It mentions that she used an inhaler, but not an epipen.  Doesn`t that seem odd if her allergy was so severe that she ended up in ICU for two days?  Even though there are differing views on when to use an epipen, being unable to breathe seems to be pretty universally considered to be an indication to use the epipen.  It is confusing to me why she would not use one if she could not breathe and was not even going to live long enough to land at the regular airport in 40 minutes.  Something doesn`t fit to me.

The statement from United is awful.  Any person knows they cannot guarantee what others will do on their flight, but they risk nothing by simply asking others to be mindful of the allergies while in flight.  Even if someone is a total jerk, and wants to eat their own peanuts, I think if it is pointed out to them the inconvenience they will experience with an emergency landing, they would comply with such a request. 

What a serious and frightening reaction! 

I've been up for about 48+ hours with a sick kid so marshmallow brain  and all but a private suit might be the only way to bring about changes in travel due to ADA having a limited protection in transportation. Much in the way that a private suit can affect law enforcement and justice administration practices without challenging the law itself.

Good point-- but my logic is that if the carrier had offered NOTHING in the way of accommodation-- (at least from their logic) they could not be the target of such suits.  Ergo... Continental.    

There are already relatively few (domestic) carriers that DO go to the lengths that United does in accommodating-- not serving any peanuts, generally being willing to do cabin announcements, giving no grief over preboarding, etc.

I can just see their legal team going... Continental doesn't get sued.  SW doesn't get sued.  Delta doesn't get sued.  Hmmm.


I mean, I'm not saying that her suit is frivolous.  Far from it.  I think it is outrageous that she anaphylaxed (primarily?) because of a refusal to do a simple cabin announcement.    Seems obvious to me what the answer is here-- but I doubt that will be the outcome. 

Quote from: CMdeux on June 03, 2013, 06:33:04 PM


Why?  Because United is just about the ONLY carrier with a good peanut policy in the domestic carrier market.

CM, this lawsuit is against United.  I wouldn't say that United is the only one.  US Air is wonderful, and American doesn't serve peanuts (they do serve warm tree nuts in first class). 

I do too. 

The original FAN was very much a product of its time, when FA's were not particularly well known.  It was almost like a community that was talking to itself, KWIM?  I think after a time it really went through growing pains and lost its direction and mojo.

FARE seems like FAAN's much more mature, more evolved older sibling.  They've really raised the bar.

I like what I see with FARE so far too!

Thus far I find the merger of Food Allergy Initiative with FAAN to be an overall improvement. As if there's at least a plan moving forward with increased attention to identifying and meeting needs. I would even go so far as to say it appears there's more thoughtful discretion on resource management.

I still can't quite comprehend what good it will do to "talk with our physician prior to flying" if I need to travel somewhere via air as the only feasible means of transportation.

I mean, seriously??   


That. is. insane.  What is my physician going to do, exactly?



And I had airlines wonder why I was "making such a big deal" about the allergy PRIOR to boarding transatlantic flights... 

We were fortunate enough to get highly cooperative flight crews that made announcements... but the level of miscommunication/lack of communication... was astonishing, given that this is the kind of thing that can divert a flight in minutes.


The even greater irony is that the end "industry lesson" here is likely to be "don't fly with us if you're peanut allergic-- we guarantee you NOTHING" rather than "we should be more responsive."

Why?  Because United is just about the ONLY carrier with a good peanut policy in the domestic carrier market.

I know how many of you feel about FARE, but this week's newsletter contains some important information you might find interesting. 

Link to a survey on the effect of FA's on parent's of young children:

https://ufl.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_38nItPqbNFcK1Sd


A news story on a plane having to make an emergency landing due to anaphylaxis caused by another passenger eating peanuts:

http://www.usatoday.com/videos/news/2013/05/30/2371829/


*Sigh*  That story really made my blood boil.  I'm still not over DS's reaction on a US Air flight, and it was almost 16 years ago.