Back to Squawk list
  • 22

Colorado mom reacts to being kicked off plane when 2-year-old refused to wear mask: 'Humiliating'

A Colorado mother who said she and her family were kicked off a United Airlines flight after her 2-year-old daughter refused to keep a mask on told “Fox & Friends Weekend” on Sunday that “the experience was absolutely traumatizing” and “very humiliating.” Eliz Orban took cell video on Friday of a crew member speaking with her husband as he was trying to keep the mask on their daughter. The video, which Orban posted on Twitter, shows her husband telling the crew member that he was holding the… ( More...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]

I certainly sympathize with the family and especially the little girl, but it seems like there was little planning done prior to boarding. They did not bring a familiar mask for the child. Perhaps a blankie or a turtleneck sweater could be pulled over the child's face and sit in the back. Something could have been done that would be comfortable with the child. They didn't think this through and were not proactive to the rule. The pilot is in charge and they could have made arrangement suitable to the pilot when making plans to board. I see it both ways. The fault is not exclusively with the airline. Otherwise, if they can't work it out, rent a car. The rule is not there to terrorize children but to provide some protection to the other passengers.
Bruce Horwitz 5
They didn't plan because, as she said in the interview, they've been flying often and this was the first time the flight crew told them the child needed a mask. They didn't even have one with them. Of course the child balked, with no prep, no "let's play a game" practice, etc. Not that a 2 year old will always play along at the critical time but the bottom line is that these frequent flyers didn't think it would ever be enforced against them.
Cathy Vajtay -6
Not science. masks for the healthy pose serious health risks. If they worked why are there still cases of the virus...of course the PCR test is fraught with unreliability, even according to saint Fauci. Amplified over 34 cycles it becomes useless and over 90% false positives so who can even believe the results reported...who can verify them? That's the dupe, 'case-demic' over an alleged virus with 99% survival rate. Really, reason to vaccinate millions for 1% susceptible? Not science! Vaccine frenzy more sinister goal. As Bill Gates stated, "with vaccines we can reduce polulation by 10-15%"...yes he did! Think twice before you line up for the biochemical. heavy metal, modified RNA, aborted fetal cell, 'cocktail'. No animal testing prior to human testing unprecedented and contrary to vaccine testing protocol. Experimental medical treatment. And vaccine companies are by law not liable for any injury or death from their vaccines. So how eager are you to be a guinea pig?
ken young 3
You're using this forum to spew conspiracy theories. Its dismissed.
You are dismissed

[This poster has been suspended.]

Yeah, real science when there are gaps all around these cheap, flimsy masks that the average Joe is wearing. Also real science enacting curfews, because science knows that covid only comes out at night ...

And how about the science of removing your masks to eat! What the hell is the point of wearing one then??
I always wondered how the Germans in the 1930's got duped into supporting the Nazis. Well, now I know!

[This poster has been suspended.]

Ken Lane 1
Masks do no good.

[This poster has been suspended.]

DNev 1
And you obviously are not well read. There are two sides to every thing.

There is as much science showing that masks don't stop or help prevent the spread of covid. Some studies show wearing mask may actually increase your chances of getting covid and cause other issues.

I don't care which side you come down on but I would suggest you consider the possibility that maybe there is information the one-sided mainstream media - be it television of social is not presenting.

Try reading all the posts and check the links included in each for fact checking the authors claims. My guess is you won't even read one of them because you are already convinced in your own mind.

As I said, I don't really care where you land. But don't think you have it all figured out and therefore must force your world view on everyone else. One size fits all doesn't work here.

The Covid news you aren't supposed to see Pt. 1

The Covid news you aren't supposed to see Pt. 2

The Covid news you aren't supposed to see Pt. 3

The Covid news you aren't supposed to see Pt. 4
FYI science does not come from websites with *.com as a domain.
DNev 1
It is folks like you who are ignorant of reality and make claims based on what they "think" vs. what is fact. Stop making things up - proving you and others like you are not well read.

To the point here is a short example list of .com science websites, there are many more.

One chooses to be ignorant but you can't fix stupid. You choose which word is going to characterize you.
With the exception of, those are all decent secondary sources. They provide summaries of current science and more importantly links to the primary, peer-reviewed sources.

It is the peer-reviewed papers that present the hard science. And those papers in turn list numerous sources as support.

Even then, no single paper carries much weight, science is based on consensus.

By the way there are not two sides to everything. All ideas are not created equal. For example there are no viable alternatives to the Laws of Thermodynamics or the Theory of Evolution. There is no valid disputing the fact that masks inhibit the spread of COVID-19 to others.
DNev 2
Some further thoughts for you, then I will leave you to your folly.

Science is not based on consensus. Science is based on facts that are reproducible and attempt to explain the world as it is. Consensus is simply agreement by a group of people – right or wrong. Furthermore, consensus does not define truth.

As to alternatives to your examples: Thermodynamics is accepted by virtually everyone because the science behind it has been born out in facts that are reproducible, hence the name "Law of Thermodynamics". No questions or disagreement there.

As to no alternatives to the "Theory of Evolution", the title itself points out a contradiction to your assertion that there are no alternatives to everything. It is a THEORY. A theory that has more problems and raises more questions than the colander in your kitchen has holes. The alternative to the Theory of Evolution is Creation Theory, which admittedly is also theory. No matter which theory one wants to believe in, both require a level of faith. Science fits very well within the Creation Theory.

To accept the theory of evolution requires more faith than to accept that there is a designer - God. This simple theory is rejected by many because of the implication of absolute truth, that there is something greater than ourselves, and that one day all will be accountable for their actions. Not a very popular position in a world that wants to re-define things as basic a male and female.

