# Flying with kids - new TSA screening stuff



## puddle (Aug 30, 2007)

We pretty much never fly because DH hates it anyway, but my sister is getting married across the country next summer and I really wanted to go. By that time, I'll have a new baby and a 4-year-old. I'm really terrified of flying with my kids now with the new screening procedures TSA is doing. Has anyone flown recently? If my child is selected for the new body scanner screening, I'm not comfortable with DD being exposed to any level of unnecessary radiation. But from what I hear about the new "pat-down" procedures, I certainly couldn't subject her to that. How am I supposed to explain to a 4-year-old why it's okay for someone else to touch her genitals? So--is the screening really as bad as I'm hearing? Has anyone been through it? Would you fly? I'm leaning towards missing the wedding at this point. There's no way DH could get enough time off work for us to drive there, and the car trip would be a nightmare.


----------



## LynnS6 (Mar 30, 2005)

We've flown a lot with our kids and were selected for additional screening once or twice. I found it to be no big deal. If the radiation scares you (I don't know how much additional radiation it is), then I think the full body pat-down is OK. Remember that the TSA people are PEOPLE. They're not going to undress your children and give them a medical exam peering into orifices, they're going to pat over their clothes. My kids have had that done and it was untraumatic. The rule in our house is that it's OK if mom and dad are there to make sure you're safe.


----------



## leighi123 (Nov 14, 2007)

We fly all the time, and every airport I've been to has had multiple 'scanner' lines. If you dont want to do the full body one, get in the line for the regular metal detector type one.

Also, the 'pat down' is just a quick thing, they dont grab crotches or anything weird.


----------



## PoppyMama (Jul 1, 2004)

There are some ongoing changes and it seems the new patdowns do involve grabbing crotches as well as breasts. Apparently they are going to stop subjecting children 12 and under to the patdowns that involve touching genitalia but I would never allow anyone to touch my 13 year old in that way either so I guess we will not be flying anywhere in the near future.


----------



## leighi123 (Nov 14, 2007)

3 airports where we had pat downs 2 days ago, Not one 'weird touch'.

And again, airport still have the option of going through a metal detector, no one touches you or sees anything. It is not a big deal like everyone is making it out to be.

My dad flies around the world (literally) every other month, and so far has never HAD to go through the body scan.


----------



## St. Margaret (May 19, 2006)

But you can't always choose the metal detector. They'll tell you to go to the scanner and then you have to decide between that and the pat-down, and the nature of the pat-down is just going to depend on the worker. I think you just have to prepare ahead, find out what the proper procedure is (like they're supposed to tell you as they do it what they're doing) and prep your kids that way. Pretty awful but knowing what might happen is helpful, as long as you have to go through it...


----------



## PoppyMama (Jul 1, 2004)

You can attempt to choose the line you want but they are pulling people from the "old" line to walk through the body scanners. My dh flew late last month and was pulled from the metal detector line to go through the body scanner. He declined the body scanner and was given the enhanced patdown. I think he was more amused than bothered by some guy feeling around his testicles but I would be horrified by the new patdown and completely unwilling to allow my children to go through it. I was embarrassed enough by the old patdown. If you and your father have avoided any issues so far I'm glad but that does not mean that this is not a problem.


----------



## Tigerchild (Dec 2, 2001)

The new patdown is hands up, not the back of the hand.

I'm actually more comfortable with the radiation exposure for my kids than subjecting them to genital and breast touching (my 8 year old is developing). But we don't fly very often. If we did, it might be a different story.

Yes, the screeners will (we can only hope) be 100 percent professional. But as someone who has performed many patdowns of children and young people (back of the hand ones at that) as a corrections officer as part of visitation day, don't believe the bullpuckey that it isn't disturbing and invasive. It most certainly is. If you have have the right person, you can minimize it--but a patdown even sans crotch and breast manipulation is often stressful esp. in unusual and stressful circumstances (airline travel, the very busy unfamiliar airport).

I personally don't have a problem with a professional feeling my crotch. I think hospital birth cured me of that particular sensitivity, plus having had to do similar (if not so explicit) actions where it wasn't personal doesn't make me feel like it's all about me.

