United Airlines bans passenger's emotional support peacock from flight

[Travis B]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42880690

A female traveller was recently banned from taking a large "emotional-support peacock" on board a United Airlines flight, it has emerged.

She had offered to buy the bird its own plane ticket, according to travel blog Live and Let Fly.

Nonetheless the airline refused to let the bird board at Newark airport in New Jersey, saying it did not meet guidelines due to its weight and size.

United says this was explained to the traveller before she arrived at Newark.

Pictures of the striking bird and its owner emerged via The Jet Set, a travel-based talk show.

The images show the animal perched on an airport baggage trolley, as fellow passengers gaze at it in shock.

The peacock is reportedly called Dexter, a rescue pet of Brooklyn-based artist Ventiko who documents the animal's life on social media.

Airlines have allowed some passengers with emotional or psychiatric problems to take therapy animals with them on board.

But the number of emotional support animals has been rising in recent years, sparking suggestions that people are abusing the system.

In 2014, a woman was escorted off a US Airways flight when her pig, named Hobie, defecated and squealed before the plane took off.

Had it made it onto the plane, the peacock would have joined a flock of jet-set birds.

Traveller Jodie Smalley, from Seattle, made headlines after taking her turkey on a pre-Christmas flight home in 2015. Cynics were surprised to hear that the bird made the return trip back in one piece - and wearing a special bird nappy.

A year ago, a photo of 80 birds of prey was captured on board an airliner in the Middle East, promptly going viral online. The falcons were being flown from an unknown destination to Jeddah in Saudi Arabia, for what was believed to be a hunting trip.

Thoughts? Should the peacock have been allowed on the plane?

[chazus]

The question is, is it actually a licensed health animal? If yes.... I guess? They'd need more things to handle than just an extra ticket though.

If it's not? Hell no. And it sounds like it's not. It sounds like it's just a social media stunt. Not enough info to really determine one way or another.

[Nfinitii]

A peacock... this has to be made up. How the fuck is it there for emotional support... a... peacock... wtf

[Laerrus]

Good call by Untited. Peacocks are well known to have an aggressive streak in them and they do attack people.

[ro9ue]

Lol. Yeah. United Airlines did the right thing.

[sopeonaroap]

The question is, is it actually a licensed health animal? If yes.... I guess? They'd need more things to handle than just an extra ticket though.

If it's not? Hell no. And it sounds like it's not. It sounds like it's just a social media stunt. Not enough info to really determine one way or another.

don't even think it's legal to ask that question and there is no official system in place which is why it's often abused

[dvaz]

What the fuck is an "emotional support" animal?

[The One Percent]

What the fuck is an "emotional support" animal?

Bullshit label people use to get their dumb fucking animals in places they shouldn't be.

[Jinpachi]

ESA's aren't legitimate service animals in the eyes of the law. Fuck her and that bird

[Better]

The question is, is it actually a licensed health animal? If yes.... I guess? They'd need more things to handle than just an extra ticket though.

If it's not? Hell no. And it sounds like it's not. It sounds like it's just a social media stunt. Not enough info to really determine one way or another.

Emotional Support animals aren't licensed, or registered. Nor do they perform any task that is vital to the health of the owner. It's function is literally to just exist and be cute to support the owner emotionally.

[Helgrimm]

Good on United. I'm sorry, but if you can't reasonably function in society like everyone else there's going to be some limitations. Bringing a peacock around is absurd.

[Mormolyce]

Emotional Support Peacock is a pretty good name for a band.

[Endus]

I'm open to emotional support animals, under the assumption that it's been officially recommended by a psychiatrist and thus carries an official designation. Doesn't necessarily require training, but I could see, for instance, someone with severe anxiety that's calmed by cuddling their cat having such a designation, if that's more effective for them than medication.

In the absence of such an official diagnosis and recommendation, it's an animal you get emotional support from. The other word for that is "pet". It doesn't qualify for any form of special treatment you wouldn't extend to any other pet (I'm generally in support of letting them fly, if they're not disruptive or destructive).

[Post]

What a weird time to live in, people are so coddled that they actually think they need "emotional support animals."

[Elim Garak]

Sedate the problematic person during the flight. Leave the animal at point of origin. Buy new animal at destination.

[Mormolyce]

What a weird time to live in, people are so coddled that they actually think they need "emotional support animals."

I believe the concept goes back to at least Victorian times.

But don't let facts get in the way of your dumb "kids these days" narrative.

[Deleted]

How would a peacock even sit in an airplane seat?

[Deleted]

Has anyone noticed how "victim blaming" is frowned upon when talking about people who are victims of their own stupidity and lack of personal responsibility, but apparently it's par for the course to blame the victims of corporations every single time.

[Endus]

Has anyone noticed how "victim blaming" is frowned upon when talking about people who are victims of their own stupidity and lack of personal responsibility, but apparently it's par for the course to blame the victims of corporations every single time.

Are you talking about this particular case, or is this just a weird attempt to derail?

Because in this case, a woman tried to bring a peacock on a flight, and the airline decided she couldn't, as it exceeded animal size restrictions. There is no "victim", here.

[Post]

I believe the concept goes back to at least Victorian times.

But don't let facts get in the way of your dumb "kids these days" narrative.

When they were called pets right?