Autism Vox

179 opinions for More Unfriendly Skies

• Bonnie Sayers
  Jul 7, 2008 at 4:20 am

  Wow, another one. That poor family, glad she somehow got the media to cover it, otherwise other families might not be prepared for what could happen to them

  Did you see the new listing:

  http://autism.alltop.com/

  We are both listed.

• Andrea
  Jul 7, 2008 at 5:55 am

  I really fail to see how this behavior (as described) can be deemed dangerous? Seriously? The sensibilities are becoming so sensitive these days, I’m wondering if the entire country has developed Sensory Disorder. Jeez.

• Maddy
  Jul 7, 2008 at 9:05 am

  Hmm lets just hope that BA and Virgin don’t take a similar attitude to their transatlantic flights.

  Perhaps we should urge them to define ‘disruptive’ and ‘dangerous to other passengers’?
  Best wishes

• m
  Jul 7, 2008 at 9:42 am

  The problem with these stories is that the public at large does not want to accommodate people with behavior disorders, and the public is being allowed to bully and demean parents of special-needs children by agreeing wholeheartedly with the airlines.

  The airlines are confident that they can treat people however they wish with absolutely no consequences or public outcry.

  It is going to take a lot of hard fighting to overcome the majority attitudes- because those attitudes are “if you have a child with autism, then you need to stay at home and away from us normal people”.

  The problem is not limited to those who don’t understand autism. Way too many parents of autistic children refuse to see the injustice is these types of situations, and immediately side with the authority figures and the majority.

• Sareh
  Jul 7, 2008 at 11:59 am

  I support the airline 110% - take a minute to think about the safety issues of kids running willy nilly on an airplane.

  If a child cannot behave appropriately, then he or she should not be on an airplane. Having a disability does not change this. I do not think that the world needs to be more understanding. I think that parents need to be less understanding and more responsible about the environments in which they place children with special needs.

• AnthM
  Jul 7, 2008 at 1:31 pm

  It’s the mother here who was behaving irresponsibly. What kind of mother of four, including two special needs children, boards a cross country flight with a connection and doesn’t even have money to feed the children at McDonalds? I’m not trying to be judgmental, but from the looks of her it doesn’t appear that she’s exactly starving to death herself. She admitted that he children were “out of control”. Autistic or not, nobody has the right to behave that way on an airplane. The flight crew is responsible for enforcing Federal Aviation Regulations which include safety related directives such as remaining seated unless the captain deems it safe to move about. If Ms. Slaughter can’t control he children, she has no business taking them on a commercial flight.

• m
  Jul 7, 2008 at 1:32 pm

  Right Sareh. Pretty soon, it isn’t running “willy nilly” that’s “dangerous”, but simply crying, or making noise for 1-2 minute bursts that is “dangerous”, and isn’t just an airline, but a restaurant, or a park.

  EVEN IF the child’s behavior was not safe, why is it ok to strand the family at the airport in a situation like this? Are you trying to teach them a lesson for daring to leave the house with an autistic child?

  People like Sareh want to make sure that public spaces never come up with creative accommodations with people with potentially disruptive disabilities, and people like Sareh are a hindrance to people with behavioral disabilities becoming full members of society.

• Regan
  Jul 7, 2008 at 2:03 pm

  As in the other case, to me, the line is safety v. annoyance or inconvenience which is a function of disability. To exclude on the latter basis is a violation of Federal regulation. Currently there seems to be some ambiguity about where that line lays and individual discretion of the situation. As noted in the story, the family mentioned were able to complete the last leg of the flight on another airline. I am wondering about the particulars that made it different or not from the flight the family was removed from. How much leeway are individual flights allowed? What is that tipping point?

  There are regulations about safety v. equal access and an office to report comments, complaints and incidents about possible situations of discrimination on the basis of disability within the Department of Transportation. Besides addressing the individual case, the goal is to track these situations and determine future improvements in regulation and regulatory clarity.

• Club 166
  Jul 7, 2008 at 2:27 pm

  …“They were being disruptive and unruly on the plane, and for the safety of our customers and the flight crew, we decided to not allow them to travel on to Seattle at that time. Typically if it’s a threatening behavior, it’s not safe to travel 30,000 feet in the air in a contained environment.” …

  How quickly “disruptive and unruly” children are transformed into exhibiting “threatening behavior”. What hogwash.

  I hate sitting in front of crying babies as much as the next person, but being disruptive and running up and down the aisles isn’t exactly “threatening behavior”. It is characterized as such by the airlines as this is the only legal leg they have to stand on.

  This is the same attitude that exists in an educational system that only wants to discipline “bad behaviors” out of kids, instead of attempting to understand and accommodate them.

  Joe

• Alex
  Jul 7, 2008 at 2:53 pm

  A screaming child on an airplane is one thing-pop a pair of headphones on, use ear muffs, (not on the child-yourselves). There are ways to handle this. I always feel sorry for the kids, their ears can hurt, it can be scary for them being in a small metal box which is thousands of feet above the ground. BUT. While running up and own isn’t threatening it is not safe. For the child or the other passengers. Firstly the staff can be serving hot drinks which can be spilt when an excitable child runs full pelt in to you-and no-one deserves that. It can happen all too easily. More seriously however is the danger of air turbulence. If a small child is in the aisles running they can be thrown around the cabin if the plane hits turbulence. And that can result in very very nasty injuries-even death. It’s a risk to the child and the other passengers who may be hit by this child. They could also suffer severe injuries and even death. The family did not control their children enough. They should have sat on the aisle seats and not allowed them to run around. They needed to keep their kids entertained-books, toys, dvds, whatever. The kids running around were a danger. So don’t bleat about how hard it is-other people have a right to safety-and it trumps this family’s ‘right’ to excuse their kids behaviour which is dangerous to them and others.

• m
  Jul 7, 2008 at 3:27 pm

  For you people talking about safety, I don’t think you’re getting it. Nobody is advocating something “unsafe” be allowed.

  What we are trying to say is sticking your nose in the air and saying, “well I’m not trying to be judgmental, but this is just all your fault you horrible mother” is counterproductive, and frankly, I would rather sit next to a screaming, disabled child than next to someone as FOUL as the person who made those hateful comments.

  THE POINT is that there are creative solutions to disruptions like this that acknowledge the behavior is caused by a disability and is not willful bad behavior and “irresponsibility”. The point is that entities who provide public services should be required to deal with this from a standpoint of sophistication, skill, and compassion- not just dump people and strand disabled children in an airport.

• Regan
  Jul 7, 2008 at 3:42 pm

  At this point we don’t, and may not know the specifics, but in re: the comments about speculated problems in moving around a cabin–I might be misunderstanding this, but I believe that there is something called a “seatbelt sign”, which is usually used to indicate when passengers must be seated and belted.

  One significant issue is the one of being stranded elsewhere than a familiar location, sans money, sans accommodation with 4 kids under 10, 2 with disabilities. If not for the kindness of the police, the anonymous Motel 6 owner, and the purchasing ability of the grandmother, what would the situation have been?. In this case there was not a member with really specialized medical needs, but I wonder what would have happened otherwise. I realize that’s speculation, but I still wonder.

