Airline denies dying Florida man boarding at BIA

  • Thread starter Thread starter KennyFlys
  • Start date Start date

Should he been allowed to fly?

  • No, he had no right to fly.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    30
I know, I know. The pilot has the right to do this, but come on. Seriously.
The guy won't live on a drive home, he wants to go home to die. Make him promise he won't sue the airline, and let him fly.....

From the article it made it sound like he was not of a mind to sue anyone anyhow.


--Matt Rogers
 
Sounds like this is exactly the type of flying that calls for a charter or general aviation flight, rather than a common carrier.

As with all articles about aviation and medicine, assume that facts are missing or even incorrect.

Remember, one should have no expectation of any medical care on a commercial flight, and there are a number of companies that specialize in just this type of transport. Also, he may have been able to arrange a compassion flight if he tried.

Not enough facts to answer your poll though, Ken.

Jon
 
I agree with Jon, not enough info. But based on what was presented, I believe the airline/crew was justified in not boarding. It isn't about that one passenger, it is about ALL the passengers. Not sure if I would be comfortable sitting next to or near a dead person for x hours.

I personally would back the captain in that case.
 
Tough call. With all the bogus law suits (caused by plaintiffs BTW) around I'm sure he figured that the airline could be seen as putting him at risk during the flight due to lack of available medical attention.
 
I can be tough when you are sick and need to fly. I recall when I was in halo traction trying to fly. I need three letters before I was allowed to board. One was from a doctor stating I was fit to fly, another to say I was able to walk and evacuate the plane on my own, and a third to say I would not hold the airplane responsible for additional injury. It took me a week to get all the requirments that airline laid out for me. I see nothing different here expect I had called ahead to find out what they needed where this person showed up at the gate and put the capt in a tight spot.
 
Yes, let him go home and die peacefully.
No, he had no right to fly.
The airline was just in its decision
The airline was being an ass... typical customer service.
I did not vote because I think none of the above. In theory, ideally, yes, let him go home. But practically, not everyone can have every wish they want, even their last dying wish. So number 1 is out.

Number 2 is wrong because he does have a right to fly, but to fly himself in his own plane, given he passes certification. There is no right to force a private company to pilot you around in a commercial craft.

3. "just"... nope. No "justice" here, this was a liability call - the pilot and the company were covering their own butts. That has nothing to do with being just or righteous.

4. No, the airline wasn't being an ass. As long as our system allows them to be ruined by a frivolous lawsuit because some other passenger had to sit next to a body for a couple hours, airlines will be forced to "be an ass" in ways like this.

The right answer here is.... how the hell do airlines know about your personal state of health? Don't signal to them you're any sicker than you are. They fly people in wheelchairs all the time. The man should not have taken his medication before boarding, so that he looked half comatose, but should have remained alert until after takeoff. He obviously looked like he should have been in an ambulance instead of pushed around by his wife; so the pilot's decision is not surprising. I dock the man points for not knowing how to play the game.

If going home means that much to him, and to his family, they will pull together the funds to hire some small private jet to take him. I'm sure there is someone who'll do it. He has a right to "pursue" happiness, let him pursue it; that right comes with no guarantee that he'll achieve it.
 
I see nothing wrong with the captain's decision to not allow the passenger to fly.
 
I did not vote because I think none of the above. In theory, ideally, yes, let him go home. But practically, not everyone can have every wish they want, even their last dying wish. So number 1 is out.

Number 2 is wrong because he does have a right to fly, but to fly himself in his own plane, given he passes certification. There is no right to force a private company to pilot you around in a commercial craft.

3. "just"... nope. No "justice" here, this was a liability call - the pilot and the company were covering their own butts. That has nothing to do with being just or righteous.

4. No, the airline wasn't being an ass. As long as our system allows them to be ruined by a frivolous lawsuit because some other passenger had to sit next to a body for a couple hours, airlines will be forced to "be an ass" in ways like this.

The right answer here is.... how the hell do airlines know about your personal state of health? Don't signal to them you're any sicker than you are. They fly people in wheelchairs all the time. The man should not have taken his medication before boarding, so that he looked half comatose, but should have remained alert until after takeoff. He obviously looked like he should have been in an ambulance instead of pushed around by his wife; so the pilot's decision is not surprising. I dock the man points for not knowing how to play the game.

If going home means that much to him, and to his family, they will pull together the funds to hire some small private jet to take him. I'm sure there is someone who'll do it. He has a right to "pursue" happiness, let him pursue it; that right comes with no guarantee that he'll achieve it.
I am in total agreement with this. I also did not vote. While you can look back on a situation and see that the passenger may or may not have sued the airline for any problems, what's to say the relatives wouldn't cash in on his "death at the hands of the airline"?

The story is media's attempt to sensationalize a tragic event.
 
If going home means that much to him, and to his family, they will pull together the funds to hire some small private jet to take him. I'm sure there is someone who'll do it. He has a right to "pursue" happiness, let him pursue it; that right comes with no guarantee that he'll achieve it.
He died 4 days later.
 
I'm no great fan of the airlines, but I side with them on this one. Too many frivolous law suits....
 
A private ambulance flight seems more appropriate. Then there would be professionals to deal with any contingencies.
How would you feel if a passenger died on your flight? Or... because of his illness, the plane was diverted somewhere and you missed your scheduled appointment. What about a ramp delay because of weather? Maybe even one of those 12 hour ramp delays we've all heard about.
I agree with the airlines. Sorry, but there were other choices he could have made. Going commercial just wouldn't work for the other 100 or so PAX.
 
So put the guy in seat 32F, and sign some waivers. That way, in case of a plane crash he is not going to be in anyone's way, and they aren't going to divert because he's waived that.
 
So put the guy in seat 32F, and sign some waivers. That way, in case of a plane crash he is not going to be in anyone's way, and they aren't going to divert because he's waived that.

I still wouldn't do it.
 
So put the guy in seat 32F, and sign some waivers. That way, in case of a plane crash he is not going to be in anyone's way, and they aren't going to divert because he's waived that.
..And where are you going to get those waivers? I don't think the pilot is going to write them--I don't think you're going to get the legal department to run those through while the plane is boarding...along with the insurance company that would probably have to be involved...
 
..And where are you going to get those waivers? I don't think the pilot is going to write them--I don't think you're going to get the legal department to run those through while the plane is boarding...along with the insurance company that would probably have to be involved...

Either way, just put him out of the way. I completely disagree with the pilot here. It would 100% not affect the safety of the flight, if you put him in the back corner of the plane. Or, they could have had a vote among the other passengers. Personally, I think the pilot needs to be punched in the maw for being a giant douche.
 
Either way, just put him out of the way. I completely disagree with the pilot here. It would 100% not affect the safety of the flight, if you put him in the back corner of the plane. Or, they could have had a vote among the other passengers. Personally, I think the pilot needs to be punched in the maw for being a giant douche.

But he did his due diligence by contacting their medical department. On this subject, I have to agree with the pilot.
 
But he did his due diligence by contacting their medical department. On this subject, I have to agree with the pilot.
I also agree with the pilot who probably had a whole 10 minutes to decide.
 
I would not have decided the way the pilot did. Having said that, I would not second guess his decision. Tough call either way.

He sits in the left seat of the pointy end. He makes the decisions. That's why they call it "PIC".
 
Back
Top