Mom and Chatty Toddler Removed From Flight

joefromchicago wrote:

sozobe wrote:
That's not what he's accused of doing -- he's accused of saying "bye-bye plane."

Well, he's accused of saying "bye-bye plane" according to the mother. As far as I know, the airline still has not issued a statement regarding the incident.

sozobe wrote:
I don't think it indicates much about what actually happened on the plane.

On the contrary, the mother said her li'l angel was "fussing" on plane just like he was on the set of GMA.

So what if he was fussing? I know many adults who make even more a fuss than a child. Where do we draw the line? If an adult is too loud, will they now be kicked off as well?

0 Replies

sozobe wrote:

Quote:
sozobe wrote:
How do you know she couldn't?

I don't know. But then I'm not making that claim. You, on the other hand, are claiming that she could control him. I don't know why you would make that claim without sufficient information, but that is, as I noted above, your choice.

I am claiming that it's easier -- in general -- to control a child on a plane when one is able to focus exclusively on that child, than to control a child when one is in a major interview situation. That's a claim I stand by, but as a generalization -- I don't know for sure what happened here.

I can agree with sozobe on this. I have traveled with children from age infant til young child. She is correct - it is much easier to to control a child on a plane when you can focus exclusively on them. In most cases, children especially toddlers constantly try to get your attention.

In the case of the interview, mom's attention was on another adult not the toddler - the child started acting up to get mom's attention - normal toddler behavior.

Why do kids always have a question immediately when you get a phone call and not the three or more hours you were not doing anything - because suddenly your attention is on something or some one else.

If you had children you would completely understand.

0 Replies

snood wrote:

I didn't call him that. I said that from the facts we have so far, he might have been - just as the stewardess might have been over reacting.

I stand by my statement that you had no right to assume "we" think Joe doesn't like kids - that was snotty and stupid.

I started on this thread because the story is interesting. And I don't give a **** whether you want me here or not.

Here's an interesting update:

ORLANDO, Fla. - AirTran Airways on Tuesday defended its decision to remove a Massachusetts couple from a flight after their crying 3-year-old daughter refused to take her seat before takeoff.
AirTran officials said they followed Federal Aviation Administration rules that children age 2 and above must have their own seat and be wearing a seat belt upon takeoff.
"The flight was already delayed 15 minutes and in fairness to the other 112 passengers on the plane, the crew made an operational decision to remove the family," AirTran spokeswoman Judy Graham-Weaver said.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16773655

This is an entirely different situation - not the same one - and the toddler mentioned in this case was below the age of 2, therefore did not require a seatbelt.

0 Replies

I couldn't help but laugh watching that GMA video and I urge everyone who thinks that kid was being fussy to think back of trying to get a family portrait done when your kids were that age.

That arched back hands up thing is so extraordinarly typical that I'll wager it's universal.

I don't know what all actually happened on that plane but for an attendant to suggest the woman drug her baby was waaaayyyyyy off base. It was probably the same attendant that ground up a Xanax and put it in that other kid's bottle. Remember her?

0 Replies

FreeDuck wrote:

JPB wrote:
This is about a mother who during the safety instructions enticed her child to look out the window at another plane, the result of which caused the child to distract the attendant from being able to properly complete her instructions.

Aside from the suspicious use of the word "enticed" I find this an unlikely scenario. When has it ever been the practice to boot someone off the plane for talking during the safety spiel? And babies? Are babies expected to know to be quiet during the speech?

I wasn't there, but I have to believe she had him looking out the window so that he wouldn't fuss and cry on his way off to pleasant dream land.

I frequently do this with my children to distract them. I have them look out the window and we talk about the how they are loading the plane getting things ready, etc. Then we talk about the plane taking off, etc as it moves. I hope I am not thrown off next time, I try this technique to keep their little minds occupied.

0 Replies

I wasn't there either. I have no idea if the kid was disruptive or not. If the FA flipped out because she was having a bad day, then she should get over herself (or get a new job). If she flipped out because she perceived that the kid was preventing her from doing her job and preventing those around him from hearing the safety instructions then, she had cause to get him to be quiet.

dunno - wasn't there.

