You'd rather have a four year old sitting next to you, crying, for 3 hours than move?

If someone asks me to move I don't care - Hell, I'll even offer if I see flustered parents. If I'm travelling alone what difference does it make to me if I'm 32A or 27F? Zero.

I'm not going to move into a middle seat, but that's rarely required (and I'd happily give it up).

I have no intention of sitting next to an unattended four year old. Your child isn't my responsibility. I'd call the FA who, undoubtedly, would simply deboard you both.

Then feel free to move. It's been explained ad nauseum why others won't and, just like parents, you don't get to tell other people where they have to sit.

In my experience even national flag carriers such as AF do not allow preselection of seats for intra-European flights.

Interesting - Probably a purely academic question as I'm sure they'd find two people willing to move so a child could sit with a parent, but I wonder if they'd really deplane the family?

If my kid was sitting next you reading Dr. Suess, what would be the criteria to deplane us?

I've seen them do it.

I'm not your baby sitter and won't take responsibility for your child. I've had UMs seated next to me, and they've been find -- better than fine, in fact -- they were perfect little ladies and gentlemen (these were kids around 7 or 8 I think). However, because they were UMs, the airline was responsible for their safety and comfort, not me. They didn't require much attention, but that which they did was provided by the FAs. Also, 7 or 8 is significantly older and more mature than 4 and under.

Not just from this thread, but I honestly don't think I've ever seen a site where the "its all about me and only me" attitude shows itself more. The parents being talked about in the past few pages work hard and use money that is just as good as any of ours to buy their tickets. The true problem lies with the airlines who chose to charge for anything but a middle seat, not the people who choose not to be suckered into that game. If anyone has a problem with the fact that they are stuck next to a 4 year-old then their problem is with the airline.

The academic question wasn't 'would you take responsibility for the child.'

The question was whether the airline would deplane a family who wasn't sitting together if the child was just sitting in their assigned seat reading or coloring. My daughter is quite shy and I suspect this would be her reaction.

The question was also, "If my kid was sitting next you reading Dr. Suess, what would be the criteria to deplane us?" The criteria for deplaning you would be my refusal to baby sit or otherwise take responsibility for your child. I don't think it's necessary to get into a discussion about why a parent would deposit a child this young next to a total stranger and then sit elsewhere.

And, as I said, I've seen FAs do exactly that.

I don't disagree with anything you've said (except the "its all about me and only me" part). If someone's 4 year-old were seated next to me, I would take it up with the airline and, indeed, in a somewhat analogous situation (parent had usurped my seat before I boarded and whined, "what am I supposed to do?" when I said I wasn't interested in switching my E+ window seat for her E- middle), I did exactly that. I called over the FA, explained the situation, and she offered the parent the option of moving or deplaning. The parent and child (actually children) were deplaned.

It's not all about me. It's all about not imposing on strangers, and expecting that they won't impose on me, at least not without a damn good reason. "I'm flying with kids," doesn't remotely approach being a good reason. "The airlines don't care about flying families," doesn't remotely approach being a good reason.

Question for you, PTravel:

How do you know whether or not there are "exigent circumstances"? Parents who are taking their kids to another state to visit grandma in hospital are not likely to announce this to their fellow passengers. Would you ask the parents "what is the purpose of your trip?" or would you just assume that they are on vacation until they say otherwise?

I don't.

I would expect the parent to say something like, "I'm really sorry, but we're traveling on an emergency and can't wait for a later flight -- would you mind switching with us?" Bonus points if they explain the emergency. As I've said several times now, I'm always willing to help out in an emergency, even to the point of going above and beyond.

However, I find it very, very hard to believe that all the parents who have whined, "But what am I supposed to do?" when I turn down their request or, worse, have them evicted from my seat, all are relocating, going to funerals or seeking medical attention. This is particularly true of the he!! flights into and out of MCO and SNA.

I would have asked the FA to summon the cops then.

Their kid destroyed your equipment, they're responsible even though it was an accident.

That's why you should also have them trademarked. :D

Can you switch to a later flight once already on the plane? I don't know if that's even allowed; if you attempt to do so it might result in the entire plane being evacuated and searched.


That's very nice of you, but I don't see how it makes any difference to you. The inconvenience to you is still the same regardless of the purpose of the family's trip. And the difficulty that the family faces by being separated is still the same regardless of the purpose of their trip.