However. Human nature being what it is, I DO worry about women (esp. young women) being exploited by the patdown. All it takes is one bad apple, and of course there are bad people in the TSA just like there are bad cops, bad doctors, bad corrections officers, bad teachers out there and it can do a lot of damage. I'm guessing that most people will choose the scanner.

I think it's a total waste of money though. If security is a concern, then you need to do it to everyone, especially classes of people who won't be subjected to it, like children. As a corrections officer I had to do regular diaper checks, because that is where the drugs/contraband/weapons came in, as well as people taping stuff under their breasts, ect. Maybe with this level of ridiculousness people will finally realize that this kind of "safety" is just $$ for contractors, and will not tolerate it and start demanding that real security is invested in.

I'm not holding my breath though.


----------



## Ninetales (Jan 25, 2009)

My problem with the scanner isn't just the radiation, it's the fact that it's essentially a nude picture that someone is seeing of me or my kid. That bothers me. And the fact that the TSA has changed their story about whether or not the pictures are destroyed doesn't make me feel better. I've only flown a few times in my life and hopefully can avoid it as much as possible for the rest of it. Unless of course something changes and they stop this ridiculous security theater.


----------



## puddle (Aug 30, 2007)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PoppyMama*
> 
> There are some ongoing changes and it seems the new patdowns do involve grabbing crotches as well as breasts. Apparently they are going to stop subjecting children 12 and under to the patdowns that involve touching genitalia but I would never allow anyone to touch my 13 year old in that way either so I guess we will not be flying anywhere in the near future.


Do you have any specifics about when they're going to stop doing this to kids? 12 seems pretty arbitrary, but at least for the moment it might protect my kids a little. Must research...


----------



## Evan&Anna's_Mom (Jun 12, 2003)

I guess I see this as roughly the same as medical x-rays. We don't fly (or do x-rays) often enough for me to be worried about the radiation. The photos aren't "interesting" enough to be used for illegal purposes -- they look more like x-rays than nude photos. So I would be comfortable with either me or my children doing the full body scan. I would be less comfortable with the full pat-down as that is harder to control and will depend on the professionalism of the screener, and you can't judge that before your are in the middle of the situation. The one thing that I would be sure to remember and insist on is that anyone being searched or scanned has the right to be accompanied by a companion, so no one has the right to take your child away from you to do any sort of security process. You probably can't get into the machine together, but you can be right there and THAT I would insist on.


----------



## greeny (Apr 27, 2007)

Quote:


> Apparently they are going to stop subjecting children 12 and under to the patdowns that involve touching genitalia


 Does anyone have a link with more information on this? I searched the TSA website and couldn't find any details. We're flying after Christmas, and I want to be informed and prepared.


----------



## Owen'nZoe (Sep 7, 2005)

I recently flew internationally, and went through 3 of the 'enhanced' patdowns (the airports I was at did not have the body scanners, and we were given no other option if we wanted to get on the plane.

It is mercifully quick, but I did find it invasive and stressful. They definitely did grope the breast and crotch area in all 3 cases. I do not know whether my children were given a pat-down, as men and women were separated into different lines, so they were sent to the other line with their father. Given the choice between the scanner and the pat down, I'm honestly not sure what I'd choose. I tend to agree that the only thing these scans will probably achieve is making the companies that produce the scanning devices rich.


----------



## PoppyMama (Jul 1, 2004)

Pistole said they were going to start exempting children 12 and under on the today show. I don't have a link to the clip but here is a link to an article referencing where he said it. http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20101115/us_nm/us_usa_security_screening_1


----------



## mommariffic (Mar 18, 2009)

I have mixed feelings about this

My first concern is safety, and if it's going to take a body scan/pat down to ensure I'm going to be flying safe fine. I've gotten pat downs before -- music concerts, club venues etc. Not one time did I feel like I was getting fondled or anything. I really don't think they are grabbing anyone's junk -- it stinks yes but what would stink even more is my plane getting blown up.


