AMTRAK throws 15 year old from the train

[Swadian Hardcore]

The kids should have at least tried to ask their parents or Amtrak personnel about the UM policy. If they are not old enough to do that, they are not old enough to ride unaccompanied.

Also, I think the UM policy should be increased to 18 years old.

 

[caravanman]

Hi,

I find it hard to understand why a youngster is allowed to drive a car yet is considered too young to sit alone on a train ??? What would it mean for students if the age limit for solo train use was raised to 18, what would THAT achieve?

Ed

 

[DocJohnB]

I think the conductor should be charged with child endangerment since he put her off in a strange location without adult supervision. the teens she was with are not adults.Also why didn't the teens call there parents when the UM parents were at a meeting. You mean tell me that there are teenage girls out there without cell phones?

Ahhhh to put that bluntly . . . . . . BS.

According to all the bleeding hearts as proscribed here, here friends were indeed adults. They bought adult tickets,and traveled as adults. And some may say they acted as adults when they detrained with her.

But, WTH, let's charge everybody with something . . . . . . INCLUDING MR. & MRS. PARENT with the same broad brush . . . . child endangerment.

As to the other gals calling their parents . . . . see my previous posts (I agree). But, WTH, in the meantime, let's charge them with child endangerment too for knowingly traveling with a minor and not having the wherewithal to inform the AMTRAK personal of her status.

 

[DocJohnB]

Hi,

I find it hard to understand why a youngster is allowed to drive a car yet is considered too young to sit alone on a train ??? What would it mean for students if the age limit for solo train use was raised to 18, what would THAT achieve?

Ed

That argument is specious at best. MOST states (and I have no clue about this child's state) do not permit a 15 year old to drive without an adult (18 or older) accompanying.

Look folks, I cannot and will not condone the actions of AMTRAK (in the being of the conductor) in this case (even if acting within the policy guidelines of AMTRAK). I also cannot and refuse to lay the blame entirely at the feet of AMTRAK or its representative. The parents should be held JUST AS responsible and they sure would not want me sitting in judgement in this case..

 

[henryj]

I used to ride the train from Houston to Dallas unaccompanied when I was only 10yo. My parents just put me on and told the conductor to watch after me. I had a good time even ate lunch in the diner by myself.

 

[DocJohnB]

I used to ride the train from Houston to Dallas unaccompanied when I was only 10yo. My parents just put me on and told the conductor to watch after me. I had a good time even ate lunch in the diner by myself.

Therein lies the difference. Her parents did not.

As an aside question . . . . . . how long ago were these solo trips of yours?

 

[Trogdor]

What would it mean for students if the age limit for solo train use was raised to 18, what would THAT achieve?

It would achieve nothing.

On the other hand, nobody anywhere (that I'm aware of) has proposed raising the age limit to 18, so what was the point of your question?

 

[PRR 60]

What would it mean for students if the age limit for solo train use was raised to 18, what would THAT achieve?

It would achieve nothing.

On the other hand, nobody anywhere (that I'm aware of) has proposed raising the age limit to 18, so what was the point of your question?

I believe he was referring to this prior post:

...

Also, I think the UM policy should be increased to 18 years old.

 

[EMDF9A]

What would it mean for students if the age limit for solo train use was raised to 18, what would THAT achieve?

It would achieve nothing.

On the other hand, nobody anywhere (that I'm aware of) has proposed raising the age limit to 18, so what was the point of your question?

I dont know how long AMTRAK has had the UM policy but when I was in boarding school in Wisconsin I would take the EB home from LaCrosse to Seattle in 1980-1982. I was 15-18 at the time, it is of course a two day/night trip, my parents were nowhere near the station when I boarded.

 

[PRR 60]

What would it mean for students if the age limit for solo train use was raised to 18, what would THAT achieve?

It would achieve nothing.

On the other hand, nobody anywhere (that I'm aware of) has proposed raising the age limit to 18, so what was the point of your question?

I dont know how long AMTRAK has had the UM policy but when I was in boarding school in Wisconsin I would take the EB home from LaCrosse to Seattle in 1980-1982. I was 15-18 at the time, it is of course a two day/night trip, my parents were nowhere near the station when I boarded.

