AMTRAK throws 15 year old from the train

Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
In reading thru this, I agree there are two very basic questions to which I would want to know the answers before drawing any conclusion,

Did the 15 yo have a child's ticket or an adult's ticket?

What was the 15 yo possibly doing, that drew the attention of the conductor? My thinking is that something happened, the conductor might have asked "where's your parents?", and the answer led to the conductor's actions.
 
It appears that Centralia is the next station after they boarded in Olympia. The conductor likely asked their ages as he was collecting tickets. It probably has no relavance if they were child or adult tickets.

The parents were wrong to let her ride alone and not read the rules. However, at that point, even though they were in violation of the rules, Amtrak essentially had custody of the underaged girl and she was in their care. Where Amtrak went wrong, weather they put her off the train or allowed her to stay, Amtrak needed to oversee the girl and make sure se remains safe until they could pass off custody. This should only be to the actual parents of the girl or some other authority such as the police that would ensure she gets safely back to the parents. Amtrak should have imediatly contacted the girls mother or father to discuss the options on how they will transfer her back into her parents care.

While nothing in the artilce mentions anything about a lawsuit, I bet many lawyers saw this story and are probably in conatct with all the girls families to take a case. Amtrak knows this so they don't want to admit any fault that could come back and bite them in court. At this point they are saying they only want an apology but as soon as Amtrak apologize and admit fault, the family(ies) will then try to get money. This is the world we live in.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sounds like both the parents and the station agent screwed up. The conductor did what they had to do, but the station agent sounds like pure laziness. It should be the policy that non-registered unaccompanied minors should be kicked off at either the first staffed station and turn them over to the station agent or anywhere else and turned over to the police.

The policy posted somewhere above is a bit OCD in my book so it sound like Amtrak is trying to cover all the bases and not get sued, but for people trying to circumvent it they just treat them like they are adults without valid tickets and that is wrong in my book. Two wrongs don't make a right. You don't just kick a child to the curb and say good luck.
 
As opposed to "PARENTS put minor child on Amtrak train, without following the rules and/or Amtrak Unaccompanied Minor policy."
To be frank, if I am a parent booking ticket for a 15-16 year old teenager for a short intercity train ride, it wouldn't even hit me to check the Unaccompanied Minors policy. I mean, come on, is traveling on Amtrak such a big deal that teenagers can't do it on their own? I wouldn't have thought they actually forbid anyone under 16 from traveling alone. I have traveled by trains alone (not on Amtrak though) from when I was as young as 12.

So yeah, in Amtrak;s books they defied a rule, but it isn't a rule that would be obvious to a customer. Easy to miss.

I'm sorry, but in today's overly PC, litigation happy times, and with all the psychopaths and perverts everywhere I can't believe any parent would put their 15 year old girl on a train full of strangers without making any effort to contact Amtrak or at the very minimum the conductor on the platform when boarding the train.

You can't leave a dog locked in a car nowadays without someone likely to call the Humane Society and PETA on you, let alone a child. At what point are people responsible for their own actions?

The parents are outraged that Amtrak put their precious daughter off in the middle of nowhere, which isn't the case, yet it seems they had very little problem putting her on the train unaccompanied but for two also minor girls.

At what point do people become responsible ? At all points. At every point. Does anyone think this idea might take hold ?
 
As I read this thread I am trying to remember when I started riding the New York Subways as a UM. I also wonder what their policies about UM are
 
Without having all of the facts it is difficult to judge what this incident is all about. Was the 15 year old really 16 and traveling on a child's ticket or was she in fact 15 yrs old and rode in violation of the rules. Regardless this appears to be a case of bad judgement by a conductor. He should have phoned in a complaint to corporate and asked how the problem should be handled. Responsible people don't leave children off at a station in the middle of a trip. I say that the family has a chance of winning the lawsuit.
 
Without having all of the facts it is difficult to judge what this incident is all about. Was the 15 year old really 16 and traveling on a child's ticket or was she in fact 15 yrs old and rode in violation of the rules. Regardless this appears to be a case of bad judgement by a conductor. He should have phoned in a complaint to corporate and asked how the problem should be handled. Responsible people don't leave children off at a station in the middle of a trip. I say that the family has a chance of winning the lawsuit.



What is the point of a lawsuit? To pay for damages incurred? Sounds like there is not much expensis that were incurred by the family. To get rich quick? That is just wrong.
 
The girl was already on the train and according to the article behaving herself. What was the harm in letting her continue to the destination? I can see the conductor booting someone with out a ticket, but come on. Wasn't the girl in more danger by being kicked off at a strange station far from home than letting her off at her destination? Where is the common sense?

BTW, my first unaccompanied train trip was from Paoli to Harrisburg and back on the PRR. When I was in the third grade. And there were several more unaccompanied trips even into NYP before I ever entered high school. As you can see, I lived to tell about it.
It's a changed, litigious era today. Even 20-30 years ago was different, let alone 90 years ago:

From a 1920's era S.A.L. Ry. Rules of the Operating Department - "Persons of unsound mind, and female passengers at night, must not be ejected except at an open station." :eek:hboy:
 
When the girls approached th agent they were told that he was going off duty in less than thirty minutes and didnt have time to deal with them.
No one is making that claim, actually. Take a listen to the story again. The girls never even approached the station agent. If a teenager is responsible enough

to travel on their own, you'd hope they'd be resourceful enough to contact the nearest person of authority, instead of wandering around town.