• Emily
  Jul 7, 2008 at 3:51 pm

  Sareh…oh, please. I wish people would stop talking about 110 percent or any percent increment over 100 unless we’re discussing hazard ratios or increases. This country is going to hell in a handbasket, and math is just the beginning.

  There are no “safety issues” with children running “willy nilly” on an airplane unless they were doing so when the “fasten seatbelt” sign was on–I don’t see indications that they were. Southwest mishandled it, even if it was appropriate to remove the family from the plane, even if they were a safety problem. What’s with the police greeting them at the gate? Were the children terrorists? Threatening the pilot or flight crew? What’s with stranding them with no recourse for alternative transportation?

  I’ve said it once, and I’ll say it again (and again and again): Air travel is public transportation. That means you get to travel with the public and deal with the many foibles and behaviors attendant thereto. If you don’t like it, get rich enough to (a) fly first class, or (b) get your own Lear, or just drive. Or try to get the airlines to book “adults-only” flights. But airplanes aren’t currently used as “adult-only” travel, so get over it already.

  The world does need to be more understanding, and they could start with the basic truth that when you venture away from your home, you’re going to run into people who aren’t like you, who don’t act like you, and who don’t necessarily have the same expectations for behavior or conduct that you do. We have laws that set the limits on these things, and your opinion about anything that occurs within the confines of that law is simply irrelevant. Bring some headphones, and don’t forget to buckle up.

• Amy
  Jul 7, 2008 at 3:56 pm

  What I’m wondering is, why is everyone overlooking the 2 seemingly “normal” children? The report said NONE of the children behaved proeprly. Why couldn’t the mother keep them calm? There were two adults for the 4 children. No where did the mother say she made an effort to keep the children calm and quiet. I completely understand that she has 2 children who do require special needs, and for those I understand some loud behavior to a point. The fact that the mother is not letting herself be responsible for the actions of her children, and having the common sense to discipline them is unaccpetable.

  This story isn’t about the autistic child or the child with cerebral palsy. It’s about a mother who has no control over her kids, blaming the airline for her own children’s behavior.

• Kristina Chew, PhD
  Jul 7, 2008 at 4:18 pm

  Once upon a time I always made sure I had at least two books to read, CD player, and many CDs, when I traveled on an airplane.

  Then I became a mother, with a young child, with an autistic child, and my entire perspective changed.

  We’ve been stranded at airports (once with only a diaper bag), because we missed our connection—–not because we’d not been allowed to continue to the next leg of the flight. But the feeling of being stuck in the limbo of an airport and with a child…..

• Holly
  Jul 7, 2008 at 5:11 pm

  These stories scare me so much! We have three kids, one who is strongly autistic, diabetic, g-tube fed, brain-injured, and delayed, one is adopted from a mother who chose to use meth and has some behavior issues, and a one year old girl.

  The last time we flew the boys were great, but my little one was very fussy. I felt just horrible, but the flight attendants were SO NICE. I couldn’t believe it after all the horror stories! The people around us… pretty upset to say the least. I was frantically doing everything I could to calm her… it was so unlike her.

  Guess what?? Turns out that she actually had a head injury from falling with my husband on the ice at home!!!!! Here the flight was causing swelling around her skull which was why she was fussing!!! Needless to say I felt horrible on so many levels, but it did hit me that we can NEVER fully know someone else’s situation and that judging people and being unkind is so, so wrong. She’s fine by the way… it was all external and no skull fracture, thank goodness.

  We’ve actually driven for 60 plus hours just to avoid the “scariness” of flying with tough kids… seriously! We would rather go through a car trip than deal with mean people who have absolutely NO IDEA the gifts and difficulties of parenting (forever) a child with significant disabilities. Quite frankly, I can’t stand being around mean people. I’d rather sit in a car for three days straight.

  I will say however that I have taken my son with “superior character” to France, Germany, Disney World four times, Disney land, Colorado, New Orleans, Mt. Rushmore, Boston, Texas, and lots of other places. I’ve only had a confrontation with one person in all that time. It resulted in him being fired!

• Airline Pilot
  Jul 7, 2008 at 7:19 pm

  As an airline pilot, I’d like to chime in.

  Once that door closes and the plane taxis out, I am totally responsible for the safety of your flight until the door opens at your destination.

  There are VERY CLEAR RULES, not made my me personally, but by the airlines, the FAA and the NTSB about the safety of the passengers. I could care less WHY the kids are running up and down the aisles. I don’t know or care if they are autistic, etc. Unbuckled children can be hurt or killed if the plane hits an air pocket. I can’t see turbulence. If the seat belt sign is on, they are supposed to remain in their seat.

  I also don’t care if the mother cannot control them or not. The fact that they will not remain seated or buckled is strictly FOR THEIR OWN SAFETY!! I would thrown an adult off a plane for the same reason.

  So don’t automatically blame the airline. We are only following rules set down by the higher-ups.

• Kristina Chew, PhD
  Jul 7, 2008 at 8:58 pm

  @Airline Pilot,
  Thank you for this—-parents are generally very conscientious and over-prepared when taking a special needs child online and hope to find out more details about the Slaughter family’s experience, to better understand.

• shelli
  Jul 7, 2008 at 9:15 pm

  I would never in a million years let my child out of their seat on a plane. However, if they began to scream, there would be nothing I could do.

  I think out of the seat running through the aisles and difficult to calm are two separate issues. My sense is that they are sometimes not treated as separate issues by the public- and by the airlines! There was a recent story about a stewardess who told a mother to make her upset, crying, non-autistic toddler be quiet right then or she would be kicked off the plane, and told the mother to give him Benadryl.

  That is the kind of thing that upsets me. If you are doing all you can to calm the child, and they will not be calm, but you are physically restraining the child in the seat, then tough crapola if someone else is disturbing you with their crying. That is not a safety hazard and the Airline needs to shut up and find a way to deal with it, or go lobby Congress to try to make it illegal for children to fly. (I should not be sarcastic about that, because that is exactly the type of thing a big corporation would do.)

• Becky
  Jul 7, 2008 at 9:30 pm

  I’m sorry if this offends some people, but having a disability is NOT AN EXCUSE. Accommodations and excuses are two different things. There is NO reason for children to be running up and down the aisles of an airplane and that IS a safety issue. I read the stories about this family and I watched the video. There was no indication that any of the misbehaviors were related to the children’s disabilities. I teach many children with disabilities and as such, I know how to accomodate their needs and prepare them for situations in which they may suffer from extra anxiety. A mother of four, two of whom are disabled, should certainly make it her business to know how to set up the situation for her children. She admits they were “out of control”, but she just didn’t think that was a reason to be put off the airplane. There is never any reason for children to be running up and down the aisles of anyplace. A frightened autistic child may cry out, but that did not seem to be the situation here. It really seems to be a situation of a person not taking parenting responsibilities seriously and of this family thinking their “rights” (which flying in an airplane is not a right–it is a business service that can be offered or denied any potential customer) outweigh the rights of everybody else in the plane (and the world for that matter).

