Unaccompanied minors stranded

[lovin'fl]

My kids have never flown without us but my DDs had a friend fly to us for a visit. She was about 9. Her mom put her on the plane and it was a non-stop flight and I was there to get her when she walked off the plane. Then the return flight, same. I took her in to gate and sat until she boarded and then her mom was at gate to get her when she got off. So there should always be some adult able to go to airport to retrieve if flight gets cancelled (really should be waiting with child...and shouldn't put a kid on a flight with stops). One time we flew to Orlando and there was a girl who got off our plane and was in tears because her adult didn't show. We all, my MIL mosly (so grandmotherly) waited around and let her use our phone to call. She didn't have a phone either. She was about 14 and nobody from the airline was with her. Her adult finally came, like 30 minutes late.

 

[msjprincess]

My kids have never flown without us but my DDs had a friend fly to us for a visit. She was about 9. Her mom put her on the plane and it was a non-stop flight and I was there to get her when she walked off the plane. Then the return flight, same. I took her in to gate and sat until she boarded and then her mom was at gate to get her when she got off. So there should always be some adult able to go to airport to retrieve if flight gets cancelled (really should be waiting with child...and shouldn't put a kid on a flight with stops). One time we flew to Orlando and there was a girl who got off our plane and was in tears because her adult didn't show. We all, my MIL mosly (so grandmotherly) waited around and let her use our phone to call. She didn't have a phone either. She was about 14 and nobody from the airline was with her. Her adult finally came, like 30 minutes late.

Yes, but the problem is the flight was diverted to a different airport because of weather.

My 13yo has flown alone to visit a friend a few times. My local airport is small. Last year I forgot that they don't have any outgoing evening flights so no TSA and you're not allowed to go to the gate. Luckily she has a cell phone and I was able to text her and tell her to meet me at baggage claim.

 

[CarolAnn856]

So there should always be some adult able to go to airport to retrieve if flight gets cancelled (really should be waiting with child...and shouldn't put a kid on a flight with stops).

That's not what happened. The flight took off as planned, but then had to land at a different airport. Depending on the departure time of the rescheduled flight, and the distance from the original arrival destination, driving to get the kids isn't always a realistic option.

 

[gotomu212]

The age limit varies by airline, but can be as high as 14.
https://www.cheapflights.com/news/kids-flying-solo-guide

Sorry I stand corrected. Thanks for the link! Several years ago we couldn’t find anyone that would cover a 14 year old, sounds like a lot of airlines have expanded coverage.

 

[MrsCobraBubbles]

Well when you find out how to control the weather, let me know.

The only other people who could have made sure this didn't happen are the parents, who elected to not travel with their children. The unaccompanied minor fee for Frontier is $110 per child per leg (nonstop) on top of the fare. It could not have been that much cheaper than 2 adult RT tickets for a dropoff/pickup - in fact it was probably more expensive.

And that fee is supposed to cover the extra expense of having the airline take charge of your child, right? I've never sent a child as an unaccompanied minor but I thought you escort your kid to the gate, give him over to a representative of the airline, and the airline takes over responsibility for getting your kid where they need to go and delivers them to whichever responsible adult you've chosen to send your kid to. I think there's a reasonable assumption that they will take care of your kid and I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that the airline should have backup plans in place to ensure the kid's safety. I just feel like your reasoning is as silly as saying that if a child is injured in some way at daycare, it's the parent's fault for putting the kid in daycare. When a parent puts someone else in charge of their child, someone who willingly takes responsibility for the kid and is a person or company that should be trustworthy, then I think it's reasonable to hold that person/company responsible for the welfare of the child. And I think the airline was negligent many times over: when they didn't feed the kids regularly, when they put them in a personal car alone with a random employee, when they put them alone in a hotel room with a random employee, when they didn't contact all the parties involved in getting these kids from point a to point b. If the airline didn't want to be responsible for these kids then they shouldn't offer an unattended minors policy.

 

[Colleen27]

I can understand where the parents are coming from. If I paid $110 extra (per child, per flight) for unaccompanied minors, I'd expect the airline would have better procedures in place too. Even a discount airline. I wouldn't expect four-star service or anything, but fast food and accommodations that don't involve being transported in a private vehicle without appropriate child seats seems like kind of a low bar that any airline should be able to meet.

But personally, I'd have found it very concerning that Frontier doesn't publish a policy about dealing with delays for unattended minors. Delta does, and when it was my (much older - 14) child that was going to be flying alone, I made sure I knew that policy and went over it with her. We fly Spirit and Frontier all the time and have no complaints, but I wouldn't put my kids on a plane as unaccompanied minors without seeing *details* of the airline's UM supervision policies.

 

[MrsCobraBubbles]

They weren't one on one with kids.

