Autistic child ¨discriminated against¨ by Qantas - NOT!!

[juddles]

Yet another unfortunate incident.

Darwin mother was outraged after her son was turned away from a Qantas flight due to his autism | NT News

From the article: ¨had been looking forward to visiting his dad and baby brother for Easter since February – only to have his hopes dashed at the last minute. The six-year-old was booked to fly from Darwin to Brisbane yesterday.
His mum Gizelle Laurente, couldn’t afford to fly with him to drop him off so he was booked through Qantas’s unaccompanied minor service.
As per normal procedure, the captain of the plane met with Ms Laurente at the boarding gate. Ms Laurente told him that although her son was autistic he had been given a higher than normal dose of medication that morning to ensure a smooth journey – as per his doctor’s advice.
Complete with a letter supporting Jake’s travel from his paediatrician Ms Laurente couldn’t see a reason why her son wouldn’t be able to fly.
“The pilot told me unless you buy a ticket and travel with your son he won’t be flying,” she said.
¨
¨“My son was discriminated against because he has autism ... it was degrading,” she said.¨


On the one hand I completely support Qantas and specifically the pilot involved. But now it appears that Qantas may be offering the family a free ticket?? I just hate that a message gets out that if you bag Qantas and raise a race/illness/whatever card, they cave in. If Qantas didnt sort it out at the time (free flight for the mother, whatever) then they should have left it at that. IMHO, once that lady decided to attack Qantas publicly, she should have lost any further compassion from the airline.

Just my opinión.

 

[mannej]

As always, there are two sides to the story with the truth being somewhere in between.

But yes it seems people are willing to use the "d" word far more often these days whether it is justified or not.

 

[ftm]

It would be unusual for the Captain to meet the UM, or even make the decision. The decision to fly would normally be done by the airport manager.

 

[mushez]

Or have changed the meaning of "poor customer service" to that of not getting what you want.

 

[medhead]

Have people replying to this thread actually checked the published Qantas policy?

 

[basso]

On the one hand I completely support Qantas and specifically the pilot involved. But now it appears that Qantas may be offering the family a free ticket?? I just hate that a message gets out that if you bag Qantas and raise a race/illness/whatever card, they cave in. If Qantas didnt sort it out at the time (free flight for the mother, whatever) then they should have left it at that. IMHO, once that lady decided to attack Qantas publicly, she should have lost any further compassion from the airline.

I don't think Qantas did anything wrong, they wanted further information on the medical condition. As for the 'free-ticket', all I can see is that they were proposing to rebook the original ticket. That doesnt seem too untoward....

 

[JessicaTam]

Have people replying to this thread actually checked the published Qantas policy?

Good point.

From the 'Children travelling alone' page:

Children travelling alone must be capable of self-administering their medication in order to travel alone. Qantas staff are not generally authorised to administer medication.

For any children with medical needs, you will need to ensure the following:

• Make sure you notify Qantas at the time of booking
• Advise Qantas of any food allergies or any special dietary requirements.
• Organise a letter from the child's doctor if your child needs to carry medication in the cabin, which may include carrying an Adrenalin Auto Injector. The letter from the child's doctor must be dated within two years of the date of travel and must be written in English. It must confirm that the child is capable of identifying the need for the medication and self-administering it.

If your child becomes ill during travel and alternative arrangements need to be made, the Parent / Guardian / Responsible Adult identified in the Qantas Unaccompanied Minor Travel Documentation (further details below) is solely responsible for making such arrangements.

 

[medhead]

So two points of possible issue. 1) the letter may not have included the required information about self administration. 2) the pilot may have deemed that the child can't self administer medical. But having been dosed already was there a need for them to administer more medication.

Neither of these points have been covered in the info I've read. The comment about the letter doesn't touch on issue 1, the pilot is no doubt empowered to make a determination on issue 2. We can presume the mother knows the requirements for the letter having done this before. We can also presume that the pilot made the wrong determination; they've certainly made the wrong decisions in the past about other things.

But there is a lack of information to draw an informed conclusion either way. As such I fail to see how anyone can definitively say either side was 100% in the right.

 

[juddles]

..... We can also presume that the pilot made the wrong determination; they've certainly made the wrong decisions in the past about other things....

hey medhead, what article/info do you base this on? I cannot see anything that suggests the pilot made a wrong call. The article I saw quotes the QF spokesman as saying that the crew got ¨professional medical advice¨.

