That whole requiring documentation to say you don’t need documentation is so absolutely drunken with power maliciousness.
By the time that exchange is half way through, I’ve already been wrestled to the floor by an air marshall.
“Oh, hang on, silly me: I forgot I actually just had a massive, massive breakfast. Can I get on the flight now please?”
Worked at an airport. The worst part of the job was dealing with the bullshit of TSA. Bunch of useless, self important pricks given unjust authority to harass individuals who are just trying to travel for some performative bullshit designed to soothe the minds of racists.
I’m pissed on her behalf!
Need documentation over 28 weeks, kay, sure, that’s stupid bullshit on its own, but whatevs.
But she’s not. And then they fucking wheedle her.
Fuck off. 24 weeks. Conversation over. Shut the fuck up and do your job.
“I’m at 26 weeks” (actually at 30 weeks)
“Ok you’re good to go.”
something bad happens
“THEY LET ME THROUGH IT’S THEIR FAULT I’M GONNA SUE YOU” and the person loses their job even if they can somehow remember and prove this woman lied.
So your answer is, like always, shitty asshole liars ruin things for decent people.
“THEY LET ME THROUGH IT’S THEIR FAULT I’M GONNA SUE YOU” and the person loses their job
That’s not liability on the gate agent, its liability on the airline (which needs processes for adjudicating when to ask and to document the answer).
This is something that’s supposed to happen during the ticket sale process, not the moment-before-you-get-on-the-plane.
It is literally not this agent’s job to probe. And if she’s worried about liability, harassing a woman who doesn’t qualify for her investigation is a bigger liability concern, particularly if she delays the flight or tries to boot the passenger.
Sounds like it isn’t hypothetical, pregnant liars ruining things for decent people, but the real acual people who implemented the shitty, unclear policy that requires TSA agents to just harass all visibly pregnant women.
Like, shit. Just add “if you’re under 28 weeks you need documentation to prove that” to the policy, so the whole thing can’t be foiled by an incredibly easy lie.
which is why the policy is dumb. it should be a document proving you’re under 28w OR a doctor’s note that says you’re fine to fly.
Yes, its the shitty asshole liar, not the fact our entire system of recompense and accountability is fucking unhinged. I’m so glad we agree.
And keeping that system instead of any better social fprm, well, sometimes you gotta deprive innocent usually marginalized people of their autonomy; it’s just a ‘cost’. Cant beat a puppy to death without havin a few orgasms, amirite?
No better option s were presented. People are just bitching with no one considering alternatives.
Actually checking the time frame of your comment a few people did give you some good replies on options even describing better systems of paper work well over an hour ago(before you made this reply)
In fact someone even pointed out how that would not hold in court either 8 hrs ago in replies. Sure, They could try to sue with such an excuse. Doesn’t mean they’d be successful.
Is it annoying? Yup. But it’s part of their actual job as security. That’s the point: They are the nark. They will face this as part of their job. They were warned they would face this. They signed their name on their contract knowing this sort of shit is expected.
you’re the one who’s bitching here.
So, have you considered a society based on the concept of mutual aid?
Are you familiar with the zapatistas?
How about state communism, like they have in cuba?
Syndicalism?
How do you feel about the municipalism they’re trying out over in the AANES? That looks pretty promising.
Are you familiar with the concept of restorative justice?
Or did you not actually want better options, abd that was just an excuse?
I’m being partially sincere here, but can you elaborate on how one of those would help in this situation?
Okay, before you read this, maybe smoke up and drop your fav psychadelic before reading so you can follow me here:
Imagine a way society was organized where instead of exploiting workers as much as possible to enrich literal ghouls, we either:
didnt exploit people and everything was nicer and everybody was less stressed, and we all got to do things out of curiosity and love rather than fear and hate
OR
We all agreed to be exploited for the collective good and we were all still fucked, but we were fucked to make things better for everyone instead of better for ~3000 ghoulish billionaires
So, like, whichever one you picked; imagine if you couldnt ‘own’ stuff you weren’t using. You could, like, keep it around. Maybe you’re the only person on your block with extra space, so you put the neighborhood tool library or insulin factory in your shed, but its not ‘yours’ in the way your toothbrush or the parts of your home you dont choose to open are yours. You certainly couldn’t ‘own’ the house someone else lived in, or the toothbrush they use (i hope). And we could focus on the best ways to do stuff instead of only being able to have nice things as the fallout from scams, too!
