actuality they are required to provide a reasonable accommodation. And the "passenger safety" argument is invalidated by their failure to do so.

This is where UA fails and this is why they were wrong. Taken from http://www.ada.gov/qandaeng.htm

14 CFR Part 382.11 does not require airlines to provide food as a service to passengers with disabilities on an aircraft. United's policy is that special meals require 24 hours notice. If a hot meal was a requirement for safe transportation, then the parents should have requested it in advance with appropriate warning for United to accommodate, asked for a later flight, or taken hot food from the terminal on board the aircraft.

Forgetting all of that, apparently the flight attendant offered a "hot sandwich" that "arrived cold" (or so says the mother) and the daughter continued to throw a tantrum after offering the "hot sandwich".

Then the mother says that the daughter, who is in an agitated state, may scratch (read: assault) other people. The father admits the daughter was still in a tantrum at this point. The mom tried to get dramatic and made the impression upon the FA that the daughter was a threat to her own safety and/or other passengers.

greg99 May 13, 15 1:28 pm


Originally Posted by Cargojon (Post 24810149)
See below. In actuality they are required to provide a reasonable accommodation. And the "passenger safety" argument is invalidated by their failure to do so.

This is where UA fails and this is why they were wrong. Taken from http://www.ada.gov/qandaeng.htm

None of what you wrote makes any sense at all.

What if the flight had no hot food whatsoever? Is UA required to carry "emergency" hot food in case there might be a passenger who needs it? I can guarantee that the answer to that is "no."

As a result, being required to carry F class hot food in surplus, simply because a passenger in Y might need it, is not a "reasonable accommodation." This is particularly the case when the issue could have been resolved by the mother carrying hot food.

What if mom had said that her daughter has a meltdown when she gets claustrophobic - would she have been entitled to an F seat with more space? No, of course not, and even Mom would have never asked for that (I would hope).

This has nothing to do with autism sensitivity, and everything to do with poor planning by the parents and mom's litigation-centric entitlement personality.

I'm stunningly sensitive to parents who travel with special needs kids, and flights to/from Orlando (and their connections) are heavily traveled by families with special needs, because the Disney parks are ideally set up for those families. That doesn't mean, however, that parents don't have an obligation to plan appropriately for those trips.

Greg


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 1:53 pm.


This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.