TSA endangers child's life by contaminating his feeding tube despite pleas
The TSA endangered the life of child who has a surgical feeding tube in his stomach by opening up his backup tube, contaminating it. The child pleaded with the TSA officer, who said that she had to open it or refuse to allow the child to board the plane. After an Orlando television station investigated the story, the TSA agreed to look into the incident:
James Hoyne, 14, has a feeding tube in his stomach and carries a back-up in a sealed clear plastic bag. Hoyne said two weeks ago a TSA officer insisted on opening the sterile equipment, contaminating his back-up feeding up tube which he later needed.Link"I said 'Please don't open it' and she said 'I have to open it whether you like it or not. If I can't open it, I can't let you on the plane,'" Hoyne said of his conversation with the TSA screener.
Sieg Heil.
The thing is clear plastic what possible information did she glean from opening it?
Next week: Watch as TSA officials rip out stitches from a recent surgery patient. "We had to confirm that they didn't have a bottle of water stashed where her appendix used to be," officials said. "Her screaming was very upsetting to our agents, and we feel she is clearly in the wrong."
Oh give the TSA a break. Who among us has NOT seen a child with chronic health problems and feared that they might slaughter us all with their sterilized plastic tubes?
What the hell? What is wrong with the TSA? How is this making things safer?
oh don't worry so much! After they kill a few children, they'll get it right! C'mon! It's been WEEKS since they killed a baby! Cut them some slack.
or else
Is there an enforced maximum IQ for TSA employees? Maybe somewhere around the 70 mark?
this isn't even procedure. Tsa should look into this.
did you watch the video? can you imagine the screener talking to this child? do you think they made him lift up his shirt to show the wound in his stomach? and ignored his pleas anyway?
TSA: Killing Children for Safer Safer Flights since 2001
Thats a good motto!
mother pus bucket
I can imagine they have insane blackwater like indemnification for these events.
My daughter has a surgically implanted feeding tube. The answer is clear - don't fly. Let the TSA put the airlines out of business. Make the guys with money the ones who are upset with the ridiculous bullshit you go through - they're the ones that have the power to actually change things. If you keep passively accepting the loss of your freedoms and you never hurt their bottom line - well - what do you expect?
Stories like this make me glad that I'm Canadian. It also makes me wonder how a nation that gained its freedom by revolution could allow itself to get this far along the path to facism. Especially where *everybody* has guns. Why the hell are your leaders not being held accountable? It's utterly baffling to outside observers...
What is so hard about understanding "sealed, sterile packaging"? We're talking about TSA? Oh, wait...
Brainspore very funny. Shit has to happen before people can get mad as hell about it. So, the TSA robot was programmed to do a job and has no ability to modify its own program. Poor, stupid machines.
If everyone is dead already, we will not have to worry about terrorists.
Some TSA staff seems to be overly excited by anyone who acts like a victim.
Hey #6 Takuan, I think it was customs, not the TSA that killed that baby a couple weeks ago. Let's give credit where it's due.
who the hell is training these idiots?
Seriously though: is there a way the People of the U.S. can bring a class action lawsuit (or whatever the proper term is) agaisnt the TSA? I mean, they actually have killed people... Why hasn't this happened yet? If not "the People", can't all the families affected so far band together and sue them, asking for an immediate halt to the practices that led to these deaths and injuries until the verdict is in? Is there a lawyer in the house???
US Customs are a bunch of clowns too, no doubt there. I provide every bit of information I have for the equipment we send to the States, and the majority of our shipments still get delayed. And I mean approximately 10 to 15 pages of documentation for a small sound system. I'm pretty sure the customs folks who inspect FedEx shipments down in Memphis actually enjoy delaying shipments.
I have been studying the TSA blog, "Evolution of Security" *giggles* http://www.tsa.gov/blog and I have found that the truth is, that there are many "Rogue Agent" *snickers in derision*.
Taking feeding tubes from 14 year olds is another example of TSA agents freestyling with the rules. As they said about electronics being removed "...we learned that this exercise was set up by local TSA offices and was not part of any grand plan across the country."
That's the scariest thing about TSA agents - they just get to make up the rules as they go along!
WHO IS WATCHING THE WATCHERS???
I wonder, did the screener think the blister packed medical equipment was a penis pump? I mean, the picture in the article shows how anyone could get it wrong.
I'm just surprised they didn't rip the tube out of his stomach to make sure it wasn't packed with C4.
The screener was off the rocker.
I would hope common sense would've ruled by paging his doctor. It's actually disgusting to for a screen to see these feeding tubes going into a hole and insisting on opening it.
This shows more and more you can't travel without "papers' Now doctors notes will be needed for wheel chairs, walkers and other medical protheses.
the TSA "former intelligence" worker...
http://www.amazon.com/Legacy-Ashes-History-Tim-Weiner/dp/038551445X
a good read,chronicling 60 years of CIA failure
All part of the TSA's new "No Child Left Alive" policy.
