Newsstand - 85 Percent of Flying Public Wants to See Children in Separate Section of Plane

I know that this will probably just start a round of flaming from both sides of the argument, but I was wondering if anyone had any constructive comments on this?

http://www.examiner.com/p-212395~85_Percent_of_Flying_Public_Wants_to_See_Ch ildren_in_Separate_Section_of_Plane.html

"BOSTON (Map) - BOSTON, Aug. 14 /PRNewswire/ -- A new airfarewatchdog.com(TM) poll reveals the frustration that most passengers feel when seated next to an active child or crying baby while flying.

When asked "Should airlines have a section of the plane reserved for parents with babies and smaller children?" 10,170 or 58% of respondents answered, "Yes, they should have done this long ago," while 27% answered, "Yes, but they never will and it'll never work." Only 15% answered, "No, this is a bad idea."

In comments posted on airfarewatchdog.com message boards, some parents with small children said that they would be in a more understanding and supportive environment were they to sit with other families rather than next to business travelers and adults traveling without children.

....

To see the poll results, go to
http://www.airfarewatchdog.com/link/kidssurvey"

By way of observation - although this has already been discussed to death -

People who aren't travelling with children don't want to sit near children. Really. Even if they are well behaved, because it puts you on edge - you're never sure they'll be well behaved until it's all over. And people who pay to sit in premium cabins usually believe they are paying for a service that doesn't involve sharing a cabin with children.

Right now, people with children can sit wherever they please. And there's little point in people with children trying to be considerate because the favour is unlikely to be returned. And people travelling with children often don't see the problem as others do, because wherever they sit, they will be sat with children. They know this when they set out and for them it's unavoidable.

How and ever, if there were a separate zone for children (or a 90% children free zone) then people with children might be uncomfortable when they are travelling with children, but they'd be guaranteed child free travel for the whole of their lives apart from those awkward occasions for a few years when they do have the little darlings. That ought to be a reward enough for their inconvenience.

Sure, some grown ups would have to sit in the kiddy zone the same as some people have to sit in centre seats. That's an incentive to check in early. But this really is a situation where the common good ought to prevail and the world would be a happier place on balance.

Please continue to follow this thread in the FT Newsstand..
Thanks..
Obscure2k
TravelBuzz Moderator

I hope the airlines are paying attention to this.

I for one would love to see a family section on planes. Air Canada already unofficially reserves the last few rows of the plane for families travelling together, why not make it official? Families usually board first and deplane last so it makes complete sense to make the last few rows the Kids Zone.

I suspect the 85% of passengers are those who travel with their own kids.

In my experience, parents' lack of control in the cabin while their kid runs around screaming seems to imply they'd be happy to forego any contact/supervision during the flight - which a separated cabin would offer.

Win-win.

I wouldn't mind a family secftion of the plane as it would make me less self-conscious about the odd moment when one or other of my children makes a noise.

But I think compulsive-seat-recliners (as in, back for a two-hour flight, but don't return it upright during meals) compulsive seat-kickers, people who take the window seat then need to stand up every hour, people who have their headphones on too loud, who bring smelly food onto the plane, who have a problem with gas or air sickness, who want to talk but have nothing interesting to say, who try to put their carry-ons under their own seat, who want vegetarian food but forget to order it in advance, who have bad breath, squeaky shoes, overly-wide shoulders or hips, decided to watch R-rated films on their laptop so you can see it from the next seat or (if they've reclined) the row behind, men who bring on soft porn magazines, women who think it's okay to cry in public, people who are scared of flying, people who take off their shoes and aren't wearing clean socks, people who see being stuck next to you for a few hours as the ideal chance to save your soul, I think all these people should have their own sections too.

When buying a ticket, passengers could be asked which annoyance category they fit into.

I have not traveled with very small children on a plane - mine were 8 when they first saw the interior of any plane - but as a parent of four, I can say this with some experience behind it.