Within the last year, Amtrak raised the minimum age for unrestricted travel from 14 to 16, and the minimum age for someone accompanying an underage traveler from age 15 to 18.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

Within the last year, Amtrak raised the minimum age for unrestricted travel from 14 to 16, and the minimum age for someone accompanying an underage traveler from age 15 to 18.

So you see, it is quite possible that Amtrak raise the UM age limit to 18.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

I used to ride the train from Houston to Dallas unaccompanied when I was only 10yo. My parents just put me on and told the conductor to watch after me.

Therein lies the difference. Her parents did not.

Well there's that.

And then there's the fact that Henry was all of 10 years old and traveling alone while these passengers were 15 & 16 years old and traveling in a group of three.

What would it mean for students if the age limit for solo train use was raised to 18, what would THAT achieve?

It would achieve nothing.

Do you feel the same way about raising it to 16? If not, why not?

 

[Blue Marble Travel]

As for being banned from the train until age 15;

Amtrak does not "ban" 15 year olds from the train. There is a specific procedure to follow, which the parents ignored either purposefully or by failing to properly

research Amtrak's policies. ...

I believe that this was said in the context of this incident, in which we can certainly say the girl was banished, if not banned. You are correct, gramatically: Amtrak did not successfully ban her. They let her on, and then threw her off. Some us are arguing that that was not the best thing to do.

However one wants to put it, one of the points being made is this: Amtrak does not authorize 15 year olds to travel alone (without a bureaucratic and time-consuming process involved, use of specific stations, and / or an adult 18 or older along with). Some of us feel this is an inappropriately restrictive policy, destined to be ignored in the way stupid bureaucracy is ignored around the world and in every domain.

 

[Blue Marble Travel]

Amtrak should have a protocol to deal with what happens if an underage person (by Amtrak's definition) boards a train and is not detected until travel has commenced. Putting the child off at the next station unsupervised is not the answer.

This is the best comment I have seen in this thread.

Agreed.

Either the kids are old enough to take care of themselves, and can thus ride the train without issue, or they're not old enough to take care of themselves and thus cannot be left alone at a station they're not ticketed for. There is no combination of variables I can come up with where putting them off the train is the preferred outcome with the information we currently have available to us. Even the sue-happy legal fear angle doesn't explain how putting them off the train makes anything better for Amtrak.

Well, unfortunately the world is a much scarier place today.

How do you figure?

Not only the dangers of psychos and perverts but just the sheer speed at which things can happen now. Everything is faster.

I don't know about everything, but blind hysteria sure seems to be moving at a much faster rate than before.

This is my favorite comment from the thread.

Amtrak isn't really THAT good at running a railroad. This new foray into the surrogate parenting business is not destined for success.

Through these posts, we have seen many different attitudes to parenting, from "kids should be allowed to run nuclear power plants from age 5" to "I'll cut the cord with my cold, dead hands, and not before." And that is precisely the point. None of us should be parenting for other people in domains where there is legitimate debate about what the right thing to do is. We are all WAY to much into telling each other what to do these days. Let's all stop pretending we care about other people's children: our voting patterns abundantly prove that we do not. We care about this incident because we care about our children, and project.

By having Amtrak make up rules about how we should parent, we are turning the issue over to the party that may be one of the least competent of all. Amtrak's role should be strictly limited to protecting riders from each other. Do you want to be seated next to an unaccompanied 6-year-old? No? Understandably not. (Though, let it be noted in passing, families are split this way on planes all the time: on my last Seattle - Burbank trip on Alaska Airlines, my 5- and 7-year old daughters and myself were placed in 3 middle seats, several rows from each other, and this struck no one as strange — except for the little girls, who were in tears).

In this case, is this 15 year old any more or less likely to get in the way of your travel experience than someone of another age? Hold the jokes: the answer is no.

Make the rules make sense, and we'll be happy to follow them. These rules should be set by the families involved, not by an organization whose job it is to grease axles.

 

[Blue Marble Travel]

What would it mean for students if the age limit for solo train use was raised to 18, what would THAT achieve?

It would achieve nothing.

On the other hand, nobody anywhere (that I'm aware of) has proposed raising the age limit to 18, so what was the point of your question?

I dont know how long AMTRAK has had the UM policy but when I was in boarding school in Wisconsin I would take the EB home from LaCrosse to Seattle in 1980-1982. I was 15-18 at the time, it is of course a two day/night trip, my parents were nowhere near the station when I boarded.

