Rog Posted August 17, 2004 Author Share Posted August 17, 2004 I guess that it’s possibly in part an ‘age thing’. To me the term ‘cripple’ carries absolutely no derogatory connotations whatsoever. It is simply a description of someone who is incapacitated in some way – in fact to me ‘incapacitated’ and ‘crippled’ are so similar as to be virtually indistinguishable. But then again, I find the editing out of the name of the dog in the Dam Busters film outrageous but I am not so insensitive to name the dog on the forum as I know well that many people would find the use of the name, once perfectly acceptable and carrying no stigma, as offensive as many of the well known ‘swear words’ that we could probably all call to mind. On that basis I will refrain from using the ‘C;’ word as although to me the word is totally un-emotive and entirely appropriate I now recognise that to others on this forum this is not the case. What should not e forgotten though is that there are many disabilities that constitute a possible hazard to other passengers on an aircraft. Obesity, blindness, and deafness to mention but a few. People who suffer from these conditions are of course not inferior to the rest of us and it was never a sugestion that they were but nonetheless they do represent a potential hazard to the rest of us in certain situations such as being on board an aircraft. As an aside if I had been in the check-in queue behind the woman who was refused boarding I personally would have offered to be her in-flight companion, but that is not the issue here. It is not about individuals or even the actions of individuals, but about points of principle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted August 17, 2004 Share Posted August 17, 2004 Is it all a question of degree? http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england...ire/3919249.stm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Posters Posted August 17, 2004 Share Posted August 17, 2004 "Iberia seems to have mistaken the health and safety risks that these young adults may have posed. It shows again the reason why airlines need to be covered by the Disability Discrimination Act." Says enough for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tee Posted August 17, 2004 Share Posted August 17, 2004 Air Frog were right for what they did. Maye could of went round the issue a little better tho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Posters Posted August 17, 2004 Share Posted August 17, 2004 For Rog Definition of cripple Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rog Posted August 17, 2004 Author Share Posted August 17, 2004 In my opinion Iberia were 100% correct in what they did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted August 17, 2004 Share Posted August 17, 2004 In my opinion Iberia were 100% correct in what they did. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> So explain how the CAA have no such regulation? Also why don't you try explaining the difference between a hearing person travelling with them and any other hearing person on that plane? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rog Posted August 17, 2004 Author Share Posted August 17, 2004 So explain how the CAA have no such regulation? Also why don't you try explaining the difference between a hearing person travelling with them and any other hearing person on that plane? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I think it’s a case of delegated responsibility. Especially in our litigious society. Can you just imagine what would happen if there was some announcement that was not communicated to the deaf passengers and one or more of them was injured or even inconvenienced in some way as a result? There would be all hell to pay. A nominated person to travel with them would be responsible for communicating with them and therefore that person would ‘carry the can’ rather than the airline. And as regards the IATA, the FAA, and the CAA I don’t know what the regs say about disabled passengers but there are regulations that apply to certain periods during the flight so that for example you may not wear headphones connected to your personal music system during take-off and landing and even the headsets provided by the airline that connect to the aircraft have a facility whereby the sound channels are overridden for in-flight announcements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 I think it’s a case of delegated responsibility. Especially in our litigious society. Can you just imagine what would happen if there was some announcement that was not communicated to the deaf passengers and one or more of them was injured or even inconvenienced in some way as a result? There would be all hell to pay. A nominated person to travel with them would be responsible for communicating with them and therefore that person would ‘carry the can’ rather than the airline.complete load of tosh, what about foreign passengers who cant understand the language of the plane staff or something. I cant see all hell breaking loose because a deaf passenger was inconvenienced either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stavros Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 Personally, I think that this is really cruel and I don't think that other passengers would have been inconvenienced at all. Emergency exits wouldn't have been blocked, she would have been perfectly safe and they would only have to have taken her back out of the overhead storage compartment when the plane had landed. Stav. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 wow what an incredible sense of humour (not). wanted to add that this woman can control her wheelchair (though god knows how) so she is only in the same boat (no jokes please stavros) as any other wheelchair bound person. I think some of you are using the idea wheelchairbound people might block the exits as excuses for bigotry. most planes, they crash, you die. emergancy exits or no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Old Git Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 wanted to add that this woman can control her wheelchair (though god knows how) so she is only in the same boat (no jokes please stavros) as any other wheelchair bound person. I'd imagine that her wheelchair is packed with heavy batteries and a head/mouth control system which isn't quite the same as the simple self propelled wheelchairs that most users have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Addie Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 I'd imagine that her wheelchair is packed with heavy batteries and a head/mouth control system which isn't quite the same as the simple self propelled wheelchairs that most users have. Is anyone else suffering from the 'got the giggles in church' thingy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 no I grew out of laughing at others misfortunes shortly after starting big school. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monkey_magic Posted August 18, 2004 Share Posted August 18, 2004 Your loss. Ha ha. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.