Mask, or no mask; I don’t believe the benefit of masks offsets the complications. There is no more evidence to say masks do control the spread of COVID than there is showing they don’t. The studies, academics, science, whatever you wish to call it, is there to support both sides. If masks work, feel free to wear one and your good to go.

As I said previously, I don't care what one chooses to believe. One is free to define truth anyway they want and they are free to believe anything they want. It does not change absolute truth and absolute truth doesn’t care what you or I think, nor will it change because of a desire to have a particular outcome.

Believe what you wish, it’s your choice and the consequences of those choices will be yours to bear.
WhiteKnight77 1
Way too many people use theory to describe something they feel is conjecture. Darwin showed that evolution exists. We still have indications of it today with the tongue in cheek award given to people who do stupid things that result in their deaths.
DNev 0
How narrow minded of you. I never said it was a science website. It's a blogger site that has more references than you have obviously looked at about the risks of wearing a mask. You've just proven how stupid the majority of people are that don't recognize there are two sides to everything. READ for once in your life READ something that you may not agree with. Then you can at least acknowledge you have considered alternatives.
EllisBabenois -1
Mask effectiveness can, of course, be disputed and has been, often with research to back it up, but you wouldnt know that if you'd rather shut your mouth and take it on face value (see what I did there?) The vaccine will not stop the virus or end sickness. Any more than the flu vaccine did/does. There were 5 variations of the Rona before it even hit the US - there's probably hundreds now. You'd best get a bit more actual information regarding the PCR cycles and testing before you declare someone else a "luddite". The creator of the actual PCR test is the one who stated this fact. But again, if you just watch MSM and are incapable of logic, you'd not be aware enough to even ask the right questions. Gates has caused untold harm in poorer countries with his experimental vaccines. You seem very ignorant.

[This poster has been suspended.]

Ken Lane 4
The PIC had every authority to allow for the toddler not to wear a mask. Common sense should have ruled, not the stupid FA.
Roger Anderson 38
At the risk of sounding heartless, it sounds like the real boss here is the 2-year-old. I couldn't try that temper tantrum with my parents.
sparkie624 15
LOL... Same here... You could try the Temper Tantrum... But I think you would have lost in a very Bad way - Hint Hint!
Roy Hunte 21
I wouldn't try that with my parents at that age either. Sounds like those parents are a bit weak.....
..a bit weak..I LOVE IT !
Bruce Horwitz 5
If you listen to the interview I believe this family has been flying quite a bit with the child... and this is the first time (apparently) that they have been told the child must wear a mask (which is why they didn't have one). Had they been compliant in the past they would have prepped the kid, made it a game, etc. and this would not have been new to the child. Parenting 101. But, no, they never planned on having to comply.
EllisBabenois 2
You DID try that with your parents at that age. We all did! It's called "2".
matt jensen 7
At the tender age of two your parents would be in jail for striking you in public!

Too namby pamby nowadays - everyone's a critic. I don't know if you've ever tried putting anything exc for a pacifier in a baby's mouth.
Mark Kanzler 1
I threw a temper tantrum when I was little. Once.

[This poster has been suspended.]

EllisBabenois 0
T.W.O. What part of 2 years old don't you people get?
wiregold -6
The Germans used that approach on everything too, but really, she sounds like a strong girl willing to stand for her rights to me. The kid was not required to mask-up.

[This poster has been suspended.]

Ken Lane 3
Tell us where in the Constitution any government entity is allowed to infringe upon a private person for no other reason than they exist?
10th Amendment and the Commerce Clause
This is NOT in the slightest the intent of our Founders. They must be rolling in their graves right now. This is the product of leftist viewing the Constitution as a "Living, breathing document". Next thing you know, Conservatives will be required to provide quarter to militant leftists using this same logic.
hwh888 16
Funny when I see ALL seats full. Social distancing doesn't apply to air travel. Why? Money is the game here.
ken young 4
To all of you who are anti....covid everything.
Look, most of us are sick of the constantly moving goalposts, shut downs and general misery being perpetrated upon us by political fiat.
The bottom line is these air carriers are privately operated business entities. They are also licensed by the federal government giving them permission to ferry the public from point A and back.
The carriers have to concede to certain regulations in order to maintain operational status. Therefore those carriers will adhere to the orders of elected officials.
Bottom line, if one wishes to use air travel, they must comply with the rules and regulation. If they object, they are free to use other modes of transportation to reach their desired destination.
The rule is "each passenger aged 2 years or older MUST wear a face covering.
The adults should ( frequent flyers, they claim) have been prepared for any contingency.
QUite frankly, they had NO business taking a vacation so "the grandparents can see our kids".....And in my opinion, ALL interstate leisure travel should be barred until such time as mainstream people receive a Covid vaccine.
BTW, Qantas has fired the first "Vaccine salvo"...Their policy is once the vaccines become available through the general population, all travelers must provide proof of vaccination in order to board a Qantas aircraft. I fully expect US, Canadian and European carriers to follow suit.
No vaccine, not fly.
Dale Oglesby 4
Its sure enough easy for us to throw rocks at someones parenting skills. I have some very close friends with a preschool child that was forced by the school district to wear a mask. The child was compliant, and did as instructed. That said, what nobody noticed was that the child begin suffering elevated blood pressure as he struggled to breath thru the mask. Within a few weeks, while at school, the young child suffered a stroke. Treatment required extensive brain surgery. In my opinion, too many politicians are acting like doctors, and too many doctors are acting like politicians.. Young children with developing lungs are not the problem, and in my opinion we place children in danger forcing anything that restricts free breathing and potentially causes a child to panic. Just my opinion.
Ken Lane 2
I saw another recent story with kids forced to wear masks all day ending up with chaffed to flesh rubbed raw because they're never allowed to remove them.
ken young 17
If they are frequent flyers as they claim, then they KNEW the rules prior to booking the flight.
Lets get back to the brass tacks here and ask, "why are these people going on vacation across the country in the first place?".....Very selfish.
It is people such as these self centered ( my kiddies have to see their grandparents) that will result in air carriers mandating vaccinated passengers only rules. Just wait. Qantas has already announced this policy will begin. Expect other carriers to follow along.
Mark Kanzler 2
Because all of us read each airlines rules before each flight - just to check for changes, right?
Ken Lane 2
The rules that say you can reason with a toddler? What moron came up with that?

