Toddler's Temper Ousts Family From Plane

[briar_rose_59]

Hmm, seems to me there are a couple of versions of this story going around. As I understood it, the family was removed because the child would not sit in her seat, despite that being the law. The article and GMA's website makes no mention of the needing to be in her seat, but rather suggests that they were asked to leave the plane because (and only because) the child was crying. Personally, I'm still going with the needing to be in the seat explanation, simply because it makes more sense. Frankly, I've been on more planes than I can remember where kids have been scared or crying when getting on the plane and just before takeoff.

 

[goofy4tink]

and if I read correctly, the delay was 15 minutes after the scheduled departure time. This means that the toddler had from the time they boarded until then to get seated. Assuming that they boarded no less than 10 minutes before departure that's 25 minutes. If they preboarded, that's more than 45 minutes.

More than enough time.

That has been exactly my thought!!! Why is heavens name did they need more time?

 

[UConnJack]

Hmm, seems to me there are a couple of versions of this story going around. As I understood it, the family was removed because the child would not sit in her seat, despite that being the law. The article and GMA's website makes no mention of the needing to be in her seat, but rather suggests that they were asked to leave the plane because (and only because) the child was crying. Personally, I'm still going with the needing to be in the seat explanation, simply because it makes more sense.

The different story versions are partially due to the different outlets putting out the story. The local hack TV news stations are putting out their typical human interest drivel focusing how these local citizens have been abused by the big bad airline. Whereas the AP reports in the national news state more the facts than contorted opinion.

The other reason is some posters who side with the parents are glossing over the extent to which this kid was pitching a fit and what the parents had to do in order to rectify the situation in order to make their "point".

Go AirTran!

 

[snowbunny]

OK they should of been able to buckle her even if that meant her screaming her head off. I Know there have been times my youngest did not want to go into his carseat. But I got him in screaming his head off..

Yup, I've been there too. It's not fun but there were times I'd have been standing there all day when my kids were toddlers, if I let them decide they didn't feel like getting in the carseat (or stroller).

 

[tjmw2727]

Hmm, seems to me there are a couple of versions of this story going around. As I understood it, the family was removed because the child would not sit in her seat, despite that being the law. The article and GMA's website makes no mention of the needing to be in her seat, but rather suggests that they were asked to leave the plane because (and only because) the child was crying. Personally, I'm still going with the needing to be in the seat explanation, simply because it makes more sense. Frankly, I've been on more planes than I can remember where kids have been scared or crying when getting on the plane and just before takeoff.

That's what's so funny about this, GMA is using the tagline - thrown off for cyring. Yet, the first day when GMA did a long segment with an interview of the family the mom explained the story as - "we needed more time to coax her into her seat". The mom clearly said that the the FA pointed to her (the childs empty) seat and asked it if was hers, we said yes but she dosen't want to sit there. The FA said she has to be seated in her seat and buckled. The mom then asked if the child could sit on her lap instead to which the FA said no because she was over two and a ticketed passenger. Of course I can't remember it word for word but that was defanately the story as the mom explained it the first time. They also showed the picture of the girl in her airline seat but even that was misleading. It was from the flight down to FL days earlier and FWIW she isn't wearing the seatbelt.

I wonder if when they didn't get the support they anticipated they revised the story a bit?

TJ

 

[briar_rose_59]

I wonder if when they didn't get the support they anticipated they revised the story a bit?

That would probably be my best guess.

 

[ransom]

I wonder if when they didn't get the support they anticipated they revised the story a bit?

TJ

That would probably be my best guess.

Ain't the 24 hour news cycle a grand thing?

 

[calgarygary]

I am not going to wade into this discussion on one side or the other. It is possible that it has already been noted but I find it very odd that the parents purchased the seat but checked the car seat. Why would you not want your toddler in the proper restraint device if you paid for the seat.

 

[mumzie2three]

I am not going to wade into this discussion on one side or the other. It is possible that it has already been noted but I find it very odd that the parents purchased the seat but checked the car seat. Why would you not want your toddler in the proper restraint device if you paid for the seat.

I don't think all car seats are approved for use on planes.

 

[tjmw2727]

I don't think all car seats are approved for use on planes.

While there are a few types that can't be used onboard like booster seats 99% of those a 3yo should be using would be approved. The seat will have a sticker on the back indicating it is approved for use on aircraft.

The FAA and AAP both recommend that a child under 4 and or 40 lbs use a carseat on the airplane. Many of us wonder why they brought the seat and then didn't use it. If they had we may not be discussing this!!

TJ

 

[WildGrits]

They gave the family a bottle of wine, for all the trouble they put up with. Man, I felt the other passengers should have gotten the bottle of wine!!

Maybe the bottle of wine was to give the kid before he got on his returning flight?

 

[UConnJack]

Maybe the bottle of wine was to give the kid before he got on his returning flight?

Would work just as well as the bottle of bendryl !!!

 

[HGD24]

I also agree with AirTran. I know that kids can say and do things at the most inappropriate times, but they were given plenty of time to try to calm their daughter down before being asked to leave the flight. I saw an interview that was done at the family's home and the child was climbing all over the couch, behind the parents, etc. It just proved that the parents have no control.

 

[calgarygary]

While there are a few types that can't be used onboard like booster seats 99% of those a 3yo should be using would be approved. The seat will have a sticker on the back indicating it is approved for use on aircraft.

The FAA and AAP both recommend that a child under 4 and or 40 lbs use a carseat on the airplane. Many of us wonder why they brought the seat and then didn't use it. If they had we may not be discussing this!!

TJ

Maybe there is a history that we don't know about.

 

[ducklite]

I am not going to wade into this discussion on one side or the other. It is possible that it has already been noted but I find it very odd that the parents purchased the seat but checked the car seat. Why would you not want your toddler in the proper restraint device if you paid for the seat.

With a three year old it's dicey. The childs legs might be too long to fit between the car seat and the plane seat in front of the child.

Anne