Is airport screening damaging children?

[kenny]

I've heard people are upset that airport TSA screeners are giving pat downs to children.
Here is a video of one.
IMHO, it is absurd that they titled it groping.

Do you think this particular child was harmed by what we see on this video?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ba030UmbkCo&feature=player_embedded

 

[Circe]

I'm a little pissed off about security theater in general: it does very little to promote public safety, and it does a lot to damage people's general quality of life, between the pervasive fear it fosters and the as-yet-unresearched effects of backscatter machines on frequent fliers, the pregnant, etc.

I'm more worried about the survivors of sexual abuse going through this sort of thing, as it can be very triggering and invasive, than about your average, run-of-the-mill child ... but given that those two categories can overlap, yeah, I find it creepy and unnecessary.

 

[dragonfly411]

I think there are parts of that particular check that were unnecessary, such as the feeling around her shirt collar/front of the shirt. It's not like that's a frumpy shirt that you could miss something hidden.

That being said, I do think it's ridiculous to call it groping. I also think no damage was done. If I were a kid, I'd think it's pretty cool to learn about how security works, and the workers and parents could turn it into an educational experience for the child.

 

[VapidLapid]

I think bombs going off on airplanes and planes being hijacked and used as missiles is more damaging to quality of life than pat-downs at airports. Every generation has to learn the dangers and precautions fitting to it's time. This is what we have now so here we are. Children are resilient and smart.

 

[chemgirl]

Until they cavity search every person getting on to that plane (including the pilot and airport staff!), search every bag, and test every substance, terrorists will be able to find a way to do what they do. IMHO, screening methods are so widely understood they have become useless. They impede peaceful travelers, not terrorists.

I don't think that the little girl was groped, but I do feel that she may have been traumatized. I know I get stressed out when going through security and I understand what's happening. A child doesn't understand what the TSA agent is doing. She's been singled out and pulled aside and that can be scary!

 

[stone-cold11]

Actually cavity search is still not enough. Words are out there that implants might be coming into play.

 

[lbbaber]

I think bombs going off on airplanes and planes being hijacked and used as missiles is more damaging to quality of life than pat-downs at airports. Every generation has to learn the dangers and precautions fitting to it's time. This is what we have now so here we are. Children are resilient and smart.

+1

My 6yr old has been through it when we traveled. I explained exactly what was going to happen and he thought of it as an 'adventure'. He actually thought the security people were "cool" and felt safe knowing that they were "protecting him". I tried to avoid details about disasters that have happened. I didn't want his young mind to worry about the bigger picture right now.

The last few times I have traveled there were guards (military I think?) walking around the airport with rather large guns. I had to explain it ahead of time because I did not want him to panic when he saw them.

I would rather explain it and be "safer"--I dont believe we are ever "safe"--then give up on security screening all together.

 

[rosetta]

You get a dose of radiation every time you fly. The screening machines don't make a whole lot of difference.

Body searching probably doesn't make us safer and please god dont let them start cavity searching everyone!

 

[Karl_K]

the screener should be charged with child molestation and thrown in jail for 20 years along with her bosses all the way up to the president.

 

[Karl_K]

That little girl was just taught it is ok for someone in uniform to touch her in inappropriate places:
Post office hires sex offenders:
http://www.insideedition.com/news/4399/inside-edition-investigates-postal-sex-offenders.aspx
cop molests kids:
http://maddad0467.new.newsvine.com/_news/2011/03/15/6272995-child-molester-ex-cop-tells-judge-he-molested-over-200-girls
another cop:
http://oa.mo.gov/ahc/case/Kranefuss07-0872PO.NTC.doc

and!:
A TSA agent has been arrested and charged with lewd and lascivious molestation of a minor.
http://www.myfoxorlando.com/dpp/news/orange_news/013110_TSA_agent_arrested_for_molestation-

 

[kittybean]

Until they cavity search every person getting on to that plane (including the pilot and airport staff!), search every bag, and test every substance, terrorists will be able to find a way to do what they do. IMHO, screening methods are so widely understood they have become useless. They impede peaceful travelers, not terrorists.