Do you send your kids to school? Sunday school? Field trips? Sleep overs? You know the kids are "in danger of being abused" in every one of those situations? Don't give me this "but the teachers have been screened" line. All that means is they haven't been caught doing anything.

I agree they should have never left the airport. But I think Frontier was trying to make the best out of a bad situation.

The adult was never alone with the kids? So there were 2 adults in the car, transporting the kids? And 2 adults in the hotel room? That's not what I heard but the story was incomplete when I first read about it.

Actually, I am a former victim of childhood sexual abuse and yes, I have firsthand knowledge of the dangers. I am insanely overprotective of my kids, which is actually a terrible thing and I have constant guilt because I really don't send them anywhere without me. There are very few people that I trust with my kids. Besides spending time supervised by a very few trusted adults, my kids are almost never out of my view. I attend their field trips. I volunteer in the Sunday school class. Until this year, I even worked in their school. There are a small handful of houses where my kids are allowed to sleep over, if someone outside of that small number invites one of my kids for a sleepover we invite them to sleep over at our house instead. So far that has worked out ok for me. I make crap wages so that I can work flexible hours so that I can constantly be here for my kids because I don't want them to ever have to go through what I went through. I don't want anyone else's kids to go through it either, which is why reading about what happened with these kids makes me sick.

 

[sam_gordon]

The adult was never alone with the kids? So there were 2 adults in the car, transporting the kids? And 2 adults in the hotel room? That's not what I heard but the story was incomplete when I first read about it.

Well, I was reading it as one adult and multiple kids, which, by my math is not 1:1, but 1:6.

Actually, I am a former victim of childhood sexual abuse and yes, I have firsthand knowledge of the dangers. I am insanely overprotective of my kids, which is actually a terrible thing and I have constant guilt because I really don't send them anywhere without me. There are very few people that I trust with my kids. Besides spending time supervised by a very few trusted adults, my kids are almost never out of my view. I attend their field trips. I volunteer in the Sunday school class. Until this year, I even worked in their school. There are a small handful of houses where my kids are allowed to sleep over, if someone outside of that small number invites one of my kids for a sleepover we invite them to sleep over at our house instead. So far that has worked out ok for me. I make crap wages so that I can work flexible hours so that I can constantly be here for my kids because I don't want them to ever have to go through what I went through. I don't want anyone else's kids to go through it either, which is why reading about what happened with these kids makes me sick.

I am sorry you had to go through that and I can understand why you are protective. However, solely my opinion, I think you are going too far. Obviously you have to do what you feel is right, but I firmly believe there is a point where you can be "overprotective" and yes, I think you've crossed it.

 

[MrsCobraBubbles]

Well, I was reading it as one adult and multiple kids, which, by my math is not 1:1, but 1:6.

I am sorry you had to go through that and I can understand why you are protective. However, solely my opinion, I think you are going too far. Obviously you have to do what you feel is right, but I firmly believe there is a point where you can be "overprotective" and yes, I think you've crossed it.

But kids can't provide accountability for the adult's actions, which is why there should be a second employee, or the lone employee should not have been permitted to take the kids to places like the personal vehicle or hotel room where their actions couldn't be observed by other responsible adults.

 

[EveDallas]

One adult, alone behind closed doors or in a private vehicle where their conduct can't be observed is negligent, I don't care how many children were in their care at the time. I've worked with kids for years and I've never been put in this kind of situation. And I would never allow myself to be put into that situation, not with strangers' kids. Did it say anywhere that this person was properly cleared to work directly with kids? In my state that would require a child abuse clearance and mandatory training in recognizing and reporting child abuse. I have to renew my training every 2-5 years (depending where I was working and in what capacity I was working with kids) for the last 15 years and it is stressed at every training that we should be careful about putting ourselves in a position where we are one on one with kids because it leaves us, people who work closely with children, vulnerable to lawsuits, it puts our livelihood at risk. So I'm thinking that this random person who was put in charge of these kids is not someone with clearances. I'm not saying that they are necessarily a bad person who abused the kids; in fact I hope that this person was sweet and motherly and able to comfort these kids who were probably terrified. But I think what the company did was negligent, Frontier put the kids in a situation where they were in danger of being abused, and I hope they either quickly come up with a good policy to cover this kind of situation in the future so they can avoid litigation or I hope they are sued for a whole bunch of money. They obviously need a lesson on how precious and valuable the children in their care are.

I can't imagine living life thinking that everyone is out to commit nefarious deeds. Seems like a very sad way to live.