I bet when you imagined that, the construct of ‘blame’ was less necessary, and there was no/less need to obfuscate systemic forces, so it would be much easier to take a solution focused mindset, instead of just crab bucketing each other. Right? And either way it was more egalitarian, so there was less advantage to take of one another. Right?
Listen I’m a syndicalist too, but I’ve seen enough interpersonal conflicts to know the instinct to find blame wont go away just because of a system based on mutual cooperation
That’s not how this works. She could also have been fat and not pregnant. She would obviously not be required to prove that in that circumstance.
The rules are clear, she was compliant, the airline agent wasn’t.
You can’t sue someone because you made a dumb choice and lied.
Technically you can try, but any judge would laugh you right out of the courtroom for attempting to waste their time.
This.
People keep confusing “can sue” with “be successful in court”.
You can sue anyone for anything at any time. I can sue you because I don’t like your default avatar. But that doesn’t mean that I would have any chance in a courtroom.
And this is exactly how it should be. The decision whether a lawsuit has merit or not should be taken in court, not somewhere before court. Because that would mean that some police man or someone else with only cursory knowledge of the law would have to decide whether a lawsuit has merit and that would be catastrophic.
No, anyone should be able to sue for anything. And garbage lawsuits should be thrown out of court by a judge and/or jury.
That’s costs money. Ever hear of slapp suits. There needs to be rules around everything because people are shitty sons of witches and always trying to weasle a way around everything.
SLAPP suits are where a bad implementation of that system struggles. The US is a mess in many places and this is one. That doesn’t mean that the concept of rule of law is an issue, but that rule of law is implemented badly in the US.
In other places, e.g. most parts of Europe, if you lose a lawsuit you have to pay for the legal council of the winner. That makes SLAPP suites much less attractive and much less dangerous, and thus they are pretty rare.
Yes you can try but the company would never even hear about it because it wouldn’t get any further than trying to file the case.
Yes that’s what I said.
I think that’s the point. It doesn’t stop the occasional chancer from trying, but no this side of the pond at least you’ll get short shrift if you do.
The whole thing is about limiting liability to the company. (In the pregnancy case I think there’s an increased risk of thrombosis at late-stage.) Their policy says no paperwork is required, you say that applies to you; if something goes wrong after you lie then the onus is on you.
Liars are everywhere. And we all have to do our own duty (to ourselves) to spot it/set passwords/monitor bank receipts/ keep up to date/ etc… No, it Doesn’t make it right that there are so many con artists out there(and they should absolutely be held accountable) but in this case it’s their literal job to observe and hold to rules and maintain their sector: they can’t take that failure to hold to a rule in a reasonable way out on everyone else.
I try the ‘if this were a date’ metaphor to see who really is the irrational person in the situation.
This situation in dating would be like if a person went around to people saying ‘prove to me you’re not going to be a manipulative asshole’ and post ‘no manipulative assholes allowed’ on their profile as their strategy to weed out assholes. But really it’s just weaseling out of duty to set healthy boundaries or taking on any observational work when shit comes up. It’s lazy. That person would be seen as the one with the problem and shirking every personal responsibility to monitor their own life, looking for ways to pass their responsibility to their own happiness and security onto everyone else.
If it sounds like it would be insane if it were a dating strategy: they are in the wrong.
In this case the person is literally being paid to monitor and take responsibility over security and they still shirked their basic responsibility pushing it entirely on the target to prove to them that they are secure despite the paperwork (set by their own standard of rules) was not required.
if anything : anyone using that excuse of someone bucking the system should be talking to management to let them know the rules are not secure as they are. Perhaps they require passengers to hold the paper to say they are allowed to travel. eg: like they do with passports. A doctor’s note acknowledging they are pregnant and what week they are in so they can compare to the rules might do better here rather than the other way around.