The conductor did what they had to do, but the station agent sounds like pure laziness.
It sounds like you didn't actually listen to the TV story. The station agent was not contacted by the conductor or by the teenagers (who apparently wandered off into town). I'm having a little trouble understanding why this makes the station agent "lazy."

I am not sure that I read where the girls boarded the train and how long she had been on the train before they put her off. This leads to the question about what caused the conductor to determine that she was an unaccompanied minor mid-trip, as opposed to at ticket collection?
What was the 15 yo possibly doing, that drew the attention of the conductor? My thinking is that something happened, the conductor might have asked "where's your parents?", and the answer led to the conductor's actions.
This is actually quite clear if you watch the video report. They got on the train and handed over their tickets. That's what "drew the attention" of the conductor. Shocking, isn't it?
 
As I read this thread I am trying to remember when I started riding the New York Subways as a UM. I also wonder what their policies about UM are
I was 12 when I began traveling alone on the NYC subway, this was after a UM trip to Syracuse when I was 9 or 10, a trip to Westerly on the Acela Regional when I was 10, on a weekend when its station is unstaffed, remember being put in Buisiness Class so the crew could keep an eye on me. And a few to Vermont when I was 11 (first was when Rutland still had its agent) and 12 (including getting on in Windsor). I also remember taking Metro-North to connecticut when I was 11 (and my mother buying me just a child's ticket). Amtrak's new policy is absolutely ridiculous.

Metro-North's is much more reasonable (and found in all of there timetables, under unaccompanied Children, not minors):



MTA Metro-North Railroad recommends that children under the age of 8 be accompanied by an adult or a responsible youth (at least 12 years old) when riding its trains. Children age 8 and above may ride alone, but we strongly suggest that they carry identification showing their name, address, home phone number and the name and phone number of the person who will be meeting them. No child should be traveling unaccompanied during late night hours. For further information, please visit our website at www. mta.info.
Greyhounds is 8-14 are okay alone as long as the trip is less than five hours and agencies are open for both arrivals and departures, a $5 fee and the standard UM paperwork at either end. There is this strange note: Exception: In accordance with Illinois state law, NO tickets will be sold to unaccompanied minor children under the age of 17 for interstate or intrastate travel from locations within the state of Illinois. Wonder what this is about Metra's policy is no child under 7 alone (that is common sense if you ask me).
 
There's a difference between a kid riding alone on a local transit system, and riding an intercity passenger train that travels several hundred miles along its journey.
 
It would seem that Amtrak again has demonstrated that it needs further training for its employees. :unsure:

As has been stated, the conductor did not act in the best interest of the minor girls or Amtrak by putting them off by themselves at the Centralia station. At the very least he/she should have notified authorities and allowed the police to determine what to do with the girls until their parents arrived to pick them up. This would have relieved Amtrak of further responsibilities and probably have lessened the impact of this story. Common sense would dictate that this would have been the appropriate course of action. :eek:

Although many would also agree that letting them ride to Portland may also have been a better choice than putting them off the train.??

There may be all kinds of legal points in Amtrak's favor regarding the 15 year old's right to ride the train. But since the conductor did not check the IDs of any of the girls when they boarded, and took their tickets--there was an acceptance of service.

Whether Amtrak is responsible for the girls' welfare under loco-parenti rules will be an issue if legal action is sought.

I would hope that the parents will accept an apology from Amtrak along with their refund of fares as appropriate compensation for this event. We shall see!! :)
 
But since the conductor did not check the IDs of any of the girls when they boarded, and took their tickets--there was an acceptance of service.
Actually, the conductor didn't "take their ticket," or rather, it was apparently in the process of taking the ticket that the age question was broached.

So, no tacit acceptance of service there.

Secondly, as far as "checking the IDs" when they boarded...do we REALLY want Amtrak to go down that route? Do we REALLY want to require

conductors or station agents to check the ID's of all passengers BEFORE boarding? Think of the impact this would have on time-keeping at

unstaffed stations. Think of how early this would make you have to arrive at staffed stations where literally dozens if not a 100 people or more

board a train at major station stops. No more showing up a few minutes before departure since now you gotta go through an ID check. No

thanks.
 
There's a difference between a kid riding alone on a local transit system, and riding an intercity passenger train that travels several hundred miles along its journey.
With a final destination out of state no less.

Imagine this scenario. Amtrak takes said minor to Portland and parents, unaware their child took the train, raise holy hell and accuse Amtrak of violating their own policy by allowing the 15 year old onto the train and transporting her out of the state.

See how easily Amtrak gets a black eye either way?

What I would have done is called Child Protective Services and handed the child over to them and let them deal with the parents.
 