Exactly. With terrorists, when there's a will, there's a way. Every "security measure" implemented has been a reaction to an act of terrorism or attempted terrorism that has already happened. If you're busy being reactive, it is difficult to be proactive and actually prevent an attack.

Guess what happens when everyone is terrified at the airport, and the privacy of United States citizens and other peaceful people is consistently invaded because of this fear? The terrorists win. They've inspired fear. They've terrorized our nation . . . which is precisely what they set out to do.

 

[LGK]

Well, speaking as someone who beeps for no reason and has since I started flying at 17 (alien implant? who knows) I have gotten a pretty serious pat down every time I fly. And because my bra always beeps when they wand me (it's way more sensitive than the gates, so just the strap grommet things trigger the wand) I always get my boobs grabbed as a matter of course. I actually think I found it even more hilarious at 17 than I do at 34. I can imagine as a preteen I probably would have freaked though. As a young kid I probably would have found it embarrassing and uncomfortable but probably not, you know, *damaging* really.

(And can I just say I absolutely detest those body scanner things? I'm hardly the most modest person ever, but the mere idea of those sets my teeth on edge and so I always ask for the pat down that I am guaranteed to get *anyway* .)

I did once have the wand dude- back when it wasn't always female security folks required to frisk me- flipped my skirt up on purpose in front of the entire airport, which made me furious- he stuck the wand under the hem of my skirt and just pulled it up, sloowwwwly, high enough to show off my thong to all and sundry. Ew. I can tell you, as an adult and not a kid, I felt pretty squicked, but as it wasn't like the worst thing ever to happen to me I pretty much just laughed it off.

I can imagine that for most children it might be annoying, scary, and/or embarrassing, but probably would lead to no lasting *damage*, but as Circe said, sexually abused kids might have a very hard time with the process. Personally I think the whole body scanner/frisking process is worse than useless, anyway.

 

[Todd Gray]

Yea, so I was thinking of designing something like this in the form of boxer briefs for the next time I have to fly

 

[Lauren8211]

the screener should be charged with child molestation and thrown in jail for 20 years along with her bosses all the way up to the president.

This is really upsetting to me. It truly belittles what it means to be sexually abused as a child. That little girl was NOT molested. Maybe we're slightly uncomfortable with the idea of frisking a 6 year old, but it hardly constitutes sexual abuse.

 

[Pandora II]

Can't see anything inappropriate there.

The parents should have explained exactly what was going to happen to the child and reassure her. She hasn't been taught that it's okay for someone in uniform to touch her inappropriately - she has been taught that there are times, with mummy or daddy there, that it is okay for another adult to touch you such as a doctor, or a nurse, or airport security. If the parents are kicking off, that is far more likely to traumatise the child as they really pick up on that.

Airport security is a PITA, but it is what it is and if something was to happen and there was no security searches people would be up in arms about that.

Regarding radiation - the dose you get on a long distance flight is far more than you will get from back-scatter from x-ray machines.

 

[junebug17]

I really don't feel the little girl was harmed by this. I didn't see anything inappropriate

Honestly, I've raised two kids and have been amazed on several occasions by how sensible and smart they are...more than some adults I know. As long as a parent remains calm and explains the situation to a child, said child should really be ok. In my experience children get upset when they see their parents getting worked up.

Very good point about the doctor/nurse Pandora. I think, as long as it's explained to them, children are capable of understanding the reasoning behind things like this.

Look, I'm not thrilled we've reached the point where children are patted down in airports. Yes, it's depressing...but these are the times we live in right now. I think children are capable of adapting to situations like this (as long as a parent takes the time to reassure and explain). People don't give kids enough credit.

 

[iugurl]

Until they cavity search every person getting on to that plane (including the pilot and airport staff!), search every bag, and test every substance, terrorists will be able to find a way to do what they do. IMHO, screening methods are so widely understood they have become useless. They impede peaceful travelers, not terrorists.

I do think that perhaps they are so widely understood that terrorists *may* be able to get around it. But completely useless? If that was the case, then why has the U.S. (and other countries) caught terrorists at the airport before their plan has been carried out? If they are so useless, then why aren't there more terrorist attacks in the U.S. on planes? Do you really think it is because no one has tried, otherwise they easily COULD have, since the screening methods are so useless?