Gate Attendant: It appears you’re pregnant?
Woman: The FUCK I am, are you calling me fat?
#checkmate
I was told that you never ask a woman if she is pregnant unless the baby is actively attempting to come out.
Even then, I’m probably just going to assume it’s some weird sex thing and I don’t kink shame…
I really wish women could just say “how dare you!”
Spot fucking on! Rest in power Andre ✊
I did that once at a birthday party. 21 weeks pregnant and someone asked when I was due. The look of horror was priceless. I had a good laugh and so did she. Her friends were in the toilets (ladies public bathroom) just about, or maybe did, wet themselves from laughing at the overheard conversation.
That’s fucking hilarious!
I am 1000% sure they’re prepared for this because they’ve heard it a billion times already.
What are they going to do? Force you to provide an exact date and time of conception?
You greatly overestimate the competency of TSA rent-a-cops.
Though, the mentioned suggestion would absolutely fail considering most airports do x-rays now. Also, if you’re pregnant, kinda want to disclose that due to the whole x-ray thing.
I don’t think they’ve used X-ray scanners on people in a long time?
Pretty certain they’re all microwave backscatter scanners.
And anyway it’s a customer service gate agent we’re taking about, not the TSA.
I felt that woman’s rage building up just from reading that
Pregnancy rage is real, the agent was moments from a disaster and the bf knew it
I feel this in my very soul. Today I had a work communication from an outside group that my team has a “streamlined” submittal process. The purpose of the streamlining is to reduce the number of documents we have to share and review to save time.
The request came asking for additional documents for a recent submittal and stated that it was their policy since the beginning of the year (I have had multiple submittals since then and this was the first time hearing this). I replied that I would be happy to submit the requested documents, but also directed them to their own guidance document saying that the extra documents were not required.
Their response came back that the documents aren’t required, and that they weren’t going to review them, but they still wanted them anyways to just put in the files. I about lost my shit because that’s functionally the same as being required! I asked if this was from the beginning of the year why is this the first I’m hearing about it?
“Oh we forgot we were now requesting them.”
I know this isn’t relevant to the post, but why do you need a doctor note for ‘any’ amount of weeks?
Its a low pressure, low oxygen, cramped environment that can complicate existing issues a lot more than some people realize.
I know of someone who died because a really bad freak ear infection ruptured at altitude and they bled out before the plane could land.
Its not like planes aren’t safe, its just that high risk individuals and situations need extra precautions.
I thought I was going to die on a plane during depressurization once. My head literally felt like it was going to pop from my forehead and the pain was so immense I hunched over as to not cause panic in the aircraft.
It had happened a couple other times before this particular instance where the front of my head felt immense pressure during the planes decent. It also caused major headaches that lasted several days after the incident.
I looked it up after this event and made an immediate appointment with my doctor. Turns out some 10% of men can be affected by this where fluid builds up in your forehead “sinus pouches” I’ll call them, and during the planes decent it will depressurize. During depressurization this fluid will push against your brain. You can see a similar action with a half filled waterbottle during this time. They implode a little bit. That’s what was happening to my head.
My doctor prescribed me a nasal spray I need to take 30 minutes before take off to drain my sinus. It’s worked ever since.
Aw man you could’ve recreated the head exploding scene from scanners on a plane. That would’ve been the best prank ever.
Glad your head is unexploded though.
Fun fact, they did the special effects for that scene by shooting the fake head with an actual shotgun.
I wouldn’t even be mad if someone next to me popped. I’d be like holy shit I can’t believe I get two arm rests.
Phew, I can finally lie down. Too bad it only happened during descent
Jesus Christ. 😧
And adding to that: Depending on the flight you might be hours away from a suitable landing location with usually no medical personell or medical supplies beyond some band-aids available.
If something goes wrong, even unrelated to pressure, oxygen or cramped environment, you might be stuck up there for a very long time before you can get to a hospital.