If one unruly child acts up, or one upset child begins crying, there will often be a ripple effect among the other children nearby. I did not say it always happens, because it does not. There are plenty of parents out there who do manage to keep their children under control, quiet and happy during travel times. Plenty of kids get into a car seat and go to sleep for the duration. But not all.

And when one small kid whose ears won't pop starts fussing, there is a distinct possibility that a nearby small kid will join the chorus just because.

So instead of one crying child within a row of you, there could conceivably be half a dozen in the back of the plane, and that noise would be heard all the way to first class.


On the flip side, several happy children can also make one unhappy kid feel a little better.

It's harder to do when they all have to be buckled in. Children are curious creatures and they want to get up and move around rather than be confined. Hunger comes when hunger comes, not necessarily on a fixed schedule. And what to do with the child whose parents offer a lollipop vs. the parents who offer a carrot stick?

And there will always be some parents with enough money to fly all their kids up front - even the crying babies - and are you sure the airlines want to face the wrath of otherwise frequent business fliers by confining everyone under a specific age to fly in the kids' zone? I can hear the DYKWIA starting already.

"Start wailing, kicking and screaming yourself"

EXCELLENT IDEA :D See how their parents like pay-back ! :D

I hope the airlines are paying attention to this.

I for one would love to see a family section on planes. Air Canada already unofficially reserves the last few rows of the plane for families travelling together, why not make it official? Families usually board first and deplane last so it makes complete sense to make the last few rows the Kids Zone.

Air Canada does not do this - where did you come up with that false fact? I would like to see fat and old people put in the back of the plane since, in an emergency, they could block the evacuation.

I would LOVE to see separate sections for kids! ^

I would LOVE to see separate sections for kids! ^Preferably soundproofed.

Meh... As much as I dislike children, so long as they are quiet and they don't touch me, I really don't care. I've been stuck next to boorish a-holes of every age, sex, colour, and creed in my 30 years of flying. I hate seat-grabbers, kamikaze recliners, stinky food eaters, and loud talkers more than anything else...

Regardless of who is sitting next to me, once I put on my headphones, they cease to exist (Save for the idiot on the UA flight who puked on me a few years back... :mad:).

As there are a lot of parents flying in C and F (like I do), I would like to see, how airlines would also install those sections in the front cabins...

As there are a lot of parents flying in C and F (like I do), I would like to see, how airlines would also install those sections in the front cabins...

On some planes it is easy. Like 747-s where business is split between upper and main deck. Children only on main deck could be reasonable.

Or you could work it by saying that premium cabins and the bulk of economy are child free. Rich parents would have to slum it in the kidzone for a few years but the upside for them is that when they don't travel with children, or when the children have grown up, they will be guaranteed child free premium cabins for ever more. Isn't that a trade worth making?

On some planes it is easy. Like 747-s where business is split between upper and main deck. Children only on main deck could be reasonable.
I think that's a good idea. There are some people who can afford to fly their children business class, I hate them, but that's another story. ;)

On some planes it is easy. Like 747-s where business is split between upper and main deck. Children only on main deck could be reasonable.
Actually, you could do well to totally reconfigure the plane and have the upstairs as a two class (J and Y) kidzone thing, and have the main deck reserved for normal people. And ban kids from F.

Actually, you could do well to totally reconfigure the plane and have the upstairs as a two class (J and Y) kidzone thing, and have the main deck reserved for normal people. And ban kids from F.
There aren't enough children who fly to take the entire upper deck.

And I still think that banning kids from F is no more fair than banning smelly people or people who occasionally offend in any one of a million ways. Kids are part of society. If passengers don't want to travel as a part of society themselves, they should take a personal plane.

There aren't enough children who fly to take the entire upper deck.
In which case there are certainly not going to be enough children to fill the entire lower deck.

I travel a lot with my two growing girls. I think traveling is vitally important to their understanding that the world is made up of many people that although different in many respects also share a great deal. Unfortunately it seems there is an added cost (it is apparent from this thread) to other people when we are on the move. For that I am sorry but I hope that the respect that my children have learned and for the experiences they have garnered even at 10 and 7 allow them to conduct themselves with awareness of other people. I must admit that we have never brought electronic games or ipods on board because I hate that kids seem so removed in their own world they forget about their surroundings. Instead the girls watch, if appropriate, whatever movie is on board or if that is not available then they read or sleep (on the long flights). Please don't brush a swath of disdain on all children or parents. Some are learning how to travel with children and may get it wrong but eventually those kids might even be interesting to sit next to on board.

I would like to see a separate area of the plane. For 2 main reasons, and neither involves the screaming, crying, misbehaved child.

1. Like others mentioned, it would be easier for the children/parents to get on the plane first, settle in the back and then it would be easier for others to get on. Also, upon landing it would be easier as well.
2. Many of the flights I've been on the parents end up separated from the child. I don't know if its because the family books late, or they don't check in online thus leading to separation at the airport. But most of the time, the parents are left to try and rearrange passengers themselves in order to sit next to their child. Or the flight attendant comes on the speaker and asks for volunteers to be reassigned. By this time, everyone is settled and knows if they move, their bags are staying in the same place. The flight ends up not departing on time. If there was an area set aside for children, then the children and parents would be accommodated.

...my children have learned and for the experiences they have garnered even at 10 and 7...It's not a well mannered 7 or 10 year old that annoys most people, it's a howling baby or a shrieking toddler.

It's not a well mannered 7 or 10 year old that annoys most people, it's a howling baby or a shrieking toddler.

9 month old Jasmine has been flying in F with us since one month old. She will continue to do so. I've found that it's usually drunk adults up front that are louder than babies. Maybe we should have a sep. section for them?

Many hold howling babies and loud drunks in equal contempt.

In which case there are certainly not going to be enough children to fill the entire lower deck.
Did anyone suggest that?

But where is the line/row drawn, when you don't have an upper cabin? Just like the smoking days, 1-39 non-smoking, 40-45 smoking. There are just not enough logistics to seperate the kids only cabins.

But where is the line/row drawn, when you don't have an upper cabin? Just like the smoking days, 1-39 non-smoking, 40-45 smoking. There are just not enough logistics to seperate the kids only cabins.

Maybe just fill from the front with families, and from the back with everyone else. Non-family fliers who don't want to sit near children would soon learn to check in earlier :)

Maybe just fill from the front with families, and from the back with everyone else. Non-family fliers who don't want to sit near children would soon learn to check in earlier :)

That sounds like very sound advice. Especially for those that travel frequently. "Hey all you frequent travellers, check in early"

Everyone seems to be trying to find ways to avoid kids.

Better to find ways to deal with the cause, not the symptom. LAZY parents. It's simple to see a parent trying their best to subdue a baby, and I don't think anyone would mind a howler in that case.

However, if I'm disturbed by an annoying child - which mostly involves seat kicking or blubbing loudly because they're not getting their way, I happily annoy the parent. Suggestions like buying Supernanny videos and learning about the Naughty Step would add amusement to any flight.

... I happily annoy the parent. Suggestions like buying Supernanny videos and learning about the Naughty Step would add amusement to any flight.I like this idea.

In fact, I am going to start looking for cheap, used Supernanny or Nanny 911 videos each time I visit Blockbuster. I'll then carry one with me in my carry on bag and when the shrieking, blubbering, and howling starts I'll make a big, concerned, highly visible, production of presenting the video to the proud parents.

Why, with a solution worthy of the late Dean Swift, we could simply stow them in kennels in the baggage hold....

Get "real", folks, 85% of the traveling public would rather all sorts of odd passengers, pets, people of grotesque size, pax with less than adequate bathing frequency, squalling rugrats, scrambling ankle-biters and small carpet- roaches be banned from commercial flight.

I, on the other hand, believe all such should be confined to the F cabin, there to appall the few who actually pay for F fares out of their own pockets, traveling business types over-stuffed with their own self importance, Status-upgraders (Status flyers seem too often those who can't get laid at home or even in houses of ill repute, and require some upgraded treatment to avoid deep depression), and FFs able to grasp the occasional reward flight up front (including me on rare occasions).

What you want and what you get are likely to vary widely, and I suggest all of us self-inure ourselves to proximity to the young in the air. After all, infants and crawlers are infinitely preferable from adolescents and teenagers who ought to be kept caged at home and banned from all travel especially driving!

As someone who has flown as an unaccompanied minor and later with his infant daughter and without, I really think the problem is with the parents.

If you have a cranky, fussy kid outside of a plane, it only gets worse when confined. Perhaps you shouldn't be flying ORD > MXP (as once happened to an extremely fussy child that I shared the flight with).

But it can be done. Here are my favored tactics.

Try to wear them out at the airport. Try to fly at nap time. Bring snacks and drinks--plenty. Never have a lap child in the middle seat. Never sit a seat child next to a non-family member. Be aware that seat assignments don't always have bearing on reality (I aim for back of the plane seats with baby, but you can't always get what you want). Bring lots of ear plugs as handouts if the unspeakable happens (which luckily hasn't happened to us, but we bring them anyway). Bring toys/books/whatnot to keep the kid occupied. Bring an understanding that not everyone finds your child as charming as you do. Bring motion-sickness meds. And be aware that your job on the flight is total child management.

If only other parents would do the same, other people might not notice that you've brought a child with. You'll just have a small passenger.

Yes, it can be done. But you've got to really do your homework as a parent when bringing a child on the plane. Bottom line: know your child and plan accordingly--even if this means not bringing your darling child with.

Sorry, but the idea of separating kids from adults is one of the dumbest ideas I've heard in a long time.

Yes, I have occasionally had flights that were made less comfortable by the presence of a screaming child. But for every time that has happened, I have had several where I had to tolerate an annoying adult. If we segregate the cabins as suggested, the odds of being closer to one of these annoying adults goes up. No thanks....

I propose a new poll: Ask flyers if they want to be separated from adults who will kick the back of their seats; or recline into their laps; or drink too much, etc. My guess is that the percentage in favor of those changes will be far greater than 85%.

85% of passengers would prefer not to sit next to anyone they're not related to (or not even that).

Can't we all just get along?

There is likely a highly asymetric effect here. Few of the 85% would pay extra, or switch airlines because of a separate child-freindly section. However, it seems quite probably that at least a small proportion of parents flying with kids would switch to a carrier not having such a policy.

So it seems like this would be a money-losing proposition, which is probably why no airline has even tried it.

My own survey shows that 85% of toddlers want what they want, when they want it. I hope the airlines notice my survey's results and respond accordingly.

There are kid free cruises..why not kid free airlines?

Fat people are much more offensive than babies. I'd fly an airline that banned fat people any day.

There are kid free cruises..why not kid free airlines?

If you hate money, investing in such an airline would be a good way for you and your money to part ways for good.

Fat people are much more offensive than babies. I'd fly an airline that banned fat people any day.

As someone who does not need a seatbelt extender but does need his entire paid for seat, I have to disagree. Fat people are only worse if they are sitting next to me and don't similarly fit in their own seat, whereas a screaming person of any age is is offensive to several rows of passangers, and parents of children who aid and abet children watching Spongebob Squarepants on "personal" DVD players without headsets or earphones are offensive unto the world.

Yes, I have occasionally had flights that were made less comfortable by the presence of a screaming child. But for every time that has happened, I have had several where I had to tolerate an annoying adult. If we segregate the cabins as suggested, the odds of being closer to one of these annoying adults goes up. No thanks....

I propose a new poll: Ask flyers if they want to be separated from adults who will kick the back of their seats; or recline into their laps; or drink too much, etc. My guess is that the percentage in favor of those changes will be far greater than 85%.
This misunderstands probability. Most pax are adults. On most flights, very, very few pax are children. However, the probability of a child being disruptive is very much higher than the probability of an adult being disruptive. Therefore, although you are likely to be offended by adults more than children, when you are in the vicinity of children the chance of being disrupted is higher than when you are not in the vicinity of children. That's why it makes sense to have separate children's areas.

In the same way, when they allowed smoking on planes, it made sense to have separate smoking areas - even though other people had annoying habits too.

And if it were possible to identify in advance who would become drunken boors, they should have a separate area too. But right now there isn't such a method to identify them, so sitting near them remains pot luck.

A plane full of small kids would use a lot less fuel. In short, they could pass the discount on to me...

I keep hearing and reading "it's usually not the kids, it's the parents. If only they (the parents) would...' True. But 'they' (the parents) all too often don't do whatever it takes to keep their kids in check.

For many years, over three different cities, I attended services of a protestant denomination I'm not going to name. Traditionally, the rear pews were reserved for parents with small and/or unruly children.

For many years, over three different cities, I attended services of a protestant denomination I'm not going to name. Traditionally, the rear pews were reserved for parents with small and/or unruly children.

That's why I prefer to take my kids to Italy for vacation. They're far less uptight about kids and their antics.

That's why I prefer to take my kids to Italy for vacation. They're far less uptight about kids and their antics.

I think you misunderstood my point. There was no seating enforcement. Folks with infants and small children were encouraged to sit in the rear pews because it was easier to take a crying infant or an unruly child out to the nave to calm them down. No one, including my parents, wanted to march down the length of the church with a crying infant or a tantrum-throwing child.

I've seen the 'laissez-faire' attitude towards children's 'antics' in Europe. I've also heard similar words used to excuse unruly behavior.

I never heard anyone, including my own parents, object to the 'policy'. The attitude was that there are child places, adult places and family places. High school jocks don't start a game of touch football in a pre-school playground. Conversely, if a child is going to sit in box seats at the ballet or opera, an 'adult' place, then presumably they should be capable of behaving in 'grown up' manner. My parents would not have taken one of us children to an 'adult' restaurant or event until we were old enough to behave appropriately.

Kicking the back of a seat, screaming, throwing food or refusing to stay seated when told to - these behaviors are not 'antics'.

I keep hearing and reading "it's usually not the kids, it's the parents"...And most of us don't much care whose fault it is.

And most of us don't much care whose fault it is.


I agree! ^

I don't care either - children are free to misbehave (except for mine).

...Folks with infants and small children were encouraged to sit in the rear pews because it was easier to take a crying infant or an unruly child out to the nave to calm them down. ...

Sounds like an arrangement everyone would like. A lot of churches have enclosed "crying rooms" with speakers, which is an even better idea.

I don't think these things are feasible for an airline, though.

there is an endless supply of things 100% of people want... :D

With the possible exception of double-decker planes, this idea is not feasible.

Fat people are much more offensive than babies. I'd fly an airline that banned fat people any day.

Actually I find both offensive.

Fat people are much more offensive than babies.

I'm having evil thoughts about how we can combine obese passengers and babies - involving seat over-spillage... and a much quieter baby.

I'm shocked at myself :eek:

I'm having evil thoughts about how we can combine obese passengers and babies - involving seat over-spillage... and a much quieter baby.

I'm shocked at myself :eek:

A 300 pound lap child is the answer! Don't worry slowly but surely were getting there.

A 300 pound lap child is the answer!
I actually was on one flight where a fellow passenger was trying to pass her obese must-surely-have-been-at-least-six-year-old off as an under 2 lap passenger. It was actually rather funny. The flight attendant didn't say anything but there were no spare seats so the mother had to sit with said child on her lap for the two hour flight. She must have been very, very uncomfortable. Anyone who'll put up with that to save the $150 of an extra ticket probably really needs the money.

9 month old Jasmine has been flying in F with us since one month old. She will continue to do so. I've found that it's usually drunk adults up front that are louder than babies. Maybe we should have a sep. section for them?

