Mother And Baby Kicked Off Airplane - 19 Month Old Too Talkative

<snip>

GWINNETT COUNTY, Ga. -- A Gwinnett County mother says she wants answers and action after she and her baby were kicked off a plane.

Kate Penland said she was glad to board the plane in Houston after an 11-hour delay to visit her father in Oklahoma. But she said a rude and aggressive flight attendant caused her to get to Oklahoma a day late.

Penland thinks her 19-month-old son, Garren, has a bubbly personality. But Penland said when they were aboard a Continental Express plane, a flight attendant became annoyed by Garren’s personality when he kept saying three words.

“As we started taxiing, he started saying ‘Bye, bye plane,’ said Penland. “At the end of her speech, she leaned over the gentleman beside me and said, ‘It’s not funny anymore. You need to shut your baby up.’

In disbelief, Penland asked the woman if she was kidding. It was then, Penland said, the flight attendant went too far.

“She then said, ‘You know, it’s called baby Benadryl. And I said, 'Well, I'm not going to drug my child so you have a pleasant flight.'

http://www.wsbtv.com/news/13664685/detail.html

Yes you may be annoyed.
Suck it the fuck up.
It's a job, not a vacation.

:popcorn:

I drive or take the train, thank you. I'm afraid of flying, and can't deal with plane personalities. ANYONE's, attendants or fellow passengers.

This is bullshit.

:hide:

What if she had been unable to breastfeed? What if he was adopted?

:D

:bounce:

Trust me, if they don't want to eat, they'll just bite you.

:rofl:

I would put my tit in my babies mouth. And I am a dude

Bitch

CB

Not that I disagree with that, mind you.

:sarcasm:

:wtf:

I have no problem w/ babies who are busily engaged in whatever is happening at the moment.

The flight attendant was wrong and bitchy.

Terrorists say it



The flight attendant was just making sure everyone was safe









:hide:

I salute you! :patriot:

That with 40% pay reductions and slashed benefits (the average for the industry these days) I'd be a little testy m'self.

Not seeing it, TD, not seeing it.

Explaining the reason for stress and inappropriate reactions is not justifying: only explaining possible motivators.

More like 9% to 18%. Maybe you're thinking of overpaid pilots?

And my friends at Delta haven't had benefits "slashed". They now have paycheck deductions for healthcare, but so do most people in the US.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18927867/


"Management compensation could have been another factor in the close vote. After the tentative agreement was reached April 26, Northwest disclosed that its top 400 managers would come out of bankruptcy owning about 5 percent of the company, infuriating the unions."

"The cuts capped top flight attendant pay at about $35,400 a year, down from $44,190 before Northwest filed for bankruptcy protection, according to the union."

19.8% cut in a field that requires no home life, constant travel, and unspecified dangers. Give 5% of the company to the top 400 managers, and add to that no pay raise since the bankruptcy in 2003.

Just saying they are under STRESS, and the traveling public should remember to act accordingly.

19.8% does not equal 40%.

And NW does not represent the entire industry.

As I said, more like 9% to 18%.


In any event, her stress in no way justifies her behavior.

I am saying that maybe this flight attendant should be FINED, Suspended, or possibly not HUNG.

Personally, Young Master shouting "BYE BYE PLANE" for half the flight would leave me rattled beyond description. I don't say kick them OFF, but I'm sorry: Baby Benadryl (while out of line for the attendant to SUGGEST it) is not beyond REASON in this modern stressed air travel as risking your life age.

They hadn't even taken off yet.

Lying to the pilot in order to get this mother and her child off the flight is inexcusable, and should be a fireable offense.

That the FA was out of line, and that FA's have not had 40% pay cuts, as your OP had it.

Take no pay raise for 4 years, be forbidden to strike, then take a 20% cut to what amounts to $16/hour IF you were only away from your family 40 hours in a week, and you'd be testy too.

This does not justify her actions, but I want you to take that cut and smile.

:rofl:

I keep seeing the "Terminally unique" like "my kid can do whatever they want and fuck you" attitudes and I guess it pushes my button.

I raised 3 kids, and I kept them up so they would SLEEP on aircraft, and if that didn't work: BENADRYL. Kinda figured I didn't want the rest of the plane passengers praying for my early and painful death.

Y

It ramps up my older son. And even if it does, some kids have issues with their ears. I did and still do. Flying can make my ears feel like someone is sticking a hot poker in them. Sometimes there just isn't much you can do. Flying with kids can just plain suck.

That's why I kept him awake before the flight if I had to fly with him. That and public training so they wouldn't bubble all over the general public.