It also appears clear that the mother only gave Qantas info on the son´s situation when he went to board!

I really doubt any Qantas pilot would make the call to deny boarding to a sick child unless they felt that was the appropriate thing.

 

[samh004]

I've got autism and don't think he was discriminated. What effect would dosing a child with higher levels of drugs have? And what are these drugs, I certainly don't take any. Are the drugs an ADHD control-type drug? Are they sleeping tablets? If so, how compliant is he going to be in an emergency?

There's so little info.

 

[medhead]

hey medhead, what article/info do you base this on? I cannot see anything that suggests the pilot made a wrong call. The article I saw quotes the QF spokesman as saying that the crew got ¨professional medical advice¨.

It also appears clear that the mother only gave Qantas info on the son´s situation when he went to board!

I really doubt any Qantas pilot would make the call to deny boarding to a sick child unless they felt that was the appropriate thing.

My comment is about pilots in the plural and is based on my personal experience. My post did not say that this pilot may a bad call in this case.

As for the rest, it is just assumption based on generally poor reporting. This mother knows enough to get a letter and the report refers to normal practice implying that the son has travelled before in this way. There are conflicting bits of information that mean Im not prepared to make a call either way.

 

[under the radar]

the whole thing stinks...and the smell comes from the mother (among other things, using her child as a media tool), her doctor (for his part), and the media (ahhhhh, for just being who they are!! :evil

i am 100% certain she did NOT follow ALL THE STEPS of the QF UM policy/procedure (and/or she 'failed to disclose' certain info to QF prior to travel). And that's all that matters to me!

 

[JessicaTam]

the whole thing stinks...and the smell comes from the mother (among other things, using her child as a media tool), her doctor (for his part), and the media (ahhhhh, for just being who they are!! :evil

i am 100% certain she did NOT follow ALL THE STEPS of the QF UM policy/procedure (and/or she 'failed to disclose' certain info to QF prior to travel). And that's all that matters to me!

From the article, and based on QF's own requirements I suspect you are right.

 

[medhead]

Great to know we have mind readers on AFF. Can't see how it's the doctors fault. Evil doctor how dare they look after their patients.

 

[juddles]

.... We can also presume that the pilot made the wrong determination.....

Pot calling the kettle black?

 

[medhead]

Pot calling the kettle black?

If you read the rest of that post, you will see that I've clearly stated there is a lack of information to support any of the presumptions that I listed. So NO, exactly as I have clearly stated, I have not made a judgement either way. Unlike many others who seem to think they know the full details, all based of a story in the NT News, and have jumped to judgement.

 

[juddles]

... I have not made a judgement either way......

Yes you did, very clearly. I agree that (as in almost all trial by media cases) there is insuffient info to sway a sensible jury. But you stated something very definite. Which is fine by me- everyone has his opinión. But then you belittled other people´s opinión. Not sexy. :/

 

[Julesmac]

Call me a over-cautious Nanna, but I'd be very reluctant to send an autistic child alone on a plane regardless of whether he was medicated or not. I'd have thought the potential for difficulty would be enormous.

 

[medhead]

Yes you did, very clearly. I agree that (as in almost all trial by media cases) there is insuffient info to sway a sensible jury. But you stated something very definite. Which is fine by me- everyone has his opinión. But then you belittled other people´s opinión. Not sexy. :/

It would be best if you actually read my posts. You've pretty clearly jumped on one little bit out of context and jumped to the completely wrong conclusion. A presumption is not a definitive statement at all, especially when I go on to say their is nothing to support that assumption. I will certainly question anyone who thinks they can be certain about anything without all the facts.

I'm not going to take direction about what is sexy from someone who attacks me when they can't even read the whole post.

If you read you will see my definitive statement is that I'm not making a judgement either way.

.

But there is a lack of information to draw an informed conclusion either way. As such I fail to see how anyone can definitively say either side was 100% in the right.

.

. There are conflicting bits of information that mean Im not prepared to make a call either way.

 

[juddles]

.... someone who attacks me when they can't even read the whole post......

I read the whole post, several times. You said what you did.

I am not trying to attack you. That is in your head. You said that the pilot made a wrong call. I disagree. That is all. No attacks or misunderstandings.