Can I ask you another question? Question: Does it matter to you if the family was separated for reasons outside their control? For example, if the dad tells you "I booked seats for all of us together months ago, but when we got to the gate we found they had separated us." Would that affect your decision?

Sure you can -- I've done it in the past.

The inconvenience of not getting medical attention is the same as not getting to Disneyland on time? I don't agree.

No, it would not. This is the reality of modern air travel. If you can't cope with it, don't do it.

Yes the question was, in effect, 'would you take responsibility for the child'. You are presumming someone else to take responsibility for your pre-school child if a parent is not nearby.

Can your 4 yo manage an emergency if you are not adjacent? Can she understand the FA emergency instructions? Secure her oxygen mask by herself? Evacuate the plane? You cannot assist her if you are seating several rows away and properly buckled in your seat (as would be expected during the initial steps of an emergency plan)

Whether the child is old enough to fly unaccompanied would be the criteria to assess the need to deplane. By not securing adjacent seats in advance, you (the parent) have created a safety issue on the flight.

You can't always assume that people didn't plan and select seats together. I was on a flight a while ago that I had booked well in advance and had selected seats so that my 4 year old, my 2 year old and my wife were all together. I knew about the exit rules etc etc etc. I checked seat guru, and as far as I knew the seats I selected were fine for kids. Come check in time they inform me that kids can't seat BEHIND an exit row. We're suddenly all separated. Luckily it all worked out in the end.

I'm glad it worked out, but what would you have done if it hadn't? Losing pre-booked seating is commonplace and happens for a variety of reasons.

Not sure. I probably would have just asked whoever sat next to my four year old if they would be kind enough to hold his barf bag for him.

I think you have this confused a little. That is the airlines fault. You HAD the family together. But there are those that will select separate seats then DEMAND to be moved. Your beef is with the airline. If you had put the kids in separate seats, that is your issue. The airline changed you, take it up with them.

Also, two adults traveling together do not NEED to sit together. They may DESIRE/WANT to sit together. But, OP is right, you have been together all the time or you work together so have no reason to REQUIRE sitting together. Don't come on board and start demanding I MUST change because you WANT it and claim it is a need. For coworkers/bosses, it's ok to spend time apart. Then there is no work talk and a chance to have mine time to myself.

And if I were that person, I'd immediately summon the FA and explain that I'm not baby-sitting an airsick young child. Nothing personal, but I see this, essentially, as a threat, i.e. "Move, or else . . ."

If, when you arrived at the airport, you discovered that your seats had been changed, why wouldn't you raise he!! with airline and get what you need or, worst case, just take another flight? Back when I had a severe flying phobia, I wouldn't fly unless I had a window seat (looking out helped me). I was in a number of situations in which, due to equipment changes, late aircraft arrivals and cancellations, I wound up booked into something other than a window. I just took a later flight (in some cases, much later). It would never have occurred to me to say to a stranger who wouldn't switch seats, "Well, alright, but when I have a panic attack and start screaming, you're going to have calm me down." I would never try to make my problem a problem for someone else.

I'm sure you're a perfectly nice person, but I don't understand your thinking at all.

Family, with children, is a good reason to sit together. Two or three adults is absolutely not needed. When I travel with my GF, we tend to sit together. If I'm traveling with friends or co-workers, I don't think I've ever sat next to one of them. Not once.

Yes, but I feel the exact converse - I'm sure you're a perfectly nice person, but I don't understand your thinking at all.

If I arrive at 31A and there's someone sitting there, and they say "Do you mind moving to 29F so I can sit with my kid?" my response is "Sure, no problem." 30 seconds later I'm in 29F flipping through Hemispheres.

I simply don't understand why this is such a big deal. Life is too short, karma, blah blah blah etc.

Maybe it's a cultural thing - I'm Canadian, after all :D

That being said, no one has ever been rude to me about it, mostly they're pleading and hopeful, and as I've said many times before, it's no skin off my nose.

I probably would, too (I say, "probably" because I think it is a violation of seat-switching etiquette to sit in the requested seat before consent is given). However, my experience has always been, "My kid and I have to sit together, so you're going to have to take that middle seat back there.

I don't believe in karma, and I don't believe in being uncomfortable because someone else thinks their entitled to what doesn't belong to them.

Clearly, that explains it. :)

Our experiences have been diametrically opposed.

You are not the type of parent who concerns most of us. While you tried to do right, not everyone is as proactive. For example.....