• maire
  Jul 7, 2008 at 9:52 pm

  What it comes down to are a few basic facts. One, this mother did not prepare herself or her children for travelling on an airplane, Two, she did not know how to handle the situation once it arose. If she had any sense and knew her children, she should have known that in a new situation such as being on an airplane for the first time, and being confined, her children were going to be anxious, antsy and have a hard time staying still. So, since she did not prepare for this situation (or was too ignorant too) Someone had to step in, for the safety of her children and well being of other passengers and say we cant let this happen again on the next flight.
  Flying is not a right or a privelage, it is a paid service, most airlines in my experience do what they can to accomodate special needs passengers. But it is not their responsibility to chase your children up and down the aisles, that is YOUR responsibility, and if your children for whatever reason cannot behave, then you will have to find alternative means to travel by. Stop whining, and find a way that you can travel with your children safely.

• Kristina Chew, PhD
  Jul 7, 2008 at 9:56 pm

  Thank you for this perspective.

  Leaving the family in the Phoenix airport seems a puzzling thing to do and I guess it’d be helpful to know how/why the family’s trip on Alaska Airlines went, as reported, without incident (am just going on second-hand reports, of course). very best—

• julie
  Jul 8, 2008 at 1:25 am

  I don’t think this has anything to do with disabilities. This family had FOUR children, all of whom were out of control. Not only were the children not safe, but I have to say I cannot imagine being a passenger on that flight. Tolerance does not mean that one gets to harass and disturb others for a prolonged period of time. If your child cannot handle an airplane do not go. And yes, I am the mother of a child with issues that cause us to NOT do some things. It is common sense and common courtesy. Besides, why would I subject my child to a situation they cannot handle? It does no good for anyone involved.

• Sareh
  Jul 8, 2008 at 8:54 am

  Emily - as another poster said - public transportation is NOT A RIGHT. There are safety issues whether you want to bury your head in the sand on that issue is up to you but others here recognize that.

• Emily Hill
  Jul 8, 2008 at 9:20 am

  I would not want to ride on a airplane with rowdy kids and where the parents did or not do anything to stop the commotion. The airplane is supposed to be a pleasant ride for everybody that is flying. I wouldn’t want to be on that plane with this rowdy bunch.

• Kristina Chew, PhD
  Jul 8, 2008 at 9:37 am

  Hard not to disagree about having peace and quiet on an airplane; again, after having my son and traveling with him, things changed.

• m
  Jul 8, 2008 at 10:06 am

  It is one thing to do everything you can to restrain your child, and I 100% agree that my child would be in her seat no matter what, but some of you commenting are not limiting yourselves to that issue.

  You are wrong, Sareh, public transportation is public space. People have a right to use and be in public space if they are not breaking the law or violating safety policy.

  So, that means if you think a toddler who is crying or struggling in their seat- but who IS restrained and IS complying with physical safety regulations- is “unruly” because they are making noise, it makes no difference, they do have a right to use that public space.

  Some of you want to excuse your selfishness by whining, “well the baby shouldn’t be on the plane because the baby is crying and that means the baby can’t handle it.” Get over yourselves.

• Kristina Chew, PhD
  Jul 8, 2008 at 11:52 am

  Southwest has agreed to refund the family’s tickets.

• elly j. engel
  Jul 8, 2008 at 11:52 am

  The airlines have been given too much power to use the legal system as a crutch to throw people off the aircrafts that they feel may be somewhat problematic. Yet they cry that passenger counts are down as are their profits. Since 9/11 instead of using security to fight terrorism they are using it as a way to control passengers who are not any real danger but annoy a ticket agent or may anoy a flight attendant. We have become a country whose liberties and rights are being chipped away and we endorse it by not standing up for others. There is a saying that was in the holocoust museum “they came for my neighbor who live on the floor above me, I did nothing, they came to get my neighbor accross the hall from me and I did nothing and then there was a knock on my door and they took me away and nobody did anything. If we continue to just be selfish and not stand up for the rights of our neighbors, who then will stand up for us when we find ourselves in a similar situation. NOBODY.

• Regan
  Jul 8, 2008 at 4:02 pm

  Interesting comments.

  I was reflecting on some flights that I have made in the past couple of years. Some with crying children, some with passengers who maybe should have passed on having one more drink, some with toddlers being walked up and down the aisle by mom or dad, one with a seatmate who had some kind of medical issue requiring him to get up and back to his seat frequently, some with cheerful flight crews and others with cranky, and possibly tired, flight crews, and one situation in an airport that seemed to more resemble an evacuation airlift than an orderly boarding sequence.
  All the flights were extremely full.

  I seem to be alive and unscathed. I would complain, but I really don’t remember that much to get up in arms about, except for the purposes of an amusing anecdote. Maybe I have lower expectations.

• Andrea
  Jul 8, 2008 at 4:25 pm

  @Regan: I don’t think your expectations are too low. I think we live in a society that’s become more hypersensitive than our kids’ ears.

  Two years ago, on a 6 hour flight back from Ireland, I spent the entire time doing everything in my power to keep him from kicking the seats in front of us to very little avail. We could not walk in the aisles for most of the trip because the seatbelt light was on. The Benadryl I gave him did zip. I was practically sitting on the poor kid because the glares from the peopl ein front of us were becoming very stressful, but his legs were longer than the space between the rows. What more should I have done? (That’s directed to the people who have commented and undoubtedly would call me an irresponsible parent for not chopping the child’s legs off so the people in front would have a quieter and more peaceful flight.)

• Andrea
  Jul 8, 2008 at 4:31 pm

  P.S. I’ve learned my lesson. That was the last trip we took on a plane and I have no intention of doing it again any time soon, considering the current atmosphere.

  It also occurs to me that so many people have judged this mom for being unprepared (no money?) or unable or unwilling to control her kids. What could have possessed her to travel this way? The nerve! It doesn’t seem to have occured to some people that maybe there were extenuating circumstances to her travelling in the first place, and just maybe she wasn’t a lazy lump, but a stressed out mom who could have used a little compassion and support, and was perhaps at the end of her own rope. Since (presumably) none of us were there, we just don’t know what the deal was.

  Not only has society become hypersensitive, but hyperjudgemental as well.

• m
  Jul 8, 2008 at 4:37 pm

  Let me answer for them:

  (Shrill, Self-Satisfied Tone of Voice)

  If your child does not obey you like a robot, on command, and does not realize that MY comfort and convenience are more important than your right to travel from point A to point B, then while chopping off his legs would please me, I would prefer you immediately surrender him to an orphanage.

• Paige
  Jul 8, 2008 at 5:24 pm

  I feel lucky to have made it through a SW airlines round-trip flight to Las Vegas from North Carolina in April 08. I am nursing a (then two month old) daughter and I have a very active and rambunctious three year old .. who has yet to be diagnosed with a title. God forbid I nurse a baby on SW Airlines. I felt lucky to not encounter any static from my fellow passengers. I felt glad (and frustrated) that having my husband there with me made me feel more protected from airline bs and safer from passenger bs. I felt ticked off that I felt lucky… like I got away with something!!
  Shame she didn’t have someone to help her with her kids. Help is great… if you can get it.
  The sad thing is, I shouldn’t have had to give any of it a second thought. The airlines have made parents fearful of flying, of being left stranded, kicked off the plane for some invisible offense.
  Yes, my son kicked the seat in front of him. Yes, I tried to make him stop. Until I was sick of saying it …..and beyond. I took his shoes off hoping that his kicking would hurt his toes.
  He did NOT run in the aisle, however, only because my husband was blocking his aisle access.

