Teen with Down Syndrome booted from flight

[SaraJayne]

Here is a statement that American Airlines sent to the Consumerist website (http://consumerist.com). There are more than 1 side to every story

If that is the case (which can easily be verified by other passengers in the terminal), he should have been kept off the flight.

 

[Colleen27]

What I don't understand is why the decision was made prior to boarding. I can understand removing a passenger, even a child or individual with disabilities, if he is agitated and unable to settle into his seat once on board but denying boarding based on behaviour at the gate? To me, that crosses a line. Even in the cases involving toddlers there was an *on plane* behaviour problem involved, a little one screaming or refusing to sit properly and thus unable to be adequately restrained.

I encourage my kids to play and get the "wiggles" out during that interminably long wait before boarding because it helps them to be calm and quiet onboard when it matters. With needing to arrive at the airport 2+ hours before scheduled departure it just isn't reasonable to expect a young child (or a disabled teen with the mental capacity of a young child) to sit quietly for the entire time.

 

[sparklynails23]

I bet the JetBlue crew didn't give a rat's patoot what the mother had or did - given that this family was flying on American Airlines. jetBlue doesn't even have multiple classes on its planes. And the other flight was on a different airline - also not jetBlue (United). You'll have to ask the two legacy carriers involved why the family was seated where they were.

You know, you can get injured jumping to conclusions like that...

I'm sorry. There was a reference to Jet Blue elsewhere in the article. I'll change my post. My opinion stands, though.

 

[Hannathy]

What I don't understand is why the decision was made prior to boarding. I can understand removing a passenger, even a child or individual with disabilities, if he is agitated and unable to settle into his seat once on board but denying boarding based on behaviour at the gate? To me, that crosses a line. Even in the cases involving toddlers there was an *on plane* behaviour problem involved, a little one screaming or refusing to sit properly and thus unable to be adequately restrained.

I encourage my kids to play and get the "wiggles" out during that interminably long wait before boarding because it helps them to be calm and quiet onboard when it matters. With needing to arrive at the airport 2+ hours before scheduled departure it just isn't reasonable to expect a young child (or a disabled teen with the mental capacity of a young child) to sit quietly for the entire time.

There is a BIG difference in a 3 yr old getting the wiggles out and a teen the size of a young man running around the waiting area being very agitated and perhaps hitting himself or acting in a violent manner. They have to decide quickly if those actions will continue onto the plane and endanger other passengers. Just like they assess someone who appears drunk and altho they may be cooperative in the waiting area are afraid how they will act up in the air.

I'm guessing he was being very agitated and the family couldn't quickly get him to stop. He may have calmed down eventually (hence the photos) but they were not in control of his actions and if he started on the plane there was no reasonable chance they could control him.

 

[kaytieeldr]

What I don't understand is why the decision was made prior to boarding. I can understand removing a passenger, even a child or individual with disabilities, if he is agitated and unable to settle into his seat once on board but denying boarding based on behaviour at the gate? To me, that crosses a line.

I respectfully disagree that it crosses any line.

A few years ago, I spent a number of extra hours at the airport on a clear day between two snowstorms, first waiting for my scheduled departure then, when that plane hadn't yet left the originating airport when it was supposed to be landing at mine, being resassigned to a different flight (oddly, the late flight I normally take).

Waiting at that gate, a couple sat next to me. They were also deleted, but had spent some time in the bar. The man was somewhat intoxicated and had taken whatever the prescription is for nervous flyers, alternately being a happy drunk and ranting. I preboarded, and kept my fingers crossed that he wouldn't delay the flight further.

Toward the end of boarding, a not-working (non-rev) airline employee boarded and sat across the aisle. She was telling the Flight Attendants about a passenger waiting for the flight getting arrested - and that couple never did board. Denying boarding actually makes more sense than removing a passenger from a plane.

 

[kaytieeldr]

I'm sorry. There was a reference to Jet Blue elsewhere in the article. I'll change my post. My opinion stands, though.

Interesting. The article first named American Airlines, United, Malaysia Airlines, and Alaska Air - all with multiple classes, including First Class. While it was considerate to edit the original post, I can't imagine what kind of horrible experience you could have had with jetBlue that would cause you to accuse them of something they couldn't possibly have done, to someone who wasn't their passenger

 

[cornflake]

What I don't understand is why the decision was made prior to boarding. I can understand removing a passenger, even a child or individual with disabilities, if he is agitated and unable to settle into his seat once on board but denying boarding based on behaviour at the gate? To me, that crosses a line. Even in the cases involving toddlers there was an *on plane* behaviour problem involved, a little one screaming or refusing to sit properly and thus unable to be adequately restrained.

I encourage my kids to play and get the "wiggles" out during that interminably long wait before boarding because it helps them to be calm and quiet onboard when it matters. With needing to arrive at the airport 2+ hours before scheduled departure it just isn't reasonable to expect a young child (or a disabled teen with the mental capacity of a young child) to sit quietly for the entire time.

Airlines do this allll the time - deny boaring to passengers based on behaviour at the gate.

They don't want problems in the air, or a problem trying to remove someone who has already gotten seated, had luggage stowed, etc. Often, as above, it's drunks.