This person doesn't accept responsiblity. He doesn't accept that he has options to 1) choose a flight that allows adjacent seat selection without extra fees, 2) pay the fee and sit together on the flight of their choosing, or 3) not fly until the child is older.

He consciously chooses to sit apart from his 4 yo and then blames everyone else for creating a safety issue. I suspect, this is a parent who won't be suckered into buying a car seat for his child either. The family should not only be deplaned, but someone should call child welfare before parental delusion of entitlement results in real harm to the child.

You've done about as fantastic of a job reading me as you did reading my post. Please re-read what I wrote and tell me how you came to any of your idiotic conclusions.

Not too long ago, one could buy a ticket to fly somewhere, bring a bag or two so that they would have clothes upon arrival, carry on a reasonable sized bag on the plane with them (granted on most airlines one can still do this) get a seat assignment, and get get a crappy high-fat, high-sodium meal; all included in the cost of their ticket. Now airlines charge extra for all of the above. When someone says "I'm not going to play the airline's game" and you wind up next to a hypothetical (not mine) 4 year-old next to you then your problem should be with the airline who has decided that an extra $25 in fees is worth more than the goodwill they lose by upsetting you and anyone else affected by a parent not being able to sit next to their young child.

Does the parent have a choice? Absolutely. Does the airline have a choice? Absolutely.

If I travel with a colleague I don't really care.

If I travel with my kids (2 and 6) obviously I'm going to make sure all of us are together.

If I travel with my wife, I'll upgrade her to first and I'll take economy! LOL

Solutions??
 

Terminator33, PTravel and others: Hi. I am reasonably new here, but not new to air travel.

1) T33 says, Take your young kids separated from the parents problem up with the airline, I'm not moving (so that parent can sit with kid).

2) PTravel says, I won't sit next to your young child sitting solo, I will call the FA / the cops / Supernanny.

If you won't move and you won't stay put, then what solution do you propose? I am perplexed. :confused:

PS I do realize there are at least two different people on this thread for whom being asked to switch seats is a sore point, so multiple possible answers.

PPS as a parent, the only time I get to pick a seat of my own preference (aisle, thanks) is when I am *not* traveling with my family, which is why I am

TheOfficeAdmin13B

As you say the airline charges for anything but an aisle seat in certain circumstances -so if the family travelling is declining to pay to get seats together then it becomes their fault. Those extra charges are a part of the cost of travelling as a family. When my son was younger sitting together was more or less essential as he has mild autism and in an emergency would be more prone to panic-so if needed I paid for us to sit together. (Realistically it was never an issue -he's a great flyer just sleeps, reads or watches movies he was better behaved than many adults -but I paid to ensure if the unusual happened we were covered (it never did but hey).

I did at times choose airlines that offered pre-allocated seats at no charge over those who charged -other times I chose the better schedule/routing and took the hit for seat charges -It's a part of the cost of travelling with your children. If parents don't want to pay it and think they can scam a swop onboard that's down to them but to then get huffy with those who say no is the height of entitlement attitude and I don't believe parents who have chosen purely on financial grounds not to ensure they have their preferred seating are entitled to my sympathy or willingness to take a less desirable seat to accommode their frugality.

I've been following this thread, and it seems that what was a pleasant discussion has turned into a heated debate involving personal attacks. Thus, I would like to chime in with my opinion :)

I am relatively young, and I remember the "not too long ago" time that you describe. I traveled often with my family, and rarely ever had to sit away from my parents. I remember the time when we didn't have to worry about bags, or not being seated together, etc. I know that that has now changed. The airline does have a choice, and they have made it. That said, I don't think it's an issue of "not playing the airline's game." The airline is a business, and we purchase a service from them. Airlines have many competitors, and some have different policies than others. If you want to use their service, I think you need to abide by their rules, however inconvenient. If not, then don't.