Within the last year, Amtrak raised the minimum age for unrestricted travel from 14 to 16, and the minimum age for someone accompanying an underage traveler from age 15 to 18.

... and many of us have said, at the time and in this post, that that is the essential problem. Another stupid rule. Just because you have the power to make rules about other peoples' behavior doesn't mean you should. My liberty stops where yours begins, fair enough. But this girl was bothering no one.

 

[EB_OBS]

By having Amtrak make up rules about how we should parent, we are turning the issue over to the party that may be one of the least competent of all.

How exactly do you surmise that Amtrak is telling you how to parent by having a Unaccompanied Minor policy and age restrictions on unaccompanied travel?

I feel I'm not alone in thinking that 12 and under is too young to travel unaccompanied and alone on the train. It's still perfectly fine for 13, 14 and 15 year old children to travel within the guidelines set by the UM policy. At 16 years old one may travel unrestricted as an adult. The policy seems perfectly reasonable and logical to me.

What seems to have fallen by the wayside here in all this discussion is that both the parents and Amtrak are asking the employee, the conductor, in the course of their job and livelihood to take sole responsibility for someone else's child during their travel on the train. I don't think it's too unreasonable to set a minimum age at which most kids are mature enough to listen and sit where asked to sit and remain there without wandering off when the conductor is busy doing their job.

Some of you act like "oh it's no big deal, I traveled all over the country when I was a 14", or "Amtrak just doesn't want to carry unaccompanied minors", which isn't true by the way. Others can pretend the world is just as safe and secure and all Pleasantville as it was when we were kids, whatever, it most certainly is not. Regardless, yeah sure the chances that something bad happens to a kid when traveling alone may be remote but what about when something does happen? What if it was your kid? Who are you gonna blame? Are you gonna blame your kid, or yourself? No! You're gonna blame Amtrak and more specifically the conductor or employee who had custody of your kid.

 

[EB_OBS]

What would it mean for students if the age limit for solo train use was raised to 18, what would THAT achieve?

It would achieve nothing.

On the other hand, nobody anywhere (that I'm aware of) has proposed raising the age limit to 18, so what was the point of your question?

I dont know how long AMTRAK has had the UM policy but when I was in boarding school in Wisconsin I would take the EB home from LaCrosse to Seattle in 1980-1982. I was 15-18 at the time, it is of course a two day/night trip, my parents were nowhere near the station when I boarded.

Within the last year, Amtrak raised the minimum age for unrestricted travel from 14 to 16, and the minimum age for someone accompanying an underage traveler from age 15 to 18.

... and many of us have said, at the time and in this post, that that is the essential problem. Another stupid rule. Just because you have the power to make rules about other peoples' behavior doesn't mean you should. My liberty stops where yours begins, fair enough. But this girl was bothering no one.

You can think it's a stupid rule all you want. There's plenty of people who don't think the new rules are stupid.

The Unaccompanied Minor policy is not too difficult to live by. Children 13, 14 and 15 years of age can travel from manned stations between the hours of 6am and 9pm. You simply have to arrive at the station one hour before scheduled departure time for some paperwork and so the ticket agent can interview the child. On overnight long distance trains at night, all other employees are in bed except the conductors. Unaccompanied minors shouldn't be on the train overnight. That still leaves and awful lot of possibilities for daytime travel on the Amtrak system. At 16 years of age there are no restrictions whatsoever on travel anywhere an Amtrak. The policy seems pretty reasonable and accommodating.

But this girl was bothering no one.

How does that matter? I don't believe the conductor handled the situation properly but nevertheless the girl shouldn't have been on the train in the first place in the manner and from the station which she boarded. Whether she was bothering anyone or not is irrelevant.

 

[AmtrakBlue]

The one thought I keep having, in defense of the UM policy, is what if the train is envolved in an highly unlikely bad accident, like the on in Nevada last year. The conductor and the OBS are busy making sure ALL passengers are ok and safe until emergency personnel arrive. Knowing our some adults wouldn't handle an emergency well, I wouldn't want to have to be responsible for kids who might wander off in their fear or confusion of the situation.

 

[AlanB]

By having Amtrak make up rules about how we should parent, we are turning the issue over to the party that may be one of the least competent of all. Amtrak's role should be strictly limited to protecting riders from each other. Do you want to be seated next to an unaccompanied 6-year-old? No? Understandably not. (Though, let it be noted in passing, families are split this way on planes all the time: on my last Seattle - Burbank trip on Alaska Airlines, my 5- and 7-year old daughters and myself were placed in 3 middle seats, several rows from each other, and this struck no one as strange — except for the little girls, who were in tears).

