Autistic girl kicked off flight because captain was uncomfor

Post Reply New Topic

I've been on so many flights with screaming kids. The airline flight attendants never do anything about it and rarely even say something to the parents.

The issue wasn't about her making sounds or her stimming, the issue is once the mother told an attendant that if her daughter didn't get her food, something hot, she could try and scratch and that is when it became a concern because the mother had just told them that her daughter can pose a danger to others because she could try and scratch. If you read the other articles online, some of them will say she tends to lash out at others. This isn't rocket science to understand.


This was about the girl could possibly scratch others because her mother said that. Not because she would have a meltdown, not because she is autistic, not because she stims or makes funny sounds. Because her mom had told them she could try and scratch.

The only way this girl could possibly scratch anyone is if the dipshyt flight attendant wouldn't take 30 seconds to fetch her a tiny, pre-made meal. But the flight attendant found the girl and her mother annoying, and decided to throw his/her weight around, instead. No one on that flight was afraid of that girl in the slightest. Let's be real. Almost every day, I read articles about autism on the interwebs, and the comment sections invariably contain many suggestions that autistic people should be locked away, that their parents are negligent/stupid/abusive/liberals, and that autism is just a made-up illness for brats who need a beating. The reality is that many members of the general public are ignorant and hateful toward autistic people and their families, and savor the opportunity to "stick it" to us. This flight attendant found such an opportunity, and took full advantage of it.

The pilot witnessed none of it, and only knew what he heard from the flight attendant.
It was all about the autism. Oh, and the flight attendant's ego.

Why did it take 40 minutes to get hot food for a child? They always have spare meals on board, because some people haven't turned up if nothing else.

Autism Speaks Statement on incident

Hi folks. This incident was brought to my attention by a family member who works with children and young adults with occasional 'challenging behaviour' (that's her term). I'm a Captain for a large airline and she wanted my opinion. Its certainly interesting. I hope I can share a little of the decision making and rationales we use whilst also showing that some of us do respect and can be flexible within reason.

It's sad indeed that the child and her family were removed - never a good thing to have to offload anyone especially if there is no malicious intent. I'd personally see this as a memorable low-point in my career. I've done it myself several times mostly with intoxicated passengers and those displaying dubious medical symptoms but this was always before pushback from the gate - never needed to divert. Passenger safety always comes first and the whole regulatory system around flying is much tighter nowadays as we all know.

The Captain is bound by law to keep the aircraft and passengers safe at all times. The situation presented here is, as I see it, that a medical emergency or incident might ensue if the child fails to get access to hot food. This detail is perhaps something a responsible parent should have checked with the operator beforehand and we are always willing to cater for individuals dietary idiosyncrasies wherever possible. Speak to the airline - don't just wait for a situation to develop in the air because then it's up the the Captain and Captain's will go to truly extraordinary lengths to avoid risk - including diversions - and rightly so.

If it were me I would have held a brief discussion with the 'number one' (senior flight attendant) and my FO. We have limited time for these debates because the job of flying is more important but we will establish the facts as best we can. It would be impossible and foolish to ignore the statement from the mother. After all she knows her child best so we must take this as a very likely outcome. I could call our medical agents on a radio link but they mostly offer assistance for medical emergencies rather than making predications about the behaviour of someone they don't know. This is my call. I would look at the worst case scenario which would be a deterioration of the situation creating a possible risk or harm to the child, other passengers and for my crew who would need to intervene. Obviously I really want to avoid this happening but I am also aware that I am not a medical professional and cannot make any guesses as to how this might develop. Finally I look at our divert options - time, distance, fuel - and consider the implications for all concerned. I reach two possible decisions outcomes and I propose these to my colleagues. I would call the operations department, not for help with the decision, but to keep them in the loop.

Decision One:

Take NO action. Supply requested meal. Ensure piping hot to best of our ability. Get mother to check food meets requirements first - maybe sample. Be aware there is no guarantee of hot food from these galleys but take from hottest part of oven or consider reheating to bring to temp. If no meal available or cannot achieve temperature then offer attractive alternative cookies?? Incidentally, aircraft galleys seem to be getting worse. Many is the time I have requested a hot meal and it arrives lukewarm.

Decision Two:

Divert NOW (unless continuing to destination can be achieved in a reasonable time), considering the risk of a possible medical emergency and fallout from an incident on other passengers. Explain my decision in person to the parent. Explain that I cannot ignore the probable risk that the parent has presented and state my responsibilities under aviation law. Offer as much onward journey assistance as possible.

Of the two decision one looks better, nicer, friendlier doesn't it? The problem is this; If I don't go with decision two and it does all kick off then I'm really in big big trouble here. I need to make sure I have a bulletproof court-grade defence as to why I took no action so I put it out to you what is that defence? I honestly don't know but when I get hauled up before the airline executives and their lawyers I have to explain why I basically took what they will call a 'chance'. And you just know what the lawyers, medical experts, psychologists are going to say and it is this - 'You flat ignored the most useful insight into the problem, the child's own mother, stating that a meltdown would ensue. Why Captain? Why did you disregard that information? In so doing you placed the child and others in danger. Explain your reasoning to us, Captain. Substantiate it! Enlighten us, please.' Everything else becomes academic at this point. Its an unrecoverable situation from here.

On the other hand If I divert I can say this: I assessed the risk. I thought it was probably low but had no way of being sure. The child's own parent highlighted the very possibility of a deterioration so it was a no-brainer. Costly and extreme as it may seem diverting a flight is a safety measure. I would not be overjoyed - far from it - but I know my responsibility is to the safety of my aircraft, passengers and crew. Therefore I cannot see what this Captain could have done differently other than take a risk and do nothing but then I don't know many pilots like still alive any more.

Perhaps I'm being simplistic, but there's a fairly easy solution to this: society needs to know far more about autism (and other 'invisible' conditions). Much is said about 'raising awareness' of autism, which is fine as far as it goes, but we currently have a situation where plenty of people are 'aware' of autism, they know it exists, that it's a condition etc, but they know virtually nothing about how it presents, how diverse it is, what it actually IS. Hence all the vile remarks on Twitter by morons who think that ASD = psychopath.

This is where the problem lies.