With the airlines' changes, my family and I have adjusted our travel patterns. We have consolidated our travel mostly on AA. My dad and I both have status, and issues of checked bag fees, seating assignments, etc. rarely cross our minds when flying. If people want to fly, they should adjust as well. Either fly enough to get status, pay for preferred seating, or use an airline like WN. If they don't, then they shouldn't complain about crappy seats, separated seats, etc. They should definitely not attempt to get other pax the move out of the seats that they paid for or earned the right to select. That said, in exigent circumstances, I am hoping that most people will be able to provide reasonable assistance.

djs, you started this thread. I will now offer you my opinion on your original question. My SO and I love each other, love spending time with each other, and don't foresee that to change even after many years have passed. Although it isn't as big of a deal for me to sit apart from her, I would prefer to sit together. We can lean on each other to sleep, we can talk, we can watch a movie together, etc. It is, however, a bigger deal for her. Recently, I asked her which scenario is worse: her sitting in business with in coach, or us sitting together in Y. Her response: "what's worse is when I don't get to sit next to you!" Which made me smile :) We usually fly coach, and she likes the window seat. And I like to make her happy, so I sometimes end up in a middle seat. While middle seats suck, it's not too bad when I am sitting next to my SO. I am fortunate enough to be able to sleep in a coach seat without reclining, so FAs don't have to bother me on landing, so a middle seat doesn't make a huge difference. However, if my SO isn't there, I will choose the seat that I prefer. If someone wants me to switch, he/she has about 30 seconds to make their case, plenty enough to say "Sorry, but I have such and such situation and I would like to sit next to my kid/SO for this reason. Would you mind switching?" In those cases I will use my discretion, and I am usually a nice person. But if the person is rude and demanding, I will respond coldly and shortly, that this is my seat, one that I am able to choose because of my status. And if you wanted seats next to your companion, you should've chose those seats, even if you had to pay extra. And if you did, and the airline switched you, you should take it up with them. With that, I have nothing more to discuss with you.

Ok, that ends my rant. That was much longer than I expected :eek:

When travelling with a colleague (especially my boss) I will go out of my way not to sit together. Short Haul isn't too bad but on LH, I really want to do my own thing (drinking and sleeping, mostly) and not get stuck into a long conversation about ongoing projects.

Welcome to FT, TheOfficeAdmin13B.

To clarify, I will stay put. The child of the parent seeking the free babysitter will be moved (unless we're talking about a legitimate emergency, in which case I will move and help in any other way that I can).

The point is this: If you want to engage in discretionary air travel with young children, you do it at your own risk. You have a special need: adjacent seats. That's no different than the obese person who needs two adjacent seats, or someone like me who used to have a terrible flying phobia and needed a window seat. It's not the responsibility of strangers to see that your needs are met. If discretionary flying with young children is so difficult, don't do it.

Pretty much agree. But with friends and family I would rather sit with them. I've been stuck on international flights not sitting with friends and it can get really lame. Recently on a virgin airline transcontinental flight and used their text feature on the screen to talk to friends since we weren't sitting next to each other. Was rather fun but those buttons are hard and hurt my fingers after a while.

My (adult) son and I vacation together sometimes. We might get upgraded and thus may not have seats together. I'd prefer to sit with him. We share food, drink coupons, sleep meds. We rarely talk. It's just more comfortable (for me) sitting beside someone I know. I had a flight last week and the guy next to me talked the entire flight. I'd much preferred reading, but I couldn't figure a way out. I've sat beside some really crazy people who wanted to talk about UFOs and secret cabals. I've sat beside people whose political views were offensive to me. I never ask for an unlike exchange. Sometimes people don't want to switch and that's fine with me.

I've chatted extensively with PTravel about this in a couple of different threads.

To be so bold as to summarize his position -

1) He will stay put in his assigned seat (ergo he will not leave the aircraft nor move seats.)

2) He will not sit next to an unaccompanied child.

After that, whatever else happens is not his responsibility. It is up the parents and the airline to work it out.

Actually, if the parent is willing to sit separate from the child, and the child takes the assigned seat next to him, then it most certainly
*is* his responsibility if he refuses to sit there.

If someone said this to me, I would call for the FA/GA/pilot and explain that the child is too sick to travel. Vomit is a biological hazard and results in the need for an expensive and time consuming cleaning of the plane.

I don't think any airline is going to allow a small child to sit separately from his/her parent. If the child is young enough, the airline will do whatever it takes to make sure that at least one parent is sitting in the next seat. There is simply too much risk of things like sexual harassment of children, and they don't want the liability. Remember that the airline has the authority to assign you to a different seat for any reason.

So take your pick. Either move when the parent asks you, or wait for the FA to come and force you.

Nope -- there's a third choice. Wait for the FA to remove parent and child, as no one will voluntarily accommodate them.

I'd just say the kid isn't sick problem solved.