----------



## jeanine123 (Jan 7, 2005)

Would the pat down/enhanced scanner have prevented the 9-11 terrorists from getting on the plane? They weren't carrying anything they weren't allowed to have, they turned the planes themselves into their weapon. Would it have prevented the shoe bomber or the underwear bomber from getting on the plane? With the last two I'm honestly curious if the bomb they were carrying could have been felt or noticed by a body scanner.


----------



## PoppyMama (Jul 1, 2004)

I don't think these measure are protecting us from foreign terrorists at all. I think they are just eroding the our constitutional freedoms until we will have none left. Honestly, if fear of terrorists has now led us to ignore child pornography laws and allow ourselves and our children to be "handled" in such a sexually inappropriate manner without a warrant then the terrorists have done a great job.


----------



## mommariffic (Mar 18, 2009)

I'm not sure I understand why these pat downs are considered sexual -- is going to the doctor for a check up (the gyno, a physical, etc) sexual? No it's someone doing their job...

Also to clarify I do not think 9/11 would have been stopped by a pat-down or anything, and maybe this is not really essential but you do have a choice


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mommariffic*
> 
> I'm not sure I understand why these pat downs are considered sexual -- is going to the doctor for a check up (the gyno, a physical, etc) sexual? No it's someone doing their job...


That depends on the doctor, doesn't it? I wouldn't paint them all with a broad brush, but I think it's pretty naive to assume that every exam is done without any sexual intent on the part of the doctor (there have certainly been GYNs who have been charged for sexual assault, after all). And, those are people who are specifically trained to think of those exams as a clinical, non-sexual process. I see no reason to assume that any given TSA employee who is cupping my crotch is doing so with seuxal intent...but there's no reason to assume he/she is doing so without such intent, either. The bottom line is that I just don't let some random guy give me a GYN check. These are two different things.

I'm sad that we're going to visit my in-laws in the Spring. I have no desire whatsoever to fly these days. I feel less safe than ever, because all this security theatre makes it fairly obvious to me that keeping travelers safe isn't the priority - putting on a show of keeping us safe is. What happens when someone smuggles something dangerous onto a plane in a body cavity? Is that going to make it okay to subject random passengers to body cavity searches, all in the name of "keeping us safe"? People draw the lines in different places. I feel no more safe from terrorists...and much, much, much less safe from the people who are "protecting" us.


----------



## PoppyMama (Jul 1, 2004)

The fact that the searches are coercive and violate my rights and I didn't hire someone to do them. Once you get back there you are not allowed to change your mind and leave without having the search without being subject to lawsuits and fines. I am lucky that I can choose not to fly without giving up access to close family or giving up my job but other people are not so lucky. Not to mention that it seems likely that these constitution violating searches are being, at least partially, used to intimidate people into not fighting the body scans.

http://pncminnesota.wordpress.com/2010/11/08/rape-survivor-devasted-by-tsa-enhanced-pat-down/

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2010/10/for-the-first-time-the-tsa-meets-resistance/65390/


----------



## mommariffic (Mar 18, 2009)

Again on mixed feelings - in a world where radicals are going towards more creative lengths to do harm a body scan may be a necessary evil. I do not agree with a pat down, but you do have a choice [and the pat down is nothing new really..] The scanner may be a little invasive, but if can prevent ONE event from happening I think it's worth it. And radiation wise, I'm fairly sure you experience more from a Chest X-ray or just going up in flight that unless you're flying daily I wouldn't worry about that. I mean honestly if someone wants to keep a black and white, grainy photo of my flabby body what-ever. Are they realistically going to store millions of grainy naked photos daily?

And again, I've been patted down going into events and while it's not pleasant, I wouldn't equate it to being sexual assaulted or anything. It was more like "I bet you want to do this as much as I want you to so lets get it over with, nothing to hide, thanks and bye.."


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mommariffic*
> 
> And again, I've been patted down going into events and while it's not pleasant, I wouldn't equate it to being sexual assaulted or anything. It was more like "I bet you want to do this as much as I want you to so lets get it over with, nothing to hide, thanks and bye.."


Really? I've definitely had dozens of pat downs going into events, but not pat downs that involve cupping the crotch or breasts. I've never heard of that before.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mommariffic*
> 
> Again on mixed feelings - in a world where radicals are going towards more creative lengths to do harm a body scan may be a necessary evil.


