The poster in question described her child as having “a mild peanut allergy”. That doesn’t sound like a condition predisposing to acute respiratory distress from contact with or inhalation of peanut microparticles.
And again - if a person is so hyper-allergic that this is a realistic scenario, it should be recognized that planes will always be highly likely to contain peanut residues from prior passenger snacks, and so the individual should be clothed in a moon suit-type garment and wear a proper face mask.
As a general matter, private entities can refuse service for any reason other than membership in a protected class. Severe allergies have been defined as disabilities for ADA and state disability accommodation law purposes in a number of cases, though.
How are passengers alerted about the peanut situation? I fly a few times each year. I remove my hearing aid for flight and put in ear-buds. I would have not heard an announcement, and potentially therefore opened a peanut package from my pocket.
There has actually been a push for the last decade or so to stop calling it the “Emergency Room” and refer to it as the “Emergency Department” - to the point that I hear “the ED” about 10x as often as “the ER” when I’m on the wards.
This is, of course, a techinicality that will likely take another decade or three to finish…not unlike the “Family Practice” vs “Family Medicine” vitriol ;).
(And, yes, the “ED physician/nurse/technician” joke is pretty standard, too.
The real comparison is the interests of the 150 versus the interests of the one/two/four/whatever small number in the traveling party with the peanut sensitive person. If that party isn’t able to travel by air, they’ll probably have to take a bus or train to their destination.
In my view, asking 150 passengers to postpone eating peanuts for a couple hours is an insignificant request that saves that traveling party of one/two/four/whatever from making a much longer journey. Therefore, I think it’s still fair.
If anyone can come up with a reason why it’s so important for people to be able to eat peanuts at all times, please present it. I would never consider being asked to not eat a particular snack for a rather short duration as me “bending over backwards.” It isn’t like I’m being asked to give someone a piggyback ride to their seat, or something that is an actual imposition.
This is a really, really lame example to use. Asking people not to eat peanuts has zero cost associated with it. Having stocks of different seats for all the different airports, aircraft, and cabin configurations, plus the manpower to install and re-install them is a very significant financial cost.
If you can’t find a good analogy, why not try not making a bad one?
I don’t think asking 199 other passengers to refrain from eating nuts constitutes a reasonable accommodation. There are people who are on special diets as recommended by their physicians and nuts are a popular choice as a snack. My default snack when traveling is nuts, not peanuts, no, but the warning label on the package says they were processed in a facility that also processes peanuts. The reason I carry my nuts with me when I travel (ha ha) is so I know I have something I can snack on while adhering to my diet. So if I need to eat something while in flight I’m going to be pissed off if they announce to me that I cannot eat nuts because someone is allergic to it.
In practice it hasn’t been a big deal. I don’t typically eat anything while I’m on a plane and for me it wouldn’t be a big problem unless it was an unusually long flight. But if I’m on a long flight and someone suddenly pulls the rug out from under my snacking plans then I’m making unreasonable accommodations.
What do they do with these people in the real world? If they’re kids do they eat in the same cafeteria as the other children? If they’re adults how have they managed to live in a world chocked full of nuts without keeling over?
How about we flip that on its head and say that if you can’t handle the peanuts, you don’t fly, or you charter your own flight?
I generally eat pretzels anyway, but I don’t see why if we packed a PB&J for my son because (hypothetically speaking) he’s a picky eater, we should have to trash that and have to deal with him because of someone else’s problem? Ultimately it’s not my problem or obligation to make sure that someone else’s food allergies are accomodated.
I’m fine with the airline’s refusal to serve peanuts and their request for customers to abstain from peanuty foods.
The airline has no obligation to serve any particular type of food. That airlines serve peanuts normally is a policy that can be rescinded or changed at any time.
I’m also fine with the airline requesting (but not demanding) that people not eat peanuts. As far as I know, their request has no force of law and is a polite request, so there’s nothing unreasonable about that. The passengers are free to disregard it to the detriment of the allergic one and perhaps their own morals and possible lawsuit.
I seem to recall hearing that the law requires passengers to follow the directions of the flight crew, and people have been arrested for not doing so. So, perhaps the request does have the force of law.
Would that only apply to requests having to do with the safety of the plane? Could a flight crew order someone to do something like take off their clothes, or give all the money in their wallet to them?
Maybe they phrased it as a request and not a demand and make sure people know they are free to disregard the request?
I would have no problem with not eating peanuts on a flight if someone asked me not to and I was sitting near them. That being said - there is little science to suggest this would be necessary or safe for the whole plane.
If you or your child is SO SENSITIVE to peanut particles that a 1 mg piece of airborne peanut protein is likely to cause your death - there is no way in hell you are being responsible or a good parent by boarding that plane. That plane had peanuts on it the flight before - and still has peanuts on it when you are on the plane. If peanut particles from seat 1B can travel to seat 23B in flight and kill you - they still will be able to kill you or your child an hour later.
If any person/kid traveling is making this request and not wearing a mask - they simply want to feel better by not having to see people eating peanuts. They are not actually making any effort themselves to reduce their risk.
If someone was deathly allergic to cats - does anyone really think it would be safe to enter the cabin of an airplane where a cat had been a couple hours before?
IMHO
The vast majority of people claiming they are having these types of reactions are NOT. They may be allergic, but if airborne food particles were extremely dangerous to any significant portion of the population - they’d be dropping like flys as soon as exposed to the forgotten peanut crumb 40 feet away that gets airborne and enters their lungs. Not saying there aren’t some out there, but it can’t be that many.
If a person is making this claim - and not wearing a mask - they shouldn’t be allowed to fly. I do not want that person to die - nor do I want my plane diverted when they have a reaction.
A person just showing up and expecting that they can magically turn a dirty plane with filters chock full of peanut dust (spewing small portions of this out during the whole flight) is living in a fantasy world if they think that they are not being exposed to peanuts.
That being said - if someone was wearing a mask - I would have no problem going along to make them feel better - and it would reduce the amount of peanuts in the air. They are making an effort and really believe that they are at risk (and may be). If someone wasn’t wearing a mask - I’d probably still go along, but would secretly despise them.
I also think if making a request to flight attendants - they should also have enough epipens to last through the trip if a reaction occurs. My understanding is one wouldn’t always be enough.
Ultimately, it’s their problem- they need to take responsibility for it and adjust their behavior accordingly. That means if the flights are too peanut-heavy, they need to do something else- drive, take the train, take a boat, ship themselves Fedex, whatever. It doesn’t mean whine to the airlines and have them change what they serve and try and prohibit peanuts on the flight. I have little doubt that the person with the allergy would have cheerfully prohibited all peanuts if they could. It’s understandable, but wrong.
They need to quit trying to make their problem mine and take care of it themselves.