Child forced to urinate in seat of plane

[Disguiseduser0308]

I need the source for "mom went ballistic" because no where have I read that. Quite the opposite.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

She did something to make that plane turn around.... Ah, she refused the flight attendant's instruction to sit down.

 

[K_Z]

RBBM -- this child was further embarrassed by her own mother overreacting to the situation as well.

As well as exploited, IMO, (by her own mother) who paraded her on a TV interview to TALK about her potty accident, AGAIN. Wow, poor parenting decision there, IMO.

 

[Linda7NJ]

BBM. Good grief, not every incident of "hurt feelings" requires a nuisance lawsuit. No damages here. There is nothing to "sue" for.



I sincerely hope she wouldn't file a nuisance lawsuit! Sheesh! If every inconvenienced passenger filed a lawsuit, the system would break down!



Now, if you want to talk about a lawsuit, redheadedgal linked this article. That family has a legitimate gripe:



Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Child forced to urinate in seat of plane





Thousands and thousands of passengers have been "wronged" and had their feelings hurt during air travel, much more seriously than this mother. Pretty much every one commenting here could share stories.



I work with a surgeon who is of Pakistani descent- born in the U.S., and completely fluent in English. His name (somewhat unfortunately) is a traditional Pakistani name, and is shared by some "unsavory" people apparently on the no-fly list. His wife is blonde and Caucasian, and they have 3 beautiful daughters. When he travels alone, despite his GOES card, passport, and TSA pre-check, he is always delayed, pulled out of line, and spends lots of time in security scrutiny. He was almost not allowed to fly to a funeral, because he had NOT checked any luggage, and security thought that was suspicious. Before he was married, his fiancée would receive all kinds of scrutiny for flying WITH him (esp internationally)-- as if she was being coerced into some kind of illegal activity or terrorism.



One of my patients has a prosthetic leg. A couple years ago, he was put in a wheelchair and made to take it off and "surrender" it to TSA security for "special screening". They put him behind a little half screen-- the only privacy he got. He spent over an hour waiting to get his leg back, and almost missed his flight.



My daughter with a knee injury had her crutches taken from her, a few months back, and had to "hop" thru the metal detector to the end of the belt. (Not supposed to happen, but we were worried about time, so we didn't make a fuss.) On the way back she was put thru a full-grope patdown that would make a hardened prisoner embarrassed.



I sweat every time my small daughter with a full body TLSO brace goes thru security, because one of these days she will be made to take it off, and she will be very embarrassed.



Remember this case from just a few days later?



http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/hollering-man-spurs-pilot-divert-jetblue-flight-n131721



Was this man a threat? Should the pilot have diverted to Detroit? That is policy now. I don't see this family demanding an apology. Maybe the passenger had a mental disorder.



When I flew airevac with the military, all the psych patients were heavily sedated, for safety and security. Some were also in restraints.



Air travel is a special environment, that requires special rules, and special "passenger behavior".



Air travel sucks. Safety and security are strict, and need to be. This woman was not subjected to anything different than thousands of passengers experience every day. She's a snooty whiner, IMO, and needs to either get over herself and pull up her own big-girl panties, or simply not travel by air.



She is very lucky, IMO, to not have to deal with a federal arrest record now. They cut her a HUGE break. She should send Jet Blue a thank you card, IMO!

I don't even understand what you're talking about and how it relates to this child and this mother and this situation.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Disguiseduser0308]

As well as exploited, IMO, (by her own mother) who paraded her on a TV interview to TALK about her potty accident, AGAIN. Wow, poor parenting decision there, IMO.

Yes, I couldn't even bring myself to mention that. Little one will have this follow her for life because mom insisted on making a big deal out of it. Graceful was the way to take this issue. Certainly not involving media ever. WTH?

 

[Linda7NJ]

She did something to make that plane turn around.... Ah, she refused the flight attendant's instruction to sit down.

No, the insensitive FA called the pilot and made a mountain out of a mole hill. fortunately witnesses, including another pilot ...had moms back.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Disguiseduser0308]

No, the insensitive FA called the pilot and made a mountain out of a mole hill. fortunately witnesses, including another pilot ...had moms back.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Whatever happened is done. Mom would have done much better for her child had she not made this into a mountain as well. Her child is now all over the media and her picture is out there. Sorry, this is not how we protect our children from the harm of the cruel world.

