THE CONSERVATIVE HIPSTERS

I don't think this particular case was about somebody simply getting 'airsick' during a flight. In this case, a passenger was identified as being sick with a possibly contagious virus (suspected influenza) at the time of boarding. I'm in agreement with their decision to keep them off the flight as a safety precaution. What if she quickly got worse during the flight and needed medical attention? What about the health of the other passengers and crew on board?
 

When we travel by air, we count ourselves fortunate if we aren't ill within the next couple of days, given the air quality on the planes - and this is travelling with seemingly healthy fellow passingers. While I sympathize with the parents just wanting to get their child home, WestJet was right. An actively sick child has no place flying. Quite apart from the potential health hazard for other passengers, there is the potential for such a child to dehydrate rapidly and become extremely ill. Under the circumstances, the child needed to have medical attention to ensure he/she did not have a condition which was either infectious (and therefore a hazard to the rest of the passengers) or potentially life-threatening to him/herself.
 

Spoken like folks who have no children.

I actually agree with the mother. Many folks, for example business travellers, get on a plane with colds, flu or worse.

Firstly, so the kid barfed. So what? They throw up pretty easily, beleive me. They asked if she was running a temperature and guessed that she was.

And you guys are talking like she had SARS. "Suspected infection"? Give me a break.

Secondly, as the story notes, if the child was so sick to be such a risk to passengers, then why did they basically forget about them after they got off the plane?

Its the treatment that makes them douchebags, not the decision to take off the plane.

Again, this one episode puts them closer to AC status - IMHO.