I HATE FLYING. And out of courtesy for others, I insisted my children SIT and SHUT UP.

If she'd just smarted off to the passenger, I'd agree with you. But I think lying to get her kicked off the plane is a few steps beyond testy. You know it had to be bad if other passengers were defending the mother, because children on flights aren't always exactly a welcome site for many passengers. You are right that they have a pretty tough job and it's a wonder they can stay so courteous and professional all the time. Of all the times I've flown, I've only ever been treated nasty one time.

Butwhen you have worked in an industry FAMOUS for over reactions and violent behavior (the Auto Industry) and you hear about the guy who came into the plant and shot up the office for no damned good reason, somehow this while bad, does not sound like the end of life as we know it.

Just to stick my foot in my mouth one more time, there is only one thing I want on an airplane: SILENCE. I am paying for this unpleasant mode of transportation because I have no other choice, and I think after three kids, if you want yours to be free and gab the whole flight through: DRIVE.

Suspend the attendant without pay, DRUG the kid.

Traveling with large groups of people means you aren't going to have complete silence. People are going to talk, laugh, cough, cry in pain (the ears), and make various other nosies on an airplane because they're human beings, and crowds of human beings, particularly crammed together in a tube, aren't going to be silent, and they all paid too. If you want complete silence and absolutely can't have it any other way, it's probably best to drive so you don't have to deal with other human beings. Drugging kids doesn't ensure complete silence either for the reasons I've outlined in another post.

:thumbsup:

I don't disagree with the sentiment. I don't mind kids, or kids on planes, but please - not everyone wants to hear it for two hours, much less all day. yes, she probably needs a different career, but I am pretty sick of the "my child can do anything he/she wants" attitude from some parents who give all kids & parents a bad name.

When I was young and would go on trips, I would sit and draw and read and quietly play, and was not allowed to bother other passengers, and you know what? I didn't. How hard is that? The drugging thing is a little too much, but honestly I can see how someone would get frazzled by this.

And yes, I already know I am an asshole. Sorry.

Kids today (wow, that makes me feel old) need to learn how to be a bit more disciplined in public. And while I will say most kids I see out are well behaved, there are some real terrors out there and their parents do not seem to notice. As someone who worked in service industry for years (food), I can't tell you how many times I saw children neglected and getting away with murder to the annoyance of other people and to the point where the kids themselves were causing dangerous situations such as lying on the floor in front of the kitchen door, running into the kitchens, and sticking their fingers into other patrons' food.

And yes, I realize that the flight attendant lied to the pilot and went way too far, I just needed to vent after flying on Sunday with Lil' Smashleigh & Bratley sitting right behind me.

True Story. Little "Jezibelle" must have kicked the back of my chair at least 300-500 times, Detroit to Seattle.

When she quit kicking, she started PUSHING.

Other flights blessed with singing, tantrums about video games then mommy SNEAKING it on when the plane was landing to shut junior up, LOUD headphones you can hear two rows away, CONSTANT NON-Stop chatter...

I would pay extra for an "Adults Only" Flight, nobody under the age of 12.

it was like one of the worst flights i was ever on--no kidding. My daughter and i were headed back to the Sac after visiting family in Boston, we get to O'Hare and our flight to Sac was delayed for 2 hours, by the time we got on the plane people were already grumpy and the flight was oversold--quell surprise. Anyhow it was one of those planes where it looked like the airline decided to jam another row of seats in after the fact so the leg room for me was non-existent, i'm not super tall but i have a 32 inch inseam so height is on my legs. The lady in front of me had 2 small children who slept the whole way through but at one point she slams her seat back and CRACK! right on both of my knee caps, people actually heard the sound and i could them muttering "Owww" no shit, it hurt like hell.

After about 30 minutes in the air a baby started to cry and of course that set the rest of them off, there were about 25 small children on that flight and over half of them were crying all the way to Sacramento, thank god i had my ipod.

so I should have expected it to be crowded and a similar experience to yours, but not quite as bad.

I had my iPod, but let my wife use it. And they say chivalry is dead....

only bothers me because i think--that abby is hurting, hungry, scared or needs a diaper changed so i tend to be one of those "Awww poor little thing" but i've never seen so many kids on a flight that wasn't going anyplace fun you know, not to knock where i live but Sacramento isn't exactly the Disneyland of the west so my question was where the hell are all these kids going or where are they coming from?