0 Replies

Linkat wrote:

joefromchicago wrote:
sozobe wrote:
I don't think it indicates much about what actually happened on the plane.

On the contrary, the mother said her li'l angel was "fussing" on plane just like he was on the set of GMA.

So what if he was fussing? I know many adults who make even more a fuss than a child. Where do we draw the line? If an adult is too loud, will they now be kicked off as well?

Why do I even bother? Read this.

Linkat wrote:

If you had children you would completely understand.

Sorry, but that is complete and utter bullshit.

First of all, I reiterate: I'm not defending the flight attendant here. I don't know what happened, but, unlike some others on this thread, I am not willing to accept the mother's account at face value just because that's the only one that we've heard. Parenthood is not a prerequisite to impartiality.

Second, this may not even be about the child's behavior. The only things we know about the kid is that his "fussing" on the set of GMA was at least at the same level as his "fussing" on the plane. Whether that merited kicking the mother and child off the plane is, at this moment, anybody's guess. I don't need to have kids to be open-minded about this situation.

Third, I can damn well offer a reasonable, intelligent opinion about child behavior and about proper parenting, even though I've never had any children of my own, just as I can offer an opinion about politics without ever having been a politician or about the war in Iraq without ever having served in the military or about the omelette I had this morning without ever having been a chicken. If you don't like my opinion, then offer a better one of your own, but don't presume that my opinion is of less value simply because I stand outside your precious circle of parenthood.

0 Replies

I think that what makes some of us lean to the mother's side is the corroboration supplied by the other passengers and the lack of another explanation from the airline.

One thing to keep in mind is that we all seem to go with what we are willing to believe about one "side" or the other. Me, I'm perfectly willing to believe that a flight attendant would abuse his/her power on an aircraft and have someone booted because they were annoyed by them. And my reason for that willingness has nothing to do with the fact that I have children and everything to do with plenty of experiences with flight attendants before I ever had any children. Others might be perfectly willing to believe that the child was doing a lot worse than the accounts say he was because of their own experiences with unruly children on aircraft.

All of us are going by the information we have and have stated that our opinions are based on the information provided. If other information comes out I am perfectly willing to re-examine.

0 Replies

I agree that one doesn't have to be a parent to have an opinion of children or childrearing.

This is at best inconsistent, though, Joe:

Quote:

The only things we know about the kid is that his "fussing" on the set of GMA was at least at the same level as his "fussing" on the plane.

How do we know that? And if we "know" that, why can you use "know" while other, similar uses of "know" have been jumped on?

In fact, from what I've read she said he was fussing in a similar manner but "not as bad." (I read a bunch of stuff and just tried to find it back can't remember where I saw that -- I can try harder to find it again, on request.) That's not at all "at least at the same level."

Let me see if I can summarize something:

I'm not a judge. I'm blathering on a message board. My opinion doesn't have any real import. Therefore I feel free to express that opinion as it evolves. I have no particular illusions about having some divine grasp on the situation; it's extremely likely that my current impressions will change or be completely upended by future information. But from what information I have now -- not just the mother's version but the fact that two other passengers corroborated that version, and whether someone (the mother) would be willing to make such a big deal out of this if she was in fact in the wrong, and many other elements -- my impression is that the stewardess overreacted. I think that sharing such an impression and admitting that one doesn't KNOW anything about the situation for sure can coexist.

0 Replies

FreeDuck wrote:

I think that what makes some of us lean to the mother's side is the corroboration supplied by the other passengers and the lack of another explanation from the airline.

This is also what I'm looking at and since there's no other info coming in to defend the airline, it doesn't look very good for them.

still waiting for more news.

0 Replies

I still think that there's some more information: for the plane's captain the flight attendant's report was reason enough to call the authorities and get those two out of the plane.

0 Replies

sozobe wrote:

I agree that one doesn't have to be a parent to have an opinion of children or childrearing.

This is at best inconsistent, though, Joe:

Quote:
The only things we know about the kid is that his "fussing" on the set of GMA was at least at the same level as his "fussing" on the plane.

How do we know that?

BECAUSE THE MOTHER SAID SO!

Quote:

"When we first boarded, he was a little fussy, kind of like this," Penland said, as her son began climbing on the table.