I meant to respond to this, too...don't know how to split my quotes, anymore.

If we just keep upping the ante on what we're willing to put up with in the name of "protection", then the things that fall under the heading of "necessary evils" are just going to get worse. The shoe bomber and the underwear guy got caught...without body scans and cupping people's crotches. Now, the creative ones are going to start loading up their body cavities with explosives - if they're willing to blow themselves up, they're not going to care how dangerous that is, are they? So...what's next?


----------



## puddle (Aug 30, 2007)

I've read a couple of articles that say that if a person is wearing baggy pants, TSA is now required to conduct the "pat-down" by putting their hands inside the person's pants. Are they really going to do this to 13-year-old kids???


----------



## phathui5 (Jan 8, 2002)

Quote:


> My problem with the scanner isn't just the radiation, it's the fact that it's essentially a nude picture that someone is seeing of me or my kid. That bothers me


Me too. And I keep hearing on the news that the pictures can be saved and stored in the machines. I've seen what the pictures look like and you can see everything pretty clearly.


----------



## greeny (Apr 27, 2007)

PoppyMama, that second link is great.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PoppyMama*
> 
> The fact that the searches are coercive and violate my rights and I didn't hire someone to do them. Once you get back there you are not allowed to change your mind and leave without having the search without being subject to lawsuits and fines. I am lucky that I can choose not to fly without giving up access to close family or giving up my job but other people are not so lucky. Not to mention that it seems likely that these constitution violating searches are being, at least partially, used to intimidate people into not fighting the body scans.
> 
> ...


----------



## WCM (Dec 15, 2007)

I'm so glad this thread has already been started. I have spent far too many nights up, stressed out about our upcoming family flight through the US. We hardly ever fly (first time in 4 years) and if we could cancel our trip we would, anything to avoid this invasive 'security theatre' (borrowd term) that the TSA has instigated.

my first conclusion was that, x-rays or not, we'd do the body image scanner because in no way am I going to tell my kids to let uniformed strangers touch them, period. While some relatives are saying NO, no, avoid the scanners, they're dangerous, do the pat-down, I still can't make peace with choosing to make my kids succumb to a pat-down.

I've yet to talk to my kids about it at all, because I'm not sure how much to say. They're old enough to understand and care about their options (10, 7 and 4), and I know if I show any fears or uncertainty, they'll pick up on it. Personally, I am vehemently opposed to this crap on every level, and I hate that I must lie about my own convictions, to keep their thoughts simple and care-free, but of course I will.

My fears are two-fold: If I KNOW I can choose the machine (body imager, not backscatter) and that guarantees me no pat-downs, then I will. We'll wear simple clothes with no pockets, nothing that could set off the scanner's viewing agent to request a further pat-down. But what if they request one anyway? And I heard that they randomly pick passengers for pat-downs, so I can't control for that. What if they pick my kids?

We're flying out of Sea-Tac, in Seattle, if anyone's gone through there recently. I would LOVE to just do the regular metal detector. LOVE it.

I guess I feel like, if I now we can avoid the pat-downs, I can prepare my kids for the scanners appropriately. But if there's a chance i'll be forced to consent to a pat down, I need to talk to them. Someone mentioned gender-seperated line-ups, is this true? My ideal is to get patted down as a family, and all by the same female agent, with DH and I going first, so the ids can see it and us fine with it, first.

I just want to avoid pat-downs altogether. I hate the thought, and know that my kids will have big issues with them, so I need to prepare them. If I have a 'big talk', that'd stress them out, so something simple and no-big-deal is best.


----------



## PoppyMama (Jul 1, 2004)

After the initial hoopla the PTB decided not to do the "enhanced" patdown on children under 12. Doesn't help me since I have a 13 dd and really I'm more disturbed about these patdowns on kids as they hit puberty. It does help you on this trip though. I would not have everyone go through a patdown starting with you because if they see the patdown you guys are getting they may freak. I honestly don't know which I would choose.


----------



## WCM (Dec 15, 2007)

We went through Sea-Tac last week. I asked at the airline desk (not security), they'd heard nothing about 12 year olds being exempt. But all we did was the usual metal detectors (which, oddly enough, did not pick up the metal pins in my FIL's hip). Backscatter scanners where in place but not in use. Phew!


