Arguments from the law aren't valid, moron. It used be the law to segregate people in restaurants. That doesn't make the law legitimate. Airline policy is the same thing. If this was policy, then the policy itself is idiotic and needs changing.

Ok, follow this logic. Airline defers to doctor. Doctor defers to patient. Therefore, the patient makes the call.

Except that THEY DIDN'T FUCKING DEFER TO THE DOCTOR. You've just given an extra hoop to jump through for outwardly sick-looking people, while conveniently ignoring people who don't look sick. We did the same thing for mixed-race people for most of history.

“I know why the caged bird sings.” How hard is that.

Except that most people with medical conditions fly without a doctor's note, because their medical conditions are not outwardly visible. A flight crew is not a doctor. Their opinion as to whether someone is unhealthy is based on literally nothing beyond stereotypes of how a person should look. Which is ableism. And…

Paternalism is discrimination. The airline decided that someone who felt healthy enough to fly wasn't, based on chemo. She isn't appreciably any more likely to experience health problems than all of the passengers who look outwardly healthy but are actually sick. The airline employees are not doctors; they shouldn't…

Um, what else is the reasoning supposed to be based on, if not statistics? And if you're gonna bring up research, you're gonna need to bring research for your own claims.

Her doctor made her aware of her ability to fly. She was fine to fly if she felt like it. She felt like it. Any response beyond allowing her to fly is patronizing at best. If it's lawsuit that the airline is afraid of, they need to absolve themselves in their terms and conditions; "you agree to waive any…

They allow passengers "to enter a situation where they may not be able to access the emergency treatment they need" all the time. At no point is there a questionnaire about whether each person is healthy enough to fly. Anyone could die of a brain aneurysm at any point. But the airline has decided that because a…

Except that for most surgery, there's no outward indication. If a person looks healthy and just needs a wheelchair, the airline won't stop them from boarding.

Except that there's no indication that this woman has a higher than average chance of medical emergency AND there's nothing to be done about it anyway. It's a fight over the ocean. If anybody has a medical emergency midflight, they're gonna die, including people who outwardly look healthy. This woman was denied a…

That's not the point. The point is that her feelings of her health—which are literally unavailable to anyone else to feel—were ignored by the airline in this case, whereas other patients are simply assumed to be "healthy". Any declaration other than hers as to her feelings are opinion.

An airline employee saw me seated in the handicap section of the boarding area. She asked me if I needed anything. The first time. I said no. The second time, [I] said, well I might need a bit of extra time to board, sometimes I feel weak.

But that logic just as equally applies to the elderly or the disabled, both of whom may need some help getting on a plane. There's no non-arbitrary distinction to be made here about emergencies, because a cancer patient isn't any more likely to experience a plane-crashing emergency than other groups which board…

You're basing your whole argument on whether or not a person looks healthy. Because there's no way to tell if most passengers will experience health problems in midair, we'll only go for the people who look like they'll cause problems? She's a chemo patient, sure. She's also wearing a mask to cut down on catching…

This argument doesn't really make any sense though. There's no place to stop if somebody has a heart attack, either. Does everybody who has cardiac problems also need a doctor's note to fly?

But there's no guarantee that any airplane passenger is truthful about their health. So the airline has decided that a cancer victim's assertions are worth less than every other person's, and that's pretty discriminatory.

Except that her doctor told her that her feelings of health are sufficient to assess her ability to fly. And if it's irrelevant to you, why are you responding?

Do you have the ability to assess your current condition? If not, maybe we should require a doctor's note from you before you fly.

Sure...except that every other airplane passenger decides whether or not they're healthy to fly without any doctor's ok. The airline singled out a woman and denied her access to travel based on...something vague and unexplained. This isn't any different from telling a passenger in a wheelchair that they weren't…