because…

“The pilot said he would not allow him to fly on the plane, and the reason he gave

I am aghast, sickened, saddened and horrified by such an outlandish and thoughtless decision.  To deny a dying wish is of course at the top of the list but certainly second is the suggestion of ‘crashing needs’ that would be a first thought in the airline’s decision.  Such first ideas gives an impression that if crashing comes first to mind then there may be something the airlines is not telling their passengers.  Duress to the body is a stupefying idea since the journey to death obviously puts the body under duress so that condition already existed and does even for bodies who are totally unaware of that affliction being close at hand.

He could be flying with 200 people, crash…and there STILL might not be anyone there to help him!

Bastages…..

This is so sad and stupid.  The guy was already dying.  Why in the world would it matter if there was anyone there who could help him in the event of a crash?  If the plane crashed, chances are that he would die on impact anyhow, which might sound a little heartless of me, but then at least it would be over quickly, and the pain from his various cancers and tumors would be over.  The man just wanted to go home and die there in peace, in the place that he loved.  Why was that so much to ask?

The report still leaves me with a couple of questions:

How did the airline know he was dying?  OK, he was in a wheelchair and sedated.  I don’t see that as unusual.  Do you need to fill out some kind of detailed paperwork if you are in a wheel chair?  Hippa laws prevent an outside entity from asking about a patients detailed medical information, so someone would have had to have told them.

Why did the man visit his brother if he was so sick?  Why didn’t the brother go visit him?    Did his doctor actually approve that long car ride in his condition?  Did the family really think that it was a prudent move?

Don’t get me wrong, I think this was horrible.  But something in the report is missing.  I have a hunch that it’s a case of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”, but the customers told too much.  If they hadn’t shared so much information and something happened to the man on board the flight, then the airline could always so that they were unaware of the condition and wouldn’t have allowed him to fly had they known.  However, they DID know and had something happend on board, they would be open to lawsuits and other scrutiny.  They apparently had enough information that guidelines required them to contact a third party for advice.  I’m betting the pilot was required to follow that advise.

Bebelicious - 06 July 2008 11:40 AM

The report still leaves me with a couple of questions:

How did the airline know he was dying?  OK, he was in a wheelchair and sedated.  I don’t see that as unusual.  Do you need to fill out some kind of detailed paperwork if you are in a wheel chair?  Hippa laws prevent an outside entity from asking about a patients detailed medical information, so someone would have had to have told them.

I am assuming they were concerned about his condition when they observed him in his wheelchair and probably other hints that he was far less than healthy—-

An Allegiant spokeswoman confirmed that Hill was denied boarding. She wrote in an e-mail that the pilot had concerns about Hill traveling, and he contacted MedLink, a third-party company that provides medical opinions to determine whether airlines passengers are medically fit to fly.

“After consulting with [MedLink], it was determined that it would be prudent if the customer did not fly on the flight,” the spokeswoman wrote. She did confirm the Hills received a full refund for the tickets.

I am assuming he wanted to make the trip again as a dying wish to feel less incapasitated by illness for the last time—-

Why did the man visit his brother if he was so sick?  Why didn’t the brother go visit him?    Did his doctor actually approve that long car ride in his condition?  Did the family really think that it was a prudent move?

I doubt doctors were advised but when your time to this life is limited, you just want to make the best of what time is left to you

Don’t get me wrong, I think this was horrible.  But something in the report is missing.  I have a hunch that it’s a case of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”, but the customers told too much.  If they hadn’t shared so much information and something happened to the man on board the flight, then the airline could always so that they were unaware of the condition and wouldn’t have allowed him to fly had they known.  However, they DID know and had something happend on board, they would be open to lawsuits and other scrutiny.  They apparently had enough information that guidelines required them to contact a third party for advice.  I’m betting the pilot was required to follow that advise.

If the plane crashed I doubt that many people would be in any condition to do anything, including the flight crew so it may be a moot point.  If the crash is not that serious then the flight crew are trained to help those who can’t help themselves.  I can’t see that the guy is any different from an 85 yr old grandmother travelling to see her kids.  Who is going to help her??

If he died on board, they would have to complete the flight with a dead guy on board. It happens more often than you might think, but I’ll bet the crew wanted to try to avoid “dead man flying”.

If they are going to so bitchy about such a silly thing…

Just hold a charity to have the guy get a personal flight home….

It be a stupid matter, but before it is too late… may as well do what you can instead of complaining.

A personal flight does not cost THAT much.

A small fund raiser would more than easily provide the funds…

Still, the air line company that won’t flight him are still total arses…. but I am sure they are doing it for liability reasons…..

.People can sure for anything these days….
If the guy dies in the middle of a crash, but they say he died a few seconds before impact…..

Legally, his inheritants are granted to financial gain.

In hindsight, this air line is trying to protect themselves from any legal battle that could take place.
By refusing him service, they are taking the only legal action they can at their hands.

DJ_Canada - 07 July 2008 03:21 AM

.People can sure for anything these days….
If the guy dies in the middle of a crash, but they say he died a few seconds before impact…..

Legally, his inheritants are granted to financial gain.

In hindsight, this air line is trying to protect themselves from any legal battle that could take place.
By refusing him service, they are taking the only legal action they can at their hands.

That’s what I was thinking.  By telling the airline too much information, they basically screwed themselves.  I also seriously doubt that the third party said that “if the plane crashed there would be no one to help him”.  From the report it sounds like they said that it was not medically adviseable.  The airline didn’t pay the third party for their opinion.  They paid them to make a decision, and the airline stuck to that decison.  Like it or not had he died mid-flight he family could very well claim that the airline knew the flight could kill him but still let him fly.  It was a no win situation, and the report was seriously biased.  There are a lot of facts missing there.

I still think the family had a responsibility to keep him at home in his condition and make every effort to have his friends and family visit him in the comfort of his own home.  That car trip must have been horrendous!