My daughter and i are flying to Boston next Wed. morning, we have one stop in Denver and then off to Logan airport, this time because my husband has so many frequent flier miles are tickets were free and automatically upgraded to first class so i'm thinking even if the flight is loaded with little kids crying at least i'll have more leg room.

all the way back and the last (as in, has to be reminded by the FA two times) to put it in the upright position. Always. It's unbelievable. My husband and I just look at each other and laugh when it inevitably happens. I even had one woman get up to walk around and talk to a friend seated elsewhere and LEFT HER SEAT ALL THE WAY RECLINED. I finally asked her husband if he could straighten it up at least while she was gone. When she returned I jammed my book and my bookbag between me and the back of her seat. She kept trying to recline her seat and it would only go back about one inch. She finally gave up.

I think I may just start doing that from now on. Maybe I can fashion something to jam between the end of my armrest and the seat in front of me to keep it from reclining. Do people not know how invasive that is to the people behind them? Or do they just not care?

crack your kneecaps, it's just really inconsiderate, it's like hey asshole i paid for this ticket just like you did so try and use whatever manners you may possess.

When I fly, I always seem to be behind someone who insists on putting their seat back for most of the duration of the flight and will ignore the request of the FA to put the seat up during meal times (or if they adhere they will put the seat upright just as long as the FA is in sight and then put it back down again). Sometimes though, the passenger will exchange seats with their spouse toward the end of their flight and, surprisingly enough, their spouse will show much more consideration toward the passenger behind them (i.e. me) and, even if they do recline their seat, will ask my permission beforehand and will apologize for the inconvenience that it will cause me. Which of course is in total contrast to the behavior of the other spouse

:popcorn:

It would have been a few minutes if it began while they were taxiing and they hadn't taken off yet. Why are people assuming he would have kept on going for the entire flight? Kids love to say the same things over and over, but a 19-month-old has a pretty short attention span.

We're not even talking about a child old enough to understand the concept of bothering others. OF COURSE you teach your child the behavior you want him to display, and you model the behavior you want him to display, but this child was nineteen-months-old. Kids that age are in the process of learning "how to be a bit more disciplined in public" but were talking barely into the toddler stage. We're not talking about a 3- or 4- or 5-year old who should know better.

At any rate, no matter the cause of his babbling, there is no excuse for deliberately lying in order to remove the mother and child from the flight. In my mind, such an action should be grounds for immediate dismissal.

Have you ever tried to discipline a baby?

Had it been my wife she had said that to, she may have wound up in the ER with multiple bruises, cuts, contusions and abrasions. Mrs Gtrman is nobody to be trifled with, especially when it comes to fooling with Gtrbaby....

:wow:

I could definitely imagine the other side of the story being along the lines of the kid screaming, not saying, "BYE BYE PLANE!" repeatedly, the FA first asking the mother to ask the child to be quiet, the mother being rude in return, and the exchange escalating from there.

Sticking to the story as it is, the FA went way overboard. The mother should have taken some steps to quiet her child, however. Common courtesy is not trumped by letting your kid do whatever it wants.

I agree. Sometimes a screaming kid only has a "bubbly personality" in his mom's eyes.

Could you point to any indicator in any article about this incident that the baby was screaming?

...and one other passenger.

I used screaming to cover a lot of ground. Maybe it was a simple matter of the child using his/her outside voice while the attendant was trying to give the safety speech.

the whole "bye bye plane" thing is creepy enough, and you can't help wondering where the kid heard it and WHY he heard it to keep repeating it, the carrying-on throughout the safety announcement is against regulations

i realize sometimes parents can't control their children, but if you can't control your child, you honest to god shouldn't be on a public aircraft

i would just like to hear the FA's side of the story, i bet it's way different, someone repeating parrotlike "bye bye plane" can indeed be construed as a threat to me, esp. when the FA has no real way of knowing why the child has picked that particular phrase to repeat, it's just "plane" sinister

because he was a kid, going bye-bye on a plane.

My son says "bye-bye!" to the preschool bus when it's driven away. He repeats things too. That's what little kids do.

:crazy:

it definitely has an ugly ring to it, considering the excitements of recent years

Otherwise, I think (aside from the potential for being obnoxious)there's not much grounds for concern.

I took my five-year-old to the bank once, and she told the teller, "the bank has to give my Mom all their money."

Nobody hit the floor anticipating a robbery.

:rofl:

You certainly can't just let your kid scream and do whatever they want. But, if "bye bye airplane" is considered over the top, then most parents couldn't ever go out in public at all. There has to be a sensible middle ground where parents and kids don't have to be relegated to 3rd class status in this world.

