You must log in or register to comment.
That whole requiring documentation to say you don’t need documentation is so absolutely drunken with power maliciousness.
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.
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?”
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 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
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
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.
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?
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.
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
Fun fact, they did the special effects for that scene by shooting the fake head with an actual shotgun.
Jesus Christ. 😧
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?
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.
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.
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.
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?
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
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.
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.
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!
Bullshit. The dose is so minimal as to be inconsequential.
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! :)
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, it’s really annoying when you just want war and someone helps you out to fix it all
I mean, it kinda makes sense? I doubt you can see the difference confidently between 24 and 28 weeks, and what if the person was lying? Idk what their policy is, but if she was lying and something went wrong, it might cause problems for the agent.
No, it does not make sense, if the policy is “paperwork needed after 28 weeks” you should not have to provide paperwork before the 28 weeks. If what you say is a concern the policy should explicitly say “X paperwork after 28 weeks and Y proof of ‘pregnancy time’ if less than 28 weeks”.
You cannot simply expect people to produce documentation on the spot when you have not mentioned upfront that is needed.
Wait until some brilliant MBA comes up with the idea to charge an extra baggage fee up to 28 weeks and an extra passenger after
make it a tax only conservatives have to pay.
Conservatives are a tax everyone else has to pay 😞
You need to purchase a second seat for two people.