[This poster has been suspended.]

Ken Lane 1
Let's see you try to reason with a toddler. Good luck with that.

And, the CDC guideline allows for such reasonableness.
Mike Mohle 19
Maybe they should have taken the minivan instead.......
Chuck Midcap 6
It seems to me that it’s the airlines that have the temper tantrum problem.
Dagmar Graham 8
As a parent, knowing what is required in these times, one works ahead: two weeks before the flight, start wearing a mask as a family and make it a game with a reward for the 2 year old. work up to the required time and have the child look forward to the reward.
We ALL have to make allowances in these times, what is wrong waiting a year to travel like most of us.
Don Quixote 17
United has no problem opening up the middle seats, but apparently a 2 year old is a COVID risk to others? Whatever happened to the air filtration systems. Thought flying was no big deal.
eji74 3
Here's a take that's bound to tick off both sides of the mask issue. First of all, the masks you buy at your local pharmacy or Walmart are not meant to protect you from getting COVID. In fact, I have bought masks where the packaging explicitly says this. What they do is keep you from spreading it to others by minimizing the amount of your own droplets that you may spew through talking, sneezing, etc. Why do you think surgeons and dental hygienists wear them? But you can wear masks all the time and still end up getting it. I personally wear a mask whenever I can't maintain physical distance or interact with anyone, because I'm not selfish like a lot of anti-maskers are. But the pro-maskers need to drop the "protection" bit. If you want protection, wear an N95 or higher-rated mask.

However, there's no need for a mask on a 2-year-old. Come on now.
Ehud Gavron 15
It's not a two-year old. The parents are making excuses.

They got their tickets refunded, their luggage returned AND they are not banned from UA.

It was bad enough in restaurants when parents let their kids scream and do what they [the kids] wanted. It's worse in COVID times in an airplane when the same entitled shits let their kids do whatever they want.

Zero sympathy for bad parenting. If you can't ensure your children do what society requires of them then you can take you and your children out of that society -- particularly when you're endangering 168 other people (or more, not sure of the AC).

ken young 10
I'm a proponent of "kid free flights"....Parents of today are either incapable or unwilling to control the behavior of their offspring. And because of whiny, overly sympathetic voices, the rest of us are forced to endure screaming crying inconsolable brats.
WhiteKnight77 2
Kids have always acted up. What has changed is how they are dealt with due to the touchy-feely people who have pushed for non-physical means of punishement. What we see with kids nowadays are a byproduct of such thinking from both the parents and children. While a swat or two across the rear is one thing and acceptable, outright abuse of kids is another, and that is unacceptable, yet the touchy-feely people cannot see the difference.
WhiteKnight77 1
Oh, here is a link to her story.
Spencer Hoefer 18
You shouldn't be putting a mask on a 2 year old to begin with
Ehud Gavron 10
If the kid zhits on dad's lap should the other pax "just deal with it"? What whiny asses here would go with that?

Breathing out potential covid is worse. No odor no shit but hey you can die.

Stop the excuses and if you don't think parents should've responsibly handled that, good for you.

As a pilot I'd have removed them also. I think UAL did great on this case.

Cathy Vajtay -6
Good little brown shirt you! As a pilot you should know the last thing you need on an aircraft or in the cockpit is hypoxia...that you get from restricting the free flow of O2 and inhaling your own exhaust through a jockstrap on your face. Masks for the healthy are criminal! Pose serious risks to health, hypoxia...lower partial pressure of O2, hypercapnia, higher cortisol levels...increased stress. Criminal to restrict the very air we need for life for our right to life!
Ken Malvey 5
Never too early to begin learning the concept of ‘consequences’ - as in - No, you don’t have to wear your mask, but one consequence of that choice is that you won’t be flying on this airplane...
Alan Cordery 7
Really dumb requirement, under the age of 5, kids will not sit still for a mask. Experience shows they don’t need it anyway. Just another dumb decision in a pretty dumb industry from an end user perspective.
If the parents cannot manage their child, they should stay home.
MSU Sparty -1
Do you have kids? I’m guessing not
John Yarno 3
Total BS. You go past restaurants with tents outside. What is the difference between sitting in side where it is warm and dry, and sitting outside in a tent which is cold and damp? Pure political garbage.
WhiteKnight77 1
One has to ask why such restrictions are in place. The video of a restaurant owner who cannot open is quite poignant, especially when a production crew's craft services is allowed to operate with no restrictions right next door.
Snowflake parents - can't control their kid, and it's "humiliating" when your kid won't wear a mask, puts everyone in the plane at risk, and you get removed.
Get over it. Get control of your kids.
paul trubits 7
Stay home or drive like everyone else. We all want to see our grand kids. What part of unnecessary travel do they not understand?
Joao Ponces 6
How more ridiculous can the US airlines get? The OMS does NOT recommend the use of masks on children under 10 years old! Even risk of life!!!! But NO, they know better!!!!
yatesd 2
OMS? Risk of life? The CDC says everyone age 2 and older should wear a mask in a public setting.
Ken Lane 0
Cite it.
Ken Lane 1
You didn't read the whole thing, did you?