 

[EveDallas]

One adult, alone behind closed doors or in a private vehicle where their conduct can't be observed is negligent, I don't care how many children were in their care at the time. I've worked with kids for years and I've never been put in this kind of situation. And I would never allow myself to be put into that situation, not with strangers' kids. Did it say anywhere that this person was properly cleared to work directly with kids? In my state that would require a child abuse clearance and mandatory training in recognizing and reporting child abuse. I have to renew my training every 2-5 years (depending where I was working and in what capacity I was working with kids) for the last 15 years and it is stressed at every training that we should be careful about putting ourselves in a position where we are one on one with kids because it leaves us, people who work closely with children, vulnerable to lawsuits, it puts our livelihood at risk. So I'm thinking that this random person who was put in charge of these kids is not someone with clearances. I'm not saying that they are necessarily a bad person who abused the kids; in fact I hope that this person was sweet and motherly and able to comfort these kids who were probably terrified. But I think what the company did was negligent, Frontier put the kids in a situation where they were in danger of being abused, and I hope they either quickly come up with a good policy to cover this kind of situation in the future so they can avoid litigation or I hope they are sued for a whole bunch of money. They obviously need a lesson on how precious and valuable the children in their care are.

I've worked with kids for years too. I am frequently alone in my classroom with infants who can't talk. Thank goodness their parents don't think like you do - I might end up arrested.

 

[sam_gordon]

But kids can't provide accountability for the adult's actions, which is why there should be a second employee, or the lone employee should not have been permitted to take the kids to places like the personal vehicle or hotel room where their actions couldn't be observed by other responsible adults.

And if you went in all the schools and daycares across this country, I'm willing to wager you'll see a LOT of classrooms with a single adult and multiple children.

 

[NYCgrrl]

Slow news day in that part of the world.

 

[EveDallas]

And if you went in all the schools and daycares across this country, I'm willing to wager you'll see a LOT of classrooms with a single adult and multiple children.

Exactly. Look at my post right above yours.

 

[RedAngie]

I would think that in order to file a lawsuit, one would have to show some sort of harm or damage. The kids were well taken care of, housed, fed (although maybe not to the parents' standards) and delivered safely. If I were on the jury for this sort of case, I would be in favor of the airline.

But, but....the parents suffered unimaginable emotional distress that will haunt them forever. Or until a cool 10 million makes them forget.

 

[BLAZEY]

In 1996 at age 16 my sister took 4 - 11 year olds from Victoria Canada to Sao Paulo Brazil. None were considered unaccompanied minors. My 16 year old sister was the responsible adult for the 4 kids. They made it there and back just fine. This was before everyone had cell phones. She had a list of phone numbers for contacts one both ends and a calling card. They had to change planes in Toronto going from the domestic terminal to the international terminal. I checked Air Canada's website now. Unaccompanied minor service mandatory for children OVER 8 but UNDER 12 not travelling with someone 16 or older, and you can purchase the service for kids up to 17. Air Canada would not have accepted the 7 year old in this case.

 

[asta]

In a world where mothers take young school age boys into women’s restrooms because they can’t trust other males in the men’s restrooms, I am amazed that anyone thinks it was appropriate to put a 9 year old in the same bed as a 14 year old stranger. This was the most amazing part of the story. I think it would have been better to just watch the children at the airport. It might not have been as comfortable but keeping everything in the public just seems wiser.

I did not think most airlines gave any consideration for weather related flight delays. My young adult daughter spent an over night sitting in the airport in Chicago because of weather. The airline did not offer anything.

 

[ronandannette]

...We ran into that situation a little over a year ago with my then 16 year old. She and her 17 year old boyfriend were attending a week long forum in Ottawa and while waiting to board the flight home, they learned that their flight was cancelled due to fog in Halifax. They were flying Air Canada which is the biggest airline in Canada, who merely rebooked them on a flight for two days later and didn't offer any assistance, even thought the airline's policy states: "Youths travelling alone (ages 12 to 17), for whom the parent or guardian has not requested the Unaccompanied Minor service, will be taken care of by our agents. We will also arrange for accommodations, meals and transportation if needed." I couldn't even get through to their customer service line to get help - it was while Toronto Pearson was going though renovations and their customer service was overwhelmed with multiple delays due to weather and construction. Fortunately, her boyfriend's mom got through and got them on a flight to Moncton for the next day and got a family friend to put them up for the night. Both kids had IB exams coming up later that week and needed to get home.


M.

I have no first-hand knowledge of this but the bolded makes absolutely NO sense. If all the provisions and protections of flying as an unaccompanied minor are made for children even though it hasn't been purchased with the ticket, why on earth would anybody actually pay for it?