In this case, is this 15 year old any more or less likely to get in the way of your travel experience than someone of another age? Hold the jokes: the answer is no.

Make the rules make sense, and we'll be happy to follow them. These rules should be set by the families involved, not by an organization whose job it is to grease axles.

Amtrak isn't making up rules about how you should parent. They are making rules about how they're going to parent your kids. You are NOT on the train and therefore you cannot possibly be parenting your child the entire time. If your child chooses to misbehave while on that train and during your absence as a parent, it is the conductor who must do the parenting for the safety of your child & everyone else.

Now if you happen to be a very good parent, then your influence as a parent will help guide your child to do the right things. Unfortunately like with everything in life, there are good parents and there are bad parents. Additionally, there are good kids and there are bad kids, sometimes despite the best efforts of their parents.

 

[jis]

I am just curious as to why Amtrak upped the age recently? While they were at it should they have upped it to 21 or higher? Afterall might as well cover a bigger chunk of ones derrier while one is at it.

Greyhound's UM Policy is:

Unaccompanied Children

Any passenger under the age of 8 must be accompanied by a passenger at least 15 years of age or older at all times. Passengers between the ages of 8 and 14 years of age inclusive, may travel unaccompanied at full adult fare if the following conditions are met in their entirety:

If any of the above conditions are not met, then the passenger must be accompanied by a passenger at least 15 years of age or older in order to travel.

The passenger's trip will begin and end on the same schedule (no transfers).

The passenger's trip will be no longer than five (5) hours in duration.

The passenger's trip (origin to destination) must take place during daylight hours only.

Both the origin and destination stations are full service agencies or company operated facilities.

The destination station will be open at the time the passenger is scheduled to arrive.

Parent, Guardian or Legal Custodian of the child must complete and sign the Unaccompanied Child Form authorizing the child to make the trip and return this to the Customer Service Supervisor on duty. This form specifically names the person authorizing the trip and the person meeting the child at the destination station and the telephone number(s) at which this person may be contacted. It also provides an emergency contact name and telephone number in the event it is needed.

In order for the child to be released at the destination, the person named on the Unaccompanied Child Form as the one meeting the child must have positive picture identification, such as a driver's license or state issued identification card, and provide such to the agent at the destination station. Without such identification, the child will be released into the custody of Child Protective Services or to local law enforcement officials in the destination city.

A fee of $5 will be assessed for each child traveling unaccompanied.

If any of the above conditions are not met, then the passenger must be accompanied by a passenger at least 15 years of age or older in order to travel.

Tickets for unaccompanied children are not sold online.

What is it that would make Amtrak less safe than Greyhound for 15 year olds? Was there any significant incident that caused the change? I am not aware of one.

As you can see, I come from the school of belief that this is an example of random rule making gone amok. Of course one can disagree with that position as a matter of opinion, but I cannot find any logical reason for the tightening of the age requirement other than gratuitous rule making that government agencies are well known for. "We make rules just because we can".

 

[PRR 60]

I am just curious as to why Amtrak upped the age recently? While they were at it should they have upped it to 21 or higher? Afterall might as well cover a bigger chunk of ones derrier while one is at it.

Greyhound's UM Policy is:

Unaccompanied Children

Any passenger under the age of 8 must be accompanied by a passenger at least 15 years of age or older at all times. Passengers between the ages of 8 and 14 years of age inclusive, may travel unaccompanied at full adult fare if the following conditions are met in their entirety:

If any of the above conditions are not met, then the passenger must be accompanied by a passenger at least 15 years of age or older in order to travel.

The passenger's trip will begin and end on the same schedule (no transfers).

The passenger's trip will be no longer than five (5) hours in duration.

The passenger's trip (origin to destination) must take place during daylight hours only.

Both the origin and destination stations are full service agencies or company operated facilities.

The destination station will be open at the time the passenger is scheduled to arrive.

Parent, Guardian or Legal Custodian of the child must complete and sign the Unaccompanied Child Form authorizing the child to make the trip and return this to the Customer Service Supervisor on duty. This form specifically names the person authorizing the trip and the person meeting the child at the destination station and the telephone number(s) at which this person may be contacted. It also provides an emergency contact name and telephone number in the event it is needed.