"Correct and consistent use of masks may be challenging for some children, such as children with certain disabilities, including cognitive, intellectual, developmental, sensory and behavioral disorders. Learn more about what you can do if your child or you cannot wear masks in certain situations."

Please tell me you're not a certificated pilot.
Cathy Vajtay -4
and you think the CDC is benevolent and cares about your health...about your life. They're political as is the alleged corona virus, a bioweapon used to hype the fear frenzy. Mandates to control the spread are unprecedented, NEVER done before. The audacity to think that anyone can control where any organism goes or how it spreads, under the ruse of saving lives...but not the lives lost to the consequences of the mandates as in some 80,000 suicides, depression, and 40 million whose lives & livelihoods have been destroyed by "lockdowns", also unprecedented, NEVER done before. You can't hide from a 0.03 micron virus or other any other organism in solitary house arrest. The virus doesn't care where you are it's going to go wherever the hell it wants. A virus is not a living thing. It needs to be in a cell to function. The air around you inside or out is not swarming with any virus. They can't survive in air especially not in sunlight. So ridiculous to kill the economy by shutting down businesses. It's not about saving lives. It's about destroying society and the individual's ability to generate income and a livelihood, independence & self sufficiency...and make everyone dependent on the government, as in 'stimulus' government control. Communism, tyranny, one world government. Hoping the American spirit of freedom prevails and is strong enough to defeat the sinister ulterior motives.
Phil Scarr 5
What was the alternative? Kudos to that crew for not putting up with her bullshit.
Steve Zilora 5
The CDC recommendations and the UA rules say over the age of 2 requires a mask. 2 yrs plus 1 day is over the age of 2. If you want to practice civil disobedience because you don't agree with the rule, OK, but accept the consequences. (But I sure hope the pilots on this forum don't pick and choose which FAA rules they're going to abide by)
Ken Lane 2
Ever raise a toddler?
Steve Zilora 3
Yup, sure did. And we never took them to restaurants, on planes, or other situations where it was unreasonable to expect them to behave according to norms. Yes, we had to do things differently those years, but it kept everything pleasant for everyone.
Ken Lane 2
Then you never had to go anywhere where they had to be required to do something far outside of their comfort zone. That includes forcing them to wear a cover over their face.

Common sense went out the window on this one.
Steve Zilora 0
Nope, never *had* to do that, just like these folks.
Tim Lyke 1
They were not or acting civil disobedience ....

Many other passengers are maskless while they eat and drink - I’ve been on a couple of flights where the milk it for the entire flight.

I’ve also note flight attendants violating FAA rules as well as passenger intentionally not turning off phone and raising seat backs to full upright and locked positions.

Additionally the airlines can easily and often do violate FAA policy because of watered down oversight - so to see this happen as a result of one flight attendant is concerning - and it is a result of poor rule
Among and poor implementation by the airlines.

Another great example is the rule that doesn’t allow certain types of face coverings allowed in doctors offices and other state and federal offices including the FAA yet banned on the flights.
Steve Zilora 1
I agree that some rules appear dumb or are poorly written like the eating exception you noted, but if you want to play the game, you need to follow the rules.

I didn't realize there was all that much in terms of FAA regs for flight attendants other than training and how many attendants are required. What FAA regs have you seen them violate?
I only fly GA so I'm not that familiar with 135 and 121 regs.

BTW, while the attendant may have raised the issue, the supervisor concurred so this isn't just due to one flight attendant.
Ehud Gavron 1
I follow ALL FAA ruled. I do speed in traffic leaving the airport though :-)
There is a reason that the "terrible" twos are so named. Reasonable people should have been able to find a less drastic solution.
It's not drastic.. don't mask, don't fly..pretty simple really.
Getting kicked off a flight and making a BFD out of it on television seems drastic to me. My point is that more reasonable players might have come to a better solution. Your point is, what? That people on airplanes should wear masks? Well, duh, that's a given.
MSU Sparty 1
Do you have a 2 year old? Have you ever tried to put a face mask on a 2 year olds that has no idea why you want to cover their face
Dagmar Graham 2
After several days and seeing other children wear masks, children will comply with this game. How come this 2 year old has not been wearing a mask out in public all along???
Ken Lane -4
Another person who has never raised a toddler.
Ken Lane -1
Clearly, you've never raised a toddler.

[This poster has been suspended.]

Ehud Gavron 2
Oh hail yes, parenting skills have changed. Unbelievable. Let your (not) 2-year old dictate the rules to his/her parents. Whut?
mikeenderle 3
"That 2 year old must hate old people. What a selfish piece of human garbage. How dare he question the almighty mask?"

-Half of Flightaware
Chris Croft 3
Roger, you don't come across as heartless, just clueless. To think a 2 yr old has the cognition or ability to "boss" her parents around is just ridiculous. I have no idea whether you have flown with your own child(or don't have children), you sound as if you are irritated by children on aircraft in general. Also pretending that you remember how your parents may have reacted to one of your tantrums at 2 yrs old is also ridiculous.
Lois Lettini 3
Temper tantrums were unheard of when I grew up. And I am NOT kidding. There is no way I would have ever gotten away with that. My bottom would still sting if I ever tried it. My dad's response to any inquiry as to why I should or should NOT do something was "Because I told you so!!" Learning to follow rules is a lessson best learned -- the earlier in life -- the better!
Josie Rojas 1
Now a days if you spank your kid’s bottom the authorities get called for child abuse!
Marcus Giddens -4
As they should....
I got the worst flu I ever had from a 4 y.o.
I had thought: my g/f's little son has a bad can it be, so he came over and spent the weekend. On the Tue. it began..I was off work for a week. I recall that on Election day. Nov. 3rd there were 83,000 new reported cases that day. I thought, my God, that's a BIG number! Now here we are, 6 weeks later and the daily cases are up to 250,000 with more than 2500 Americans dying every day. That's 894,000+ deaths on a yearly basis and getting worse. If you haven't been paying attention, what the scientists are saying is STAY HOME. Flying around the country on trips to see Grandma hardly qualify as safe practice and this will make for a good "learning opportunity" for the kid since mommy is too busy being entitled and practicing her "whine".
Ken Lane -2
The CDC statistics along with Dr. Scott Atlas show the virus has the least effect on younger ages and they're also extremely unlikely to transmit the virus to adults.

