Eclipsepearl

My main concern is "what if the baby/toddler gets sick?" I know there are ship doctors, but how good are they.

The only time we had to see someone, for something minor, she was South African.

They are covered for this, since a lot of elderly cruise. There are also ports, where an English speaking doctor can usually be found pretty easily. You're usually not far from shore.

Cruise ships have been known to airlift off seriously ill or injured to hospitals.

Most cruise companies now don't allow babies under about 6 months (may vary) because of the medical issue but for a toddler, I think this is not really a factor. Being on a ship vs. on the ground in a foreign country, medical care is available.

Eclipsepearl

...and about kids and travel, I will say that this is a tough age but mine varied. I think having more than one also changes the dynamics. Two parents and one child, you still have the numbers on your side. I took a toddler to London alone, with two older siblings and she did great. I disagree that you have to get kids "used to" travel, that that will magically make them easier. Toddlers have their moments, or not. The only point to "warming them up" with another trip would be to make sure they don't have sleep issues away from home but you can find this out when visiting relatives, going for a weekend trip, etc.

icedancer

I'm honestly not trying to be rude here, but how is dropping the kid(s) with a sitter for 6 hours a day actually "vacation with the kids"? For what I'd probably pay for a sitter (6hrs x $20-$30hr x 7 days) I could just fly one set of grandparents to town to take care of the kids in our own house and save on the kids' vacation airfare as well. Not everyone has family who can/will do that, of course, but let's compare apples to apples...

exbayern

I would not recommend a cruise at that age.

River cruises tend to ban children.

Cruises to most ports in Europe are port-intensive, and not suited for children of that age, meaning leaving them on board in the nursery (which may incur extra cost), or remaining on board and not seeing the ports (the point of a cruise), or splitting up with one parent staying on board and the other seeing the port. Many excursions have a minimum age requirement. None of those is a great option.

In Paris many visitors are surprised at the number of steps in the Metro. I find it far better than the London Tube overall, but if you have a stroller realise that you will be collapsing it and opening it all day long, and/or carrying it up and down many stairs. Buses are a better option in this case. There is a reason why generally toddlers are expected to walk and not use a stroller much in France and Germany.

Generally, I agree with CDTraveler's advice. Along those lines, I would consider the Côte d'Azur in the shoulder or off season. Pick one place as a base, using trains or buses to visit other areas, or even a rental car. I've posted some advice on the Nice with child thread.

CDTraveler

There are 24 hours in a day.

On the Santa Barbara trip:
We got the child up, had breakfast, played together until his lunch time. The sitter gave him lunch, put him down for a 3 to 4 hour nap, and then took him for a walk. We came back late afternoon, spent some playtime with him, had dinner together and bath and bedtime as a family. Parents had time for grown-up type activities and the child was happier not going hiking, sight-seeing or shopping.

Weren't you the one making negative remarks about being "attached at the hip" to your child during a trip, so that you couldn't pass her off to other people? I don't see how having sitter stay with a toddler during his extended naps makes me a bad parent or disqualifies what we did as "vacation with the kids" because we had help with the child.

Not every family has grandparents capable of babysitting. My parents are deceased and my ex's (not an ex at that time, obviously) wanted nothing to do with babysitting.

Eclipsepearl

Don't feel you have to justify your use of a babysitter on vacation.

This is very personal. Some parents want their kids with them 24/7, while others don't.

If the children are taken care of, I'm not one to judge. I'm a SAHM with a husband who does not help out with the practical care much. I need a bit of a breather while on vacation. I spend enough time with them. Some parents are better about sharing the care. If you're vacationing with family, they can often help out. I rarely had that luxury (unless I was actually visiting family, not on vacation).

Vacation has to be what you want. Some parents need a break from their kids while others see it as time to spend together. You got to do what works for you. It's your vacation, after all. Don't feel the need to explain it...

PWMTrav

Interesting perspective. My wife and I both work, so when we go away, we want to spend all of it with our daughter. It'd be nice to have a sitter at bed time so that we could go to a nice dinner, but we really can't bring ourselves to leave her with someone we don't know or just met through the hotel. My opinion would probably change if one of us stayed at home and needed that breather, though.

icedancer

I'm not calling anyone a bad parent. I'll be the first person to stand up and support the use of nannies so that caregivers can work/get a breather/spend time working on their relationship with their partner so that everyone can be better workers/partners/parents when they are caring for their child. When I discussed the inability to hand the baby off to anyone in our family group, I meant for a 15 minute shower. Not even going out to have fun doing adult things.

Some people, like yourself, CDTraveler, have no choice when it comes to using a nanny on vacation. If that's what it takes for you to get what you want out of travel, that's fine. I honestly support that.

What I was taking issue with is the naming of what you described as "vacationing with the kids." It sounds like the vacation/choice of location was for you and your partner, not for or about the kids, and the choice of location was completely irrelevant to the kids' experience, as the only time the child was out of the hotel was for a walk and possibly dinner. Maybe this is just semantics for some. To me, this is a vacation for the parents that the kid(s) had to come along for...

This is the last I'm going to say on this, as I believe it's veering OT.