• Emily
  Jul 8, 2008 at 6:07 pm

  “Emily - as another poster said - public transportation is NOT A RIGHT. There are safety issues whether you want to bury your head in the sand on that issue is up to you but others here recognize that.”
  Really? There are safety issues with flying? Gee, I did not know that. Thanks for the heads up.

  Seriously. I already, um, acknowledged that and believe that I named dropped the “fasten seatbelt” sign. And then I said, even if these children were a safety violation, that doesn’t excuse the treatment they received from the airline upon landing. You see, I wasn’t on that plane. I don’t know if the sign was on or off. I don’t know if the mother was a complete whiny-pants loser who can’t control her children, autistic or not (I like how everyone here expects the “normal” children to behave so well…whatever). What I do know is that police met a family consisting of a mother and four young children at the terminal, that they did not receive offers of assistance or alternative transportation from the airline, and that they were stranded as a result. Given that they were not terrorists or belligerent adult drunks, I have a hard time understanding the airline’s on-ground behavior in this situation.

  Hell in a handbasket, people. Math, reading comprehension, lateral thinking skills…all going down the drain.

  Public transportation actually is a right, as long is it’s available to one, it’s available to all. There’s this little bit of legal mumbo jumbo called Section 504 you might want to check out.

• Emily
  Jul 8, 2008 at 6:07 pm

  Hey, Becky? Do you have a disability?

• Sareh
  Jul 8, 2008 at 6:13 pm

  Emily - Now that I think about it - it is NOT public transportation & the business has a right to refuse service.

• M
  Jul 8, 2008 at 6:39 pm

  Sorry, thinking must not be working for you.

  Commercial airlines are without question public transportation and are held accountable to federal laws governing access to the disabled in public space and for public services, as well laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis of a protected class.

  The Federal Aviation Association and the Department of Homeland Security regulate various aspects of the operational control of airlines. Why? Keep in mind these are executive branch agencies that receive annual appropriations from Congress.

  Because it is public transportation. The federal government would not have operational control over various aspects of commercial flying if commercial flying were not providing a public service.

• Regan
  Jul 8, 2008 at 6:42 pm

  Now that I think about it - it is NOT public transportation
  ————————
  The U.S. Department of Transportation (which interestingly enough, has a Civil Rights office), Federal Aeronautics Administration and the TSA might disagree. There are regulations on the denial to board or rejection from flight, those specific to safety, as well as those applicable to ADA for ground transportation and the separate equivalent regulations for air carriers.

  Get funding, grant, tax allowance from the Feds, or regulated by the feds for use of airspace or highway–it’s public transportation.

  I’m not asking for free-wheeling license, but there are regulations. The points boil down to the particular circumstances, the regulations, and not down to personal druthers based on convenience. There are situations where passengers are in the wrong, and also those where the airline or other public transit has overstepped authority or misinterpreted regulation (Service animals is one that often comes up). I might suggest that a passenger who believes that they have a grievance, report it to the appropriate federal office, both for possible resolution, but also to register the event in the data system.

  (Not airlines, but public transit, but you get the general idea. I posted the link to the airline regulations in one of the comments to an older blog post.
  United States Department of Transportation
  Federal Transit Administration
  http://www.fta.dot.gov/civilrights/civil_rights_2360.html
  )

• Kristina Chew, PhD
  Jul 8, 2008 at 6:56 pm

  Indeed—-Southwest, American Eagle (the airline that removed an autistic toddler from an airplane) are private companies—businesses. As opposed to the public mass transit that we take all the time with Charlie (subways, PATH train—under the Port Authority—–that’s another story).

• M
  Jul 8, 2008 at 7:05 pm

  Airliners are private company whose business is providing public transportation service. They do not have the discretion to discrimate against protected classes and they must comply with ADA.

  There are many private companies who provide public services. Loan companies, for example, who provide government-insured loans.

• Regan
  Jul 8, 2008 at 7:14 pm

  Originally posted by squid
  The Air Carrier Access Act
  http://www.autismvox.com/the-very-unfriendly-skies/#comment-417095

  The Air Carrier Access Act: Protecting the Civil Rights of Airline Passengers with Disabilities, presented by Mike Spollen, U.S. Department of Transportation on September 13, 2006
  Also describes distinctions of ACAA regulations vs. ADA regulations.
  http://www.autismvox.com/the-very-unfriendly-skies/#comment-418486

  Hey, everybody have a good day.

• Sareh
  Jul 8, 2008 at 9:29 pm

  Bratty, uncontrolled kids are under ADA? Bull.

• Emily
  Jul 8, 2008 at 9:37 pm

  Ah, so you *were* on the plane. Do tell us more.

  Again, I’m not saying that this specific situation falls under the ADA. There are two threads of “discussion” afoot here. Yes, air travel is public transportation, essentially. And there are laws to protect the disabled that apply to airlines. And yes, there are laws to ensure passenger safety on a city bus or on a Southwest Airlines plane. And yes, as long as you’re behaving within the bounds of those laws, it doesn’t matter whether other people disapprove of you. And yes, airlines have kind of a history around here of overreacting to certain situations. And I’ve already said, even if these children were a safety risk (which apparently Sareh will be able to tell us, having been there and being able to attest to their having been “bratty”), I’m still mystified by the way the airline treated the family once they got on the ground.

• Kristina Chew, PhD
  Jul 8, 2008 at 9:58 pm

  Again, one’s perspective on children’s behavior and what is behind it changes as one becomes a parent.

• Sareh
  Jul 8, 2008 at 10:05 pm

  And, Emily, I am truly mystified as to why you stick up for this family given that I would bet you weren’t on it.

  That horse sure is mighty high.

• Emily
  Jul 8, 2008 at 10:12 pm

  Your mystification must find first root in a failure of reading comprehension skills.

  I do enjoy immensely, however, the deliciousness of your accusing someone of being on a high horse. Hee hee.

• Sareh
  Jul 8, 2008 at 10:15 pm

  Poor, sad little woman.

• Kristina Chew, PhD
  Jul 8, 2008 at 10:16 pm

  I look forward to being seatmates.

• Sareh
  Jul 8, 2008 at 10:21 pm

  Kristina - you crack me up!

• shelli
  Jul 8, 2008 at 10:50 pm

  I think she must have been talking about you, Sareh.

  You are the person I’d want to avoid at all costs in any public place.

• Emily
  Jul 9, 2008 at 12:08 am

  “Poor, sad little woman.”

  You’re a hoot. Let’s see. Poor, possibly from my perspective but not in the grand scheme. Sad, no. Little? Depends on which country you’re in. Woman. Yep. What’s that add up to? 110% incorrect?