Seems parents and kids have 1st Class+ status everywhere. When I start seeing parking spots reserved for married couples or singles without children, then you can start complaining. Til then, you're a long, LONG ways away from 3rd class status.

You know those spaces for new moms and parents with children are courtesies to an expanding stomach as well as to people trying to handle small kids across the parking lot So THEY CAN SPEND MONEY IN YOUR STORE.


I am WAY past using those spots, but I would be supremely offended if there was a special spot for married couples or singles. Sorry.

You know, the thousands of dollars worth of benefits that have absolutely no applicability to anyone BUT parents of small children?

I could go on, and on, and on, and on, and on about all of the extra little things that parents and children get. I don't mind them, but don't even start trying to say you're 3rd class.

And here's the deal. You chose to remain childless. I did not. But the young people in my children's generation will be the ones caring for me as well as you when we older and I want the best possible care and education for all of them. It has been this way forever. Some children actually do a hands on caretaking, others caretake through their chosen careers or volunteering.

I want the person driving the ambulance to be able to follow directions. I want the pharmacist to be able to decipher the doctor's handwriting and so on.

It takes a village.

I'm CURRENTLY childless. I don't plan on that being the case forever. And considering I'm a lobbyist for education, you're comments implying I don't care about kids are way off base - I've made it my career to fight for kids, forgoing a boatload of money to do so. Furthermore, I'm not sure what that has to do with these additional perks to parents and children that no one else gets. If you can tell me how better parking spots are going to make your kids any more capable of becoming a doctor than they would otherwise, I'd be happy to hear it.

You know what though? Keep your self-righteous assumptions to yourself. Like you said, however, you CHOSE to have children.

pregnant women and new moms is a COURTESY put forth by the establishment that wishes to have them shop there.

And, I'm basing my opinion on your statements that married couples and singles deserve the same percs. They don't. Whether or not you ever have kids, it would seem to me that someone who has made it his career to fight for kids wouldn't begrudge such a small courtesy. Why do you care?

Wrangling three kids under the age of 5 across a crowded parking lot isn't all that easy, but sometimes it HAS to be done. I would have very much appreciated that convenience when mine were little and I certainly don't begrudge those who use them now. It's a COURTESY. I'm delighted that the stores I shop in offer this for new parents and expectant moms.

And, I don't get any tax credits for my kids. We earn too much to qualify. We get exemptions for them, but it hardly puts a nick in what it costs to feed, clothe and house them.

Parents and kids are NOT 3rd class citizens. Not even close. THAT is my point. That I back up this point with evidence that there are plenty of perks given to parents and kids should not, by any reasonable measure, be construed as me having a problem with them. My problem is with ignorant "woe-is-me" comments that try to claim no one cares about parents and kids.

I hate to belabor that point, but if you're basing your arguments on that, I'd like to try to save you some trouble. While I'm at it, I'll say that I've never made any woe is me comments claiming that nobody cared about parents and kids, either. I've always directed my comments at people of a specific mindset that I've always made clear I realized was not everybody.

And your statement was definitely a declarative one. There is nothing subjective or conditional about your comment. Say what you mean - otherwise you look like you're back-peddling.

I will make that bold. And then I'll include the sentence that was before it that you omitted, that clearly gives it the meaning I intended. And that's not including all other sentences in that post, or the post I was responding to that also adds context . I did not say in any way that parents and kids are 3rd class citizens. I didn't say it. I was responding to a person who was making the claim that "Bye bye, airplane" is a kick off the plane offense. My response is clearly "If that is so, then we are relegated to 3rd class", NOT "We are third class". Anyway, here:

"But, if "bye bye airplane" is considered over the top, then most parents couldn't ever go out in public at all. There has to be a sensible middle ground where parents and kids don't have to be relegated to 3rd class status in this world."

It is the first "if" in the sentence you chose to omit that clarifies what I said. If A is the case, then B is the case. I did not make the statement anywhere that B is the case.

Believe whatever you wish.

It's remarkable how many ways you can word a sentence and still have its meaning plain. A and B are in the same sentence for most of them. "If A, then B." "A is a terrible thing. If A, then B." "B would be the case if A were the case. Therefore we can't let A be the case". I'm sure there are many more. I really don't mean to be snarky or a pain, here. But the thing you're accusing me of saying is ridiculous and I don't think it's the case at all. ETA that it's a good thing you're not in the mood to give a grammar lesson, because I'm really not in need of one. You have a nice day as well :hi:

Have a good day.

to anyone to drug an adult passenger if they were too noisy.

