What is the value of your child?
 

I realize that the thread below about the child being counted as part of the carry-on limit was ridiculous. That agent was totaly out of line.

I am curious though: Why do families with infants elect not to buy the additional seat? If it means the child will be more likely to live in the event of an "air disaster"; wouldn't it make more sense to buy the seat? Why the pain and agony?

------------------
CO757

I Agree 100%. Why is it that children must be restrained with a seat belt on the ride to the airport, but are not required to be restrained while on the airplane.

Many times I have experienced very hard landings and always wonder what would have happened if I was holding an infant when this happened.

I saw the original post last night, but I did not want to be the first to respond.

I feel very differently than each of you do and I do not have children and never will. That being said, I do not refute the fact that it is safer for the infant or toddler to be secured in his/her own seat. That's proven.

In my opinion, there is no valid argument to compare restraining a child in a ground vehicle vs. being restrained while airborne. Just think of how many hours a child, before the age of 2, spends in a car vs. on an airplane. The chances of serious injury or death resulting from an aviation accident is infinitessimal (sp?) compared to an auto accident.

While I think it would be great if the parent chose to purchase a seat for his infant/toddler, it is totally unreasonable to require that those hundreds of dollars be spent on the extreme unlikelihood that an injury/death would occur by being held when the injuries would be less severe or non-existent if being restrained in his own seat. It's simply cost prohibitive for too many young people with children under the age of 2.

I agree with Sheryl. As the parent of a child who travelled a couple times with a child under 2, I did consider getting an extra ticket for him. But as she points out, it was too cost prohibitive, leaving us with the choice of flying with him without his own seat or leaving him in someone else's care while my wife and I flew. The odds of injury or other problems were probably much greater had he not flown with us.
The same principle applies to car purchases; yes I'd like to be able to spend $20K+ on a new car with a 5 star safety rating to decrease the likelihood of my family being injured in an accident, but we can't afford yet to replace our 1990 Escort.
The problem, too, is that even if the child has his/her own seat, they aren't necessarily going to be in that seat when any potential problems might strike; those of you who have children know that keeping an under 2-year-old child strapped in for the duration of a flight is a recipe for an unpleasant flight for the child, the parents and the surrounding passengers. And, while having the child strapped in during takeoff and landing would be helpful, it is not the same as the need to strap in a child in the car. In the case of a car accident, one may go from 70 mph to 0 in a split second in a head-on crash, making it impossible for the parent to hold on to the child. Those situations don't happen on aircraft--except in those accidents in which being strapped in will not make a difference in the final outcome.
Yes, there may be some cases when being strapped in may prevent some injury, but they are few enough as to not warrant the extra expense for those people who cannot afford it.

We travel frequenty with our daughters, ages 3 and 5 1/2. Both always have ticket, usually award tickets. We bring the car seat for for our three year old for safety and parental control. It's much easier to deal with a temper tantrum when she is physicaly restrained in the seat. Also,she is more at ease as it is a familiar setting, and she can sleep without falling over. The only downside is carrying on more thing. We usually have one stroller stacked high with the car seat, diaper bag, cooler, kitchen sink etc, and make the kids walk !

If want to bring my cat and hold him in my arms then...enough of this discrimination against family members who happen to be non-human. For my Mancharian tiger - I will check him with cargo...he just won't stay on my lap. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif

Hasn't been an issue for us yet, but when the time arises, I won't travel without my kids in separate seats, regardless of the cost. (And by the way, I am as cheap as they come, and don't make big $$ by any stretch!)

1. Adult comfort. We grow 'em big (Patrick is 18 mos. old and over 35 lbs - all in the shoulders). Victoria (3 in May) is almost 40 lbs. She once climbed on my chest and fell asleep while I was napping on the sofa. I woke up 30 minutes later thinking I was having a heart attack!

2. Kid's comfort. The more comfortable a child is, the less fussy he/she is going to be.

3. Safety. The odds of anything happening are minute. Nevertheless, in the event of some nasty turbulence or a hard landing, they'll be exactly they should be.

4. Sleep. Our carseats have wings for the headrests. Patrick nods off within a couple of miles and sleeps comfortably.

5. Familiarity. New experiences can scare kids. The comfort of their car seat plus the companionship of their favorite blankie goes a long way to relieve stress.

When I bring Patrick to visit my mom, he doesn't sleep well in the portable crib. However if I put his carseat in the crib in a reclined position, he sleeps until morning.


------------------
"I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own."

Schutzee, at their ages, your children are required to hold a ticket. I'm curious though, before they each reached the age of 2, how many times did they each fly and did they always have their own ticket?