  Kristina…same here. Re you and travel: I keep thinking that Fate is going to send me to SF right during BlogHer…but Fate apparently is taking her time reading Mr. DMFP’s thesis, so his defense may happen after that big event. That would, indeed, temporarily make me a sad, possibly little, woman. Sniff.

• Kristina Chew, PhD
  Jul 9, 2008 at 12:43 am

  Just in case Fate still sends you to SF (and gets the thesis reading done), I’m there on the 18th and 19th—-provided some interventions are not, ahem, necessary out here. Am fortunate (??!??!!) to be, well, “little”—I always take the middle seat on the plane.

• Regan
  Jul 9, 2008 at 3:05 am

  As Emily noted, several different themes.

  In one of the stories describing the refund to the Slaughter family, this was one description that came to my attention,
  “(Passenger Pat) McElroy said the children kept moving around when the seatbelt sign was on. He also said the kids were shouting, going up and down the aisle being disruptive…”

  As in the other story of the mother and the autistic son removed from American Eagle, where another passenger came down on the side of the parent and that was taken as corroboration that she was trying to do the best she could, was following safety regulations and was unnecessarily humiliated, if the above stated eyewitness account is accurate, it seems that it is possible that in this case safety regulations were violated above and beyond annoyance.

  That said, the related comments on the web about children (seen and not heard comes to mind), “incompetent” mothers, some harsh remarks about Ms. Slaughter’s appearance, rights vs. privilege, those with disabilities, etc. etc. etc., has been an interesting and sometimes unsettling snapshot into what Joe Public thinks. I kinda wish that I didn’t know.

• Sareh
  Jul 9, 2008 at 8:29 am

  Good lord you have a problem with sayings, don’t you? I studied statistics but chose to go with a saying. Deal with it. I also choose to see humor where humor was intended, I don’t care who it was aimed at.

• Kristina Chew, PhD
  Jul 9, 2008 at 8:36 am

  If that’s what Joe Public think, I can’t say I’m that surprised—-onward.

• Sareh
  Jul 9, 2008 at 9:00 am

  Kristina - I don’t know what/who you are responding to but that made you look quite uppity.

• Emily
  Jul 9, 2008 at 9:01 am

  Regan, it is the comments that you read that are most disturbing. I remained skeptical about the Jarret Farrell situation until I found a passenger interview that fully corroborated what the mother had said, which was interesting. And in this case, the facts regarding what happened after they landed (police, stranding, Motel 6, kindness of strangers) don’t appear to be in doubt in the news reports. But these situations, instead of serving as a heads up to airlines to try to exercise compassion, even if they must kick a child or family off of an airplane, instead turn up the trolls who think that they were never children at all or that children are all brats who must not make a sound or that parents of high-spirited children are awful parents. Some of the comments are so harsh…what people said–untruly as it turns out–about Jarret Farrell’s mother would make your hair stand on end (hey! a *saying*! Feel the love.).

  It’s incredible the presumptions and assumptions people are willing to make on very little evidence whatsoever. And I still don’t understand why the police have to be involved in every situation. Why are taxpayers paying for police to throw children and mothers off of airplanes? Is there not something better that could be done with time, energy, and money?

  Kristina–I’m a window seat gal. Tuck in there, block out the world inside the plane, lean on the wall. My kind of place. I’m still rooting for the 18th, but there’s a graduate advisor out there who is taking her time.

• Emily
  Jul 9, 2008 at 9:03 am

  Here’s a saying: “Somewhere, a village is missing its…” well, maybe you know the rest.

• Sareh
  Jul 9, 2008 at 9:08 am

  Just because I don’t add the “Ph.D.” at the end of my name, doesn’t mean it doesn’t go there…

• Emily
  Jul 9, 2008 at 9:49 am

  Ooooooooooooh. You and…what…thousands and thousands of others? They’re everywhere. Whoopteedoo. You were just DYING to let everyone know that, werentcha? Hee. A PhD isn’t necessarily a powerful indicator of intelligence or an ability to reason logically or a capacity for lateral or long-term thinking. Stubbornnes, maybe. Intelligence…nah.

  Are you sure that your PhD is not “expected” in 2009? You seem quite young and a tad starry-eyed over the potential of having those three little letters after your name.

  At any rate, PhDs are like everyone else. Some are bright and witty and funny and engaging, and some are plodding, thick-headed, unimaginative folk who couldn’t creatively think their way out of a paper bag. Many a village has lost its idiot to a graduate program.

• Sareh
  Jul 9, 2008 at 9:57 am

  Not expected - already earned. Without revisions, thank you very much. As I am part of 1% of the population, what you think of me (as I guess that you are a know-it-all grad student, it shows & I remember that phase well) doesn’t mean much at all. Good luck to you.

• Emily
  Jul 9, 2008 at 10:00 am

  You are really really a major hoot. Thanks for the laughs.

• m
  Jul 9, 2008 at 10:00 am

  Stubbornness- or luck and the political skill to survive and be supported in the graduate program they chose. You could say the same thing of the people who are promoted to top management.

  Intelligence, creativity, and the ability to grasp the salient point in a situation and see subtle nuances are better revealed by reactions to everyday events.

  Such as a person’s reaction to seeing armed police officers escort two women and four children from a boarding area for walking around at the wrong time inside a plane… I think the ability or inability to see the inherent problem with that scenario is a good indication of superior reasoning capabilities.

• Sareh
  Jul 9, 2008 at 10:22 am

  Anyone who thinks that going through the rigors of a graduate program is simply stubborn, lucky, or has political savvy needs to learn a lot.

  As is understanding that parents need to be able to teach children not to run around a plane - do you sincerely not grasp the concept that it is dangerous? Really?

• m
  Jul 9, 2008 at 10:36 am

  There is nothing more ridiculous then someone using their social status to attempt to trump the arguments and ideas of others on an Internet forum.

  I could stoop to your level and brag about my education and IQ score, but it is so distasteful to me I will not.

  I do find it fascinating how this conversation has evolved to reveal your core personality deficits.

  Maybe that is the lesson for everyone. If someone is giving you a dirty look on a plane, they are probably the type of person who feels compelled to use any means available to them to establish dominance and superiority, even if it is as ridiculous as bragging about their PhD on an Internet forum.

• Andrea
  Jul 9, 2008 at 10:43 am

  @Sareh: From what I’m reading, and I may be mistaken because, you know, I don’t have a doctorate, I don’t think that safety is in question here. No one is saying that children running around an airplane is safe. The problem, I think, is in the poor handling of the situation. Oh and there was a question at some point about whether or not an airline is public transportation. And someone seemed to think that flights should always be peaceful and coomfortable…I vaguely recall somethign about how I should have chopped my little kicker’s legs off…nope, no one said anything about kids running on airplanes being safe.

• Sareh
  Jul 9, 2008 at 10:52 am

  “m” - I simply responded to a comment about an idiot - idiots don’t get Ph.D.s. Social status? Have you met many Ph.D.s? I wouldn’t say that social status is a factor.