I've been on planes where the noise level of the person next to me or in front of me or behind me was friggin' deafening, yet no one suggested that he or she take something to keep them quiet.

It was however, acceptable for the FA to insist that this mom do so and when she refused, kick them off the plane.

That FA needs to lose her job.

In no way did the FA act appropriately. I've never said otherwise. And it certainly doesn't seem acceptable that the FA took that action, at least judging by the response it's been met with. Certainly not every passenger that gets kicked off an airplane gets media attention.

for being noisy. Drunk, yes, not noisy.

But once again, I'm not even questioning that the FA was entirely inappropriate here. I do question that we've only heard one side of the story and only one eyewitness 3rd party account, but based on this, there's no question the FA was wrong. How many times must I say that?

"There has to be a sensible middle ground where parents and kids don't have to be relegated to 3rd class status in this world."

I did not make a declarative statement. Simply put, I did not say what you claim I said. Most people are reasonable enough that they don't have such standards, and thus we aren't relegated to that standard, much to the chagrin of some around here.

but in the military if you're married you make more money, and if you are new to the military you get to live in a house immediately (either on or off base). If you're new to the military and single (and no children) you get stuck in the barracks until you either get married, have a child, or get promoted to Sergeant (or E-4 if you're lucky).

If you have children and live on base, the number and gender of children dictate how many bedrooms your free house will have (rank also comes into consideration).

If you are married or have children you get about $250 a month added to your pay to cover groceries (then buying the groceries is on you). If you're forced to live in the barracks your food "entitlement" is the mess hall. Let's compare that for a moment: groceries you choose yourself vs cafeteria food!

If you're forced to live in the barracks, then you must adhere to insane cleanliness standards. You can stay at the fanciest/most expensive penthouse/suite at a 5 star hotel, and it won't come close to meeting the cleanliness standards that barracks residents must obey everyday.

This extra money they get is non-taxable, and it improves their quality of life while treating barracks residents like 3rd class citizens.

Fortunately I've got enough rank that I won't be in the barracks anymore (unless I'm at a remote assignment like Korea). I've lived in the barracks for 5 years and 8 months.

Before anyone start bashing me, please take into consideration that I've lived on both sides of this issue. I'm divorced with a 7 year old son who lives with my ex-wife.

I just went and read my post again just to make sure. Nope. I didn't say it.

I was referring to the notion that parents should stay away if they can't stop their children from doing such innocuous things as saying "Bye bye, plane". My hyperbole was an attempt to highlight how absurd those standards are. It was an attempt to plead some frigging middle ground, here. A child screaming with no attempts by the parents to calm them is inexcusable, and I think most parents would agree with that. Those that wouldn't are at the extreme end of the scale, as are the people who think children should be seen and not heard and that parents have the ability to shut them off like little machines. Sensible, middle ground here. Parents should make every effort to calm and quiet their kids. I also think anyone who goes out in public and expects total silence should have to bend a little as well.

:thumbsup:

I'm glad some people are speaking up. Sometimes I get the feeling everyone thinks I'm the lone raving loony when it comes to this subject. And all I ever advocate is compromise and middle ground. I've never defended the parents who won't parent their kids. But, if I were to base my actions on the expectations of a lot of people on DU, I could never step outside this door.

to a restaurant where you don't order into a clown's face. :eyes:

I take my kids out to eat at nice restaurants all the time. They behave. We enjoy ourselves. Just because someone is offended at seeing kids in a restaurant, that's not my problem. I prefer my kids' company to a lot of adults I know.

But, when I do get the rare chance to go sans kids, I'll often notice other families with well behaved kids. Occasionally I'll see the unfortunate incident, and I do understand why that is aggravating to other people. It can ruin a nice meal. But, even then the parents usually look mortified and are obviously struggling with the situation. It's been very rare that I saw them sitting quietly and not lifting a finger. They are the extremes I was talking about, and is by far not the norm, in spite of what some may claim. I would never defend such behavior. But the way some respond to my arguments, you would think that was exactly what I was arguing.

:eyes:

Why would he say, "Bye bye plane"? Probably because his mother prepared him for the flight by saying, "We're going bye bye on a plane!" "It's time to go bye bye on the plane!" "See that plane? That's just like the one we're going on. Bye bye, plane!" "We're going to take off now and go bye bye on the plane!"

Even if this baby were somehow involved in a nefarious plot, I'd guess that most terrorists are smart enough not to teach the baby how to give away their threats.