May I ask what the solution is to this problem? Have no screening? Do you think that will help?

No, I don't think there was anything inappropriate about the search. I think that parents sometimes freak out about their kids, and say she/he is just a kid, obviously there is nothing on her/him. They forget that bad people can have kids too. If a terrorist or even a drug smuggler had a kid, wouldn't the child be a perfect place to hide things? No one thinks that an innocent little kid could have anything bad on them. Well, I guess TSA no longer thinks that way, which is obviously why they are now searching children so thoroughly.

 

[zoebartlett]

I don't think the TSA agent acted inappropriately. I agree with what Elle said.

 

[packrat]

If they took a child alone into a room w/no parents present and locked the door, there would be issue. If the parents are standing right there and are talking to the child, explaining what is going on, I don't see the big deal.

My thoughts..it's not a big deal to me (well, first cuz I've flown like, 3 times my entire life haha) to be checked when I fly. I don't care if a machine shows me naked. (which, does it really, or is it just like an Xray picture?) I've been on exam tables w/my feet up in the air, I just don't care. I'm not hot anymore the way I used to be. There's no 6 pack and rock hard butt anymore, so if someone thinks they're getting a good oogle, likes the weird squishy hangy stretchmarkey stomach and jiggly thighs, whatever trips yer trigger.

If I were a "bad guy", a terrorist etc, I wouldn't probably be skulking around behind pillars and ducking behind things acting all furtive and stealthy. I'd be Joe Normal. If I were a bad guy, I probably would recruit women, eh? Maybe brainwash a pregnant lady or a 90 year old woman to convince them to die for whatever awesome reasoning I had. Bad guys don't come w/big flashing neon signs on them..I think to catch a sick demented freak you need to think like a sick demented freak and that's what I'd do-find the least likely person and my job is done. Mom told me they used to rig little kids up w/bombs in Vietnam and tell them to "go hug the nice soldier" and the soldier would see a child running towards them, lean down to pick them up and then that's all. I asked mom why someone would do such a thing and she said "would YOU expect a child to have bombs on them?" nope, can't say as I would. JD spent 4 hours doing training over the weekend, and watched footage of kids being taught to kill and die for terrorist purposes. The things he saw made my skin crawl.

*I* know I'm not a terrorist. Does the general public at the airport know that? Nope. Maybe the short little blonde all wide eyed in the big airport yapping about how excited she is b/c she's never really been anywhere outside of the Midwest is really just a silly farm girl, and maybe she's got other things going on, but nobody would know b/c they're too busy scoping out the guy behind her who looks a little too "obvious". Which probably would be my husband..I've always been waved on thru, silly farm girl that I am cheesing out and talking to people, while he's naturally suspicious and is assessing everyone.

 

[GingerP]

I saw the footage yesterday and had mixed feelings, and to an extent still do, but my general thought is that the outrage is a bit extreme.

This is the times we live in and security is heightened. Terrorists are willing to sacrifice themselves and attack all kinds of innocent civilians. They pick pointed targets inclusive of a random population. Do you truly think they would not use a child to push their agenda? I wouldn't be surprised if they did, and as such all travelers must be screened. People would be up in arms if a large act of terrorism slipped through the cracks after what happened 10 years ago. The questions would then be, "Why didn't they do anything? How did they let this happen again?"

Yes, it could be traumatizing, but the benefits outweigh the risks. I also think the "traumatizing" effects could be prevented or lessened by common sense or a proactive approach to travel. If you are a responsible adult who knows what to expect and is traveling with a child, why would you not educate and inform your child about the processes and procedures beforehand? If you are not aware and did not do your research, then you are still ultimately culpable and passed your ignorance off to your child, who then suffers. Otherwise, you are an educated traveler and you choose to allow your child to fly, which means you choose to allow your child to experience airport security in exchange for the luxury of flying (and yes, it is a luxury). If you are so enraged by the policies, why would you allow your child to fly knowing that no one is exempt? Flying has all sorts of inherent risks, and airport security is part of that.