Never mind airlines are the most healthy environment in terms of air turnover.
Dr Atlas has as much COVID expertise as a podiatrist.
Ken Lane -4
I'll trust him over the idiot who has been a bureaucrap since 1968.
Scientists can drop dead.
Lee Ensminger 2
Today we got kicked off of a United flight going from Denver to Newark because our 2yo would not “comply” and keep her mask on. Go see the full IGTV on my Instagram

And there it is. It's not about safety, or her and her family being traumatized. It's about becoming a "celebrity" on Twitter and Instagram.

No sympathy for her whatever. Follow the rules, or don't fly.
Ken Lane -1
Clearly, you've never dealt with raising toddlers.

The United FA and the manager are thugs. The executives that allowed the policy are idiots and the pilots who refused to speak up are wimps.
wiregold -1
They were following the rules. 2 and under do not require masking.
Comprehend or don't comment ...
Lee Ensminger 4
Quoted from the article:
"Orban explained that when she and her husband boarded the airplane on Friday, a flight attendant immediately asked how old their daughter is and demanded she wear a mask given she was over the age of 2. Orban said they asked for a mask since her daughter didn’t have one and the flight attendant gave them one before they went to their seats."

Over the age of 2. Nothing wrong with my comprehension. You, on the other hand...
jeff slack 1
We must wear masks until this is behind us.

However, here in safe New Zealand; masks are not required on domestic flights or public transport for children under the age of 5.
masking a 2 year old is insane, unworkable
Brad Hovis -3
Its amazing how many Americans are willing to just give up all their freedoms! we will see how you all feel in a few years when all your posts are Censored! Its a free country and the CDC has already said, several times, kids are safe. Just the government trying to get their power play into yet another aspect of our lives!
Atanu Dey 4
The hysteria is a lot more dangerous than the Wuhan virus. That hysteria is driving the politicians to grab more power and the people are willingly surrendering. The worst bit is this -- the lockdowns are going to end up killing an estimated (by the UN) 130 million of the most vulnerable (meaning the poorest of the poor.)

For the very young, Covid-19 is less dangerous than the seasonal flu. In the age range 0-19, the case fatality rate is 0.00003. That is 3 out of 10,000. Toddlers and infants are even more unlikely to die. The CFR increases with age.

0-19 years: 0.00003
20-49 years: 0.0002
50-69 years: 0.005
70+ years: 0.054

That's from the CDC.

And here's a good piece on the Covid Derangement Syndrome over at Cafe Hayek:

It's time to dial back the hysteria.
Dagmar Graham 6
it may be less dangerous to the child to have covid, but with their coughing, sneezing, finger in the nose etc, they are a danger to the rest of the population.
Norm Shea 3
This is really not about the danger to the child, it's the danger to others. If you're an 85-year-old with COPD, sitting in the seat in front of the unmasked child, you might have a different perspective as to whether their mask is important or not. And, anticipating comments, yes, it's dangerous for an 85-year-old with COPD to fly, but it's their constitutional right and they should expect the airline to protect them while they are (aka Boeing and their 737 MAX).

Maybe the family with the child should take some personal responsibility and realize that it's going to be difficult to travel with a 2-year-old while complying with guidelines. “We’ve just flown two months ago because all of our family lives on the East Coast, so this is the only way for them to see their granddaughter.” While that's heartwarming, there's a thing called Zoom. Hopefully in another 6 months it won't be an issue, so why not be considerate and just wait.
Monty Baugh 7
1, there is no constitutional right to fly on a commercial airliner, but if there were, the 2-year old and her parents would have the same right. 2, if an 85-year old with COPD gets on an airplane, he/she assumes the risk and deserves whatever consequences arise.
Norm Shea 2
So "constitutional" right was a little facetious but, none the less, the 85-year-old has the right to expect to be able to travel if they chose and do so safely. The 2-year-old and their parents also have that right IF they follow the airline's established policies. They, or you, don't have to like or agree with the policy, but if you want to fly on the company's plane, you have to abide by it. I don't like that I can't include a camp stove fuel bottle in my luggage, even if it's empty, but that's a policy. So, my choice it to fly without it or don't fly.

It seems pretty straightforward, fly and adhere to the policies or don't fly.
Ken Malvey 0
There’s no constitutional right for the 2 year old to fly either - particularly if its unwilling or unable to comply with airline’s face mask requirement. Doesn’t matter if you agree or disagree with the need to wear masks - the airline owns and operates that airplane and gets to set the rules for people flying on their plane. Don’t like the mask requirement? Walk.
Linda Stone 2
Maybe the 85 year okd with COPD should be the one staying home.
Ken Lane 1
If you're a high risk individual it is YOUR responsibility to keep YOURSELF safe. It is not your right to force everyone else to comply with your demands.
Norm Shea 1
Nope, that would be my right and the people who won't comply with the airline's policy's problem. I'm not forcing anyone to comply with my demands, the airline if forcing them to comply with their policies. It's really not that hard to understand.
Ken Lane 0
The airline can be as stupid as they like as UAL has proven to be. And, they won't get my business as a result.