----------



## Petie1104 (Oct 26, 2010)

This is an article on the radiation. Basically you get more radiation in the flight than you do from the scanner. More from an x-ray than from the scanner. There are people who are concerned, but the consensus seems to be that if the machines are in proper working order they are safe.

http://www.usatoday.com/yourlife/health/medical/cancer/2010-11-18-scanner-radiation_N.htm

This is what the images look like...

http://boingboing.net/2008/10/24/what-the-tsas-new-bo.html

While I'm not thrilled about that, it definitely isn't x-rated and fairly bland. Yes they can see your body shape, but really very little detail.

This is a video of a 3 yr. old getting a pat down.






While it's not something great, it also didn't seem like something traumatic and the agents seemed to be trying to keep him smiling.

OK, now my opinion. If flying were necessary for me, I would probably go through the full body scanner and have the kids do the same thing. But the airport near us doesn't have a scanner so we only had to go through the metal detectors. I honestly don't mind the procedures, but no, they aren't comfortable. I think the policy needs to be changed because it does seem like they are slowly adding more and more invasive measures, but I wouldn't let that keep me from flying.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Petie1104*
> 
> OK, now my opinion. If flying were necessary for me, I would probably go through the full body scanner and have the kids do the same thing.


You don't always have the option to skip the patdown, though. If they see anything that seems suspcious on the scanners, you still have to do the patdown.


----------



## Smithie (Dec 4, 2003)

DS (age 6.5): I want to fly to Disneyworld! The drive is far!

DH: Well, did you know that when you go to the airport nowadays, they have a machine that will take pictures of your body under your clothes, and then a stranger will look at your whole naked body including your penis?

DS: ... no way. You are teasing me, Dad.

DH: No, it's true. And if they don''t like what they see on that naked picture, they will touch you all over your body, including your penis.

DS: I am pretty sure that they will like what they see in the penis picture.

(Mom collapses in laughter.)

DH: Well, if they DON'T, they are going to touch your penis. There is a man whose job it is to touch people all over at the airport.

DS: ... you mean like at the dentist's office?

Both Parents: WHAT HAPPENED TO YOU AT THE DENTIST'S OFFICE?!?

DH: ...wait, do you mean the doctor's office?

DS: Yeah.

DH: Well, this man would not be touching you all over to make sure that you are healthy. He would be touch you to make sure that you are not carrying a knife or a bomb.

DS: PEOPLE KEEP BOMBS IN THEIR PENIS?

Long story short, we drove to Florida as planned


----------



## Petie1104 (Oct 26, 2010)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Storm Bride*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> ...


And, if flying somewhere is important enough to me to make sure I have the money set aside to afford airline tickets, then my point is, I would put up with it. Of course, to us, flying is an expense that has to be saved for times when we really need to do it. We just can't afford it otherwise.


----------



## Owen'nZoe (Sep 7, 2005)

Petit - I respect your opinion on this, but did want to point out that the USA Today article you posted relies on the TSAs own studies of their own equipment. Independent scientists have questioned the validity of that testing, and have said that it is likely the radiation levels are higher than the TSA is reporting.


----------



## peainthepod (Jul 16, 2008)

Recently I flew with DH and both children to attend my grandfather's funeral. None of the airports we went through had what DH and I jokingly call the "cancer machines" (porno body scanners) but if they had, we would have refused to go through them. And I was fully prepared to be turned away at the gate, because I'd sooner miss seeing family and honoring a dead loved one than allow some goon to fondle my children or me, over the clothes or not. We are not criminals and I won't let my children be conditioned to be treated that way. Nor do we want them to ever believe that it's okay to be molested by a stranger just because they wear a government badge and "everybody's doing it".









DH and I drive everywhere...and I mean everywhere. We don't fly except in case of emergency (i.e. funerals) and it's a shame, because we love to travel. But we won't support an industry that allows its customers to be treated like prisoners. It just doesn't mesh with our values as a family.


----------



## Super~Single~Mama (Sep 23, 2008)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Smithie*
> 
> DS: I am pretty sure that they will like what they see in the penis picture.
> 
> ...