Interestingly, I have never been on a flight where a child who was obviously under the age of 1-1/2 had their own seat assignment.

I'm really stunned by the earlier responses by Sheryl and Griffon. I can't believe you'd be willing to take a crap shoot on your child's life (whether you have one or not).

I was recently on a cruise and met the captain of the Souix City DC-10. Did you know that some of the children that died on that flight might have been saved had their parents bought a seat for them!

I don't have kids either, but if and when I do, I will find a way to pay their way or I won't go!

I'm sorry for the lecture, but this really gets my dander up...especially when you consider what some people spend a year on their hair or nails or golfing or drinking....no wonder many of today's youth lack values!

While I agree that children should always be seated and safety-belted in vehicles, the "controversy" is the airlines fault IMHO.

The difference in taking a vacation or not (if you have small children) is often the extra $1000 or so it will take to get two kids on a plane with mom and dad.

Many arlines (CO included) have removed their reduced fare/mileage level for child tickets/awards. And I believe there's only one that still does a "kids fly free" (Southwest).

If airlines had a "children under 10 fly for $100 with a paying adult fare" People would buy the seats, kids would be safer, and airlines would make up any loss with the additional volume the policy would create for moms and dads.

My kids are 6 and 1, and I've always purchased seats for them. In fact its a pleasure that I only pay 50% fare for my 1 year old, because when my daughter was under 2 a domestic ticket was full fare. So now I look at it as if I'm saving money! Anyway, I don't understand why anyone would want to suffer holding their child for the whole flight (I'm cramped enough without sharing my seat), let alone put them at risk. As for the cost - its the airlines (or the Y and F travellers) that are subsidizing it now - a seat for a child at 1/2 off costs the airline the same as an adult ticket, but you pay 50% off! If cost is an issue stay at a cheaper hotel - take the bus instead of renting a car - skip a few dinners out, etc. - don't put your kids at risk.

CO757, I think I've read previously that you are a flight attendant. Based on your follow up post, it seems that people who share the opinion set forth by Griffon and me really bother you. No doubt that there are lap children on nearly every one of the flights you work. If this makes you so angry, how do you reconcile within yourself that some of the adult passengers on your flights do not purchase a ticket for their under 2 year old children? Do you realize that your strong beliefs may unknowingly influence how you relate to these passengers?

And as to "taking a crap shoot" with a child's life, I think it is very important to point out that allowing your over 2 year old children to play outside unsupervised has a far greater chance of them being harmed than holding your under 2 year old child on an airplane.

Back to the subject at hand. Do you advocate for children not being allowed onboard an aircraft unless they are ticketed with their own seat? What a burden to so many that would be if such a policy was in place.

I think NJDavid best hit the issue on the head: the airlines should have a 100 dollar fare for children traveling with adults. This way the children can have their seat (or putthem in a car seat buckled in the seat.

Best leaving this discussion to FLyertalkers like Jon Toner and NJDavid with children. I don't want to say something and start a flaming war but, I think it would be safer for a child in a separate seat instead of children flying through the cabin.

OMNI to Aubie: I flew once with Yaz and Eddie. They went on in their Shepra bags to Chicago, bags placed in the seat in front of me. We all got upgraded to First. Luckily all 12 people in First, the pilot and the F-A all were cat people and begged me to take the cats out. I said "I'm afriad to in case there's turbulance and the fur flies!"

But your other big kitty should get his own seat and his own F-F account.

WHY NOT let pets have FF accounts?


[This message has been edited by Catman (edited 03-22-2000).]

[This message has been edited by Catman (edited 03-22-2000).]

For previous related links/discussions see:
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum1/HTML/000912.html
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum1/HTML/000305.html
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum1/HTML/000251.html
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum1/HTML/000268.html
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum1/HTML/000499.html
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum1/HTML/001654.html
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum1/HTML/002212.html
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum94/HTML/000209.html

Sheryl,
My oldest daughter, Katie, first flew at 4 months. We did not buy a ticket. We did bring the "bucket" part of the infant car seat, and luckly there were empty seats, so she was belted in. On her next flight, we tried first class, again with no ticket. This didn't work too well, as the armrests don't fold up. Since then, we have ticketed both children. It takes the same miles for four coach as two first class. When I haven't had enough miles, I buy Katie a ticket at the child discount. She is just shy of the 30,000 miles for her free ticket to Saint Marten.