I suppose the airlines want that for liability reasons. But I’m curious of ‘why’ pregnant women need a doctor’s note and not, say, folks with heart conditions then. Are there other groups that require some authority figure to give them medical permission to fly or do we only not trust pregnant women to listen to their doctors?
i would guess it’s less that they don’t trust them, and more that the doctor might do some extra tests to make sure that everything looks okay
heart conditions are typically a long-term thing; pregnancy is relatively short-term so there’s not a lot of time for people to get used to their situation, and there’s a lot to pay attention to
Probably because you might end up giving birth prematurely on the flight and they don’t wanna be liable for anything
The liability thing is definitely part of it but it ain’t good news for anyone involved if that thing decides to pop out over the Pacific.
It can literally affect the citizenship of the baby which I find so strange.
Only the Americas have jus soli really. Everywhere else it’s the parents’ citizenships that matters.
Interesting it lines up with the new world / old world concept.
Jus soli is important for former colonies, especially those with large permanent colonist populations. It’s an easy way to build an immigrant-based citizenship.
If one of your parents are a US citizen, you are one no matter where you are born.
There are a bunch of regulations to make sure that in most cases a US citizen giving birth abroad, will grant their kid US citizenship. Although the law does not “guarantee” it like it does in most countries outside the Americas.
“Interestingly” the US does tend to apply jus sanguinis over jus soli in case of stateless people.
deleted by creator
Someone doesn’t know something? How dare they!
I’m fairly certain the person I responded to is well versed and aware. I was saying that it is sad that the question need be asked. Here’s a mirror for you to continue this non argument.🪞
For all you know that person could be a teenager.
The real problem would be if they didn’t have any interest in learning something they didn’t know about.
For all you know that person could be a teenager.
Oh, alright, it’s a american thing.
What in the actual fuck does this mean?
Fascist country. Controlling women fascistically. Old white guys who take pills to make their decrepit dicks work on their mistresses and aids and probably children are very concerned about “Gods will” when it comes to pregnancy and womens bodily autonomy.
Something something Margret Atwood.
It’s easy to be chill when you’re not the one being disrespected.
Some people are non confrontational to a fault. I’ve seen the opposite happen too: the disrespected bending over backwards to acquiesce while their partner/friend doesn’t want to let that slide.
It’s also easy to be chill when you don’t interpret every slightly contentious interaction as being disrespected.
Being inconvenienced over nonexistent rules is disrespectful
It’s easy to be chill when you don’t consider other people’s experiences to be valid.
pfft, I reserve the right to judge that a person’s interpretation of reality is incorrect in some way, thanks.
Your interpretation of reality is wrong in its entirety.
You have no right to reserve judgement of someone else’s situation and invalidate their experiences. That just makes you a judgmental prick.
Did you know that sometimes you can choose not to reply to people on the internet?
Pfft then why didn’t you exercise that ability yourself?
From the makers of ‘Please respond if you want to come to the party’.
- So are you coming to the party? You didn’t respond
I know, it’s really annoying when you just want war and someone helps you out to fix it all
I think she handled this brilliantly. I’d have only changed the last intrraction.
“No. I am only 24 weeks pregnant. Do I need documentation if I’m only 24 weeks pregnant?”
“Can you please point to the policy that says I need a note at 28 weeks? Right there? You’re absolutely correct, that IS what the policy says. Well done! Now point to the policy that says I have to provide a note to you that I’m at less than 28 weeks. Take your time, I’m patient.”
“Take your time, I’m pregnant”
“But don’t take too much time, I’m still trying to stay under the 28 week limit here.”
Also I have a plane to catch.
Honestly, if I were her I’d be at least a bit miffed at the boyfriend at that point, for undermining my righteous fury.
There’s only so much energy each of us has to fight the bullshit. You aren’t going to win every battle. So you need to pick your battles and spend your energy wisely. The post says they were getting on a plane. Travel in general comes with a lot of bullshit to navigate. If you use all your energy up and you haven’t even gotten on the plane yet, you’re going to be fully exhausted before you reach a safe recharge space and be in meltdown territory.
I think bf properly chose to defuse this situation because the lowly worker making the demands may have zero ability to influence policy and has their job at risk if they don’t follow it. Alternatively, the worker may be on a power trip and has the ability to use their power to fuck up your travel. Yes, you’ll get grounds for a complaint, maybe a refund, but that “justice” will arrive days, weeks or months after the offense. Your travel will have already been screwed, and it was totally avoidable by providing enough benign info to satisfy the worker.