Ok, your DS sounds HILARIOUS!!!!! Especially the first one. I almost fell out of my chair.


----------



## Super~Single~Mama (Sep 23, 2008)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WCM*
> 
> We went through Sea-Tac last week. I asked at the airline desk (not security), they'd heard nothing about 12 year olds being exempt. But all we did was the usual metal detectors (which, oddly enough, did not pick up the metal pins in my FIL's hip). Backscatter scanners where in place but not in use. Phew!


Pins that are designed to be implanted are generally titanium (I believe) and are not picked up by metal detectors. I do wonder if they would show up in a scan? I'm also wondering what is going to happen to those who have things like pace makers and who cannot go through metal detectors b/c of medical exemption - will they have an enhanced pat down or are the scanners safe for them?


----------



## Petie1104 (Oct 26, 2010)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Owen'nZoe*
> 
> Petit - I respect your opinion on this, but did want to point out that the USA Today article you posted relies on the TSAs own studies of their own equipment. Independent scientists have questioned the validity of that testing, and have said that it is likely the radiation levels are higher than the TSA is reporting.


The USA Today article had references for the FDA in it. So it wasn't just TSA's studies I don't think. With that said, the main complaint I have read is that they don't know that the equipment is working properly at all times. With that said, I did post the article so that everyone could draw their own conclusion. I was just saying that for me, it isn't enough to keep me from flying if I need to.


----------



## mrskingred (Aug 3, 2006)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Super~Single~Mama*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> ...


I broke both wrists in Oct 2001, initially I was in casts but ended up having plates and screw holding my wrists together. Flying home for Christmas that year, I set off every detector not just the ones at security but also in the duty free shop. I ended up having the plates and screw surgically removed the following spring.


----------



## ilovemygirl (Sep 8, 2008)

This topic infuriates me like almost nothing else.

I think there are a lot of issues here that are rarely brought up.

The first is the whole "professional" argument. While most of the TSA agents may be very nice, well intentioned people, they are hardly professionals. There are no education requirements and the salary ranges somewhere from 25-40k. There is nothing wrong with not having a higher education or making a low salary. I have a GED and barely make a livable wage but I'm not pretending that I'm somehow qualified to stop terrorism or to perform invasive inappropriate acts on strangers. These agents are not required to take a class on ethics or communications and are given nothing more than on the job training to use very complicated equipment.

Secondly, while I think it is wise to have basic security measures in place (scanning of bags and such), are we maybe just too afraid for our own good? I can sit here and come up with a dozen things I do every day that are more dangerous than getting on a plane, I would dare to say that are even more dangerous than getting on a plane that has had no excessive security screening at all. More people are killed in car accidents every single month than have been killed by terrorism in the history of our nation. That's not me being insensitive, it's a statistic, a fact.

Other modes of transit like bridges and subways in large metropolitan areas, especially New York, are under the "threat" of terrorism every day as well. Remember that there was a subway bombing in London? And yet millions of people get on the subway and drive over bridges every day. And ..... do it without ANY invasive or personal security measures. NONE, not one. As someone who lived in NY for twenty four years and still goes there frequently, I can tell you that I've never once heard anyone ask to have airline security measures extended to subway use.

So my point is that I very personally resent someone telling me that my child should be forced to pose for pornographic pictures and be subjected to inappropriate touching to make them feel better about sitting on a plane, when odds are they are a lot more likely to be harmed when they get off.


----------



## Smithie (Dec 4, 2003)

"I have a GED and barely make a livable wage but I'm not pretending that I'm somehow qualified to stop terrorism or to perform invasive inappropriate acts on strangers."

Heck, I have a Master's Degree and I never use it as an excuse to grope strangers at the airport!


----------



## ilovemygirl (Sep 8, 2008)

I love your humor Smithie! Your son's story a few posts back had me laughing so much


----------



## peainthepod (Jul 16, 2008)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ilovemygirl*
> 
> This topic infuriates me like almost nothing else.
> 
> ...