I have seen some really giant "under two" children on flights. My little one, Sarah can pass for under two as she is really is little. But we want her in her car seat. The safety issue isn't about crashes. It's the turbulence, out of control service carts, and unsteady little feet. There are lots things on a plane that are harder than a childs head !

Catman, your comments are highly offensive to me and would have been far better left unsaid. You are attempting to butt FTers against each other by virtue of their opinions. Keep yours to yourself. You're way out of bounds. Consider the offensiveness of your post and stay out of such discussions where you have nothing useful to offer. I doubt you would make a similar comment to a parent holding a child on your flight, so consider and RESPECT that others have opinions different than yours.

Sheryl, I was not offended by Catman's post at all.

I guess he was just using a flip comment to make a point and lighten-up a serious discussion.

Once you've seen photo's or video's of children thrown from cars because they were being held by their parents as opposed to buckled in, you understand that a parents' arms are about the least safe place for a child in a moving vehicle.


But hey, different strokes for different folks, I guess...we're each entitled to interpret as we see fit....sorry you were offended.

With a comment like "Best leaving this discussion to fine people like Jon Toner and NJDavid with great children," I see no reason you would be offended. Excluding anyone's opinions, unless they are inflammatory in nature, goes totally counter to a public bulletin board. I'm sorry you did not pick up on that.

Leaving a discussion to certain "fine people" suggests others are inferior. Very very offensive and simply untrue.

Did you miss where I said "I do not refute the fact that it is safer for the infant or toddler to be secured in his/her own seat. That's proven." in my original response to this thread?

[This message has been edited by Sheryl (edited 03-21-2000).]

Good grief. Of all the people on this board, I've found Catman to be the most inoffensive and sensitive of us all.

Keep on keepin' on, Catman! You are one of the good guys and don't ever let anyone tell you different.

Sheryl - I would prefer to email you (but I can't) - it seems to me that you don't know Catman at all. I do. And I am sure that his postings were not meant to be offensiv - I understand that he meant to exclude himself from going further on discussing matters he thinks others (parents) are knowing more about.

"only people speaking the same language can misunderstand each other"

[This message has been edited by Rudi (edited 03-21-2000).]

Sheryl,

I understand what you mean now. The line about great kids can easily be misinterpreted as other people not having great kids. That could feel offensive.

What you probably don't know is Catman has met my kids (shopping at Costo, at a gymnastics class, lunch at Burger King) and was just throwing me (and I suspect John) a gracious compliment.

I know Catman...trust me, he's probably NEVER thought any child is bad...he's got your proverbial heart of gold.

He can speak for himself...I just suspect it's hard to find an "internet cafe" in Dublin.

Christine said I should have stayed out of this conversation but I had to say something. It was my concerns and my feelings that each child should be buckled in SEPARATE Seats. That's all!

I have taken out the nice adjectives for my friends NJDavid and Jon Toner and their children. I hope that calms everyone down.

Sheryl, if you want to criticize me I do suggest that we discuss this via private e-mail. (I can't get onto my system now but I would prefer to wait until I come home and NOT ruin my business trip and vacation in Dublin. I don't need any stress.)

Never meant to start another flaming war. Those who know me know I stay out of these wars no matter how much I try to want to come in and stop them.

I want to thank everyone for pointing out the fact that I'm not this inhumane idiot. I did the "Fine and great" remark because NJDavid and his wife helen and their sons are considered part of my family and I LOVE them. Thank you NJDavid, Rudi and Hnechets for backing me up.

I have a godchild and I find children wonderful and facinating and funny and I hope to be lucky enough to have one someday. (Now I know I"m going to get e-mails about "divulging more of my personal life that nobody cares about."

Jon Toner, If I have offended you, I am very sorry. I consider you a friend and your children facinating and brilliant. And you are my friend.

I see you point Sheryl but a better way of saying it is "could you please read over what you wrote. It may be offensive to some."

Now let me get back to work.


[This message has been edited by Catman (edited 03-22-2000).]

Back to the topic ... just wanted to add that in addition to the safety issue, I always found buying a ticket for my son when he was under 2 to be a great deal. The fare was always 50 percent (except to Hawaii, which they never seem to discount for kids) and he received full mileage credit (status miles too!).

If you save those miles earned at reduced prices (he currently pays 75 percent of fare as he's under 12) for free tickets when the child is over 12, you'll find he was basically flying free in his own seat previously.

Not to change the subject,as I have kids as well (fly in their own seats now, but in the old days, when $$ were more of an issue, I admit that they often went on Mom & Dads Laps), but What airlines are offering discounted fares? Is it market/destination specific?

