Family Kicked Off Flight Due to Peanut Allergy

Peanut Allergy
image: wikimedia commons

A family is claiming that they were kicked off of an Allegiant Air flight because their son has a peanut allergy!

The family was flying from Provo, Utah back home to Oakland, California with their two year-old son.

Kyson Dana says that his wife Sara alerted a flight attendant about their son’s peanut allergy and asked if they could not serve peanuts in the area.

The Dana’s say that the flight attendant suggested that they don’t fly. On the way to their seats, another flight attendant asked passengers seated near them to not eat peanuts and all seemed to agree.

This is where the story really gets weird.

According to FOX, “the flight team told the family that they consulted with a “medical professional” and decided it wasn’t safe for them to fly“.

The family then got off of the plane and missed their flight home!

In the end, the Dana family made it home on time thanks to a Provo Airport worker who helped them get a flight on a different airline from (a different airport) Salt Lake City International Airport. Best of all it was at no cost! The worker was even kind enough to drive them to the airport.

After a complaint, Allegiant apologized to the family for “for the inconveniences this incident has caused“. They also regretted that the Dana’s were “denied boarding due to any misunderstanding regarding the severity of your child’s peanut allergy“.

There was no mention of the family being offered any sort of compensation or refund for the flight they missed.

Do you think people should be denied from flying due to allergies? If you ask me, it does seem that the flight crew went a bit far in asking the family to leave the plane.

Find out more from FOX News here.

5 thoughts on “Family Kicked Off Flight Due to Peanut Allergy

  1. Interesting points of view…

    Interestingly enough, had this happened in Canada, there would have been a very different outcome, as many provinces have legislation that declares severe allergies as disabilities that must be accommodated if at all possible. If this had been a flight out of Toronto, for example, the airline would have had no legal choice but to accommodate the allergy and not serve peanuts. However, this wouldn’t prevent individuals around them from consuming peanuts, and they might have still been advised not to fly.

    I would like to think that anyone with a medical issue, whether disease, condition, allergy, injury, or otherwise should be allowed by others around them to live a normal, unobstructed life, provided that they are not causing danger to others around them. Since there is no inherent danger to the other passengers on the plane by not eating peanuts, such a request to not consume peanuts doesn’t seem unreasonable to me. It’s a common courtesy thing, which I think some people forget about when they fly.

  2. If the airline feels that they are not able to adequately protect they’re right to deny boarding. Perhaps peanuts were served on the incoming leg and they couldn’t guarantee it was decontaminated enough. I’m not saying that was the correct response here since there are many factors to be weighed but it’s always possible that it’s the best option. (I disagree with the exceptionally rude and ignorant comment about others not being “inconvenienced” due to someone’s life threatening allergy. Everyone should know by now peanuts may be restricted on any given flight due to the nature of the enclosed space.)

  3. Seems like they raised the issue with the flight attendants, who probably being wary of litigation, consulted a doctor who must have said that its better that the kid doesnt fly. Could the family have spoken out about this earlier. Yes! Was the airline wrong? Thats where things get tricky.
    My personal view is that if you are so allergic to peanuts that being around them will cause you to die, then
    1. Dont travel by plane
    2. Wear a hazmat suit with a HEPA filtered oxygen supply

  4. Nope – Alliegiant was correct to boot them. Not proper to ask others to be inconvenienced because of other’s medical issues. If little junior is so allergic that even being “near” peanuts is a potential health hazard, then have them buy enough seats to keep sufficient clearance. Or put a mask on him.

    But it all seems a load of hysterical malarkey. 100 to 1 there were peanuts in the seat cushions and not serving people would have made no difference…

  5. It’s not entirely mystifying. The airline surely didn’t want any liability, as the inside of the plane was covered in peanuts, and the other passengers likely didn’t mean anything evil, but just thought about the safest way. I do also empathize with peanut allergy families and the difficulty flying in airplanes when peanuts are the default snack. Surely the family could have done more beforehand to settle things before an expensive flight was at risk. A phone call beforehand would have done wonders, or a conversation with the gate agent.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *