Narrative:

I was assisting a passenger with an personal oxygen container (poc). The customer was listed on flight attendant information sheet. Initially at boarding; flight had open seats. I had the device (because it is big) placed under the seat by window; male passenger requiring oxygen in the middle; wife on aisle; row 3 def. Twenty or so minutes later; before oxygen mask demo; wife of man on oxygen said to us that he was not receiving oxygen and that the device had to be upright. System was approved; and since the passenger under ada; we stood the device upright in front of seat 3F. Since we have no general knowledge of how these devices work; I assumed that since they are approved by the FAA; and since the company allows for the carriage of such; and since the passenger required the use of it; that under ada (american with disabilities act) we were required to provide proper accommodation for the device and the customer. Since the device; according to the customer; required being upright for the device to work; I assumed we were required to allow the device to be upright next to the customer so the customer was provided with life needed oxygen. My 'C' flight attendant and I did further research of this situation in the flight attendant manual (fam) as this was a first in my entire career. Fam states that the device must be stowed beneath the seat for takeoff and landings; but it does not mention a situation as indicated above: an approved device with the customer requiring it (the husband) and the accompanying customer (the wife) insisted that it had to be upright for such to be operational. A device in which the customer said needed on a continuous basis; and nowhere does it provide us (the flight attendants) a basic understanding of what they are in depth; whether they require to be upright in order for such to be operational; and if such is not the case; then how we can communicate to the using customers that they are in fact operating the device the wrong way; and how we as an airline protect ourselves from negative retaliation from the said customers under the ada. For a situation as this; fam states it has to be stowed for takeoff and landing; but like any medically assisted devices that would seem to be protected under ada under reasonable accommodations. Fam does not go in depth for a situation such as the one above; and recurrent training does not train us on the basic operation/understanding of these devices when faced with such a situation; especially when the said customer claims the device must be upright for such to be operational; and therefore if such claims were true as we have no basic knowledge of operations of such; and therefore such was cleared by customer service agent; and that such device is an approved device; then I was to assume that consideration of such operational constraints were taken into consideration by the FAA; and therefore I believe that since such operational constraints were seemingly approved; that we would have been required to act as I need; and especially and therefore providing proper accommodation under ada. The device was by the window; the egress of the customer was not obstructed in the event of a called evacuation. The device was stable in its respective cradle; and the customer was receiving oxygen as said to be required by both himself and his wife.give us more information about the devices; whether they require to be upright or not in order to be operational; basic understanding on the operation of all devices approved by the FAA; whether these devices can work laying down; more in depth training on how to explain to ada customers that they are doing wrong; and most of all; provide us with proper explanation on how we are protected from legal retaliation from the said customers under ada by explaining to them that their devices seeming as I was told today does work laying down when the said customer where vehement about what they believed that the said approved poc device could only work while standing up.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A flight attendant allowed a Personal Oxygen Container (POC) to remain upright during takeoff and landing because the ADA law requires accommodating the disabled and the system did not provide oxygen when lying flat.

Narrative: I was assisting a passenger with an Personal Oxygen Container (POC). The Customer was listed on Flight Attendant Information Sheet. Initially at boarding; flight had open seats. I had the device (because it is big) placed under the seat by window; male passenger requiring oxygen in the middle; wife on aisle; Row 3 DEF. Twenty or so minutes later; before oxygen mask demo; wife of man on oxygen said to us that he was not receiving oxygen and that the device had to be upright. System was approved; and since the passenger under ADA; we stood the device upright in front of seat 3F. Since we have no general knowledge of how these devices work; I assumed that since they are approved by the FAA; and since the Company allows for the carriage of such; and since the passenger required the use of it; that under ADA (American with Disabilities Act) we were required to provide proper accommodation for the device and the Customer. Since the device; according to the Customer; required being upright for the device to work; I assumed we were required to allow the device to be upright next to the Customer so the Customer was provided with life needed oxygen. My 'C' Flight Attendant and I did further research of this situation in the Flight Attendant Manual (FAM) as this was a first in my entire career. FAM states that the device must be stowed beneath the seat for takeoff and landings; but it does not mention a situation as indicated above: an approved device with the Customer requiring it (the husband) and the accompanying Customer (the wife) insisted that it had to be upright for such to be operational. A device in which the Customer said needed on a continuous basis; and nowhere does it provide us (the flight attendants) a basic understanding of what they are in depth; whether they require to be upright in order for such to be operational; and if such is not the case; then how we can communicate to the using customers that they are in fact operating the device the wrong way; and how we as an airline protect ourselves from negative retaliation from the said customers under the ADA. For a situation as this; FAM states it has to be stowed for takeoff and landing; but like any medically assisted devices that would seem to be protected under ADA under reasonable accommodations. FAM does not go in depth for a situation such as the one above; and recurrent training does not train us on the basic operation/understanding of these devices when faced with such a situation; especially when the said Customer claims the device must be upright for such to be operational; and therefore if such claims were true as we have no basic knowledge of operations of such; and therefore such was cleared by Customer Service Agent; and that such device is an approved device; then I was to assume that consideration of such operational constraints were taken into consideration by the FAA; and therefore I believe that since such operational constraints were seemingly approved; that we would have been required to act as I need; and especially and therefore providing proper accommodation under ADA. The device was by the window; the egress of the Customer was not obstructed in the event of a called evacuation. The device was stable in its respective cradle; and the Customer was receiving oxygen as said to be required by both himself and his wife.Give us more information about the devices; whether they require to be upright or not in order to be operational; basic understanding on the operation of all devices approved by the FAA; whether these devices can work laying down; more in depth training on how to explain to ADA customers that they are doing wrong; and most of all; provide us with proper explanation on how we are protected from legal retaliation from the said customers under ADA by explaining to them that their devices seeming as I was told today does work laying down when the said Customer where vehement about what they believed that the said approved POC device could only work while standing up.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2013 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.