Am I the only one who thinks that motto "The Evolution of Security" a tad ironic? Seeing as how the a-holes running the show dont even believe there is such thing as evolution to begin with?
Anyway, again, any lawyers read this blog? Why hasn't anyone sued them yet?
@25-
It should read: "The Intelligent Design of Security"
I honestly think that the "terrorists" have infiltrated the DHS (Heimatsicherheit) - we would not willingly endanger/murder our own, right?
That's just a really sad story. Probably the kid was not seriously jeopardized, but the even so heartless of the TSA people, it's untrue.
The whole reason we employ human beings to do jobs is because they can (and should) use discretion and common sense in doing their job.
I was listening to Stephen Fry's potcast and he claimed he was forced to remove the plaster cast from his his broken arm before being allowed to fly to/from LAX! And your country is also harassing little kids, tampering with their surgeries and making them fear infections!
'merica is going insane guys. It's your country, FFS sort it out before it gets any worse.
...and the dumb kid let him do it. Don't get on the plane if the screening is life threatening.
Also, it was a back-up tube, which, the article says, he later needed. Did he need it on the plane? If not, why didn't he get a new one and throw the contaminated one away?
TSA are goons, sure. This story, though, is about a kid who gambled his health against having to change his travel plans and lost.
Good to see that the Terminal Stupidity Administration can still figure ways to outdo itself. Have they at least contacted the Guinness Book of World Records?
EKPPP:
That has to be the stupidest post I've read all year.
No one should have to gamble their health against changing their travel plans--especially if they're 14 and have a medical condition. To say otherwise is just absurd. If you were diabetic and had paid $2000 for a plane ticket and the TSA decided to dump all your insulin, would you seriously be blaming yourself?
By simply questioning their procedures you guarantee that they will proceed.
They must maintain full control of any situation even when obviously wrong.
Sort of like the men in blue...
Too much power mixed with too little training and no responsibility.
#28 EKPPP
"...and the dumb kid let him do it. Don't get on the plane if the screening is life threatening."
The sad thing is that I can actually imagine, if they had refused, the TSA detaining them and going through their stuff anyway because of 'suspicious activity'. You don't have to worry if you have nothing to hide, right?
This just seems so out of character for the TSA.
#33 BOLERO
The sad thing is you are probably right. TSA are goons, especially in major airports. I abhor them and the culture of fear they represent.
I think, though, that their abuse of power will never end if nobody calls their bluff. The article indicates the kid had a choice: a contaminated back-up tube, or no flight. Given that choice, I would head for the bus terminal.
Even if the TSA goon then tried to detain the kid, chances are a supervisor gets involved, since TSA is all about escalation. You might be able to reason with the supervisor. The trick would be remaining calm, of course.
RIP, Common Sense, I sure do miss you.
I don't mean to be calous or contrarian, but I think this is a bit over the top. I think the TSA needs to do a better job training their personnel, but "endanger a child's life"? Is that kind of hyperbole really necessary? If the kid... actually, teenager, knows that the guys is making it dangerous for him to use, he's not going to use it. Unless this guy is critically ill (in which case he would probably be traveling with doctors/caregivers), not having access to a BACKUP feeding tube for several hours is not going to endanger his life. Even for people who are pretty sick, going without food for a day is not going to kill them. Water, maybe, but food?
I don't understand why people act all surprised. As if their votes had no consequences.
That is horrifying. What goes through these people's heads when they're making choices like that?
I mean, besides wind.
And if this were Dune, all the House Harkonnen TSA guys would have gut-emptying tubes as well.
@ 37 DVDMON, completely agree, this 'endangers child's life' title is way off the mark. I agree that TSA policy is fucked-up, and many here have already made that point.
TSA wasn't forcing the kid to get on the plane.
Another fantastic posting by Cory regarding the TSA - hurrah!
Seriously, I agree with #28 posted by ekppp - what the heck were the parents thinking?
Why wasn't this post entitled "Parents risk health of child to keep scheduled flight plans"?
This kid is seriously ill, and they choose a form of transportation that involves dealing with simplistic, yet intrusive security measures.
Why didn't the parents simply say no? The trip was so important they (the parents) permitted their child to get infected rather than impact their plans.
Had they arranged for "medical transport" for the child, this all could have been avoided (but I suspect it would have been cost prohibitive).
When do parents accept responsibility and start making hard choices? Honestly, this isn't even a slightly hard choice, were it my kid, his/her health comes first - end of story.
Cory: I don't mean to get too personal, so please consider this a rhetorical question - if your child (heaven forbid) were to be in a similar condition, would you risk your child's health for the convienience of making your scheduled flight? I suspect the answer is no, yet you race to defend the parents that knowingly put their child's health at risk - they could have simply said no and had their baggage pulled from the plane. TSA siad this is the policy, make a choice, and they choose badly (IMHO).