But, no one else has a right to force any private person or private entity to comply with their demands.
Norm Shea 1
I bet UAL is worried. Think of all the money they could have spent on litigation if they'd just ignored all the rules and allowed you to keep flying.

So, I assume (back when you did fly), you brought items too big to fit in the overhead bin, walked around the cabin during takeoff, never put your device in "airplane" mode and didn't buckle your seat belt either, correct? Because, nobody is gonna make you do anything you don't want to. I suppose you don't have a driver's license or pay taxes either.
sconklan 2
The snowflakes in this country are killing us. The idea of making anyone wear a mask is fascist and making a toddler wear a mask is absurd.
The snowflakes who are killing us are those over-aged toddlers throwing temper tantrums over a public health requirement that they wear a mask when in public.

There is no constitutional right to threaten the health of others.

The social immaturity of Americans is part of the reason that despite having only 4% of the world's population, we have accumulated nearly one quarter of the world's cases of COVID-19 and nearly one fifth of the deaths.
Actually. It's the "snowflakes" that are making Instagram msgs of themselves crying *at the airport* while the rest of the pax are enroute, on their flight.
United's policy clearly states over 2, not two and over. What happened here was an unknowledgeable and imperious FA trying to impose a policy that did not exist. The family is totally in the right here, and the airline and the FA are totally in the wrong. Where was the PIC in all this fiasco?
"Two years" is a point in time; the next moment is more than two years.

Here is a less ambiguous statement:

"We're requiring United travelers to wear a face covering during their entire flight and in the airport, including at United customer service counters and kiosks, United Club℠ locations, our gates and our baggage claim areas. Children younger than 2 years old are exempt."
wiregold 1
They did not say 2.0, they said 2. Remember significant figures; the next point in time is 3.
wiregold 0
The people commenting who have missed the obvious, which you point out, is why the Founding Fathers creating a Republic and not a Democracy.
DNev -5
Granted, a two year old should not be deciding issues for adults, but in this case, the airline, parents and society as a whole should be better informed. Filtration systems aside, the kid has it right. Even if the kid has put it on so the flight could depart, do you really think it would have stayed on?

I would have thought that most of the readers here were pilots and therefore able to digest information and come to reasonable solutions. The problem is the media, both networks and social are blocking any view opposing that of mass pandemic. The information is out there...if you are willing to read it. Here is an excellent article with all the links for verifying the information...including reports from the CDC. Masks are a joke. More of the world is wearing them than are not wearing them and yet the "pandemic" is still here.

Read this entire article before you go downvoting me or anyone else who does not align with what is being portrayed as the truth. It's part of a serious titled: "The COVID News You Aren’t Supposed to See". Those of you who don't want to be ignorant may read it to see the other side, but, being the platform this is, I know many of you won't bother to read it at all before commenting. Ignorance is something you can change, but you can't fix stupid.

Trust no one and verify everything.

For those of you to busy to take the time to read the entire article, the concluding remarks of the article summarize it well. Here they are.

The short version: Mask mandates have failed to slow the spread of COVID and may actually make you more likely to catch it. Lockdowns don’t appear to slow the spread of COVID at all, and they damage the economy and mental and physical health of people. If we can trust the excess death number, then lockdowns may actually be killing almost as many people as COVID-19 is. Stay tuned for part 3!
Allan Weber 7
Suggest you go to the CDC site and read what they say about wearing masks. Anyone 2 and over should wear a mask to keep from spreading the virus. I trust our scientists.
Archie Duiker 5
So is that why the USA has the worst record in the WORLD in managing Covid? The facts there clearly indicate that not wearing madks doesn’t work either!
Ken Lane -2
You mean by locking people down, restricting liberty along with the economy?

Tell us, what areas have the most spikes? They seem to coincide with those that had the greatest restrictions, don't they?
Science doesn't care what you believe. Put your tinfoil hat back on and STFU.
Ehud Gavron 6
You're a moron. Crawl back into your science free hole.
ken young 5
Hey genius, I have FOUR nurses in my family. Every day, they witness the results of contracting Covid 19. Posting of stories from anti( mah rights) blogs gets you no mileage. If one does not wish to wear face covering, they then choose to not participate in certain activities.
These people should NOT be traveling for vacation. Especially to visit senior citizens who are in the "most vulnerable" category.
If the mask doesn't stay on the kid, the kid doesn't stay on the flight. Same goes for adults. Pretty simple, really.
Randy Marco 6
Quit spreading COMPLETE false information and LIES!!

"I would have thought that most of the readers here were pilots and therefore able to digest information and come to reasonable solutions"

Well, you got that one thing right. Sadly, you seem to have gotten everything else dead (and I use the term literally) wrong. Pull your head out of your ego and use your neocortex for something other than dangerous nonsense!
lfilipov747 -4
100% agree with everything you said here.
KoolerKT 1
Selfish people.
Appears like the parents own the lionshare of this drama. What if the child wants a unicorn ?
Richard Loven 1
Everyone(Flight Attendants, Parents) should just pretend the kid was less than two years old. What people don’t know won’t hurt them.
Oh yes it will..ask the 300,000 dead COVID victims if it "hurt" them.
patrick baker -6
the little brat is capable of spreading the virus and being infected too, so masks are necessary for all. Perhaps a few benedrils or such similar pills ought to have been put into the kid. The tyranny of the child is the parents dilemma, and the spread of the virus is all our concerns.
James Bruton 0
Two year olds can be very obstinate and tantrum driven. Remember the "terrible two's"? Everyone who as had children know this. I always hope not to fly on planes that have these toddlers onboard. They can be pretty bad trying to keep them in their seat even without masks. That said, the airlines were wrong.
Then, in these troubling times, this is NOT the time to take an obstinate 2 y old on a flight. If any passengers can't or won't follow requirements, then they don't fly. Simple.
s s -1
Let's all wear a piece of random fabric (handkerchief/cheesecloth/nylon stocking/silk scarf/whatever) over our faces (that in no way will protect us from airborne viruses) so we can FEEL better and virtue signal about doing OUR PART!
Bruce Horwitz 2
Sure, you can take that attitude, but oddly some citizens actually try to wear a functionally useful mask. From the tone and content of your commen; I guess you don't. Thanks. I'm sure there are 300,000 mourning families who appreciate your consideration.
DNev 0
There are two sides to everything. your comments are ludicrous and show how sheep like you and others like you are to accept blindly what the media is pushing.
s s -4
Hey Bruce, take a look at all the deaths in the U.S. over the last five years (somewhere around two million, eight hundred thousand deaths each year) and explain how 2020 is on pace to equal or even be BELOW the average of deaths a year and not the average plus 300,000?