Seriously. This was a baby. Babies like to say the same thing over and over. Saying "bye bye plane" sounds absolutely, perfectly normal for a toddler going bye bye on a plane. The idea that this could be construed as a threat just proves to me that the fear tactics of the right are working and taking hold in the minds of Americans.

Creepy?

Lighten up, Francis.

That's what they do.

If it was an adult who should know better, different story, but the FA was a total ass about the whole thing.

:thumbsup:

is another's "grind against my consciousness like nails on a chalkboard."

there is no reason to let kids just keep going and going and going.

i'm sure many parents are spellbound by their beloved wunderkind's precocity, but the rest of us are irritable, high-strung, and otherwise pissed off the majority of time. especially in highly adversarial/potentially volatile environments like airports and airplanes.

i wonder if other passengers complained or if the kid was REALLY loud.

no one needs to be subjected to that shit in an enclosed environment.

CONTROL YOUR KIDS.

And what kind of person wants to volunteer to be the defender of the person who kicked a mom and her kid off an airplane? I'm the kind of guy that would typically do something like that and even I'd steer clear of this one.

"Penland said when the other passengers began speaking up on her behalf, the flight attendant got angrier and soon announced they were turning around and that Penland and Garren were going to be taken off the plane."

don't piss off flight crew members.

she might have been excessive, but without actually witnessing the scene, it's hard to say.

still, i think children should be encouraged to behave in public.

There is nothing in the article to suggest the mother was unwilling to encourage good behavior. She was unwilling to DRUG her child.

Remember, this child is barely into the toddler stages. He's a baby. Babies don't always do exactly what we want them to do, no matter how hard we try. This also sounds like a baby who was excited about going "bye bye" on a plane.

and what he did was creepy. :eyes:

as well. I will predicate this by saying that I am not yet a parent, but I am planning on having children in the future, so I do like observing other parents in public places... just out of curiosity, I suppose.

I truly believe that many American parents are very permissive with their children and are exceedingly protective of them. We aren't having the same number of babies as we used to, so those that we do have are extremely precious to us and we do all we can to protect them. I do believe we live in a more child-centered society now, and I believe that's driven by market forces. (Special parking spaces for expecting mothers? They're not just being altruistic here). Whether that's good or bad is to be seen, but I do wonder if the cost is a society more tolerant of self-centered, entitled behavior - and that we're so accustomed to precocious behavior in children and entitled behavior in adults that we won't label it what it is.

Americans notoriously are viewed, around the world, as loud and demanding. Europeans are especially beguiled by this. I was having coffee with an English friend of mine on Tuesday and we happened upon this conversation. He raised his children here in the US, and he's also a college professor, so he has dealt with at least two generations of students. He's taken aback by how American parents coddle their children, and how those children have (in his eyes) grown to view themselves as deserving accolades with little work. I wonder if a growth in this attitude has much to do with societal norms on raising children in this country. But that is only one opinion, of course.

Which returns me back to this incident. Yes, I think the flight attendant was over the top, but I also would bet $100.00 that this flight attendant has had his share of parents refusing to quiet their children while living in a society that tolerates loud, precocious behavior by children. The flight attendant needs to be suspended for a while for his behavior, but I do wish that American parents would take a moment to reconsider how we place (or don't place) boundaries on our children's behavior in our society as a whole.

She was unwilling to DRUG her child, and the flight attendant's suggestion she do so was unprofessional and uncalled for. In another article I linked below, the mother had told the FA the baby would soon fall asleep anyway.

What boundaries are we talking about? This is a baby who was babbling for a few minutes. I'd like to know who the people are who have the magic on/off switch for a child that young.

There is nothing in either article I read to suggest the baby was loud or disruptive, behaving badly, or that the mother had an entitlement complex. And we have a flight attendant who lied to the pilot in order to remove the mother and child from the plane. Just who has the entitlement issue there?

for comments on this specific situation. I'm not applying this to this particular incident, but to incidents I've personally have witnessed or have heard from friends and relatives.

This is a specific situation that obviously was mishandled by the flight attendant. But I think there is, if we can step out of this situation and look at child rearing in general in America, a larger issue at play - that being Americans who are more permissive with their children than in other societies.

I'm not saying that to be snotty or dismissive, but it really isn't relevant. Whether other American parents or even American parents in general are more permissive than other societies has nothing to do with the injustice of this mother being kicked off this flight.

I think it could make an interesting topic if you wanted to start a thread, but I'd suggest asbestos panties before plunging in.

why not discuss it? I think we can learn more about ourselves as a society if we don't close ourselves off to discussing why we make the choices we make as parents, teachers, flight attendants, etc.....