I have to ask how a post like this jibes with the subtitle of this site: "A Directory of Wonderful Things" No matter which side of this issue you fall on (TSA or Parents were at fault) I can't find the "wonderfulness" of such postings - of course, your site, your policies (no argument from me), but have you considered that this may be outside the scope of this blog?
I'm just askin'
Ken
There are choices we can make other than snark or sob. I'd encourage people who find the callous and reckless behavior of that TSA employee outrageous to take a few minutes to write to someone who could improve the situation, such as your Congressman, your Senator, the TSA, the mayor of Orlando, Orlando's tourism board, or similar groups. Figure out what should be done, and ask people with political clout to do it. It won't always work, but it's far more likely to accomplish something than just gawking at the wreckage of our society. Here's the letter I sent to Mayor Buddy Dyer of Orlando:
To the Honorable Buddy Dyer,
I am writing to ask you to investigate the recent incident at the Orlando airport where a TSA employee contaminated sterile medical equipment that a 14-year-old child was carrying. A news story about the incident is at:
http://www.wftv.com/irresistible/15511359/detail.html
My family and I have greatly enjoyed our vacations in Orlando, most recently in January. Reading of this incident, however, has us extremely concerned that we will not be safe flying in and out of Orlando airport in the future. A member of my family also depends on sterile medical equipment, and we are unwilling to risk our health by flying through an airport where this sort of behavior
by TSA employees is tolerated.
Orlando's airport has EMTs available, and ready access to people with medical training. When there is a medical or health concern raised by a passenger, personnel at the airport must be taught to call in people with medical training. If a passenger appears unable to breathe, people with medical training should be called. If a passenger says that his health will be endangered by the
actions of an airport worker, people with medical training should be called.
The news story about this reckless TSA employee at the Orlando airport is spreading, as it should. While you do not have direct authority over the TSA employees at the airport, you do have the
political power to ensure a reasonable conclusion to this news story: first, the reckless employee should be located and fired, and second, all airport workers should be taught to call in people with medical training to respond to medical and health concerns.
These two steps would go a long way to restoring our willingness to travel to Orlando, and would protect the safety of the millions of people who travel through Orlando's airport. If done publicly
and assertively, these two steps would allow Orlando to serve as a model to other cities. Thank you for your time and attention to this very serious issue.
God forbid anything happens to the child, but if he were to get an infection, get sick, etc. could he sue? Doesn't TSA have exemptions for certain medical devices? This just seems like an overzealous, misinformed TSA agent.
@EKPPP:
These are prescription devices that you can't just buy at any old pharmacy. They typically have to be ordered through the mail. So if you don't have a backup with you, and your equipment goes bad... you say hello to our wonderful hospital system.
@Ken Hansen:
The article doesn't mention parents. In fact, it says *the child* pleaded with the TSA. I hardly think the parents were there.
That being said, do you think the kid, who is 14 years old, is so wise and experienced that he'd know not getting on the plane, going back home, and not getting to his destination was an option?
I think you're ascribing way too much savvy to a 14 year old.
"This just seems like an overzealous, misinformed TSA agent."
There are a lot of those, all of them backed up by heavily armed police officers. If we held some of the worst offenders accountable, the rest of the TSA agents would get better informed and the traveling public would have better protection.
I don't know what's more despicable, the actions of the TSA or the apologists trying to excuse them in this forum?
Oh, I'm sorry, please forgive my "hyperbole"!
It's people like you that allow this sh|t to go on. Since when did America become the land of making up excuses for abusers of power? It's amazing and sad how easy it is to use the language of "choice" to actually disempower individuals. (Of course, this is what corporate America has been doing for decades...)
Does the status quo really treat you so well that you must defend it at all costs? Shame on you. I expect better from people on the Internet (heh).
Robert
I hardly think the parents were there.
We just don't know, it happened two weeks ago.
dvdmon
Is that kind of hyperbole really necessary?
It isn't hyperbole or do you know his medical condition? The screener open a sterile backup the boy needed and contaminated it rendering it useless. So yes it was potentially life threatening.
Ken Hansen
Had they arranged for "medical transport" for the child, this all could have been avoided
We've already seen how well that works out. The TSA would have killed him for sure in that case.
I can't find the "wonderfulness" of such postings
Would you like your money back?
Blog - "A shared on-line journal where people can post diary entries about their personal experiences and hobbies."
Is there something about that definition that has you confused?
The apologists here for this latest TSA atrocity scare me as much as the TSA does.
DVDMon, if you're feeding through a tube, how do you think you get water? I'm pretty sure that comes in through the tube, too.
I do hope that if I was in this situation, I would choose not to get on the flight. But I would be spittin' mad and raging to the TSA. I don't hold a chronically ill 14yo to the same standard, though. I imagine he felt pretty helpless.