  Andrea - quit with the attempt at being condescending and just say what you mean. Many posters thought it ridiculous that kids running around didn’t have any consequences. I simply don’t think the situation was ‘oh-so poorly handled’. I agree with the airline. There were 2 adults, 2 normal kids, and 2 special needs kids. There definitely shouldn’t have been chaos and it sounds as though that is what the result was.

• m
  Jul 9, 2008 at 11:00 am

  Umm..yes… I am quite familiar with people who have PhDs

  Interesting that my comment went right over your head. You obviously didn’t get your PhD in Sociology.

  This is an anonymous forum. You relied on a personal fact related to your social status to gain credibility in a discussion.

  What does that say about the merits of your argument when you cannot make the argument without resorting to your SES?

• Sareh
  Jul 9, 2008 at 11:11 am

  Sociology? The study of groups of people? How does that relate exactly?

• Andrea
  Jul 9, 2008 at 11:14 am

  Sareh - ok, fine. I’ll say what I mean. I think the world is in much more danger from people like you who think that the world is supposed to be a neat, quiet, perfect little place instead of dealing with the reality of it. Sometimes things are chaotic. That doesn’t mean they need to be exaccerbated. And why do ‘consequences’ have to equate to a woman who was having trouble being stranded with 4 kids? You probably think she should have just beat the kids until they shut the hell up. But then someone else would have called child protective services. If the situation was so chaotic and dangerous, would it have been so much more trouble to maybe ask how they could help? Nope - just kick em off the plane. They’re clearly not with the program and have no place in Sareh’s neat little world.

  Are you going to get over yourself any time today?

• m
  Jul 9, 2008 at 11:19 am

  Jeez.

  You said “social status is not a factor”, which I guess was supposed to mean that education is not related to social status. That’s not even remotely true. Socio-economic status is a precisely defined category that is studied by Sociologists, and one component of socio-economic status is education.

  So yes, when you say, “well I have a PhD too” you are referencing your social status.

  I must assume your undergraduate degree did not have a social sciences requirement.

• Sareh
  Jul 9, 2008 at 11:25 am

  Andrea - no.

  m - so you don’t know what sociology is, check.

• m
  Jul 9, 2008 at 11:28 am

  Wow, you really are the Village Idiot.

  How stupid.

• Sareh
  Jul 9, 2008 at 11:32 am

  Well, it has been amusing. I still support the airlines for booting these idiots but we will just have to agree to disagree on that.

• Regan
  Jul 9, 2008 at 1:19 pm

  “Amusing”.
  “idiots”

  David Irving, Peter Singer and Ward Churchill have Ph.D.s too, so that’s not an automatic ticket to right, although apparently righteousness isn’t out of the question.

  But I digress…

• Regan
  Jul 9, 2008 at 1:26 pm

  Kev wrote a blog commentary on an article that discusses a parallel situation to that of Janett Farrell (substitute restaurant for airplane).

  Neurodiversity on show

• travelingon
  Jul 9, 2008 at 3:46 pm

  Mark me down as supporting the airline. In my opinion having such disruptive kids raises my blood pressure beyond what is safe. Everyone is so busy staking out their ‘rights’, but allowing your uncontrolled children to annoy and annoy and annoy is not right. I once flew sitting behind a couple who blithely had their rude children seated 2 rows behind them, in fact behind me. I offered to change seats but they were enjoying being separated from their little brats so they refused. The child behind me kicked and kicked my seat even after I politely asked him to stop. So then each time he kicked my seat I hauled off and kicked as hard as I could the seat in front of me - his father. After about 5 times of me looking innocent at this jerk, he finally got the idea and changed seats with me - and guess what? He stopped the kid from kicking any longer. A lot of parents expect strangers to put up with behavior they would not enjoy themselves - but their little darlings can do no wrong if a stranger is annoyed.

• Emily
  Jul 9, 2008 at 4:14 pm

  I’m back. I can see the discourse has remained at defcon 5 in my absence.

  Sareh…you said, “as I guess that you are a know-it-all grad student, it shows & I remember that phase well…”

  Whiff! She swings and misses again!

  You must be quite freshly minted given your cute little pride in your degree and your mention of having defended “without revisions.” Really, I feel like patting you on the head. Have you, by any chance, done the math on what it means to be in that “1%” even in this country? What’s that…in the millions? You’re simply not that special just because you’ve got those three little letters after your name. Sorry. It doesn’t somehow add a special provenance or cachet to your assertions about the airline’s treatment of these children that you’ve toiled your way to doctor of philosophy-dom.

  For the record, grad school and I parted ways some time ago. We could go to the mat and compare our educational background, publication records, postdoctoral experience, faculty experience, etc. Kristina’s got a great pedigree, though, and she’d probably win anyway.

  Or…we could simply not bring up our eddymacations and discuss the situation on its merits, rather than on ours. Give it a try. It might make you come across as less…silly.

• Sareh
  Jul 9, 2008 at 5:11 pm

  When I received my degrees doesn’t make them less valid.

  I was being silly at times on this, I agree. It doesn’t make me support the airline any less. I worked for an airline lo many years ago and remember too many aggravating flights where nothing was done. After reading the articles about this family with 2 adults, 2 regular kids and 2 special needs kids (if indeed CP falls in that category), and given their own account that the children were out of control, I support the airline saying ‘no more’.

  Let’s just say, not that it is true, that they kids were simply annoying. The airline has tens of thousands of dollars in customers that are now annoyed. They let go of possibly one thousand. The other people on that flight had a right to expect a reasonable flight. It isn’t done often enough in my opinion.

• Chuck
  Jul 9, 2008 at 5:40 pm

  So Sareh,

  I guess you would side with American Airlines when it canceled a flight due to hostile passengers in Florida.

  Did the people on that flight have a right to expect a reasonable flight?

• Sareh
  Jul 9, 2008 at 5:52 pm

  Do you know the protocol that needs to be completed when this occurs?

  It isn’t simply “they bug me, let’s kick them off/cancel the flight”.

• Kassiane
  Jul 9, 2008 at 6:21 pm

  If I had a dollar for every person who annoyed me on an airplane, I’d be one rich girl. And most of those people were neurotypical adults. Perfume, not bathing, overchatty, spilling over into my seat, I’ve had adults kick my seat, the lean all the way backers…

  Here’s a revision, Sareh: CP is unequivocally a special need. Did you need a widdle autistic girl to tell you that?

  (can I get in on the IQ pissing contest when that starts? please? IQ tests are fairly useless in the real world, but I do so love a good pissing contest…)

• Emily
  Jul 9, 2008 at 6:42 pm

  “Let’s just say, not that it is true, that they kids were simply annoying.”
  And who said this?

• Sareh
  Jul 9, 2008 at 9:08 pm

  Kassiane - depending on the categorization, CP may not necessarily fit in the special need spot.

  Emily - it was a ‘just let’s say’ scenario on the spectrum of ‘they were just being annoying kids’ to ‘disruptive and dangerous’.

• Chuck
  Jul 9, 2008 at 10:13 pm

  “It isn’t simply “they bug me, let’s kick them off/cancel the flight”.

