Discussion in 'Up to the Minute' started by peeples, Nov 27, 2012.
This sounds like a frivolous lawsuit. The airlines TRIED to accommodate her, she should have gone to a local hospital if she were that sick.
They chose to vacation in their native country every year knowing she had health problems, they should have had a plan on how to deal with it if she got super sick during one of their frequent trips.
I don't know, Sonya. The article doesn't say why she didn't go to a European hospital.
But time and again, she was told such-and-such an airline would accommodate her, only to drive to the designated airport and be told the airline would not. That's negligence on SOMEBODY's part.
That's the thing that gets me.. they GOT her there. why couldn't they get her home??
She was extremely obese, only had one leg and other health issues. Frankly I am not so sure someone in her condition should have traveled out of the country to begin with.
It really depends on what the airline has available at the airport they wish to use. I work at a small airport (for the airport itself, not an airline).
When Northwest was still in operation, they had a frequent flyer who was extremely obese, with many health issues, who flew first class, and had an ambulance meet him as he had to have a stretcher to leave the aircraft as he could not fit in a wheelchair (and we have one's we call the wide bodies) and could not move on his own. Everytime he arrived, the ambulance service would request assistance from our emergency rescue services because they could not handle it alone, getting him off the aircraft.
It got to the point he would relieve himself of his body waste while reclined in his seat. The airline had to start denying him as it offended the other passengers, and he had a very aggressive attitude that he was entitled. The ambulance service even started to refuse him due to his attitude.
So, I would not want to take sides at this point. We do not know if this particular person had an attitude to go with her problems.
I am sorry she passed away, but I still don't understand why she traveled in her condition to vacation so far away.
I think it's because she got bigger while she was gone.
It sounds like she needed dialysis because of her kidney problems but didn't have it while they were in Hungary. So she retained a lot of water and got several sizes larger.
The alleged reason they didn't see a doctor in Hungary:
It's very sad but hardly the fault of the airline. It's possible the Hungarian doctors could have done something to save her life.
She was a dialysis patient who went without her treatment to go on this trip? She was playing with her life long before the airlines denied her access. In fact, she was playing with her life with that first missed dialysis appointment, which was probably the day after she left the US.
She didn't deserve to die, but both she and her husband are the ones responsible for her declining health and eventual death.
Airlines can also deny otherwise healthy pregnant women who are past a certain date in their pregnancy. It seems that some people could realistically use some protection from themselves, but that would be denying their rights. Example: my own mom wanted me arrested in 1977 for drinking peppermint tea to quell nausea during pregnancy. ( She said this with a lit cigarette in her hand and lit another one before the first was gone ) While not exactly common back then, peppermint for nausea is completely mainstream-acceptable, even encouraged, today.
I do understand individuals AND business entities not wanting to accept liabilities for taking KNOWN high risks. We'd screw them to the wall for taking a high risk with our safety via maintenance issues. This woman's humanity deserved preserving and the airline tried to do that. Too bad she and/ OR hubbie didn't make a better choice.
Do we know for sure this wasn't the husband's legal way to offload his wife? AND make big money through litigation at the same time? :what:
Reminds me of the seeming scams of Natalie Khawam in the Petraeus situation, especially concerning her lawsuit against former employer Cohen.
THREE different airlines sold this woman a ticket and told her they could fly her back to the States (including KLM, which got her to Europe in the first place). THREE different airlines changed their minds after the woman was already on one of their planes.
In the meantime, the woman and her husband drove all over Central Europe.
I'm all for personal responsibility and, yes, I think the couple should have stayed at home in the U.S. But the passenger and her husband had no way of telepathically analyzing the wheelchair capacity at the Prague Airport. They HAD to rely on airline officials and those officials share some of the responsibility.
She shouldn't have left the country if she were that sick and didn't trust the doctors in the country she was visiting. Sorry, but the safety of everyone else on the flights trumps whatever this woman felt she was entitled to. Private businesses have a right to deny service to anyone for any reason.
But why are the airlines responsible for her demise? After all, it appears she was very sickly. The airlines didn't get her from point A to point B. That doesn't make them responsible for her ending up dead due to her health issues.
I don't think it's the airlines' fault that she died, but I DO hold them responsible for reneging on their agreed travel plans. They were definitely jacked around, and if they went on this trip annually, they certainly had some success with the accommodations in the past. A lawyer would get to the bottom of any patterns of refusal the corporations had enacted without warning said customers.
Iow, I think the surviving spouse has a case, but it's not about the fact that she died, imo-- traveling with dicey health, is-- well, dicey. They lost that bet on their own.
I am betting they reserved their flights online or by phone, well in advance of the day of the flight. Airline reservation agents on the other end of a phone line have NO way of assessing a person's fitness and safety to travel. A computer has even LESS means.
In all the reservations I've made over my many years, I have NEVER been asked about my health status and medical record, either on the phone or on a computer. :what:
I believe it is fair to say that no human was ABLE to make an accurate assessment until these people were at the gate. And since this was a very LONG overseas flight with no place whatsoever to make an emergency landing in the event of a medical emergency, I believe the airline made the best decision that could be made.
I believe there were also issues as to whether the seats could hold her weight. What would have happened if a seat had collapsed and fell onto another passenger? If lots of firefighters couldn't lift her on the plane then she was a danger to others in the air had she fallen or had her seat collapse. With her health issues, she had no business flying. I'm sorry she died but that is NOT the fault of the airline.
I can't believe this is even an issue. There is no way an airline should have to accomodate this person's issues in the first place, much less be responsible for what happens to her when they don't.
If it was so difficult to get her on the plane it would have been impossible to evacuate her quickly if there was an emergency situation.
Actually, as I read the link, KLM DID get her from North America to Europe and made representations that it would return her in time for additional treatment. The dead woman relied on those representations.
When she arrived as scheduled, KLM refused to honor (or was unable to honor) its commitment and sent her to Prague instead. And then the shuffling continued until it was too late.
Anybody want to bet KLM settles the lawsuit on this one rather quickly?
Your argument does not reflect the link above. It says that KLM transported the couple to Europe and asked them about their plans for return travel. So KLM had seen the woman and had knowledge of her situation.
Actually, under U.S. law, the airline is responsible for accommodating passengers with disabilities. European law is still evolving, but has similar requirements. (In this case, I don't know whether U.S. law or European Union law would prevail.)
Separate names with a comma.