Why would you want to subject your nine month old to the drunks up front?

It's not a well mannered 7 or 10 year old that annoys most people, it's a howling baby or a shrieking toddler.

What's REALLY annoying is when the mother is sitting there with a smile on her face while the kid howls.

What's REALLY annoying is when the mother is sitting there with a smile on her face while the kid howls.And then comes to FT and posts about what angels her kids are.

On some planes it is easy. Like 747-s where business is split between upper and main deck. Children only on main deck could be reasonable.

Does that solve the problem once and for all? :p

I travel a lot with my two growing girls. I think traveling is vitally important to their understanding that the world is made up of many people that although different in many respects also share a great deal. Unfortunately it seems there is an added cost (it is apparent from this thread) to other people when we are on the move. For that I am sorry but I hope that the respect that my children have learned and for the experiences they have garnered even at 10 and 7 allow them to conduct themselves with awareness of other people. I must admit that we have never brought electronic games or ipods on board because I hate that kids seem so removed in their own world they forget about their surroundings. Instead the girls watch, if appropriate, whatever movie is on board or if that is not available then they read or sleep (on the long flights). Please don't brush a swath of disdain on all children or parents. Some are learning how to travel with children and may get it wrong but eventually those kids might even be interesting to sit next to on board.

Unfortunately the fact, that the world is made up of people of all ages and all dispositions, seems to be lost on some of our frequent flyers. :p

Hello, people, this looks to be a NON-SCIENTIFIC WEB POLL :rolleyes: which in fact is still open at http://www.airfarewatchdog.com/ReaderSurvey/tabid/73/Default.aspx , and the linked article is NOT A NEWS ARTICLE but A PRESS RELEASE :rolleyes: from the sponsoring website published in THE EXAMINER. If the mods are going to continue to allow publicity stunts to be posted in Newsstand, could we apply at least some minimal critical thinking before the wails begin? :rolleyes: Oh wait, this is an election year, so our brains have been shut down for months...

Unfortunately the fact, that the world is made up of people of all ages and all dispositions, seems to be lost on some of our frequent flyers. :p

^^^^

I was transatl. FA many years ago, and have been a frequent flyer for at least 25+ years.

As I try to recall, the horror stories, i.e bad experiences on countless flights, I can honestly say, both as a crew member and a pax, that these do not involve babies or small children. Adolescents (especially those "visiting" parents flyings premium cabins!) ~ and rowdy/loud adults, are by far the more annoying. Their total lack of consideration for others is just plain rude.

Sure, some grown ups would have to sit in the kiddy zone the same as some people have to sit in centre seats. That's an incentive to check in early. But this really is a situation where the common good ought to prevail and the world would be a happier place on balance.

Who says kiddy zone would be in the back ?

And do we have 6 class planes:
F with out kids
F with Kids
C without kids
C with kids,
Y without kids
Y with kids
E+ without
and with kids and
possibly the same for
women and
men
smelly people,
fat people,
orthodox, -- ooops big no no - was tried in the 30's and some small percentage in the world didn't like this too much
Muslims and
atheists, and
Evangelicals,
black and
white- oopps I think we had that this one also before and it didn't quite work
Asians and
Latinos and what other preference can we think of -
gay,
heterosexuals accepting gay,
heterosexuals not accepting gay,
militant anti gay,
militant gay,
vegetarians,
vegans
allergic people - separated by
nuts,
lactose,
peanuts, and
fish


oh as I come to think:

vegetarian gay with kids
vegetarian lactose intolerant without kids

would it be kids alone or kids with parents

visiting hours for kids or not

why not have separate flights - one for families - one for individuals

Oh I forgot old people can be quite a nuisance
and sick people ughh
ohh just any people - I hate them I want my plane for myself


I think I have detected a little issue though - not sure just maybe ....

children below 3 in the overhead. up to 12 in the cargo hold. teenagers on the wing......problem solved.

Not even a scientific poll, but simply a poll of self-selected people on their web site. Worthless.