There will always be scenarios you cannot account for in any number of situations. In this case, a child could have been sexually abused and the experience could be traumatizing. That's a sad fact, but it is largely improbable and ridiculously hard (or impossible) to predict.

I'm not a parent, but I can imagine not being happy watching security frisk my child (hence the mixed feelings). Considering that, I think I would choose other means (train, car) of travel (and thus locations) until I believe my child is emotionally capable of understanding the process, or I would forego it completely until that time.

*Disclaimer: "You" is not targeted at anyone specific.

 

[luv2sparkle]

I think the parents point was that we tell our children that no one, especially strangers are allowed to touch you without your permission.
Then they go on a trip and suddenly it is ok for this man to touch her all over her body WITHOUT her permission. It is a bit of
a double message. I don't think it is necessary to pat down a six year old. Do we really think there are a lot of parents in America
who would smuggle a bomb on their small child's body. If we do we have bigger problems than pat downs.

I understand safety and want to be safe flying. I am not sure that the means were are going about to get it is really going to make
us safer or solve the problem. We are a country with some incredibly intelligent people. Surely, we can come up with a better
solution than this.

 

[MonkeyPie]

It's more than a bit excessive - I mean really, running a finger under her collar and the waist of her jeans? She was wearing pretty fitted clothing, the extra digging wasn't necessary at all. But molestation? Not even close. Not to mention, she looks sort of amused by the whole thing, not traumatized.

Some people just enjoy creating drama because they felt they were impeded.

 

[packrat]

I think there's a difference between being touched w/out permission by a stranger behind a building and being frisked in an airport w/your parents standing right there. My kids have been touched WAAAAY more intimately by Dr's and I've had to explain to them the difference, why it's ok when mommy or daddy is standing right there and that there is a reason behind it. My daughter had a male Dr once for something in a veeeery "don't ever let anyone touch you there" problem and that was hard to explain. Different circumstances, you know?

 

[iugurl]

Do we really think there are a lot of parents in America
who would smuggle a bomb on their small child's body. If we do we have bigger problems than pat downs.

Unfortunately, I do! Not a lot, like a majority, but I would think at least a hundred or so. That is very minor in terms of percentage, but it is enough to be worried about . People who are willing to kill themselves and a few hundred innocent adults AND children aren't thinking right. Why wouldn't they use a kid, theirs or someone else's? That isn't any more unbelievable than the horrors we hear on the news that people do to each other - murder, rape, kidnapping, torture etc. People do horrible, horrible things to kids and adults alike, everyday.

 

[monarch64]

I will likely get flamed for this (my opinion) but here goes:

I fit people for backpacks. I ask before touching them, but I have to touch them in the hipbones, the spine, and sometimes other parts.

I have measured inseams in the past for tailoring purposes. I am an adult female who has measured male minors for fit purposes.

I've done bra sizing. No further comments on my part on that subject.

At different times in my career, I sell shoes. I sometimes have to touch feet. Some people are uncomfortable about having their feet touched, but in the end it is necessary to obtain proper measurements/fit.

To me, flying is a service you purchase. If you aren't willing to go along with the terms of the service provided (much like getting fitted or having alterations done) then don't make the purchase.

 

[ksinger]

As far as I can tell, random screening has caught no one that could properly be called a "terrorist", although it can boast that it has caught a bunch of people with nail files. The likely reason that some terrorists have been caught at airports would be because certain people are on watchlists or (gasp!) we are profiling, which from a purely statisical standpoint would likely be more effective at actually catching more bad people. I've not heard of even the rumor of a single case that was caught in a random search. (If anyone knows of one, please post.) We spend oodles of money on intel, yet we're randomly patting down every 4th granny with an oxygen tank? Effective NOT.

And I'm with some other posters in that if we're really so worried now that the danger of flying includes people with some sort of explosive implant that would require cavity search or vivisection to find, then maybe we should just all stop flying. Besides, other than the oogy mental factor, I fail to see how air travel warrants so much more attention than any other form of mass transit. More spectacular I guess.