  Actually, to American Airlines multiple times to many people, it is in fact that simple.

• Kassiane
  Jul 9, 2008 at 10:15 pm

  If CP is relevant enough to be diagnosed, and mentioned, it’s a special need. If it wasn’t there would be no need for a diagnosis.

• Sareh
  Jul 9, 2008 at 10:23 pm

  It really isn’t, Chuck - for all airlines.

• Sareh
  Jul 9, 2008 at 10:30 pm

  Kass - how is it relevant to obnoxious, out of control kids kicked off an airplane?

• M
  Jul 9, 2008 at 10:39 pm

  Sareh,

  Your pseudo-intellectual analysis of this situation grates on me like nails on a chalkboard.

  I watched the news video interview of this mom, and she clearly says that they were asked twice to keep the children quiet. She said the next thing she knew they were kicked off the plane.

  There was no “protocol” followed here.

  And what the H*&^ is this “CP may not fit the special need spot”? What does that even mean?
  That means nothing. You know nothing, you are rambling off the top of your head, and you have nothing to contribute to this discussion.

  You had one point- “the kids are obnoxious brats”. You have nothing else to say.

• Kassiane
  Jul 9, 2008 at 10:53 pm

  Sareh, CP is a special need. If you can’t understand that, I will have to conclude you got your mythical PhD from a crackerjack box.

  Regarding obnoxious children, bet you were a real prize. You sure are one now…(omgautisticusingsarcasm)

• Sareh
  Jul 10, 2008 at 8:30 am

  Okay, there is absolutely no protocol for airlines to kick off passengers? Do you actually believe that? The flight attendants can just choose the ones they want when they are having a bad day and throw them off the plane? Does this truly sound reasonable and accurate to you? Of course not.

  Kass - you clearly miss the point (omgusinglogic). CP as an excuse in the case does nothing to explain the situation. It is a physical disability, not an excuse for out of control kids.

• Kathy
  Jul 10, 2008 at 8:49 am

  Hmmm. Perchance has anyone here read
  “Lord of the Flies?”

• Shari
  Jul 10, 2008 at 8:53 am

  I fail to understand why we need to have greater tolerance for poor manners and poorer parenting.

• Andrea
  Jul 10, 2008 at 8:57 am

  Sareh: You are tenacious if nothing else.

  CP as an excuse in the case does nothing to explain the situation. It is a physical disability, not an excuse for out of control kids.

  That’s not what you originally said. What you said was:

  After reading the articles about this family with 2 adults, 2 regular kids and 2 special needs kids (if indeed CP falls in that category)

  You questioned if CP falls into the category of special needs. It unequivocally does.

  And it also adds to the explanation of what happened on the plane. When attention is focused on one of four children, one who perhaps needs a lot of attention, like an autistic child or like a child with CP, it can absolutely leave the opportunity open for the others to get out of hand. Since I wasn’t on the plane (and neither were you) I don’t know if that was the case, but it’s plausible enough. Having had to manage only two children on my own (one with special needs and the other with just needs), I can understand how kids will inevitably find any opportunity to kick up their heels when their caregiver is focused elsewhere, even for the shortest length of time. It’s the nature of kids. We have ALL been there.

  Maybe if someone had tried to help, things may have gone differently for everyone. I’m not even necessarily talking about the flight crew, either.

• Sareh
  Jul 10, 2008 at 9:08 am

  I agree, someone could have helped, maybe the pregnant sister or SIL or whoever. 2 adults for 4 kids isn’t an outrageous ratio - there shouldn’t have been the brou-ha-ha that happened.

  The mother admitted herself that the kids were loud and restless. In my experience, parents downplay their kids’ behaviour, I hate to think how they were truly acting.

• Chuck
  Jul 10, 2008 at 9:08 am

  Sareh,

  I really hate to burst your bubble (ok maybe I don’t), I was a crew scheduler for a major airline. I know what goes on in the back offices. Senior management at American Airlines sucks, so American Airlines sucks and they repeatedly make bad calls. It is that simple.

• Emily
  Jul 10, 2008 at 9:11 am

  Sareh–do you have special needs (I mean, besides the obvious)? Do you have children? Any with special needs? Any experience with special needs? I ask because you don’t seem to know much about what you’re discussing here, your 1% degree notwithstanding. You’ve been grossly off the mark with just about everything allegedly factual you’ve tried to say. Why are you here? To support the airline “110%”? Because you don’t really appear to be here to discuss special needs…especially the special need we usually talk about, which is autism.

• Sareh
  Jul 10, 2008 at 9:14 am

  Chuck, AA truly does suck, that I concur but that doesn’t extend to every airline out there.

  Emily - I am here for the topic du jour (of the day).

• Sareh
  Jul 10, 2008 at 9:16 am

  Do tell me the obvious - that I have brain damage (which is true)?

• Andrea
  Jul 10, 2008 at 9:26 am

  Four kids, two adults - that’s a 2:1 ratio and can turn into a brue-ha-ha quite easily given the right circumstances even without one of the two having special needs. If you throw special needs into the mix, it’s more like a 2.5:1 ratio.

  I’d also like to know - have you actually been in this woman’s shoes?

• Chuck
  Jul 10, 2008 at 9:31 am

  Sareh,

  If AA sucks (which I already knew) why are you supporting the airline 110%?

• Sareh
  Jul 10, 2008 at 9:41 am

  I support their actions to draw a line on bad behaviour.

• Kathy
  Jul 10, 2008 at 9:56 am

  Wisely, Kristina has refrained from engaging in this “gang up!”

• Emily
  Jul 10, 2008 at 10:00 am

  So, the answer is no, you don’t have children? Por eso, quiero que saber porque estas aqui. Ich wundere warum Sie sind hier. Pourquoi parlez-vous ici?

• Emily
  Jul 10, 2008 at 10:02 am

  Kathy, I don’t see how this is “ganging up.” Someone makes assertions that require countering. And I am starting to see Sareh as a troll, which is why I’ve asked why she’s here. Is it simply to say things that she knows will push buttons and keep her at the center of things? Because I don’t see any other reason for it.

  Sareh, as for the “obvious,” the “special need” I had in mind relates to narcissism, not to “brain damage.”

• Emily
  Jul 10, 2008 at 10:12 am

  And as much as I respect Chuck, he and I aren’t usually in the same “gang.”

• Sareh
  Jul 10, 2008 at 10:13 am

  View me as a troll if that makes you feel better. I truly support the airline’s actions.

• Sareh
  Jul 10, 2008 at 10:32 am

  I truly didn’t know this was a particular message board - I thought it was simply an article on the internet in which anyone could comment. I don’t have an autistic kid. I have worked with autistic kids but that isn’t required in order to have an opinion on this topic, is it?

  Are you too close to the situation to see it for what it is? 2 adults and 4 kids caused enough of a disruption on a flight for them not to be allowed to take the next flight. *They* admitted that there kids were being difficult. I don’t know these people and have no dog in the fight. With that viewpoint, I wholeheartedly agree with the airline.

• Chuck
  Jul 10, 2008 at 10:59 am

  You wholeheartedly agree with the airline that you admit sucks. Brilliant.