I’m not saying “always capitulate”, but make sure the rage is worth the cost. If the jackboots show up at my front door asking me for information on activities of the gay couple that lives next door for no other reason than that they are gay, I’ll tell the jackboots to pound sand.
All of that is well and good. But I’d still spend a teeny tiny bit of energy to say “Next time let me handle it, or back me up. I need a partner, not a ref.” If mama’s going in, help or get out of the way.
Each couple’s relationship’s are different. So that sounds like your advice would be compatible with your desired relationship.
I can assure you that what the boyfriend did in this example can be being “a partner”. Part of being a partner in my relationship is offering a “check” on a course of action. We do this for each other. If escalation is called for, we have to generally agree on it. When you escalate, you commit the other person to your cause (and the consequences). If the consequence in the above example would have been to screw up months worth of planning on a vacation before we even left the airport, that affects both people. It has to be worth it. In this situation, I agree with the boyfriend, it wasn’t worth the battle.
Everything that would ultimately be accomplished from escalating with the worker (and possibly facing immediate consequences) could still have been accomplished without escalating, including contacting the company and complaining. In a moment of passion many times that’s not clear. If one partner is thinking more clearly than the other in the moment, then it helps both if the clear headed one provides the “check”. In my relationship I’ve been in both roles, the checker and the checked. I love my partner for both.
I need a partner, not a ref.”
If my partner told me “[don’t be] a ref”, I’d probably nicely communicate “Don’t write a check you might require me to cash without my buy-in.”
None of this says your relationship or approach is wrong. There is no universal objective “right” or “wrong” in this one. You and I have different approaches, so the only way it would be “wrong” is if we are in a relationship together. From our differing opinions here, I think we’re both equally glad we’re not together.
None of this says your relationship or approach is wrong. There is no universal objective “right” or “wrong” in this one. You and I have different approaches, so the only way it would be “wrong” is if we are in a relationship together.
At no point did I suggest that right or wrong was of concern here, and your use of quotes is bizarre. I simply stated what I would do in that situation. I’m honestly not sure what the goal of your straw man is here.
I think we’re both equally glad we’re not together.
What an absolutely weird thing to say. Friend, I’ve never met you, have zero desire to interact with you further, and I have absolutely no idea why you feel the need to evaluate the degree to which you and I want to be together. I think you need a snack and a nap, then maybe go take a walk outside.
I think you need a snack and a nap, then maybe go take a walk outside
Don’t treat others like children just because you don’t like the conversation. It makes you look less mature by comparison, not more.
If you invite conversations in an open forum don’t be surprised if people respond.
At no point did I suggest that right or wrong was of concern here, and your use of quotes is bizarre.
I don’t mean to go grammary-Nazi on you, but I wanted to give you this information to communicate I had no intention of trying to offend you or strawman you here.
I believe you concluded that I used reason #1, when I wasn’t:
“1 To quote a source directly or indirectly - Direct quotes use the exact words from a source and require quotation marks. Indirect quotes restate or paraphrase those words or ideas and don’t require quotation marks.”
In fact, I was using reason #5:
“5 To discuss words - If you want to discuss a word, phrase, or letter in writing without using its intended meaning, set it apart with quotation marks. Depending on the styling format, some writers alternatively use italics without quotation marks.”
I used this because “right” and “wrong” have subjective meanings, and putting them in quotes meant I was intentionally avoiding adding my own subjective values of those words to the discussion. I was recognizing, in text, that different audiences can and will land on either side of an argument, and in this case there isn’t one side that is objective because its subjective to each of us.
What an absolutely weird thing to say. Friend, I’ve never met you, have zero desire to interact with you further, and I have absolutely no idea why you feel the need to evaluate the degree to which you and I want to be together.
