Bring lots of entertainment for them. At least one new toy/coloring book (that they've never seen before) for each hour of travel. If they are real small, a bottle ready to drink when it is time to land. Little ears pop as well as big ones do, but the baby doesn't know what's going on, and drinking helps a lot.

/Pete

On Qantas there are such seats. The middle row bulkhead seats in COACH are reserved for parents with babies which makes it very handy for the parents.

dhacker is absolutely right on this one. I'm a 1K and travel first class all the time but that cannot insulate me completely from inconveniences.

If as a businessperson it is SO important to arrive at a meeting well rested and without any possibility of a disturbance on the flight then there is an answer---charter a jet. If that is too expensive for you then maybe you have to deal with all of the inconveniences of commercial air travel just like everyone else.

deech

Young kids on a flight can be a pain but that is life! They (or rather their parents/guardians) may not have paid as much as an adult but partly that is reflected in the food/drink they consume on board and the less fuel their lower body weight requires. Therefore their rights are equal to those of an adult.

------------------
Mark

Spider, point well taken. I rarely fly QF, but most aircraft have bassinet attachment points on the bulkheads, middle and side sections. However, given the additional fixed space (no reclining seat in front) and ample leg room, on some planes, I often request bulkhead.

From my experience, small babies usually settle down after takeoff, and only cry a bit on pressurization during landing. It is the likely location of toddlers and young kids that I would really like to learn about prior to boarding.

(Edited for bolding)

[This message has been edited by UAL Traveler (edited 01-08-2001).]

[This message has been edited by UAL Traveler (edited 01-08-2001).]

Continental refused to allow my daughter and son-in-law to upgrade to first when traveling with their baby. I have mixed emotions, as a mother who traveled extensively with kids. Depends on the kid and the airline has no way of knowing what the behavior will be. I took someone else's 2 yr old once who screamed non-stop LA to SF. I personally wanted to put him on the wing.

Continental may have broken several laws if they denied the upgrade only based only on having an infant with them. Anti-discrimination laws concerning public accomodations and common-carriers come to mind.

I have mixed emotions about this. I am married but don't have any kids yet. It is aggravating when a young kid is sitting near me and he or she is screaming, crying, etc. It is especially aggravating when both I and the kid are in first class. My feeling is this: if you have enough money or status on an airline to be able to get your very young child into first class, that's your right. But you should also have the decency to fly coach if you know your kid is a noisy traveller. If you fly first class repeatedly and your child always screams, you should have the decency to realize that you are impeding peoples' ability to enjoy a luxury that they have paid for. You should fly coach next time.

And for those who don't like screaming kids or other loud noises, do as I do. I always travel with good earplugs, i.e. the squishy kind that go all the way into the ear and then expand. They block out most noises. Then I put on noise reducing earphones and I can't hear much of anything. But these don't eliminate all noise. I would still be able to hear a screaming baby if he were a few feet away. Then, my only resort is to look at the offending parent and make them feel bad.

I agree with you on this one! It would also be a wonderful thing if other travellers knew wheteher there are any kids in their vicinity on their planned flight. It also wouldn't hurt to make some flights more appealing to passengers with children by giving them a discount while making other flights more unappealing by charging 100% for an infant.


On a different issue, why would any parent who really loves their baby take their child on a plane in the first place since this causes them pain and suffering (popping ears, dry sinuses, irritated eyes, etc...)? A parent who can afford to fly in the front cabin can most certainly afford to hire a baby sitter for the duration of their trip.

premex2000: Why is it more decent to subject coach passengers to a noisy baby? I'm sure a coach airfare for a rare vacation for someone with a low or moderate income is more of a luxury that 1st class is for most of those fortunate enough to get it. 1st is usually obtained by either a free upgrade or on the company expense account. Even when it's paid for by the individual, it may represent less of luxury to a wealthy individual than coach fares are to someone else.

Flying 1st clas entitles me to a bigger seat, more legroom, more individualized service, better food/drink, and a few other perks (lounge access, shorter check-in lines). Flying first-class does not guarantee me that my cabin companions will not be boors, or that my flight attendants will not be surly.

It's the essence of MarieAntoinetteism to suggest that the élite in 1st shouldn't have to hear the wails of an infant, but that it's perfectly ok for the people in coach to enjoy the same concert. Shame on you all who suggest that.

That said, I would strongly support any airline that wanted to offer non-children flights. Such flights might be targeted specifically toward business travellers and would not alow anyone under, say, 10, on board.

(And, by the way, since when are children a protected group in anti-discrimination laws? I can't discriminate based on sex/race/and a few other things, but being an infant isn't one of those categories. Plenty of B&Bs don't allow children; it'd be against the law, though, if they didn't allow Jews or Italians.)

I can think of lots of reasons (not that it would be any of your business). Here are a few:

- visiting relatives to show off new baby
- breastfeeding
- separation anxiety
- enjoyment of being with your family

Spider - i think you must not have children, or else you would be aware of the plethora of reasons why parents might be traveling w/ children. Amazing as it might be to someone without children, it may be as simple as the fact that they like to be with them?

Last year, I took my daughter-in-law and my infant grandson to SanAntonio to visit my son who was "temporarily" (in fact, six months) stationed there. You would have had us drive 24 hours so as not to cause you to have to listen to a few minutes of crying? Or maybe you think the kid should have just done without Dad for six months?

We had a ground hold and were off gate for 25 minutes prior to take off. Immediately on take off, the baby fell asleep. For that 25 minutes, however, the term "Rosemary's Baby" comes to mind. The mother was mortified, but there was nothing that could be done but endure it. We couldn't explain it and couldn't fix it. I found most people to be incredibly tolerant, making jokes, and offering their own horror stories. No one was in the least ugly about the situation.

I'm one of the oldies here - three kids and seven grandkids. Yea - I'd like my own plane and complete control of the world. But I didn't get it this year http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

We better get used to it. Years ago, most of us had children when we were young and broke: we could afford neither baby sitters nor plane fares - for ourselves or our kids. Times have changed. Two-executive families in their 40's with infants are the norm these days. These affluent parents can afford to fly, and do. If sharing our airspace with them is intolerable, we should be looking for other choices for ourselves - not for them.

Just my 2cents worth http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

[This message has been edited by svpii (edited 01-08-2001).]

The children aren't the protected group, but the parents may be. I know that you can't exclude families with children from renting apartments unless the community is an authentic retirement community. B&B's may be exempt from such laws because of their size or perhaps they just don't get challenged. Or maybe I'm wrong and CO did nothing wrong. I did say "MAY" in my post.

Hello,

It seems that there will be kids on the plane regardless. I love kids, don't have any but someday hope to. Anyway, for those of you who have kids, if, for some reason, your kids were being really loud and made it difficult for others. How would you like to be approached about it?

I usually do the ear plugs, noise reduction headsets, close my eyes thing. But a few times, I wish I would have asked the parents to do something. In a couple of instances, I don't think the parents realized that the babies were screaming because their ears hurt and that, so I have been told, giving them a bottle helps with that. But I didn't want to embarrass them (at least I thought I might embarrass them).

I am looking for suggestions that can make a situation better. Kids are gonna be on the plane no matter what. Do the non-children passengers have the right to speak up about it? By the way, I love those kids that kick seats!

Cheers,

Richard