• Sareh
  Jul 10, 2008 at 11:01 am

  You see, Chuck - I’m not the idiot as some would like to believe. I think my MIL sucks but she makes great financial decisions. Isn’t there a saying about not throwing the baby out with the bath water…?

• Emily
  Jul 10, 2008 at 11:06 am

  Now I’m just curious. Who is Piggy?

• Chuck
  Jul 10, 2008 at 11:15 am

  If your MIL sucks at making financial decisions and you follow her advise, you would get what you deserve.

  You have admitted that AA sucks, they have proved it, and you are supporting them. You are getting what you deserve.

• Sareh
  Jul 10, 2008 at 11:16 am

  Way to try to deflect, Emily - you are pretty good at it.

• Sareh
  Jul 10, 2008 at 11:23 am

  Chuck, for god’s sake - reread the post. In general, I think my MIL sucks but she makes awesome financial decisions. I evaluate on a situational basis.

• Sareh
  Jul 10, 2008 at 11:25 am

  Also - AA was not the airline that booted the family, it was SW. I support this situation that SW responded to.

• Andrea
  Jul 10, 2008 at 11:41 am

  Working with a special needs child and parenting them are two very different things. Clearly you don’t have the experience to understand how such a situation could arise without it being a case of ‘bad kids’ or ‘bad parenting,’ nor do you seem to have the compassion to care. You’re making a judgement based on incomplete information and are unwilling to hear anything other than what fits into your view. And that’s fine. Your loss.

• Chuck
  Jul 10, 2008 at 11:41 am

  I worked World Airways and SW. I quit the industry because I saw how slimy they truly are. That was before my ASD child. Trust me when I say I am vindicated now.

• Sareh
  Jul 10, 2008 at 11:57 am

  Andrea - I clearly said that having or working with special needs kids isn’t a prerequisite to having an opinion on this topic. It isn’t at all. Why is it that no one here addresses the ratio of 2 adults to 4 kids? That isn’t an outrageous ratio, it is reasonable that the situation could be handled but it wasn’t, not even in the eyes of the parent.

• Andrea
  Jul 10, 2008 at 12:00 pm

  And obviously, since you’ve never been in such a situation, you can’t understand that just because the numbers suggest it should be a manageable situation, sometimes it’s just not. You can have all the opinions you want - doesn’t make you right.

• Andrea
  Jul 10, 2008 at 12:05 pm

  And, the parent also said that the airline asked her twice to control her kids. I at least give my kids until three before I start with the punishing, if that’s what’s called for.

• Chuck
  Jul 10, 2008 at 12:10 pm

  You have also given more credence to protocol concerning passenger behavior that doesn’t actually exist from a management perspective.

• Sareh
  Jul 10, 2008 at 12:12 pm

  So are you saying that the airline should give an *adult* to the count of 3? An adult? That is way over the top. They shouldn’t have had to ask a parent once.

• Chuck
  Jul 10, 2008 at 12:24 pm

  Are you kidding? Attendants have to ask drunks to shut up and sit down at least 3 to 5 times before the cabin crew can even get involved.

• Andrea
  Jul 10, 2008 at 12:24 pm

  I’m saying that they reacted in an extreme manner and maybe the mom could have used a helping hand from anyone instead of just hauling off and smacking her. Sometimes an adult needs a break, or some time to get a handle on a situation. I don’t recall her saying that the kids were out of control and she wasn’t even trying to get a grip on them. That’s the assumption. And as it’s been said several times, the kids were fine on the next flight.

  Anyone can have a bad day. Maybe this was the norm for her, who knows. But it’s just as possible that it wasn’t and that she didn’t really deserve the treatment she got.

• m
  Jul 10, 2008 at 12:24 pm

  Interesting how you keep twisting what you defend and don’t defend, so as long as you are 110% right.

  You were spouting off last night about “Airline Protocol” that must be followed before someone is kicked off a plane, as if you actually knew something about it, which you don’t, and now you’re back to the shrill, judgmental “nobody should ever have to tell anyone to control their kids” line. So which one is it? Can’t you make up your mind?

  There was no protocol followed. The family was never warned they could be kicked off the plane. And you have no idea what really happened, and what “out of control” means here. None of us do.

  I- and others - are criticizing the LACK of protocol, professionalism, and competent handling of the situation by the Airline, which is patently obvious.

  You are just grasping at straws to show everyone how brilliant you are and 110% right and better than this mother. Talk about obnoxious brats..

• Sareh
  Jul 10, 2008 at 12:28 pm

  I agree with both - Chuck just confirmed it if “Attendants have to ask drunks to shut up and sit down at least 3 to 5 times before the cabin crew can even get involved.”

  That shows that they have to follow a protocol. It is clear that I am not the one grasping at straws - it seems that there are very sensitive parents screaming that ‘how could the airline be so awful’. Bah I say to that. I don’t think the world needs more tolerance to poor manners or poor parenting.

• Sasha
  Jul 10, 2008 at 12:33 pm

  I read this on
  http://www.jimmyjubes.com
  I think we should leave comments on how horrible this is on every site.

• Chuck
  Jul 10, 2008 at 12:39 pm

  There is NO PROTOCOL unless violence to passengers or crew is imminent. This was NOT the case here.

• Andrea
  Jul 10, 2008 at 12:39 pm

  As defined by who? You?

  Now I’m really convinced.

  I’m going to the beach. You have fun. And I sincerely hope that you never find yourself in a situation where you could use a hand and some basic human decency.

• Sareh
  Jul 10, 2008 at 12:42 pm

  What needs to be defined, poor girl? http://www.dictionary.com should help…

• Sareh
  Jul 10, 2008 at 12:50 pm

  Since you clearly didn’t read the original article, here is a snippit:

  “The children were out of control on the flight you know, they were restless, excited and worked up and they are kids,” said Slaughter.

  The parent admitted that the kids were out of control. Why should an airline have to step in to say “do you job as a parent”?

• Kristina Chew, PhD
  Jul 10, 2008 at 1:03 pm

  @Sareh, Maybe you’ve noted this and you do not have to respond of course. Do you have an autistic child? Very best.

• Sareh
  Jul 10, 2008 at 1:07 pm

  Sasha - why? Clearly many people don’t think it was horrible. I have talked to many moms of special needs kids who don’t think it was horrible either. Sometimes doing your job as a parent and taking responsibility when you fail sucks, but that is reality.

• Chuck
  Jul 10, 2008 at 1:07 pm

  Why did the airline step in when they don’t HAVE A CLUE how to handle their own bad behavior? BTDT. Sareh, you don’t have a clue what goes in at SW.

• Sareh
  Jul 10, 2008 at 1:13 pm

  Nope, never worked at SW. I don’t see or remember reading about any ‘bad behaviour’ at SW. As I said before, I evaluate it based on each situation. From what I read and saw, they were acting appropriately in this case.

• Sareh
  Jul 10, 2008 at 1:14 pm

  Kristina - I have answered that - I don’t have a special needs child, I have worked with them (no, I am not saying that is the same thing - simply saying I have some understanding).

• Chuck