+1

Although neither person was entitled to the seat, and neither is "morally" obliged to allow the other to have the seat...the aisle guy was a jerk.

It's called manners. Just like letting pregnant women/elderly have a seat on a bus. Not a law, but it sure is a nice thing to do. Sometimes it's just the right thing to do....sacrificing something minor to be nice to someone, even if you're "right."

I mostly agree with this premise, but would it be that much of an imposition for two parents traveling together to carry a lap child who, for example, always stays on the lap of whichever parent is in the window seat? I realize that's not at all the situation the OP was describing, and I also cringe every time I see a solo parent carrying a lap child in the middle seat (I've also been the "victim" of a flight like the one you described), but your crusade against the institution of lap children goes a bit too far IMO.

Not too far off.

The parent referenced in the OP made the mistake of not bringing an FAA-approved child safety seat on board. If there is an open seat available, a car seat can be used in said open seat, even for a lap child. In such a situation, the car seat goes in the window seat, and the parent goes in the middle seat.

I do not know if a lap child gets priority for an open seat without an FAA-approved child safety seat on board.

From my experience, if you are traveling with an infant in two seats, you have no need for the arm rest that you are sharing with the third person in the row (unless, perhaps, you have massively wide shoulders).

If it's that uncomfortable, buy the extra seat. Don't expect the use of an empty seat because you're uncomfortable. If that's the case, then anyone who is uncomfortable on a plane should expect to use an empty seat.

The gentleman in the aisle seat certainly expected to be able to use the empty seat next to him, no?

^^^Cool!

The fact is the mother repected his request, although the baby just like all of us, is a human being, and although not charged for the ticket, deserves comfort just as the aisle guy does who decided to check into an aisle seat with an empty middle seat. Just because the child didn't have a paid ticket, airlines go out of their way if there is an open seat, to assign the single mother traveller with child for that extra seat.

Sit the child down first.. bleed a bit.. fine over the armrest.. or lift the armrest and be a bit more comfortable.. The main thing is there is lots of leg room under.. so that's his real estate.. but c'mon, denying another human being a seat when one is available because you can't move your fat a__ is treating another human being unequally IMO and hurting a child by denying comfort for his own selfish reasoning. The guy in the aisle use to be a kid as well.. very unlikely a stranger would treat him like that when the aisle guy was less than two years old.

But, isn't it the child's parent denying him or her of a seat? It is the parent who chose to not provide the baby a seat of their own. If I recall correctly from the OP, the aisle pax was taking up about 1/2 the seat. Couldn't the child have taken up the other half?

I am the mother of two young kiddos but aside from several flights while younger than 4 months old, they have both had their own seats (in FAA approved car seats) on each flight we've taken. I just don't like the idea that a parent traveling with a child, who chooses to hold that child instead of getting them their own seat, has any more right to an open seat than anyone else.

When was the last time you've had your kids stick up for themselves when they are less than two? You've got a point.. I would have stick my kid on the other half of the seat.. in fact I've got a 5 year old and a 1 year old.

Pop down the tray, use the extra seat tray for your drink or food, bleed into the seat a bit, put your legs under.. but for cryin out loud, let the kid sit in the seat.. they are human beings who can't talk to stick up for themselves.. why pin this on the parents?

I think the aisle passenger was perfectly right. If nobody has a boarding pass for the middle seat, then it's common space.

It's amazing how many people on this thread never learned how to share.

..like the aisle passenger that you described that's perfectly right.@:-)

hmmm...didn't think this would get so heated.

Exactly - and well put. A few posters here are saying the parent should have purchased a seat for their child - well the aisle passenger could have purchased a first class seat.

Not all parents travelling by plane can afford an extra seat.

What is actually quite eye opening is the fact that some people on here seem to think that Mr Slobby in the aisle seat (the ONLY one he had booked and paid for) was justified in his actions.

Granted the parent of the child had not paid to use the middle seat either - but given that it was empty - do those who applaud him really think that his rights over it were any greater than those of the parent? I realise that for some people who fly - their manners and social conscience seem to go out of the window the moment they board an aircraft, and it becomes all about ME! ME! ME! but most of us would always applaud some good old fashioned courtesy and consideration - especially in a case like this.

The child is a human being after all - and i really think that a real live small person has MORE right to the seat than inanimate objects like books, bags and coats which can be stowed in seat pockets in overheads and on the unused floor space.

And as they are small and would be sitting closer to the parent (probably with the armrest up), the aisle passenger would have both armrests and no infringement of space round his shoulders which has to make for a more comfortable flight!

See, this claim is one that really ticks me off. If you can't afford it, you shouldn't be there. It's not everyone else's role to help parents save money.

Other people's budgets are of no concern to me. You won';t see me thinking the store or my fellow shoppers should subsidize me or give me a deal when my kid wants the expensive sneakers at the store, so why should it be any different for a trip to disneyland?