Thank you Letiole and BIM for getting the thread back ON TOPIC!!! You have the makings for the CMDR CATCOP academy!!!

Catman, it would be my honor. How do I get an application, and how soon before I get my gun? http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

[This message has been edited by BIM (edited 03-22-2000).]

Duplicate post, sorry.

[This message has been edited by BIM (edited 03-22-2000).]

Another Dang dup. What's this "Flood Control" anyway.

Not having a good day...

[This message has been edited by BIM (edited 03-22-2000).]

I can't believe I've missed this thread for so long! There is a solution:

When we had our second kid (at that point I was traveling a lot) we got a contraption for a shower gift that should please everyone. It looks kind of like a seat-belt extender, but it has 2 straps. You hook it on your seat belt and around the child on your lap (that is, you are seatbelted, and the harness is independently strapped to your strapped seatbelt...make sense?). While it is clearly not as safe as a child seat, neither is the average airplane lap belt as safe as a three-point belt with an airbag that you get in cars these days. And rightly so, given the nature, probability and survivability of air "incidents."

I've used it a few times and this contraption is great. Since it was a present I dont know where it came from, and the box is long gone so I dont even know what its called, but it is a great compromise!

Mr. Nutz:

Sounds like a great idea - since you can't remember the manufacturer, let's make our own, market under the FlyterTalk brand, and split all profits! We could all retire young...

Aggggggh!!!!!!

More dups!

Trashing PC now!

[This message has been edited by BIM (edited 03-22-2000).]

I'm throwing my two cents in here because I agree with a bit of Rudi's comment about people misunderstanding each other. Allow me to explain.

The purpose of seatbelts is actually quite different on airplanes than it is in automobiles. If you think about it, the reasons for this make sense; the forces are very different between the two. We're all quite familiar with the seatbelt issue in automobiles, so I'll focus instead on their purpose in aircraft.

Seatbelts in aircraft are designed much less for crash protection (generally speaking, in a crash, the seats themselves rip right out of the track, so you still go flying around...just in groups of two or three). Rather, the focus is on some of the more common forces in flight and landing. Heavy turbulence causes severe injuries to people who are not strapped in. Seatbelts keep them in the same place on the plane, so they don't fall on things or each other.

I'll never forget an IAH-CRP flight I took on an ATR-42. We hit some incredible turbulence while flying through a thunderstorm. Prior to entering the storm, the pilot asked for everyone (including the FA) to be strapped in. There was one lap baby, and one woman who stupidly refused to use the seatbelt even during that turbulence. We hit a powerful downdraft that resulted in the seatbelt violently pulling me down. It was the first time I had ever experienced something like that. The woman was plastered against the overhead bins until the plane stabilized, after which she hit the seat with a loud *thump*. (She did put on her seatbelt after that.) The lap baby nearly slammed into the same overhead bins; fortunately, her father caught her just in time. That could have easily resulted in a broken neck and a dead baby. Or if we had a slightly different attitude in the airplane, the baby could have flown in some other direction and seriously hurt someone else as well.

What are the odds of something like that happening in a flight? Far greater than the odds of a crash. It's those situations that I think about when I'm considering whether or not to have children in their own seats.

Incidentally, Nutz's suggestion makes an awful lot of sense in those kinds of situations as well. The only danger is in cases where you have to be in crash position (which, incidentally, would be unnecessary if the seats had shoulder harnesses). You could easily crush your loved one anyway. But those odds are much slimmer.

------------------
Michael

BIM: I primarily fly UA and have always found children's fares with them except on routes to Hawaii and on e-fares.

dup -sorry

[This message has been edited by letiole (edited 03-23-2000).]

Catman:
No offense taken. You can call my children great anytime. I give you free reign to compliment my kids as often as you like. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

I think people need to read the "grammatical flourishes" a little less literally.

Someone who addresses someone as "My dear (x)", is likely not intending to offend, and deserves the benefit of the doubt.

I have a lot of phrases I use conversationally which I avoid on an on-line medium because without voice inflection, it could lead to misunderstandings.

When I was working for a large company, this topic was addressed. Consider the following sentence:

"I think you did an OK job on that project."

Now, repeat that sentence with emphasis on each word.

I - meaning I think, but no one else does.
THINK - meaning I don't know.
YOU - meaning you were OK, but no one else.
DID - then, but not now.
OK - but not great
THAT PROJECT - but not the others.

Bottom line, we need to lighten up, folks.

Catman is trying to offend just strikes me as ludicrous. I don't think Catman is CAPABLE of forming the requisite intent.


------------------
"I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own."