No one is apologizing for the TSA goons. They are a manifestation of the greatest threat to the United States, which is the use of fear against the public in the interest of expanding government power.
I think there are two good questions so far:
1. When did the kid use the contaminated tube?
2. Where were the kid's parents?
The kid has a feeding tube. This qualifies him as special-needs in my book, such that, at fourteen, he shouldn't be traveling alone.
Furthermore, the kid knew the tube was contaminated with TSA Goon Germs. When the goon opened the tube, it became trash. In what situation could he have used it?
Seriously, if your life is in danger without the backup tube, you cannot allow the tube's packaging to be opened. If that means listening to Eminem in a holding cell while the issue is straightened out, which I don't think would happen, so be it. If the kid cannot be relied on to make that judgement, he should not be flying alone.
you know, you have whistleblower protection now.
EKPP:
Three hours later and you're still talkin' crap.
What's next - godwin the unsympathetic?
EVERYTHIMG the TSA did was wrong and showed a deadly incompetence.
The more you keep trying to pin the culpability on the kid, the stupider you come off to the forum.
Please shut it.
First they came for some loser sick 14 year old's backup feeding tube, and I said nothing because I am not a loser 14 year old stupid enough to continue with my non-refundable travel plans despite having my backup tube contaminated.
Then...
EKPPP, you're missing the entire point. No person should have to make the choice of missing his flight and possibly having to sit in a 'holding cell' while the issue is "straightened out", and going ahead with plans without a necessary medical device. The fact that the TSA has the power to stop people with medical conditions from taking plane trips on a bureaucratic whim IS the problem.
What makes it even more ridiculous is that the device appears to have been packaged in clear plastic. Who needs to open a clear package to examine it? Look at it, run it through the machine, and let him through.
Jesus, what the hell is wrong with some of you?
This was a special needs CHILD and you want to blame the kid instead of the ADULT AUTHORITIES? Victim-blaming at it's finest...blame the powerless child instead of the adults that make and enforce the rules. Lovely. No wonder the TSA gets away with this BS.
RE: #45 posted by Robert
Without a parent to act in that capacity, the kid was responsible for him/herself - period. I didn't put the child there, I didn't give the child the responsibility, the parents did. What amazes me is that everyone is so quick to jump on the TSA that they fail to wonder why: why did the child travel alone? Why did the child (knowing the risks) let the TSA agent open the packet? Why didn't the kid call for help (was the child also travelling without a cellphone)?
Unless this is an emancipated minor, there is someone responsible for the health and well-bing of this child - they failed in that role, IMHO.
Many have written about "TSA apologists" - what about the "parent apologists" that hold the parents blameless?
As for the wonderfulness question, I've seen many, many stories on BoingBoing that even while they discuss some horrible atrocity somewhere in the world, they manage to include some small bright spots, some glimmer of hope. Stories like this, while newsworthy, don't have even a small tiny bright spot (no matter who you blame for the child's infection - the un-yielding TSA, the absent parents, the passive 14 year-old, or the flying spaghetti monster). Where is the wonderfulness?
Re: #55 posted by Alexis
No person, while claiming a medical problem should be given carte blanc to ignore any rules others have to follow.
So let me get this straight - since the folks that want to bring down planes and cause terror in the general public would never send a sick person on a plane to bring it down, we should let all go through? Of course, no person would have a feeding tube put in so they could get an explosive device on a plane to blow themself up - that's insane! No religious zealot would bring a baby along to let them get past the amount of liquid they could bring on a plane - ludicris!
Clearly the TSA needed to open the package. Not to inspect it, obviously, but to show a teenager who has the power. Teenagers are always needing to be shown that by adults; it's very tiresome. /sarcasm
Nothing less than outright abolition of the TSA will do. And between now and then, TSA people have to start going to prison when they abuse their authority. TSA keeps hiring thugs and losers; they have to be forced to stop.
Personally, when I read shit like this I just want them all dead.
Besides EKPPP, it doesn't say he used it. It says he needed it. In other words, he would have changed out his feeding tube had it not been contaminated by the TSA thug, and instead had to go on with a tube that should have been swapped out.
I have no idea what consequences this would have, but certainly it could endanger his safety, even if it's safer than using a contaminated tube.
Ken, clear plastic. It was in clear plastic. What security purpose was served by opening it?
She opened it because he asked her not to, and you know it.
Why don't we get these people's names? Hers, I mean? I want to vilify her across the blogosphere.
The screener liked the tears.
Does Godwin's Law apply to actual, you know, fascists? Just wondering.
xphr, t's rctnry dts lk y tht scr m mr thn th TS.
oh no! That's just scholarly debate
#58 You are right. Where the article said "a sick teenager", I assumed it meant he had gotten sick using the contaminated back up tube. He probably never used it.
