They did make sure she had food - they couldn't guarantee hot food because you can't bring hot food on an airplane.
And if the airline had sent them a nastygram saying "this is not standard practice, don't bring your daughter on flights if you can't control her" I'd have agreed that they made a reasonable choice. I'd *prefer* they let an accommodation be made - but saying "we won't serve hot meals to just anyone" would be reasonable.
But they diverted the flight. That, I'll call an over-reaction.
I can't really blame the crew or pilot with the info presented here--flexibility under stress is a special skill, not a norm, and flight crews are under a lot of stress, and who knows what disabilities they may be dealing with themselves. If they passed on info about the situation in the same terms in which the mother made her description of the situation to the pilot, I can't say the pilot's decision was unreasonable. I want the pilot to be concentrating on flying the plane with full focus. If the pilot feels they can't if there is a disturbance among the crew or passengers, then good for them for diverting the flight as soon as possible.
What I can find fault with is the airlines setting a no exemption policy and not encouraging their crew to help with disabilities, so yes, requiring airlines to educate their crews on autism would help, or anything else for human accommodation rather than money making. I'd like more to be demanded from airlines for the human comfort of all passengers and our very many disabilities. But it might not have solved this situation once the mother said her daughter might become out of control and be a safety hazard to other passengers--that was an unwise tactic, to say the least.
Well, I don't agree. I'm hearing you say that we can't blame the plane crew, because how can we expect flexibility under stress when they're only responsible for the lives of hundreds of people - and maybe we can blame the parents who tried to take care of all contingencies and whose only crime was an imprudent statement which was intended to express that they weren't asking for a luxury, but a necessity.
I do agree that this is not the incident upon which to crucify airlines for poor behavior. But I don't agree that they made the right decision. I think they made a mistake and should learn from it.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2015-05-13 04:53 am (UTC)And if the airline had sent them a nastygram saying "this is not standard practice, don't bring your daughter on flights if you can't control her" I'd have agreed that they made a reasonable choice. I'd *prefer* they let an accommodation be made - but saying "we won't serve hot meals to just anyone" would be reasonable.
But they diverted the flight. That, I'll call an over-reaction.
no subject
Date: 2015-05-13 03:27 pm (UTC)What I can find fault with is the airlines setting a no exemption policy and not encouraging their crew to help with disabilities, so yes, requiring airlines to educate their crews on autism would help, or anything else for human accommodation rather than money making. I'd like more to be demanded from airlines for the human comfort of all passengers and our very many disabilities. But it might not have solved this situation once the mother said her daughter might become out of control and be a safety hazard to other passengers--that was an unwise tactic, to say the least.
no subject
Date: 2015-05-13 05:02 pm (UTC)I do agree that this is not the incident upon which to crucify airlines for poor behavior. But I don't agree that they made the right decision. I think they made a mistake and should learn from it.