It'll usually not be a tiny kid running around or acting kooky - that's normal behaviour for tiny kid an it's expected that they can be controlled an restrained by the adults with them (hence the toddler removal after boarding - they'd have thought he could be controlled until proved wrong).

It's not as easy to control someone larger or more unpredictable - as they apparently thought this boy was, so they'll try to get some assurance the person will be stable in the air or they'll bump 'em. It's dangerous to have someone uncontrollable in the air.

I was once on a flight with a woman got so drunk and out of control the flight attenants ended up hog tying her to her seat with extra belts and such - after literally sitting on her proved less than effective when she was crawling on the floor, refusing to sit in her seat, lurching all over, etc. If there's an emergency, someone like that becomes a liability for everyone's safety.

 

[CandleontheWater]

The article did not mention the teen acting violently, hitting or anything like that. They did mention him running around. If they are not going to let people board who are running around, I'm never getting on another flight with my toddler. He is a tornado in the boarding area, I try my best, but sitting still is not his strong suit and I have a vested interest in letting him wear himself out before the flight.

Just because the kid was running around beforehand does not mean he would be disruptive on the flight. Maybe the parents had things to entertain and distract the teen, but were waiting until they got on the plane to pull them out. I can understand if he was compromising safety on the flight, but before he even boards, that's crazy.

 

[SaraJayne]

The article did not mention the teen acting violently, hitting or anything like that. They did mention him running around. If they are not going to let people board who are running around, I'm never getting on another flight with my toddler. He is a tornado in the boarding area, I try my best, but sitting still is not his strong suit and I have a vested interest in letting him wear himself out before the flight.

Just because the kid was running around beforehand does not mean he would be disruptive on the flight. Maybe the parents had things to entertain and distract the teen, but were waiting until they got on the plane to pull them out. I can understand if he was compromising safety on the flight, but before he even boards, that's crazy.

There is no comparison between a toddler and a developmentally delayed adult-sized teenager.

Passengers are denied boarding in the gate area all the time. It's a common occurrence. They'd much rather do it in the gate area than end up with an emergency situation 30,000 feet in the air.

 

[Disney Doll]

Our very dear friends have a 16 year old son with Down Syndrome. Thankfully he is a very good flyer but, as others have said, someone the size of an adult with the developmental capability of a 4-5 year old is not someone you want to find out, while in the air, that he is uncontrollable. Our friend's son, if he were the type to get out of control, would take a lot of effort by more than one person to contain/restrain.

I'm also wondering why Mom & Dad felt the need to videotape him in the waiting area? Perhaps they were videotaping the whole trip so that 30-60 seconds of taping the young man was the "This is us waiting to get on the airplane" part. If not, it sounds to me like Mom & Dad thought they might need some "proof" that he was well-behaved.

I agree with the others...there is more to this story and the parents are using the "look at our poor special needs son discrimnated against" angle to get some $$ from the airline.

 

[Disney Doll]

The article did not mention the teen acting violently, hitting or anything like that. They did mention him running around. If they are not going to let people board who are running around, I'm never getting on another flight with my toddler. He is a tornado in the boarding area, I try my best, but sitting still is not his strong suit and I have a vested interest in letting him wear himself out before the flight.

Just because the kid was running around beforehand does not mean he would be disruptive on the flight. Maybe the parents had things to entertain and distract the teen, but were waiting until they got on the plane to pull them out. I can understand if he was compromising safety on the flight, but before he even boards, that's crazy.

Re: the bolded part- what if these things they had to entertain the young man on the flight didn't work. The time to determine if someone is going to compromise safety on board a flight is NOT when you are 30,000 feet in the air.

 

[luvmy3]

The article did not mention the teen acting violently, hitting or anything like that. They did mention him running around. If they are not going to let people board who are running around, I'm never getting on another flight with my toddler. He is a tornado in the boarding area, I try my best, but sitting still is not his strong suit and I have a vested interest in letting him wear himself out before the flight.

Just because the kid was running around beforehand does not mean he would be disruptive on the flight. Maybe the parents had things to entertain and distract the teen, but were waiting until they got on the plane to pull them out. I can understand if he was compromising safety on the flight, but before he even boards, that's crazy.

First, you can't compare a toddler to a teen, physically they are very different. It wouldn't matter if he wasn't hitting or acting violent, the act of running around a crowded area has the potential to cause him injury and others injury too.
Second, what happens if they can't control him during the flight? What happens if he chose to not sit still and get up an run around the plane? A 3 year old, a parent could grab and buckle them in their seat and force them to stay put, but a teen is a different story.

 

[Hannathy]

If the difference between a 35 pound toddler running around and 150 pound young man isn't obvious, I give up.

 

[sparklynails23]

Interesting. The article first named American Airlines, United, Malaysia Airlines, and Alaska Air - all with multiple classes, including First Class. While it was considerate to edit the original post, I can't imagine what kind of horrible experience you could have had with jetBlue that would cause you to accuse them of something they couldn't possibly have done, to someone who wasn't their passenger

Why would you say that? I don't think I've ever flown Jet Blue. Weird conclusion.