 

[K_Z]

I don't even understand what you're talking about and how it relates to this child and this mother and this situation.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well, I was too long winded!

My point is, she is acting like she was somehow singled out for this "terrible" treatment, and that as a mother with kids, she should have received "special" exceptions to the rules that apply to everyone else.

Lots of passengers experience far worse than she did, every day of the week. She was treated like every other passenger, and for that, she is very upset, and made a big narcissistic media splash. Unreasonably so, IMO.

 

[Linda7NJ]

Whatever happened is done. Mom would have done much better for her child had she not made this into a mountain as well. Her child is now all over the media and her picture is out there. Sorry, this is not how we protect our children from the harm of the cruel world.

Defending your child & advocating for her best interest...will never damage a child. Neither will standing up for what's right.
If you notice in the clip, the child wasn't embarrassed, she wasn't shy, she was rather refreshingly feisty & assertive. Mom isn't raising a sheep.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Linda7NJ]

Well, I was too long winded!



My point is, she is acting like she was somehow singled out for this "terrible" treatment, and that as a mother with kids, she should have received "special" exceptions to the rules that apply to everyone else.



Lots of passengers experience far worse than she did, every day of the week. She was treated like every other passenger, and for that, she is very upset, and made a big narcissistic media splash. Unreasonably so, IMO.

I just don't see it as a competition....
Or some sort of pissing contest.
Sorry...couldn't resist

It was wrong. JetBlue apologized. Moms happy with that. A charity will receive 5k. Flight Attendants will receive sensitivity training.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Karmady]

Well, I was too long winded!

My point is, she is acting like she was somehow singled out for this "terrible" treatment, and that as a mother with kids, she should have received "special" exceptions to the rules that apply to everyone else.

Lots of passengers experience far worse than she did, every day of the week. She was treated like every other passenger, and for that, she is very upset, and made a big narcissistic media splash. Unreasonably so, IMO.

And, as a result, a three year old had a potty accident in public. Which, as we all know, never happens -- except to the 99.9% of three year olds it happens to lol Terrible I tell ya :facepalm:

 

[Linda7NJ]

And, as a result, a three year old had a potty accident in public. Which, as we all know, never happens -- except to the 99.9% of three year olds it happens to lol Terrible I tell ya :facepalm:

Except it was NO ACCIDENT.

Can't we stick to the facts here?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Disguiseduser0308]

Defending your child & advocating for her best interest...will never damage a child. Neither will standing up for what's right.
If you notice in the clip, the child wasn't embarrassed, she wasn't shy, she was rather refreshingly feisty & assertive. Mom isn't raising a sheep.

Let's revisit this when this little one starts school. She doesn't know enough about the world and what surrounds her to be worried about how this will affect her later. It's her mother that should have known better.

I've had to advocate for my own children many times. Being a mother doesn't give me carte blanche of every situation my children and I find ourselves in. Sometimes things are out of my hands, be it because of rules, laws, etc. It's those times that I find myself being more of a teacher than I could have ever imagined. Work together for the greater good. That doesn't make some families sheep.

I've witnessed too many situations where people feel they have a right to expect employees to risk their livelihoods. Understanding could have went both ways here.

 

[Karmady]

Except it was NO ACCIDENT.

Can't we stick to the facts here?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I disagree. It was an accident just like any other, imo. Same thing would have happened if she wasn't wearing a pull up or hadn't pottied and had too much to drink anywhere else where a potty wasn't available. And she's three -- not an age that would/should be embarrassed over such a thing unless someone (like their mother) made her to be.

eta: Actually, many 3 year olds will actually deliberately pee in public rather than stop playing or what not. The whole thing is ridiculous, imo.

 

[Disguiseduser0308]

Except it was NO ACCIDENT.

Can't we stick to the facts here?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You won't convince the other side it wasn't an accident. I believe it was an accident as well. The child couldn't hold it in until it was potty time.. thus creating an accident.