Also, I agree that TSA should be abolished as soon as possible. I think we should abolish the Department of Homeland Security too. Neither does us any good.
sr h "wnts m dd," r wshs t "vlfy m."
@DVDMon comment #37
You have never dealt with a feeding tube have you. What that 14 year old had was a mic-key button that is held in with a balloon. If the balloon pops (a very real possibility on an airplane where there are pressure changes) the tube needs to be replaced within an hour or else the hole closes up and surgery is required to replace it. So no, if he had an emergency it would not be just about missing a feeding, let alone we do not know anything about the missing.
Bah! This useless coddling of the weak and infirm! These useless eaters! Do you fools not realize that the Reich cannot stand with less than healthy,strong specimens! Snivel while you can, traitors. Soon we will have special flights to provide a final solution!
TSA groupies,
I know that most of you have read previous posts and comments here describing how screaming infants have been separated from their parents so that the screeners could shake them down. You also have no idea where this victim was headed. He could have been going home or to a larger city for a specialist appointment. People who are that ill don't generally travel without a good reason. Why so hateful to the victim?
because it's easy to beat up a sick, 14 year old boy?
#4 posted by Brainspore , March 6, 2008 10:25 AM
'Oh give the TSA a break. Who among us has NOT seen a child with chronic health problems and feared that they might slaughter us all with their sterilized plastic tubes?'
That's the greatest comment I have read on BoingBoing to this date. And I think it will be hard to beat.
A few people have asked if you can sue the TSA for this kind of thing. The answer is effectively no: the TSA is part of the Executive branch of the US government, which has the "right" to decline to be prosecuted for anything it doesn't want to be, and has frequently demonstrated the will to use it where the TSA is concerned.
(This is a de-facto right that stems from the fact that the Executive is responsible for enforcing the rulings of the courts: the Executive can simply refuse to enforce any ruling made against it, so the courts don't ever rule against the Executive on this because they would be made to look powerless and silly)
The only thing you can do to the TSA, or any branch of the Executive, is to impeach the president and then try to elect one who will do things differently.
This is a bug in your government. Please fix it.
i know someone who worked for tsa until she failed a test, they said that capricious enforcement is the rule. they had to take a bottle of perfume from a little girl, a college girl was allowed to take her yogurt onboard, but on the same flight, a woman was not allowed to bring applesauce for her baby/toddler on the plane. they said they don't regret failing the test.
Did any of you bleeding hearts actually bother to click through and play the video? It doesn't work in Firefox, but I opened up my trusty IE7 to get a look at this so-called 14 year old kid.
Let me tell you he is one scary-looking mo fo.
Whoa. He's like three feet tall and weighs 50 pounds. I was bigger than him when I was seven. I wouldn't even call him a teenager; he's a child.
"Two weeks ago" - wow, it took that long to find a TV station to pick up on the story?
"Contaminated the tube that he later needed" - I later needed the 20 oz. coke that was thrown out at the TSA check point... Did he use it?
"If I don't open it I can't let you on the plane" - What? I am 100% positive the TSA screener said something like "If I can't open it, you can't take it on the plane. Spend soem time with a 14 year-old, and you'll learn that stories morph as adults show interest in it (like a fishing story).
The kid never used the tube as far as I can tell(I'm at a loss as to why the kid kept it after it was opened), so if he needed it, and he used it the TSA agent put his life at risk? No. Why wouldn't the person that chooses to use a contaminated feeding tube be responsible? Honestly, if this is the only way the kid can eat, wouldn't you have a few spares?
I honestly think that what we have here is the 14 year-old's version of the story, which was shopped to the media for two weeks before someone took the bait, and the parents are pushing a political agenda through a simple mistake. Another screener might have made a different judgement call. A supervisor might have made a different call.
The big unanswered question in this whole issue is why did it take two weeks for this story to surface?
I take medication for a transplant and traveled from LAX to Armenia and then back stopping in Ibiza. This was a month long trip and I had to take all my medication with me. I traveled through about five screenings and had a 12"x12"x3" brick of all kinds of medication in my carry on. Not one single airport ever asked me to open any thing or take anything out.
yep, keep it arbitrary. The peons don't raise their heads much when they know the whip is random.
Frankly, for me, the big, unanswered story is why they don't disable the bold tag in comments. Although it has legitimate uses in structuring a comment, when used for emphasis it's far more annoying than all caps. Exclamation points, parenthetical statements (yes, I use them too) and emphatic markup represent an unfortunate failure to use language to make one's point. Pointedly, it diminishes the credibility of the screamer.
Quote (#56): "Of course, no person would have a feeding tube put in so they could get an explosive device on a plane to blow themself up - that's insane! No religious zealot would bring a baby along to let them get past the amount of liquid they could bring on a plane - ludicris![sic]"
You're absolutely correct, no one would. Those are ludicrous scenarios. Just jam the freakin' C-4 up your ass and be done with it. Plenty of drugs move about the world that way even today, so security must be sought in other, more diplomatic ways. You know; the ones that work.