I wasn’t evaluating our degree to be together. We are talking about relationship style preferences. The style you communicated is not one that everyone is compatible with. The style I communicated is is also not one that everyone is compatible with. There’s nothing wrong with either of our relationship styles. Should two completely rando people that neither of us know each hold the relationship style we each hold, they would be incompatible with each other, and neither would be wrong. They would just be wrong for the relationship style of each other. That is all I was saying in that text.
That doesn’t sound like a good relationship to me. It seems like you’re letting your ego get in the way of a better life. My partner helps me do things and i help my partner do things. When my partner helps resolve a situation that was not going well for me, then I’m very happy they did
I’m not sure you’re reading their meaning the way OP intended it. From my read, it sounds like you’re saying that she (assuming she’s a woman because she called herself “mama”) is unable to determine when to pick her own battles, and/or is ill-equipped to fight her own battles alone. I don’t think that’s what you meant, but I don’t know why you assume that a woman who wants to take charge of her own problems is “letting (their) ego get in the way” and must not be in a good relationship? It seems a wild jump. The OP reminds me of my own relationships.
My partners know that when I decide to actually speak up about something, it’s because it’s something important to me. If they were to see me advocating for myself, they would never tell me I was letting my ego get in the way - they would cheer me on. They know that if I need help, I can ask them for it and reliably receive it. They don’t swoop in assuming I’m a damsel in distress that can’t fight my own battles.
I’d be more concerned if my partners didn’t implicitly trust me like that. I’d feel coddled, thinking they see me as a child they need to keep control of.
That’s absolutely ridiculous. He was doing his part in trying to keep her calm and trying to help defuse the situation. To be mad that he noticed a problem starting to boil over and handled it is insane. A partner helps in exactly these situations. Its not us vs ourselves. The issue can be addressed after. Why risk getting thrown off
Yeah in most places airlines have zero obligation to actually put you on a flight. If you start to raise your voice, act upset, cause a scene, it nearly always results in your ticket(s) getting cancelled and airport security getting called. Don’t let a braindead airline agent ruin your travel plans, it’s not worth it
They’re allowed to arrest you for something they completely made up. Probably not the safest hill to die on.
These aren’t actually cops. They have as much authority as a mall rent-a-cop. They have no authority to make arrests. The most they can do is report you to the FTC (I think this is the right alphabet org.) and get you banned from flying.
I think meant agent like flight attendant, not like air marshall, although I would be okay with giving them this authority.
Anyone who works at an airport can call security on you and get you arrested. My ex with anger issues started going off on someone at the front desk and we almost didn’t make a flight.
I was hoping the story ended with “my usually cheerful unbothered bf told them politely but firmly to eat shit” but he just instantly capitulates to the bureaucracy? Wack
Getting on the airplane is way more important than feeling superior to a bottom-rung worker.
Nah they can kick you off at the “Captain’s discretion”
we as a unit must put up a united front
wtf do you need documentation for? god, fuck everything about flying
It’s a health risk to the baby and the mother.
They also don’t want people giving birth on planes. Makes a bit of a mess and cleaning up delays the next flight
Don’t they need a special cleaning team, since it’s a biohazard?
So? That’s what liability wavers are for.
Can liability waivers bring someone back to life?
They don’t ask you for a document that your cardiologist let you fly. They don’t ask you for a document that you don’t need a document from any other doctor. They only ask a woman that. Because it’s not about health.
If someone dies of heart attack on plane, nothing happens, they just die. If someone goes to labor, they bring the plane down.
If someone dies of heart attack on plane, nothing happens, they just die.
they absolutely bring the plane down. most declared Maydays are for medical emergencies in flight. until someone’s pronounced dead by an authority, they are a critically ill passenger.
How are you supposed to see if someone has a heart condition?
I’m asking since you made a statement making them equal. Can you see if someone is pregnant at 20+ weeks? The answer is yes, therefore you can enforce it.
However, enforcing it like they appeared to have done and asking irrelevant questions are the real issues.
Why the fuck does this matter? Are we only care about health if it’s visible?
Oh, so it is ok to check for pregnant women then? Good. Then thats sorted.
No, but if a pregnant mother wants to get on the plane despite knowing the risks, then a liability waiver should let them
Can you sign a liability waiver for killing a child that has gone past the time for a legal abortion? Clearly there is a point when you put your child at risk. The liability waiver is for the airline.
