Originally Posted by
bon mot
Per the OP, all children in this thread were under adult control. And nothing prevented the woman in 6 from handing the infant back to her companion. And before Saver seats (which 22B is not), all parents had to “pony up" or find another mode of transportation. And sharing one’s opinion in a forum is one reason why we’re all here. I note no pettiness, only dialogue from those who do not wish to be inconvenienced by families who prefer not to plan accordingly. “Actions have consequences” applies to parents, too.
Because of safety concerns, you can't subject children to danger as a way of increasing ancillary profitability. You can scream "cheapskate parents" all you want, but if some kid is molested on an AS flight because Alaska's systems are insufficient and the flight crew refused to invoke their absolute power to alter seat assignments, the carrier going to suffer far more public anger than the parents. In an emergency, as a fellow passenger, do you want Dad going upstream and flinging people back into their seats so he can get to his 6 year old daughter 15 rows behind him?
Frankly, any airline that allows such a condition, no less encourages it by their business model, deserves every last bit of what they'll receive.
I was careful to refer to adult/child pairs. If a Mom, Dad, and one minor child are traveling, one adult and the child should be seated together without fee. Dad wants to sit with Mom and baby? Pay the fee, select the seat. I two adults and two children are flying, each child should be seated next to a parent without fee, but the if the family wants to sit all together, one adult must pay the seat selection fee to choose a seat adjacent to the other adult.
Saver fares as I said should be off limits to minor children unless they pay the UMC fee.