Like any paper would, the Mail have doubtless edited the copy to read as though the mother is holding only the airline responsible - any mention of her own grief at her parental shortcomings would have been ruthlessly cut.
Add to that her choice in allowing her son to walk around with his hair in a particularly challening style, and it makes it all look bac for her.
There is no mention of her attempts to track him down - which would not have been difficult, siimply look for an unaccompanied child with the stupidist haircut in the airport that year - they'd have found him in a flash!