Then please let me know how many deaths there have been for the normal flu this year. Funny how nobody is talking about the flu this year? Is it a bad flu year or a good flu year? And if someone dies of the flu - and up to 100,000 people die of the flu each year - are those deaths being called flu or Covid 19 deaths?

As for the "300,000" why not use some damn facts over your mockingbird media emotions and admit the vast majority of those deaths are people who were very, very ill to begin with and most likely would have been dead within six months or a year simply from being so gravely ill. If that sounds "cold" or "inhumane", well the "science" you seem to claim to care about IS cold. Science is about facts, not emotions, and the facts say that unless you are a person very gravely ill and will probably die in a short time no matter what, you have less of a chance dying from Covid 19 than the typical seasonal flu.
Ken Lane -4
I suggest further study rather than listening to the politically motivated BS by the politicians and liberal media.

Show us where all those claimed deaths are caused by the virus. Because the CDC does not agree with you on that.
mmc7090 0
Obviously the parents never demonstrated and "played with masks". A two year old is only beginning to learn. Life is more than ones and zeros it is analog. Going to a million degrees is a bit over the top. Using fuzy claims about what masks actually provide leaving good judgement behind.
Where is the final authority Captain?
wtwisniewski 0
These comments are why the US can't kick the virus in a nut shell. Self entitled people do most of the spreading of both the virus and misinformation. Liberty means that everyone has a right to their opinion, no matter how incorrect and damaging it is, but it also means that the virus wins. We can't beat the virus if we don't agree on our behaviour.
flee2013 -5
Good discipline, United. We need more of that if we are to win the war against the virus.
ian mcdonell -8
Good result - well done United
s s 0
If United or the FAA truly cared about safety and not simply virtue signaling, they would require everyone wear AT LEAST AN N95 MASK plus a FACE SHIELD which covers the eyes and under NO circumstance, other than rapid decompression and the need to don an oxygen mask, can this N95 mask and face shield be removed once aboard the aircraft.

Because only those with their heads in the sand and a child's understanding of science believe an airborne virus like Covid 19 is stopped by wrapping a paper surgical mask or nylon cloth that says "Go Broncos" over your nose and mouth.
Ken Lane -4
Yet, they do absolutely no good. Want absolute protection? Wear an NBC rated mask.
Bruce Anthony 0
Rules are Rules and I applaud all involved for keeping their cool and I hope they were able to fly on another outbound...
United's policy clearly states over 2, not two and over. Rules are those established by an airline, not stuff made up on the spot by an imperious FA.
Carl Spade 0
She was lucky that selfish stupid Trump like behavior happened in the US. In the middle east or China she would have been publicly flogged and heavily fined as well. The stupid cow should be thankful that all that happened was for her & her pet monkey to be kicked off the aircraft.
Yes, sorry we don’t live in military dictatorships that you are so proud of. We will have to do our best to endure freedom.
A Biden family member would have been issued a Crack Pipe and a Hooker because now anti Trump venom will be thrown in here. OK.
the rules as for all. Mom or dad...lost the ticket to ride...(Beatles dixit)
People people...they are dealing with a 2 year old ...damn tough at best ! Here in CANADA children under 2 are not required to wear a mask ... many here obviously have no children .. Airlines have no hearts ..ever !

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

sparkie624 3
Language Please....
With that language it seems evident that he does need a face nappy.
Ehud Gavron 2
No, he needs a face slappy.
No, he needs to get Covid. Serve him right.
patrick baker 0
thats okay- for we will not be seeing you on any flight ever. enjoy your bus ride. At least the scientifically ignorant are these days easiily identifiable..
This is what "The Land of the Free, and the Home of the Brave" has been reduced to? A 2-year old child getting thrown off a flight for not being forced to breathe through a piece of paper or fabric? God help us all ... There is no science in that. This is pure IDIOCY. The whole lockdown was pure idiocy! Never in history did anyone think to shut down an entire economy and destroy people's lives over a friggin virus. All throughout the 20th Century there were plagues and sicknesses that killed far more than covid ever did, or ever will, yet we forged on. We logically accepted that people will die, and people will live - that's how life has been for thousands of years. Now we have curfews, and can't go to church ... but it's ok to go to Home Depot or Walmart with 200 other shoppers ... or go out to eat where you wear your mask walking in, but take it off to eat as soon as you sit down. The logic in this is maddening! ZERO logic! And everyone got reeled into this horsecrap hook, line, and sinker.