Honestly, I think the less trauma this child goes through over this the better. Someday she may find herself reading this very thread. She had an accident. Accidents can happen to anyone.

 

[K_Z]

Well, I hope mama Jennifer Devereau will be much more prepared if she chooses to fly again! Better prepared mama, pull ups handy, and hopefully a lot more cooperative passenger. She dodged a very big bullet, IMO-- imagine how much her life would suck right now if she was dealing with the after effects of a federal arrest for interfering with flight crews! Yikes!

She gets a second chance to be a "better" passenger. She is very, very lucky, IMO! All she had to was clean up some wet clothes and complain about it. It could have gone much, much worse for her. One lucky passenger. (With a voucher, even!)

 

[Linda7NJ]

Odd ...I just did a quick google search. I couldn't find one instance where someone was arrested for simply using the bathroom on an airplane.

Lots of really really gross stories though.
Like this one
http://jalopnik.com/qantas-flight-to-australia-becomes-poop-plane-from-hell-1011607008/1015096981

I wonder if all 26 were forced to all sit tight soil themselves ...or if common sense and decency ruled the day...

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Disguiseduser0308]

Odd ...I just did a quick google search. I couldn't find one instance where someone was arrested for simply using the bathroom on an airplane.

Lots of really really gross stories though.
Like this one
http://jalopnik.com/qantas-flight-to-australia-becomes-poop-plane-from-hell-1011607008/1015096981


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I shouldn't have read that. :scared:

 

[K_Z]

I just don't see it as a competition....
Or some sort of pissing contest.
Sorry...couldn't resist
It was wrong. JetBlue apologized. Moms happy with that. A charity will receive 5k. Flight Attendants will receive sensitivity training.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

But I bet "wee" can both agree Mama was pissed off, lol!

 

[Linda7NJ]

But I bet "wee" can both agree Mama was pissed off, lol!

Yes we can!
Kid was really cute, seemed like a real WIZ! Lmao!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[K_Z]

Federal charges for interference with a flight crew: (not subject to copyright)

9-63.110

Interference with Flight Crew Members and Attendants

Section 46504 of Title 49, United States Code (formerly section 1472(j) of Title 49 Appendix) sets forth the offense of interference with a flight crew member or flight attendant within the special aircraft jurisdiction of the United States, which is defined in 49 U.S.C. § 46501(2). The statute applies to any "individual on an aircraft in the special aircraft jurisdiction of the United States who, by assaulting or intimidating a flight crew member or flight attendant of the aircraft, interferes with the performance of the duties of the member or attendant or lessens the ability of the member or attendant to perform those duties." The statute provides for up to 20 years imprisonment, and further provides for imprisonment for any term of years or life if a dangerous weapon is used. Interference with a flight crew member or attendant is a general intent crime, and does not require a specific intent either to intimidate the flight crew member or attendant or to interfere with t he performance of his or her duties. United States v. Grossman, 131 F.3d 1449 (11th Cir. 1997).

Venue is governed by the standard venue provisions, 18 U.S.C. §§ 3237 and 3238 and Rule 18, Fed.R.Crim.Proc. See also United States v. Hall, 691 F.2d 48 (1st Cir. 1982). "[T]he offense continues for at least as long as the crew are responding directly, and in derogation of their ordinary duties, to the defendant's behavior." United States v. Hall, 691 F.2d at 50. Prosecution is always proper in the district over which the aircraft was flying when the interference took place, if that can be determined. In many cases, particularly those in which either (1) the aircraft is diverted due to the defendant's actions, (2) the defendant's interfering actions continue, or (3) the crew remains concerned about defendant's possible further actions, venue is also proper in the district in which the aircraft lands. Since determining the district over which the aircraft was flying when the action took place may be difficult, and that district may have little or no connection to the matter, the Department advocates prosecution in the district where the aircraft lands and the defendant is deboarded and arrested in all appropriate cases.

The interference and other Title 49 aircraft offenses are supervised by the Counterterrorism Section of the National Security Division.

See also the Criminal Resource Manual at 1411.

http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title9/63mcrm.htm#9-63.110