If it’s for the airline’s liability then wouldn’t it no longer be their business once passed to the consumer?
So murder is ok, as long as you get it signed off?
You mean the documentation that is the first thing mentioned in the meme?
Why on earth would you get a corporate liability waver from your doctor?
No I mean like the kind printed on the back of the ticket that says “by using this you accept all liabilities and responsibilities therein henceforth and in perpetuity blah blah blah”.
And how do you prove that you’ve signed the liability waivers?
Checkmate, libtard
I have a note from my doctor
Is that what they’re for? You know this as a fact? You’ve worked in the airline industry?
Or are you just making things up about something you obviously don’t understand.
You get a bit of a dose of cosmic radiation while flying. It won’t turn your baby into the Thing or give them the ability to catch on fire or turn invisible, but it could still damage the baby at a vital stage of their development.
Bullshit. The dose is so minimal as to be inconsequential.
I don’t buy that explanation. Why would that dose of radiation be more harmful to a more developed fetus?
The crew just doesn’t want to deal with a mother spontaneously giving birth, and the airline doesn’t want to deal with the paperwork of taking off with n passengers and landing with n+1. And no-one wants to find out the nationality of a baby born over the Atlantic.
Correct. As a father of four and who moved across an ocean when one of them was six months in utero it has more to do with concerns that changes in air pressure might induce early labor.
Edit: I realize this post reads like I abandoned my family when one of my kids was six months away from being born. I didn’t. But it’s a funny enough mistake that I’m not changing it.
So how were the cigarettes
Eh. Should’ve got menthols.
Correct, has nothing to do with radiation.
Nationality of somebody born on a plane wouldn’t be a big deal as long as at least one of the parents comes from a country where lex sanguis applies. If lex solis applies (as in the USA) then they could in fact be stateless unless their parents have some other nationality.
And, if I remember correctly, the captain has the responsibility to record births and deaths on board an airplane. So you might be on to something with the paperwork.
And no-one wants to find out the nationality of a baby born over the Atlantic.
That actually sounds incredibly fun, as a law nerd!
after all that drama, an actual answer LOL
but still, fuck everything about flying
Multiple people have given you actual answers that are all a part of it.
Do you thing the airline industry has no experience with this type of situation or something?
That’s not it at all. It’s mostly the acceleration and turbulence that can potentially damage the fetus, the same reason they shouldn’t ride rollercoasters.
Yeah but the cosmic rays tho
I mean have you seen what happened to the fantastic four?
In the US it depends on the airline. We went on a babymoon vacation when my partner was 30-something weeks and didn’t need to provide any documentation (Alaska Airlines). She did run it by her providers first, but that wasn’t an airline/TSA/FAA requirement.
How long was the flight though? Were you staying within say… three hours of travel or was it crossing the Pacific or going to like…Florida…which are both over 7hrs? The flight length and where you’re travelling to can be a factor in whether they ask for documentation or not.
>2000 mile flight. Not crazy long but not short. (The state of Alaska was not involved, just the airline.)
Oooh. Ok. Sorry, when I hear an airline with a specific place name my brain goes to somewhere within that place as one of the ends of the flight. It gives me an anchor point if I’m looking into flight lengths. :)
Regardless, I can see why some airlines have restrictions, especially on certain flight paths. They’re not exactly equipped to handle labour if the pregnancy is high risk or something unexpected goes wrong and there’s an increased chance of early labour later in pregnancy in that situation. (And it’s higher if it’s twins, triplets, etc. You can have multis ‘on time’, but you have a higher chance of going into early labour in that case to begin with.) And if you’re say…halfway across the Pacific or Atlantic you don’t really have a lot of options in any kind of emergency situation. Whereas if the flight is from LA to Toronto you have a lot of places you can land in a situation like that.
It never hurts to discuss and check in with your trusted medical provider(s) at that stage of pregnancy or if you’re in the high risk category (or if you have other non-pregnancy conditions that might put you at an increased risk). Forearmed - with knowledge in this case - is forewarned, right! :)
