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.

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.