It's standard practice on the Cascades, and on most trains for that matter, to board the passengers and get moving again quickly. Then the conductors canvas the train to collect tickets and to check IDs if needed.
 
Let us not ignore that if the conductor let her stay on into Portland, he could easily be going to jail- at that point the minor is crossing state lines.
 
There's a difference between a kid riding alone on a local transit system, and riding an intercity passenger train that travels several hundred miles along its journey.
With a final destination out of state no less.

Imagine this scenario. Amtrak takes said minor to Portland and parents, unaware their child took the train, raise holy hell and accuse Amtrak of violating their own policy by allowing the 15 year old onto the train and transporting her out of the state.

See how easily Amtrak gets a black eye either way?

What I would have done is called Child Protective Services and handed the child over to them and let them deal with the parents.
Under normal circumstances, this might be a good idea, but calling the police would be much quicker since there is no guarantee that Child Protective Services would be able to arrive in a reasonable amount of time to avoid undue delays for the train. And if Washington's CPS is anything like here in Ohio, they would ask why you are bothering them on this issue. :( As a former high school principal, I can attest that the event must be something producing endangerment to the child before they will act quickly. They would probably have suggested you notify authorities, who may or may not decide to handle it In-house or turn it over to CPS.
 
Let us not ignore that if the conductor let her stay on into Portland, he could easily be going to jail- at that point the minor is crossing state lines.
And, exactly what would he be going to jail for? I believe the transporting a minor across state lines issue also includes "for immoral purposes".

I think, pretty much, all involved share in the blame game here.

Certainly the conductor didn't make the wisest of choices . . . . would notifying the local authorities that they would be de-training the minor would have been a much better choice. Holding the train at that location until the authorities arrived would not be an unheard of delay, would it? (Even though I believe he didn't have a choice in the matter . . . . . . just the manner)

The girl and her friends wandering off in an strange environment wasn't the wisest decision, but some would argue that is typical for teens. Apparently she tried unsuccessfully to contact mommy but wasn't able to. Did not the other two girls have parents who could have been notified. Actually should have.

The parents . . . . . ahhh, the parents, let's not forget them. I will leave the purchase of the tickets aside as I don't have a clue how that transaction took place in this case. However, if I read it correctly above, mom turned off her cell phone while she attended a meeting causing the delay in notifying the dad. If it were my kid, my cell-phone would be on vibrate and/or my spouse would have her cell phone available. It would not be the first "important" meeting ever to be interrupted by an emergency.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Let us not ignore that if the conductor let her stay on into Portland, he could easily be going to jail- at that point the minor is crossing state lines.
Twelve year olds can travel alone without restriction on American, Southwest, and United. Crossing state lines is not an issue.
 
I even suggested calling the police but what do you think their reaction would have been? Why are you bothering us?

I don't know what the mother does, but I have been in meetings where people have had their phones ring and/or vibrate. It is always an emergency and then they get distracted from what the meeting was about. I was in a meeting once that the client told another consultant straight out after his phone vibrated that if something is more important than this project, he was welcome to leave and they would find somebody else to work on the project. Also, many places of work have policies against cell phone use during work and you can't even have one with you.

Twelve may be a little young but by 14, a person should be able to travel alone. Also, I beleive some states have laws where kids can drive as ealy as 14.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Although many would also agree that letting them ride to Portland may also have been a better choice than putting them off the train.??
Bill,

I would never agree that letting them ride to Portland would have been the correct thing to do. In addition to the following posted by EB_OBS

Imagine this scenario. Amtrak takes said minor to Portland and parents, unaware their child took the train, raise holy hell and accuse Amtrak of violating their own policy by allowing the 15 year old onto the train and transporting her out of the state.
there is also the consideration that if the parents actually knew what they were doing and deliberately allowed her to travel figuring that no one would notice, now Amtrak has rewarded the parents bad behavior.

So no, I for one believe 100% that the correct course of action was putting them off at the very next station. The area for debate is just how the conductor did that.
 
Let's back up and look at the facts. No laws were broken here. It was Amtraks own policy that dictates that 15 year olds cannot travel unescorted. All the conductor had to do was to conduct a citizens arrest of the 15 year old so that she was held in violation of Amtrak's regulations and in protective custody. If something bad happened to this girl when she was put off of the train Amtrak could be held liable.

As for being banned from the train until age 15; I grew up in Brooklyn, NY and started taking the NYC subway around age 12 and everything was fine. I would go with 4 or 5 friends to New York City or to Coney Island. We didn't have much money back then so the train provided a means to get to all of the free stuff in the city at that time
 
Hi,

Just as a matter of interest, at what age can youngsters drive a car, or own a gun, in America?

Ed :cool:
It varies from state to state with some allowing Learner's permits and restricted licenses during year 14, with the earliest full license available at 16 in some places and 18 in others.

Guns are even more complex as there are differences from state to state over the gun being a long gun vs a pistol, conceal carry vs open carry, parental supervision vs. not, hunting vs. not, one's own property vs. other private property vs. in public, but I believe the general rule of thumb is 18 for long guns, and 21 for pistols with most states having exceptions for supervised use on private property.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top