If the mother and child were not displaying the behaviors you wanted to discuss, how is it germane to this topic?

and I think, also, the norms of American society say that it is okay for children to behave loudly, precociously, without boundaries. From my perspective, I don't think this translates to a good future for America.

but it still isn't relevant to THIS discussion about THIS mother and THIS child. All it does is muddy the waters by implying that this is just one more example of the "many cases" you've referred to.

and the messages kids are taught from day one regarding how "special" and "unique" they are.

coddling?

that too can be problematic. i wouldn't want little lord fauntleroy to become a raging sociopath, but there is a lot to be said for sternness and consistent discipline.

i see WAYYYY too many parents who treat the world outside their home as a "phantasmagoric learnatorium" for their offspring.

which ISN'T so bad. in museums or at the zoo. but when they let little johnny or jane hold up the line coaxing them to decide something from the hot dog guy or at mcdonalds, i say enough is enough.

there are other ways too teach life lessons that aren't so irksome to the world around a parent.

After all, Clenis gets blamed for everything! Watergate=Clenis...Vietnam=Clenis...Enron=Clenis...JFK assassination=Clenis...Lincoln assassination=Clenis...

No sarcasm, just venting about the freeptards obsession with blaming Bill Clinton for everything.

on this incident. I'm sorry I attempted to introduce a bit of critical thinking to this issue. I don't have an agenda. I'm just trying to introduce a BROADER discussion.

You know, I think in general (not necessarily you) but people in general can use a few less of these stupid tit-for-tat arguments on anecdotal situations and a few more critical explorations of our society. I think we'd learn more about ourselves.

And God help us if we try to introduce them in a public discussion.

No one said you couldn't introduce the topic into public discussion. In fact, I think I even suggested you open up a thread about it.

However, discussion on whether or not American society is permissive about behaviors and boundaries does not offer any "greater perspective on this incident" because the subjects of this incident were not behaving inappropriately.

You posted your theories as a response to a post of mine regarding this particular baby, but it really had nothing to do with this particular baby.

:grouphug:

:grouphug:

If LIW would join in...

If you don't want to tackle these larger issues, then don't. I won't take offense to that. I just thought it might be an interesting view in yet another stupid tit-for-tat argument.

From my point of view, the world doesn't fall into neat little "for or against" categories. Why limit ourselves to these constrained, petty discussions on only one incident out of many?

:applause:

obsession/addiction of this country.

Someone didn't let a child do what he/she wanted! Crucify him!!

This article has such little information as to be fucking laughable.

People here are calling the flight attendant a liar - how do we know he lied? Because of the report of another passenger?

No, no conclusions can be drawn from this article whatsoever, except the continuing conclusion that this country has very fucking few journalists who know how to write or investigate or do their fucking job; and that the media has an obsession with children and their purity and the satanic nature of anyon who would deny a child anything.

Here. Here's another article, one which uses the word "eyewitnesses" (as in, plural, more than one)

http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=local&id=5472927

"Suddenly eyewitnesses say the flight attendant announced they were returning to the gate and Penland would be removed from the plane."

They didn't make any comments on the altercation, just that they were suddenly returning to the gate. So we're still at a singular other passenger.

Why not just ban all talking on the plane? Because, let me tell you, I've sat around some pretty obnoxious human beings on a plane. They talked over everyone else, complained loudly, and kicked and jostled my seat. And you know what? They were all over 30.

It doesn't appear that the kid was screaming or grumpy. While I don't support parents of young children getting kicked off of planes at all, this seems to be ridiculously over the top.

Right, JVS?

:bounce:

Just like they suck at everything!

Oh wait, you can't smoke on planes anymore.

Nevermind.

but there IS booze :shrug:

"Bye bye, plane"???

I have a short fuse, too, but daaaaaamn. Was someone not happy having his or her job?

because the little darling behind us was a brat through an entire flight.

the parents ended up fighting with each other because the kid wouldn't behave :eyes:

http://www.wsbtv.com/news/13675836/detail.html

Mom Booted From Plane Goes National; Kid Kicks, Whines At Interview

POSTED: 9:12 am EDT July 13, 2007
UPDATED: 12:39 pm EDT July 13, 2007

NEW YORK -- The Gwinnett County mother kicked off an airplane with her 19-month old son tried to tell her side of the story Friday morning, but her son's crying and whining drowned out the interview.

Garren Penland, 19-months old, got so unruly during his mom's chat with 'Good Morning America' anchor Diane Sawyer, co-anchor Chris Cuomo had to take the toddler off the set.

