planemechanic

Define "soft porn". Is Game of Thrones included in that? If so, your 14 yo daughter has surely seen that and more already.

Rebelyell

My children flew with me a number times, and I must say their behavior was amazing. They cried very little as infants, and were not disruptive. I think they were the exception to the rule. I don't think they ever flew in business or first, though, and if we had been told they couldn't, I would have understood.

Many restaurants don't allow children under 12 or some other age. I remember going out to eat with friends when our children were roughly 6 and 5 and being absolutely stunned that out friends' children simply were not able to eat in a restaurant. These kids are 18 and 16 today and can eat in a restaurant just fine. Setting age limits weeds out the kids who are disruptive, and yes, it also weeds out the quiet, obedient children as well.

I realize there are sometimes loud, obnoxious drunks in first class, although I really haven't run into any. I really haven't run into any unruly children or crying babies either (plenty in coach, though). But my personal opinion is that a premium product is made better by an age limit, and that one airline ought to differentiate itself by putting into effect an age restriction. They will attract the business of those who don't want to be around squalling babies while the other airlines will attract the squalling babies. Everyone wins.

BadgerBoi

Isn't it a bit disturbing that every time this topic comes up in a thread, parents always find it necessary to compare their kids to drunken adults. That's a really creepy comparison, surely people could find something more appropriate.

(I defy anyone to find a thread on FT about the behaviour of kids on planes (particularly in premium cabins) where an indignant parent of a perfect child hasn't dragged the above cliché out.)

Rebelyell

To take this further, how many times have you been on a plane with disruptive children? How many times have you been on a plane with disruptive drunks? The latter, despite news reports, is fairly rare.

MSPeconomist

Sometimes the drunks are arrested. Kids, and their parents, never.

onobond

That is really constructive criticism.

elusive1

For me its pretty easy

If you paying, it's your money, anyone can fly.
For mileage, upgrade certs, non-rev, etc., over 12 only please.

burbuja0512

I haven't read through all 17 pages of this thread, but when I saw the title, the first thing I thought was "oh no.. if you do that, you'll have a bunch of unchaperoned kids in the back of the plane while the parents relax and enjoy life in biz class."

Sorry if this point has been mentioned..

chollie

Perhaps it is just the airlines I fly, but I have never ever witnessed someone watching porn on their laptop.

I have had a number of flights where kids played hand-held games with the volume on 'high' or where my seatmate's Ipod volume was so high (with earphones!) that I needed ear plugs to tune it out.

I have been discomfited by one drunk sleepmate falling asleep, snoring loudly and leaning onto me once. I have been stuck next to snorers a few more times.

I have had a number of flights that were less than stellar because of uncontrolled children - loud voices (if they are old enough to talk, they are old enough to learn the difference between 'indoor' and 'playground' voices), running up and down the aisle, kicking my seat non-stop, fidgeting and knocking my drink off my tray table, etc.

Yes, I have kids. No, I don't hate kids. I do really dislike rude misbehavior of any age and adults who condone such behavior out of laziness.

That said, the vast majority of my flying hours have been unremarkable. The hours that were disrupted by fellow pax were largely the result of undisciplined children.

When folks grumble about comparing a misbehaving adult (drinking, porn-viewing) with a misbehaving child, I think that's a deliberately false comparison. The comparison should be between two adults: one who engages in bad behavior himself and one who condones bad behavior in a child for which he is responsible. IMHO, the second is more contempt-worthy than the first.

nkedel

Amazed this thread hasn't ended up locked, given others on the topic.

Saw this, and figured there will be some unhappy folks on AA transcon J later this summer - direct coach fares were absolutely awful SFO-JFK, and J surprisingly reasonable. We'll see how son (~8 months then) and daughter (a bit past 2 1/2) do.

xSTRIKEx6864

Again, if someone is paying for First/Business class, they are entitled to fly in it.

DSI

"For me its pretty easy

If you paying, it's your money, anyone can fly.
For mileage, upgrade certs, non-rev, etc., over 12 only please."

Can I just add this, too? Under 40, please. IQ's start to drop and abs get flabby. Really don't want to be around old people.

Oh wait, that sounds ridiculous and absurd.

DSI

"Perhaps it is just the airlines I fly, but I have never ever witnessed someone watching porn on their laptop."

I've seen plenty of ladies reading S&M on flights. Fifty Shades of Gray.

You want to go where?

I agree, assuming they behave responsibly. If they don't, then they should be offloaded no matter what their age. Obviously, you can't offload a child alone, so the parents go with the child (which is appropriate as it is far more likely that the child's misbehavior is the parents' fault not the child's).

perchance

And 40+ Kate Moss, (with 'all the money in the world'), was just booted off a plane.