For the OP, I think it's important to figure out what you want to get out of this experience, and how important the relaxation aspect is. I can't fully relax when I'm in charge of other people. If the OP is going to be using child care for a large portion of the trip, then I'd choose location based on where you and your partner want to go and where childcare is readily available. But it might be more cost effective to leave the child at home. If you're not planning to use childcare, then you need to figure out how much you are comfortable missing out on, and be realistic about how much you'll actually be able to relax in that case. And have a contingency plan if the kid ends up not being the "angel" traveler.

exbayern

OP, the other place I may suggest is southern Germany, and in particular Upper Bavaria. You could have a very nice holiday apartment for not much money, often complete with kitchen, and have a driving/train/bus holiday to include day trips to Salzburg, München, various castles, nice walks by lakes an mountains, and even some very 'unique' theme parks aimed at smaller children such as Freizeitpark Ruhpolding and its sister park in Marquartstein http://www.freizeitpark.by/ Legoland is a little far for a day trip but possible, or move westwards for part of the holiday to the Black Forest area where there is a lot of family oriented activity but won't necessarily be a holiday entirely child-centered.

I'm not sure why CDTraveler is getting heat for the suggestion of a babysitter/nanny for part of the day. Someone else suggested a cruise, which I pointed out is really not that viable with a small child. Why was that poster not criticised for a suggestion which would as well mean time apart for parents and child? Does a vacation mean spending 24 hours a day together with every family member? (And certainly it sounded like the child had far more than just 'a walk and possibly dinner')

I actually think that the idea of someone to look out for a small child for part of the day is a useful suggestion, and one that people may not have considered. It's just one of several options.

As to the question about why Italy may be more toddler-friendly during mealtimes? Don't expect child menus (except for the most touristic places or fast food places) Children are expected to eat adult food for the most part. However, Italy tends to be extremely child/baby friendly and you will probably find people are very willing and eager to go out of their way for a small child, including strangers offering more assistance, etc.

CDTraveler

You've gone from offensive to outright insulting in your absolutely baseless assumptions about our family travel.

Perhaps you should attempt to check your facts before putting your foot any further in your mouth.

icedancer

If you think I'm going to go searching through your posting history to figure out what you or your family's issues are, guess again. If you feel like sharing here, and I feel like there's something I ought to apologize for, I will.

Based on the words from your own post, I don't think my conclusions were much of a stretch. And I still don't think you've done anything wrong. My judgments/opinions are my own and YMMV.

Eclipsepearl

Someone else suggested a cruise, which I pointed out is really not that viable with a small child.

It's hard to find any sort of childcare for under 3's on cruiseships but there are a few out there. NCL, Disney and I think Royal Caribbean (??) among a few others. Depends sometimes on the time of year and the ship. It will limit what cruises you can take. It IS really viable with a small child but once the parents decide if they even want any kind of childcare, they should also look into what facilities there are for toddlers on their cruise, even if not. Diapered children are usually not allowed in the pools but many cruise ships offer alternatives, like "splash zones" or kiddie pools.

Someone mentioned river cruises. For those not familiar with them, these are much small ships. The seniors like these and I understand some even don't allow children. I haven't taken one but I live on a popular river cruise port stop and once a relative came. I was allowed on the ship and checked it out. Very nice but not very child-friendly. There are plenty of cruises in Europe on the bigger ships, especially in the Med.

Don't expect child menus (except for the most touristic places or fast food places) Children are expected to eat adult food for the most part.

A note on this, as a parent who lives in the region. There are no "Chuck-E-Cheese"s here. Children are welcome in normal restaurants. Child-oriented restaurants are rare and not really done in Europe. Typical restaurants usually have high chairs. The dress code is casual and children are welcome.

I recommend arriving at 7pm when the restaurants in Italy, France, etc. open and you'll have more attention from the wait staff and fewer other customers for jr. to annoy. There might be a child's menu. Don't hesitate to "adjust" it or simply ask them for some plain pasta or steamed veggies for your little one.

roknroll

In July we did London + Dublin with our 1.5 year old. Also were with in-laws who had a 1.5 year old and 3 year old. We had 7 nights splitting it up with 3 nights in London and 4 in Dublin. I think it worked out well, but the London stay was a bit short. We did the train/ferry from London to Dublin and it was pretty easy with the little one. We reserved a table seat on a Virgin train and brought plenty of quiet toys and activities to keep them busy.

Realize that with the toddler, you will not be able to do as much per day as you would by yourself. We planned on one major sight per day which we'd do in the afternoon or morning making sure to schedule it around nap time. Then the other half of the day would be a more casual thing like just walking around shopping or going to a park. Sometimes we made it back to the hotel for the nap, sometimes the nap was in the stroller (which we used to go sit in a pub or cafe to eat in peace).

I think London/Paris is a good idea, but also consider what we did. The Irish people are extremely friendly and having everyone speak English does make it easier with a toddler. The train/ferry was a really fun experience too, plus the Ferry is large with a full pub in it where our son napped while we drank some pints .

We enjoyed London, but it is a very large city with a lot of hustle, bustle, and traffic. Once we got to Dublin we really enjoyed the slower pace and 'walkability'. There were some great day trips as well that worked well with the little one. Paris is different than London, but you're still getting the same big-city experience. Your Italy itinerary would give you a nice mix larger and smaller cities but I think you have too much on there. Venice, Florence, Rome would be ideal. Skip Pisa & Milan, as you will lose too much time in transit, and do 4 nights in each city.

In London we stayed at the Radisson Blu Edwardian Hampshire on points (great way to burn all the Club Carlson points I've built up from promos and the credit card). With the last night free on award stays, we paid only 100k points for 3 nights. The location couldn't be beat, with the lobby door walking right into Leicester Square. Plenty of stuff within walking distance (National Gallery, parks, Big Ben, London Eye, etc) and there were multiple tube lines within a few blocks.

In Dublin we stayed at the Morrison (newly branded DoubleTree), and got in before the HHonors devaluation. Great use of points there, and as a gold member we had a free breakfast buffet every day. The Morrison was in a great location to walk anywhere, and the light rail was 2 blocks back (took it to the Gaol).