Since these bogus security tactics don't work, all abuses of power TSA by agents against anyone are by definition egregious because the whole context is a sham and no greater good is being served by any of it. Sure, plenty of stuff we wouldn't want the guy sitting next to us to have in his pocket gets confiscated at the checkpoint, but that's been going on for a long time and has never generated such outrage before. That, and it's just the same stuff people all around us have in their pockets outside the airport, no big deal. It's even less of a big deal now that the cockpit doors are reinforced to keep imaginary boxcutter-wielders and other assorted boogeymen out.
And about the "where were the parents" thing, most people try to do the very best they can by their children. Sometimes that might not be good enough for you, I guess. I'm sure his parents were confident he would be fine and his trip wouldn't turn into a national news story and hell, I've seen much, much younger kids flying alone.
I don't subscribe to the "blame the victim" talk I'm seeing on here, sorry. You guys are way off.
Back when I used to travel with my violin frequently, I was pulled aside for special screening every single time so they could search the case. Some of them even cracked the same "mobsters carrying guns in violin cases" comment from airport to airport. Conclusion: I think they ARE robots.
Ken @75: And you're not pushing a political agenda?
Ken Hansen said:
"The kid never used the tube as far as I can tell(I'm at a loss as to why the kid kept it after it was opened), so if he needed it, and he used it the TSA agent put his life at risk? No. Why wouldn't the person that chooses to use a contaminated feeding tube be responsible? Honestly, if this is the only way the kid can eat, wouldn't you have a few spares?"
You are kidding, right? This whole story is about his back-up feeding tube. You know, the spare, just-in-case feeding tube? How many extra spares was he supposed to bring with him, and what suggests to you that they wouldn't have 'needed' to open and contaminate every single one of them?
why did it take two weeks?
mmm,lessee.... intimidation, word of a sick child against a government thugocracy that breaks grown men, threats against the family? risk to medical insurance- ah, thats a good one.....
no, I reviewed the video again, the kid's obviously a terrorist and the two week delay is because he's a liar and thief as well as a Taliban loving rapist.
My daughter has a surgically implanted 'g-tube' aka feeding tube. It doesn't need to be sterile - only clean. In fact, it's quite literally impossible to keep it sterile during insertion as it rubs against the abdominal skin. No one's life was at risk.
Having said that, however, the 'TSA' is out of control. Why do you yanks put up with the fascists stealing your freedom in the name of "security" and "safety"? It's amazing to watch from outside your country. You used to be a shining light to the rest of the world representing freedom and democracy and now you just represent a bunch of mindless, frightened children. Take your country back! The fact that you're willing to lie around waiting for your freedoms to return is baffling, when you consider your forefathers killed and died for the rights you're losing. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance. Get off ur asses, yanks!
All the comments here show us something any of us should be willing to admit: the situation is more complex than it at first seems. To tackle just one thread of this complexity, consider the nature of the harm, terrorism, that TSA's policies are supposedly designed to protect us against (leaving aside for now whatever other motives individual agents or the institution as a whole might have).
Terrorist attacks are low probability but high impact. There's a lot of psychological research on biases in human reasoning that show that thinking about events like these is especially prone to error, because of the strong emotions invoked by the imagination of catastrophic events. This is why the issue is so contentious. It's extremely difficult to offer an accurate assessment of what the real risks are and of what measures will be effective in decreasing those risks.
I think the reasonable response, though, is to recognize that no terrorism-prevention strategy is fool-proof. Instead of letting someone's wildest imaginations dictate what we do or not allow, we should use reason and scientific investigation to assess the effectiveness of policies, to the best of our ability. (That is to say, while assessing risks accurately is difficult, we can still achieve some degree of success.)
Consistency, to ensure fairness, and flexibility, to accommodate the unforeseeable details of specific cases, must be balanced. Perhaps experimentation on a local basis is worthwhile: if a trial provision eliminates a certain risk without constituting too much of a hassle, it might be adopted on a larger scale. Similarly, certain existing regulations might be suspended temporarily and the effects assessed.
It's difficult to think reasonably about these things because of how great the potential costs are, but it is the best chance we have for making things tolerable, both for would-be victims of terrorists and of TSA agents. No one wants to live in a police state, but neither do we want to have to fear for our lives due to inadequate security measures.
To give just one concrete example, let's take the ban on liquids. First, we might ask what are the specific liquids which pose risks, and what are those risks? From what I recall hearing, the supposed liquid explosive which prompted this policy was one that was all but impossible to mix undetected on a plane (it required mixing chemicals which had to be controlled at certain temperatures, which would be next to impossible without the right equipment, equipment which would be easily detected in carry-on baggage).