----------



## Cyllya (Jun 10, 2009)

It sounds like their policies are kind of wishy-washy. They change regularly but half the airports don't get the memo. My experience was fine, but I don't feel like that's any garuntee that yours will be. But just in case it helps, here was how it happened to me:

I recently went through the Nashville airport (BNA) at the end of December. My biggest beef with the scanner and pat down (besides the fact that it's done at all) was that they didn't do anything to let you know what the scanner was. The fact that I'd done some before hand (because I was so nervous about being scanned) was the only way I recognized it. So you're not giving informed consent to be scanned.

The lady directing people to the scanner was friendly. She tried to convince me the scanner was less invasive than the pat down (for most people it probably would be, but I'm weird like that), but she was sympathetic and said she'd "get someone nice" to do it. I was briefly separated from my DP because he went through the scanner without knowing what it was, while I hung back waiting for the patting-down agent to show up. When she arrived, I went through the normal metal detector and into an area sectioned off for this purpose. She found my DP so he could be a witness. She got fresh gloves. She asked if I'd had the pat down before, and I said no, so she explained the procedure to me (moving hand up the thigh until it "meets resistance" etc, you've heard it), so there were no surprises. She touched my butt with the back of her hand, and she checked between and under my breasts with the side of her hands. She did reach in my collar and waistband. She didn't touch my genitals, but she came close enough that it could have easily happened by accident, I think. (It'd probably be more likely to happen on a man?) I had to wait while she tested her gloves for something or other. This all occurred at the same time that your shoes, laptop, bag is going through the x-ray, so I'm glad my DP was there to re-pack our bags.

I was wearing slacks and a slightly form-fitting sweater. It seemed like everyone had to go through the scanner (or pat down) whereas I've heard they just pick random people sometimes. However, it wasn't especially crowded at that time.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mommariffic*
> 
> I'm not sure I understand why these pat downs are considered sexual -- is going to the doctor for a check up (the gyno, a physical, etc) sexual? No it's someone doing their job...


It may or may not be because I was sexually abused as a child, but I do in fact find a medical professional poking around my private bits to be very, very distressing. And it used to be worse. Hell, it was years before I could comfortably change clothes in front of stuffed animals! (We're talking long after an age where I knew stuffed animals weren't secretly alive, but I did keep getting flash backs of Toy Story anyway.)

Still, there are some key differences between going to the doctor and going through "enhanced" airport security.

1. Technically, you don't have to do either one. Technically, you never have to do anything in your life except occasionally sleep and eventually die. But being able to say "But it's your choice!" doesn't make it okay for you to put another person in a situation where they have to choose between two bad things. The TSA is pretty much blackmailing people a la "Let us take a naked picture or you and/or feel you up, or else you don't get to see your family this Christmas." With the doctor analogy, you're choosing between an exam or the risk of an undiscovered health problem, but that health problem is a fact of life rather than something another human is deliberately inflicting on you.

2. Doctors try to give you as much privacy as possible. They leave the room while you're changing. They give you a gown which they move aside just long enough to do what you need to do, and then you can cover up again. They don't make you stand still for several seconds while they look you up and down naked.

3. You can choose a same-sex doctor if that makes you more comfortable. You will get a pat-down from a TSA agent of the same sex, but you don't get to pick who looks at the scanner picture.

4. If a doctor is creeping you out in any way, you can leave and get a new doctor.

I think I've heard that 1 in 5 women are sexually abused at some point, plus there's people who for cultural or religious reasons were brought up with ideas resulted in them being very modest. So just because *you* don't mind the pat down and image scanner doesn't mean it's unreasonable that someone else does.


----------



## sk8boarder15 (Jan 12, 2010)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PoppyMama*
> 
> The fact that the searches are coercive and violate my rights and I didn't hire someone to do them.


THAT is why I WON'T FLY! Want more info on the unconstitutional and ineffective pat downs check out this site.... http://wewontfly.com/


----------



## rightkindofme (Apr 14, 2008)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sk8boarder15*
> 
> THAT is why I WON'T FLY! Want more info on the unconstitutional and ineffective pat downs check out this site.... http://wewontfly.com/


My childhood best friend is getting married in Scotland. All of a sudden saying "I won't fly" is a different choice.


----------