0 Replies

What Walter said makes a lot of sense. It seems the captain of the airplane agreed with the stewardess, and we must in general give the captain the right to make those decisions. Something about this story just doesn't fit, and I'm not sure what it is.

0 Replies

Quote:

"He just didn't want to sit still," his mother said afterward. "He wasn't quite that adventurous on the plane."

0 Replies

joefromchicago wrote:

[quote="LinkatIf you had children you would completely understand.

Sorry, but that is complete and utter bullshit.

First of all, I reiterate: I'm not defending the flight attendant here. I don't know what happened, but, unlike some others on this thread, I am not willing to accept the mother's account at face value just because that's the only one that we've heard. Parenthood is not a prerequisite to impartiality.

Second, this may not even be about the child's behavior. The only things we know about the kid is that his "fussing" on the set of GMA was at least at the same level as his "fussing" on the plane. Whether that merited kicking the mother and child off the plane is, at this moment, anybody's guess. I don't need to have kids to be open-minded about this situation.

Third, I can damn well offer a reasonable, intelligent opinion about child behavior and about proper parenting, even though I've never had any children of my own, just as I can offer an opinion about politics without ever having been a politician or about the war in Iraq without ever having served in the military or about the omelette I had this morning without ever having been a chicken. If you don't like my opinion, then offer a better one of your own, but don't presume that my opinion is of less value simply because I stand outside your precious circle of parenthood.[/quote]

What I meant at that you can not fully understand unless you are a parent is how children act. In other words you cannot fully appreciate how much attention a child requires and how and why they act in certain situations.

I know because I have been both childless as an adult and with children as an adult. When I did not have children, I did not comprehend everything involved with a child and there is no way to fully comprehend how to raise and handle children until you have one of your own - period.

Can I fully understand how it is to be a man simply by living with one and being around them and observing them? No. You need to be in the situation yourself to fully experience it.

I am not talking about being impartial - I am talking simply experiencing caring for a child. And I don't think your opinion is any less - just simply lacking in not experiencing a portion of it.

0 Replies

And you've accepted "the mother said so" as evidence throughout, of course...

(What did she say after the "kind of like this..." ellipses? What I read was an addition that was something like, "...but not so bad." What I read may have been inaccurate, of course.)

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

Something about this story just doesn't fit, and I'm not sure what it is.

I have that same exact feeling. Something seems missing and it has me puzzled.

0 Replies

(After the comma, rather, not ellipses.)

What FreeDuck found may have been what I was thinking of, at any rate. (Thanks FreeDuck.) (And thanks Thomas and Chai for info on what the other two passengers said btw, forgot to thank you for that before.)

One other thing I read yesterday (I read a TON of stuff and some was news and some was blogs so I can't vouch for it all, and also won't necessarily be able to find it all back, so take it or leave it) is that in these situations the pilot kind of has to make a snap decision. He can't go and investigate every situation and find out if the attendant is telling the truth, he just has to go with it or not. The person was saying that it was a regional jet, which is usually where newbies start and get more experience before going on to the larger ones, and that there's a lot of movement so that attendants and pilots don't really get to know each other well. If an attendant reports that she's being threatened, a pilot is likely to go with that -- and then if it turns out that she was lying/ exaggerating, she'd probably be fired.

0 Replies

According to several news articles, the airline refuses to say anything because of potential lawsuit.

Here are the quotes from other passengers in regard to this (from a few different news articles):

"It was ludicrous," one of the passengers, Stacey Watts, told 11Alive News on Thursday, from her home near Oklahoma City. "I even heard somebody from the back of the plane call out there, 'You telling me there's a switch on kids all these years?'"
"I heard nothing from Katie to indicate there was any type of a threat," Watts said. "I never heard any of that."

INSIDE EDITION spoke with Stacy Watts and Sandy Taylor, passengers on the same flight who said they didn't think Garren was threatening the flight attendant. In fact, Watts was so upset she also got off the plane to show solidarity with Kate and the baby.

0 Replies

sozobe, Sounds reasonable; new pilots usually start with the regionals where they log miles and experience.

It would be interesting to find out what, if anything, upper management decided on this case.

0 Replies

Mom and Chatty Toddler Removed From Flight

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know