Now, maybe there are other risks that liquids pose, but if investigation reveals no significant ones, the liquid ban should be eliminated. (Perhaps some new threat will emerge in the future that would justify a ban, but this could be said about just about anything; we should deal with such threats if and when they are discovered; again, you can't prevent everything potentially disastrous.)
We desire certainty when our lives are at stake, but this is never achievable. We need to learn to live with a degree of risk that is reasonably mitigated by soundly-established regulations. I think this is the only way to reach a compromise that will actually address the concerns of everyone involved.
..people need to step up and stand up. Period.
EKPP.
First you blame the kid for not being responsible. Then, when someone points out that it was a kid, you're jumping on the parents. Where were they?
Sometimes kids fly without their parents. It happens. Sometimes they are visiting family or there is split custody or who knows, they could be going someplace for some kind of medical treatment and the family can only afford a ticket for one.
But you're talking the talk of someone who is pretty convinced the system as it stands will protect them over other troublemakers (poor people, people with accents, people with health issues, people who resent the way the USA is rolling over on its back and letting a police state come in to being...).
You side with the guys in the jackboots. I side with this kid and all the other folks.
Just don't be too terribly surprised when someday the TSA or some other arm of the new Amerika takes a dislikin' to the way you look and marches you off to the body-cavity search cubical, despite your protests and your being a white Christian male.
Just don't holler too loud and disturb the law-abiding folks waiting on line. Maybe if you remember to bring clearly-labeled lube in a 2 oz container in a sealed transparent plastic bag, they'll let you use it.
I too have had run-ins with retarded TSA personnel.
On my way BACK from New Mexico to Louisiana, the TSA tard questioned my unopened 3oz bottle of Benadryl.
I have a deadly allergy to nuts (sometimes served on planes), and an epi-pen is useless because my allergic reaction lasts for 10 hours when exposed.
Anyway, he told me I could not take the Benadryl with me because it was not in a baggie.
I couldn't believe my ears. HOW ON EARTH could placing the bottle in a baggie make it safer?
So I did what any non-tard would do. I started making fun of him LOUDLY.
One of his co-workers let me through with the Benadryl and snickered at his tard co-worker.
Some TSA personnel are not worth the air they breathe and probably will never make any meaningful contribution to society.
Have you ever considered that the whole TSA thing is a big smoke and mirrors plot to distract us from the fact that the brain dead are running our national security and from their incompetence at protecting our military networks from intrusion?
http://www.govexec.com/story_page.cfm?articleid=39456
Okay, I can see their draconic reasoning for restricting how much baby food you can carry on, making you put everything in easy-to-search plastic baggies, even taking off your effing shoes every single time to be checked for explosives, but this is an abhorrence.
Isolated incident or not, that TSA guy needs his ass kicked for doing that to a sick kid.
RE: Glittertrash:
You raise an interesting point - what happened with his non-backup feeding tube? Was it not sterile and could be checked without opening the protective plastic wrap? So if that is the case, why would the backup need to be more sterile than the non-backup feeding tube? And if the the non-backup feeding tube is also sterile and wrapped in a similar fashion, then the TSA agent only "ruined" one (assuming that the tube *needs* to be sterile, based on comment #84 by justdisguy), leaving one tube sterile.
Let's remember this - thankfully, I've seen nothing to indicate the child suffered as a result of the TSA agent's actions - it is a theoretical risk he suffered.
RE: #79 Village Idiot:
Most people do try to do the very best they can by ther children - agreed, but apparently these parents (or parent) apparently choose not to follow their 14 year-old child through the airport to the security checkpoint.
It's not about pleasing me, I'm happy the child was safe and didn't suffer any actual injury/harm as a result of this incident, but they are the ones saying the Gov't failed them, put their child at risk - sounds like the pot calling the kettle black. Do these parent know about pedophiles? Do they know about muggers/con men, were they concerned about thier child with the medical condition might have a problem on his "adventure" that could prevent him from communicating with medical personnel?
Because other parents put their younger (and presumably healthier) children on planes doesn't mean it makes sense to do the same with your child with a serious medical condition (and by my definition a feeding tube in and of itself is a serious medical condition all by itself, regardless the of why doctors had to add the tube in the first place).
If we could just install the TSA at Disneyland, we'd have one of these posts every day!
To those of you recommending asking questions or just saying no:
Try it. No really. Next time you're being illegally searched by an ex-Wal-Mart employee in a fake policeman's uniform, just ask to speak to a supervisor or ask why you have to do this.
It's fun, as long as you're cool with possibly missing your flight and losing all that money. Because you're going to be there awhile.
My wife doesn't allow me to do it anymore, but I used to. Basically, asking any questions, even if you are as polite as you possibly can be and assure them you're fine with taking a seat and waiting to hear the answer, your bag will be opened and everything pulled out and re-scanned; you will be wanded; you will go through the air-puff machine; you will be approached by huge middle-aged woman and asked loudly 'are you male or female;' you will be publicly humiliated.