Pray for our Nation this Christmas.
Cathy Vajtay -3
Airlines now the Gestapo. They know not the harm they do with the mask obsession. They pose significant health risk from restricting free flow of O2 necessary for life, and breathing one's own exhaust. The air on an airliner is cleaned through HEPA filters that capture organisms and particles down to 2 or 3 microns, and airflow is probably at least 500cf/m. Mandating that people don't breathe the clean air but their own exhaust through a jockstrap on their face, is criminal! Compromises the health of passengers. I know I'm not flying commercial until they get their sanity back.
Craig Good 0
That was a complete setup by that "mother". She and her husband should be banned from flying for life.
Ken Lane -7
This airline is run by idiots. The FA is a BLOOMING IDIOT with not a lick of common sense as is the male moron they're speaking with at the end of the video. I hope they don't have kids and never will have kids. They certainly have no experience dealing with a toddler. It is difficult to reason with any child under four. They just do not have the understanding for why some things must happen when a risk cannot be demonstrated to them. It's not same as their hand becoming warm near a stove.
The airlines' policy states a face cover for those "over the age of two". Really? The person who wrote that is also a dumbass whom I hope never has a child in their care.

I hope the family sues the hell out of United and makes them an example of absolute stupidity.

Never mind the masks DO NOT WORK! Airliners have the best circulation and cleanest air of any environment you'll ever be in. Air turnover is four to six times that of the average commercial building. It introduces roughly fifty percent new air in each cycle. At altitude, the air could not be cleaner unless they fly through volcanic ash; not likely given the certainty of damage to engines.
And, if you do have a mask on then suddenly cough or sneeze, it's blocked going forward. So, where does the pressure go? To the sides... right into the faces of those next to you.

Let's look at the Danish study on masks. The leftist media in the US has tried hard to discredit it. But, look at the numbers on what started with 6,024 people and finished with 4,862 still participating. 3,030 wore masks, 2,994 did not.

"Infection with SARS-CoV-2 occurred in 42 participants recommended masks (1.8%) and 53 control participants (2.1%). The between-group difference was −0.3 percentage point."

The only thing missing is how seriously the infection affected those small numbers or if any resulted in death. But, if we look at a study in the US where they're saying actual cases are somewhere between eight and twenty times the confirmed case count. So, that means somewhere between 120 million and 320 million have been infected with more than 99% asymptomatic.

The numbers do not lie. Masks are a joke. And, so is this piece of crap flight attendant and airline manager who "understands".

As for the risk from children to adults... nil. There have been only seventeen deaths under age four.

On other pages, there were a few less than insightful individuals who attacked Atlas for being nothing more than a radiologist. My response is, these are the doctors we trust to read images from inside our body and determine what issues we may have. They must have a quite thorough knowledge of the body that enables them to provide necessary information to other doctors and surgeons. Residency is four to six years after medical school. Atlas' specialty is that between our ears. Given that area controls so much of the rest of our body, I have more than sufficient faith in his knowledge of what makes us tick and what can affect us.

Now, let's look at the hypocrisy at UAL....

What's the first line stated?

"What's the risk of exposure to COVID-19 on an airplane?

"Almost non-existent."

UAL is an airline run by hypocritical idiots.
The main purpose of wearing a mask is to prevent the wearer from infecting those nearby. That said, the 0.3% difference, if scaled up to the US population would almost equal one million people.

Scott Atlas has been condemned by 78 members the Stanford Medical School for making "falsehoods and misrepresentations of science". He has been condemned by 85% of the Stanford University Faculty Senate. His degree is in neuroradiology, not epidemiology.
Mark Kanzler 4
An airplane is not the same as inside a building.
with the exchange rate of the cabin air, it may be safer than outdoors.
Ken Lane 0
You didn't read very well, did you? That "0.3%" was between two small groups that were roughly 0.013% of each entire group. So, no. That does not equate to a million people.

You need to look further. About the only high number is case counts. And, that's about all the media talks about for the sake of sensationalism.

As for Stanford, it's right up there with the New England idiots who want to stop putting gender on birth certificates. They are going with the usual BS put forth by the liberal hypocrisy.

All take a doctor who has actually dealt with patients and not been a bureaucrap since 1968.
It’s obvious you don’t understand what you copied and pasted. The group that had masks recommended to them had 0.3% fewer infections.

See additional commentary here:
Ken Lane 0
Yes. And, what percentage of all participants contracted the virus?

What we do not know is what percentage of those infected developed further issues or even death.

So, you posted another piece on the study. Is that it? Or, is there some aspect you are trying to communicate about it? Or, you want me to follow comments from others when you're putting all your effort into belittling my comments?

Make a point.
Ken Lane 0
All you crybabies just vote me down indicating you lack the ability to make a cogent argument against what I've shared.

wtwisniewski -2
Covid is deadly. It spreads best in confined spaces and long duration increases risk making air travel one of the most dangerous activities these days that used to be safe. I applaud airlines that are effectively minimizing the risk. Folks, hang on (isolate) for another year and we'll beat this beast.
ken young 2
Covid is 'deadly' in 0.07% of contracted cases.
Look genius, I have 4 nurses in my family with a combined experience of nearly 120 years on the job. They see the patients every day. And while there are therapeutics available that lessen the symptoms and expedite recovery, the fact is the virus is spreading rapidly. Many hospitals are running near capacity for intensive or critical care beds.
However, to use the phrase "The virus is deadly" is irresponsible and alarmist, Stop it
Ken Lane 2
So deadly, there's a 0.07% you'd die from it? And, that's across all ages. It drops to 0.0009% if you're under age 55.

You have a one percent chance of dying in an auto accident. That's per the NHTSA.


Don't have an account? Register now (free) for customized features, flight alerts, and more!
Did you know that FlightAware flight tracking is supported by advertising?
You can help us keep FlightAware free by allowing ads from We work hard to keep our advertising relevant and unobtrusive to create a great experience. It's quick and easy to whitelist ads on FlightAware or please consider our premium accounts.