Posted on 04/26/2013 8:22:27 PM PDT by oxcart
WASHINGTON, DC -
A man with Tourette Syndrome was denied boarding a plane Thursday after he said the word “bomb.”
Michael Doyle and Chaz Petteway are friends and travel companions. They were booked on a Jet Blue flight from Reagan National Airport to San Juan Puerto Rico Thursday to take part in a weekend Revolutionary War reenactment.
"It was a really big deal for us. It was going to be fun. A very fun time," said Michael Doyle.
Doyle says he was not allowed to board his flight because of his Tourette’s. But they'd planned ahead, alerting Jet Blue and the TSA about his so-called ticking. That’s frequent outbursts and vocalizing thoughts he's trying to suppress.
“With all the stuff in the news about the Boston bombings and stuff... I started ticking 'bomb.' Because that when I get nervous and anything on my mind will come out. And things you're not supposed to say," said Doyle.
It didn't cause any issues at passenger screening.
"We went through TSA saying 'bomb' the whole time and no one stopped us. No one said anything because they were aware.”
But just minutes before boarding, the Jet Blue pilot put the kibosh on the trip.
"I mean they stood me up in front of everyone and told me like I'm in kindergarten that I'm not allowed to go on the plane," said Doyle.
As someone who suffers from tourettes, I feel for the man. I know from experience that the more he tried to stop saying “bomb” the harder it must have been not to say it. As a young boy of 8 or 9 I had the overwhelming urge to laugh during the preacher’s sermon in church. The more I tried to stop the more I laughed. It is not something you can control. I can also see the airline’s side too. I could see how the other passengers might get a little techy hearing some guy shouting bomb over and over again on the plane.
Tourettes and OCD are believed by most to be in the same category as epilepsy.
The man could no more stop saying that than an epileptic can stop seizing.
This was wholly unnecessary.
There was a great show about a kid with that. Barbara Heaton played the mom.
He boarding a plane knowing that the possibility of an outbreak making those around him uncomfortable and a potential safety risk to the crew members of the airplane . . .
Or the pilot who will protect his crew members and surrounding passengers greater than a mama bear protecting her cubs?
Each case is unique, each incident has it own particular set of circumstances. When a Captain says and removes what he believes to be a safety risk . . . The discussion is over. Regardless!
Tourettes’ scene from “Deuce Bigelow.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sSfHryQzNkI
(warning: bad language!)
Maybe he was saying “Baum?” Or maybe balm? We can never be sure...
So? I wouldn't let an epileptic man seizing board the plane either. Whether it's voluntary or not I don't think it's fair to subject the other passengers and crew to it.
“The discussion is over. Regardless!”
How absolutely royal of you.
Did you miss the part where he got through security checks and then, at the last minute, was denied access in a very public way?
Was *that* necessary?
The airline had plenty of time to do that in a more compassionate manner.
Not sure I would use the term "royal" but if that suits your description, then yes, "royal " is how the industry views the role of Captain of a commercial airplane. A Captain's word and decision is absolute, and it is fundamental to the safety of the skies.
What is missing and no journalist is going to write, lest it screws up their "human interest" story, is the captain has consulted with all involved including ground staff supervisor, listen to all the facts, and attempt to mitigate the situation, ex: interview the individual, re seat him and his friend if it was only the surrounding passengers or single crewmember not comfortable etc.
Now to be sure, an airline or the personnel involved, being the professional they are, will later review the facts, try to understand and learn from these type of incidents.
A Captain is looking for a solution, and in the end he is accountable for his decisions to his immediate boss. Decisions are made in real time and i assure you, he/ she is considering the well being of hundreds of souls.
p.s. I assure you, on a personal level, i have and i extend great compassion for those who board and are disabled. So no, for me it is not a " royal" attitude, rather a passionate concern for the safety of all those on board.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.