Me, I don't mind, because it really just makes these thugs look worse. But it can really eat up a lot of time.
No, the only way to solve these --and many other-- problems is armed revolt. But those always just end up getting you killed, either by losing, or by winning and running afoul of the military government you've accidentally ushered into power.
So the best bet is to just get used to it. We're heading into a new Dark Age.
I can't believe some of the opinions in this thread. My son doesn't have a feeding tube... he does have a colostomy, and has been in hospital with a lot of children who do have feeding tubes. According to some posters here that makes him "special needs" and in need of a carer. Forget that the parents of children needing such interventions work hard to ensure that it doesn't turn them into needy people, that they work hard to make life seem "normal" to teenagers who require such things. If you have a feeding tube, or any other assistance with your life, you have special needs and should have a babysitter.
Fourteen, for some children, is old enough to take responsibility for yourself... but even adults have a hard time standing up to the sort of jobsworth than the TSA appears to recruit and employ. Many people, and not only a 14 year old would have trouble balancing up the choice between allowing someone to mess with their required medical equipment and getting on the place. You do not know if he had a hospital appointment or some important event to reach.
It's hard from outside the USA to understand how these things happen. Then people post to the comments and you start to understand.
today is March 6th,2008
The Second World War,for most Americans lasted about five years.
The attack on the World Trade Center buildings
took place on September 11th, 2001
The "emergency" has now lasted two years longer than the Second World War.
No end is in sight.
Do you really want to live this way forever?
Takuan, you're absolutely correct.
Orwell and others saw this coming; the easiest way to keep everyone under firm control is to ensure that there is a constant, imaginary enemy who can never be defeated.
Sadly, Orwell offers no clue as to how this sorry state may be averted.
I think you may be in for a generation or two of paranoia.
(And it's not just Eusa.)
I like how so many TSA apologists make the comment "Well, if he didn't like how he was being treated, why couldn't he just not fly?"
Maybe it's because y'all are new media professionals with mad bank, but let me tell you: plane tickets are tres cher if you're low on funds. With the burdens the United States healthcare system places upon families I'm willing to bet that this is the case here, too.
Ken Hansen is completely infused with fail, or an entirely brilliant troll.
I suspect the former.
Straw man arguments, missing the point entirely, quarrellous speculation, ignorance and fear-mongering references to terror babies - what else could you ask for!?
How about plenty of formatting! Nice italics, bold, and proper use of quotes.
Still full of fail.
You know that scene in 12 Monkeys, where the baggage check guy sees a bag with a series of clear and apparently empty tubes that are in fact full of plague? He looks at them, then opens one and sniffs it, to see what it might contain, thus sparking the release of a pandemic.
I used to think that was really stupid. It just seems kind of likely now.
The problem is, the TSA workers might actually believe they are important, that they are the First Line of Defense in the War on Terror. So, a bunch of duds with a high school education are being given possitions of power that they shouldn't have. They are just another layer of parasitic government employees that are feeding on Tax Payer dollars because we LET our government do so. Time to make the TSA a big issue. But I bet Clinton or Obama won't talk about it.
Bill O'reilly hates the TSA too, and when I see O'reilly and BoingBoing agreeing on something, it just makes my brain implode.
Ken wrote: "I have to ask how a post like this jibes with the subtitle of this site: "A Directory of Wonderful Things" No matter which side of this issue you fall on (TSA or Parents were at fault) I can't find the "wonderfulness" of such postings - of course, your site, your policies (no argument from me), but have you considered that this may be outside the scope of this blog?"
To which I answer, shutting down the TSA would be a wonderful thing.
And I have to ask, where do you get off deciding what is outside the scope of this blog?
#95 Ken wrote:
You raise an interesting point - what happened with his non-backup feeding tube? Was it not sterile and could be checked without opening the protective plastic wrap? So if that is the case, why would the backup need to be more sterile than the non-backup feeding tube? And if the the non-backup feeding tube is also sterile and wrapped in a similar fashion, then the TSA agent only "ruined" one (assuming that the tube *needs* to be sterile, based on comment #84 by justdisguy), leaving one tube sterile.
Now I know you are truly ignorant and did not watch the video. The backup was to possibly replace the tube that was already in his stomach if it failed. The tubes need to be regularly replaced every 6-10 weeks, and can fail sooner due to random events. So let me repeat: THE NON-BACKUP TUBE WAS IN HIS STOMACH! You do not pull these out until you need them, they stay in your stomach indefinitely.
And by the way, while the tube does not necessarily need to be sterile, I am quite sure it is preferable that it be clean. The kid does not know where that TSA officers hands had been and whether she was sick when touching his medical equipment that goes directly in his body. Or do the apologist think the TSA officer should be allowed to touch each individual pill in their medicine box as well, because it is pretty much the same thing.
"And I have to ask, where do you get off asking Cory whether he might have considered that a post was o