 

[chemgirl]

Until they cavity search every person getting on to that plane (including the pilot and airport staff!), search every bag, and test every substance, terrorists will be able to find a way to do what they do. IMHO, screening methods are so widely understood they have become useless. They impede peaceful travelers, not terrorists.

I do think that perhaps they are so widely understood that terrorists *may* be able to get around it. But completely useless? If that was the case, then why has the U.S. (and other countries) caught terrorists at the airport before their plan has been carried out? If they are so useless, then why aren't there more terrorist attacks in the U.S. on planes? Do you really think it is because no one has tried, otherwise they easily COULD have, since the screening methods are so useless?

May I ask what the solution is to this problem? Have no screening? Do you think that will help?

No, I don't think there was anything inappropriate about the search. I think that parents sometimes freak out about their kids, and say she/he is just a kid, obviously there is nothing on her/him. They forget that bad people can have kids too. If a terrorist or even a drug smuggler had a kid, wouldn't the child be a perfect place to hide things? No one thinks that an innocent little kid could have anything bad on them. Well, I guess TSA no longer thinks that way, which is obviously why they are now searching children so thoroughly.

A bit off topic, but I actually do think security is a song and dance routine set up to make the American people feel that their government is doing something about terrorism. I sincerely believe that any terrorists who mean business will be capable of circumventing security. The body scanners don't penetrate the skin, so anything hidden under the skin can get by security. Also, I haven't been asked to turn on my laptop at security in over 5 years. There are just too many of them out there to properly check them all. A laptop would make a convenient explosive. Since airlines have started charging for checked bags, more people have been bringing all of their luggage in the cabin and more items are getting through security. The last time I flew I had a large bag of spices, laundry detergent, a tube of toothpaste, several types of nailpolish, and a small container of nailpolish remover. I was expecting grief over the spices, laundry detergent, and nailpolish remover since acetone and 2 large bags of powder really SHOULD get TSA's attention. They didn't even notice. My point is that security is sorely lacking where it is needed.

I have a problem with body scanners and pat downs when there are so many other holes in security. There should be routine chemical tests. People should not be allowed to bring laptops and large bags on to the airplane. All checked baggage should be searched and baggage handlers should be checked on their way in to work. There used to be drug dogs all over the airports, why not use bomb sniffing dogs? Some countries (I'm thinking Isreal) use behavioral specialists to watch people from the time they park their car. I'm sure there would still be holes in the system for terrorists to get through, but as it stands, its far too easy to get something through. Why submit peaceful travelers to pat downs when they don't even open carry-on bags?

 

[Pandora II]

We only hear about the failures... when a plane, or a car or whatever blows up. We obviously never hear about the near misses or the plots that are foiled by intelligence. Not everything makes the papers.

Maybe we are more used to this in the UK after the decades of bombs from the IRA. I spent several years living in Belfast at the height of the bombings and I can't remember how many times I was searched, but it's in the dozens.

For some reason I also fit some dodgy demographic and it's a standing joke amongst family and colleagues that they will meet me later in the departure lounge as I am invariably taken aside at security. Very tedious but it is what it is.

Anyone who thinks that people might not use young kids for things... people smuggle wraps of heroin into prisons by putting them in their baby's rectum - if one burst, it would kill the child. If people who aren't terrorists or 'major' criminals are prepared to do that... well, who knows.

 

[Tacori E-ring]

This reminds me when we were traveling once. My daughter was 7 months old. DH carried her throw the scanner and forgot to take off his belt so be beeped. A male TSA patted him down and they brought in a female TSA to pat down my baby daughter! I actually thought it was funny b/c she was so little. It was NOT as detailed as the one in the video at all. The Agent couldn't even keep a straight face.

I don't think the video was inappropriate but did seem quite detailed. I like how the TSA verbally said what she was doing while she was doing it and had the mom witness it.

 

[princesss]

the screener should be charged with child molestation and thrown in jail for 20 years along with her bosses all the way up to the president.

This is really upsetting to me. It truly belittles what it means to be sexually abused as a child. That little girl was NOT molested. Maybe we're slightly uncomfortable with the idea of frisking a 6 year old, but it hardly constitutes sexual abuse.

Completely agreed.