In order for the child to be released at the destination, the person named on the Unaccompanied Child Form as the one meeting the child must have positive picture identification, such as a driver's license or state issued identification card, and provide such to the agent at the destination station. Without such identification, the child will be released into the custody of Child Protective Services or to local law enforcement officials in the destination city.

A fee of $5 will be assessed for each child traveling unaccompanied.

If any of the above conditions are not met, then the passenger must be accompanied by a passenger at least 15 years of age or older in order to travel.

Tickets for unaccompanied children are not sold online.

What is it that would make Amtrak less safe than Greyhound for 15 year olds? Was there any significant incident that caused the change? I am not aware of one.

As you can see, I come from the school of belief that this is an example of random rule making gone amok. Of course one can disagree with that position as a matter of opinion, but I cannot find any logical reason for the tightening of the age requirement other than gratuitous rule making that government agencies are well known for. "We make rules just because we can".

I think you nailed it. It is Amtrak's government agency mindset. Yes, I know that Amtrak is not technically a gevernment agency, but if walks like a duck...

Here is a statement from Amtrak to MSNBC at the time the change was made:

“This is not in response to any incidents,” Jeff Snowden, Amtrak senior director of service delivery, said in a statement, but “... out of an abundance of concern for the comfort and safety of all our travelers.”

Somebody at Amtrak had a bug up their butt about this, they gathered a bunch of suits around some conference table, banged their little heads together for a couple of hours, and came up with this nonsense. Why? Because they are in charge. Airlines say a 15 year old is perfectly able and welcome to travel anywhere by themselves, including making connections if needed at ORD, ATL, DFW or other large, confusing airports. Amtrak says, "Go home kid, your not welcome here", after over 40 years of permitting travel by kids that same age with no incidents.

 

[Big Iron]

Something to fan the flames of Amtrak inconsistency. When I rode 164 in February there were two young girls who boarded at ALX and were sitting in business class. I estimate their age at under 12. When the train left WUS the new condutor knew the girls. Overhearing the conversation (they were seated across from me) the girls were the daughters of a good friend of the Condutor. He spent most of the time talking with them but did leave a few times to do his job. The two girls got off the train in Baltimore.

Clearly the girls were underage, boarded at a manned station, and were unaccompanied......unless you consider the conductor their guardian.

 

[TimePeace]

I love the verb in the title of the thread, which has been used in some of the comments as well: "Amtrak throws..." etc.

It conjures up this great mental image of a scowling conductor holding the girl by the seat of the pants and the scruff of the neck, and tossing her off into the weeds by the tracks out in the middle of nowhere. A perfect image to continue the theme of how utterly lame Amtrak is; a nice contrast with the theme of how utterly stupid the girl and her parents are.

 

[Ispolkom]

Others can pretend the world is just as safe and secure and all Pleasantville as it was when we were kids, whatever, it most certainly is not.

This is absolutely spot-on true. The world isn't as safe as secure as when I was a kid. It's much more safe and secure. Violent crime has declined remarkably since 1973.

Sadly, sensationalization of crime by television news has only increased.

 

[jis]

Somebody at Amtrak had a bug up their butt about this, they gathered a bunch of suits around some conference table, banged their little heads together for a couple of hours, and came up with this nonsense. Why? Because they are in charge. Airlines say a 15 year old is perfectly able and welcome to travel anywhere by themselves, including making connections if needed at ORD, ATL, DFW or other large, confusing airports. Amtrak says, "Go home kid, your not welcome here", after over 40 years of permitting travel by kids that same age with no incidents.

It may be a good idea to ask a pointed question about this matter to Amtrak bosses when a chance presents itself next, and see what they have to say. Specifically it might be worth asking them why they believe Amtrak is less safe than Greyhound and the airlines, and what are their plans to improve safety to make it as safe as Greyhound and the airlines, so as to allow 15 year olds to travel again, and see what they have to say.

I wonder how many of the suits who butted their heads together to come up with this are now not suits at Amtrak anymore too.

BTW I found this blog that aligns quite a bit with my opinion on this matter. The Animal House style double speak from Amtrak is quite interesting too.

OK, I guess now it is time for me to duck, since of all the sites discussing this matter this one is the most pro-Amtrak management on this matter that I have come across.