While Kate Penland explained her child was well-behaved on the Continental Express flight, little Garren kicked, wiggled and squirmed out of his mother's arms.

At one point he climbed up on a coffee table and rifled through Sawyer's scripts.

When Sawyer handed him a model Space Shuttle to distract him, Garren flung it to the ground.

Kate Penland said she and Garren were booted from the flight last month by a flight attendant who suggested she use benadryl to calm her son down.

:hide:

That mother is an idiot.

He's Our Precious Gift from God. That mother is only a shade away from The Virgin Mary. Oh why, why must we treat them so?

:eyes:

First of all, I can't believe that a flight attendant has the authority to stop a flight and boot somebody off. The pilot would, but a flight attendant?

If a flight attendant has the right to stop a flight from taking off every time she's annoyed, the story currently being discussed would be commonplace, not anything that warrants 100+ posts here. If I were a flight attendant with such authority, you could get thrown off my flight instantly for:

a.) having a noisy kid (sorry, but I don't like being around loud kids)
b.) talking off your shoes if your feet reek
c.) having bad breath
d.) asking me for a drink before we've hit cruising altitude
e.) being snotty
f.) wearing white shoes after Labor Day
g.) any other little thing that pisses me off

Second, if the mother is such a jerk as I'm told she was on some morning interview, my guess is that she got snotty with the flight attendant and oversteeped her bounds. The only testimony I've read comes from the pissed-off mother herself.

Third, this quote jumped out at me: "I was crying, I was upset and I was thinking, ‘What am I going to do? I don’t have anything with me, I don’t have anymore diapers for the baby, no juice, no milk," said Penland. What kind of mother boards a plane with no diapers for a kid of that age, much less something to drink? Given the fact that airports sell milk and juice, if not diapers, was she entirely without cash or plastic?

I would be stunned to learn that the story is as one-sided as it's made out to be in the article Matcom posted, just stunned.

as her child kicked and flailed and cried, she tried to act soft and innocent as she spoke to Diane Sawyer, and not ONCE did she make her child sit still. I honestly think she's playing the victim and getting her precious little Garren a college fund. The article contains no quotes from the airline, the flight attendant, only from this poor victim and His Majesty, The Child.

I am getting more and more disgusted by this story.

...and now I'm convinced we're right.

The article was so one-sided, and the truth rarely is. I hope the flight attendant defends herself and gives us her side.

Sort of explained everything, didn't it?

NT

I think we're getting only one side of the story.

This is bizzaro....

I think either this mother doesn't understand what a good behaving child looks like, or this mother is playing the system. But either way, the posed photos and the slanted article are not portraying this issue in a fair way.

"You need to shut your baby up" and "It's called baby Benadryl" jump out at me. Those are really inappropriate for the FA to say. If things went as the article states then you just can't talk to a customer that way and if someone did to me I may "shut her up" by putting my fist in her mouth ;-)

My two travelling buddies are both pediatric nurses and they told me that benedryl is usually recommended for the child's comfort too. So, many pediatricians and nurses are aware of the practice and recommend it.

Hell, I'd take some myself if it would help the flight go by faster :evilgrin:

This mother has done one hell of a job approaching the media to convince the public that she was a victim, when quite frankly I think she's an overly lenient mother who does not know what a well-behaved child looks like.

Of course if you say they need to be taught early on you're told a little one doesn't have the ability to learn right from wrong. God forbid jr is shown there are consequences for behavior that isn't acceptable. Of course the consequence varies depending on their age but you can still teach them.

I was accused of not having kids so I don't know how hard it is, not knowing what I was talking about, practically supporting violence when I suggested teaching them all along will help them know what the limits are in public.

Does this mean a kid won't pitch a fit once in a while? - of course not, but you can sure cut down on the incidents by sticking to that time out you give them when you threaten them with one etc.. AND you can tell by the parents reaction to the fit if they have made a pattern of caving in or not - it always shows if they're not in control when that happens.


That mother is a classic example of a parent who expects everyone around him to think he's the second coming of Christ and dare not question why he may not be behaving. Something I've always noticed in these situations that there are always other little kids around that do NOT act that way - reason being their parents are in control, not the kid.

Even if a majority of parents are in control of their children, it is evident when rules are not established at home for those that are not behaving in public. It starts at HOME.

Someone had to say it; :hide: surprised it took this long.

However, I'd grab my headphones and attempt to block it out. And certainly the flight attendant was rude, but seriously...

"Bubbly personality"--what the fuck does that mean? I know many "bubbly" people who are also airheads. Perhaps that explains the bubbles?