One adult, alone behind closed doors or in a private vehicle where their conduct can't be observed is negligent, I don't care how many children were in their care at the time. I've worked with kids for years and I've never been put in this kind of situation. And I would never allow myself to be put into that situation, not with strangers' kids. Did it say anywhere that this person was properly cleared to work directly with kids? In my state that would require a child abuse clearance and mandatory training in recognizing and reporting child abuse. I have to renew my training every 2-5 years (depending where I was working and in what capacity I was working with kids) for the last 15 years and it is stressed at every training that we should be careful about putting ourselves in a position where we are one on one with kids because it leaves us, people who work closely with children, vulnerable to lawsuits, it puts our livelihood at risk. So I'm thinking that this random person who was put in charge of these kids is not someone with clearances. I'm not saying that they are necessarily a bad person who abused the kids; in fact I hope that this person was sweet and motherly and able to comfort these kids who were probably terrified. But I think what the company did was negligent, Frontier put the kids in a situation where they were in danger of being abused, and I hope they either quickly come up with a good policy to cover this kind of situation in the future so they can avoid litigation or I hope they are sued for a whole bunch of money. They obviously need a lesson on how precious and valuable the children in their care are.

I simply couldn't disagree more. You're really reaching and although it's obviously an emotional topic for you, your comments are simply devoid of all practicality. You can't possibly think it's reasonable for all the mandates, and checks-and-balances and standards to which child-care professionals are held, to apply in this situation.

I can't imagine living life thinking that everyone is out to commit nefarious deeds. Seems like a very sad way to live.

As a survivor of childhood sexual abuse myself, I would never disrespect the obvious deep impact this has had on @MrsCobraBubbles , whatever her situation was. But I also know with certainty, and truly believe that she does also, that child abuse and/or neglect is almost always perpetrated by someone known to the child; almost always a family member or very trusted authority figure. The instances of random sexual abuse or violence against children by strangers is statistically minute.

The risk posed to these children by the airline employee, who in no way seems to have "angled" to get alone with the children as a predator would do, was extremely small. Heck, I bet that employee was pressed into service - who on earth would have willingly taken that on? This incident needs to be chalked up to a very valuable learning experience and used by the airline to codify a firm policy. The parents need to step off and take a much harder look at the potential consequences of their decisions before they make them. And just because I simply can't resist, I find the suggestions that the airline/airport should have scrambled together an impromptu tent-city on the concourse for these kids to be laughable.

 

[MrsCobraBubbles]

I've worked with kids for years too. I am frequently alone in my classroom with infants who can't talk. Thank goodness their parents don't think like you do - I might end up arrested.

I'm alone with kids too, in a classroom in a public school, or in a bathroom with the door open and another adult just outside. You're in a classroom, where there are other adults around who can monitor your interactions at any time. You are not putting your daycare kids into your private vehicle or taking them offsite to a hotel. Surely you can see the difference.

 

[MrsCobraBubbles]

I have no first-hand knowledge of this but the bolded makes absolutely NO sense. If all the provisions and protections of flying as an unaccompanied minor are made for children even though it hasn't been purchased with the ticket, why on earth would anybody actually pay for it?

I simply couldn't disagree more. You're really reaching and although it's obviously an emotional topic for you, your comments are simply devoid of all practicality. You can't possibly think it's reasonable for all the mandates, and checks-and-balances and standards to which child-care professionals are held, to apply in this situation.

As a survivor of childhood sexual abuse myself, I would never disrespect the obvious deep impact this has had on @MrsCobraBubbles , whatever her situation was. But I also know with certainty, and truly believe that she does also, that child abuse and/or neglect is almost always perpetrated by someone known to the child; almost always a family member or very trusted authority figure. The instances of random sexual abuse or violence against children by strangers is statistically minute.

The risk posed to these children by the airline employee, who in no way seems to have "angled" to get alone with the children as a predator would do, was extremely small. Heck, I bet that employee was pressed into service - who on earth would have willingly taken that on? This incident needs to be chalked up to a very valuable learning experience and used by the airline to codify a firm policy. The parents need to step off and take a much harder look at the potential consequences of their decisions before they make them. And just because I simply can't resist, I find the suggestions that the airline/airport should have scrambled together an impromptu tent-city on the concourse for these kids to be laughable.

Sorry, but I do think that all the mandates should apply to anyone who works with children in a professional capacity. Especially someone like an airline employee who is supposed to oversee their care and safety when they are away from their parents. I admit that it makes it tricky that different states have different rules.

Pedophiles seek out jobs where they will be working closely with children, in a "trusted authority figure" capacity. Not all teachers, daycare workers, Sunday school teachers, summer camp counselors, mall santas, etc. are pedophiles, but many pedophiles will try to work in those positions--at least until the first time they are caught. Then--hopefully, if everyone is doing their jobs correctly--the child abuse background checks will catch them before they ever start working with kids again. But if we don't do child abuse clearances on everyone working with kids, how can we know what their background is?