greenery

On a recent flight I sat in a window seat next to a mother and father of twins. The twins were 20 months old and carried on the laps of Mom and Dad. (At no cost to the parents) The kids cried and fussed the entire flight. The parents looked miserable!

At the end of the flight I was honest with both parents when I told them that I missed the "good old days" when kids of that age were left home with relatives. Of course neither parent liked my comment and told me so.

It made me think. Is it necessary for parents to bring their very young kids on leisure trips? In my day they were left home with Grandma. Now days young screaming kids are everywhere.

In luxury hotels
In fancy restaurants
In tourist attractions that would hold no interest to someone that age
In the office (bring your kids to work day)
In movies, plays and concerts

What happened to a babysitter or Grandma?

mia_marlin

We fly to see Grandma.

Ages 6 and 4 now. Been flying since the oldest was 7 mos. Always buy a seat.

Beats driving.

jfe

I wonder why



But flyertalkers beware, I will be taking my baby girl on flights, and yes she will scream, and I will try to do everything to console her. But Grandma works a full time job, and a baby sitter is not something I would like to do for a trip that will last a few days. So, she comes with me and my wife.

And yes, if I can find a SkySaver award, she is going in First

mia_marlin

Right next to you!

Lets have a drink and leave the kids to the IFE!

^

jonah1

It is very unfair of you to generalize all children and all those traveling with children. What is wrong with taking your child(ren) on leisure trips? My wife and I both work (as most parents do) and we cherish the time we have with our son and make it a point to birng him wherever appropriate.

flymeaway

I'm a big believer in the parents-only vacation - but of course some trips are taken just so relatives can see the kids, etc. And obviously we know nothing of other families' situations...kids that have special needs, no reliable relatives or caregivers around, etc, etc. In that respect, it understandable that the parents didn't take your comment well!

But yeah, personally I wouldn't do the lap child thing myself. I don't have a beef with parents who do - it's perfectly legal and acceptable at this point. But...I can only imagine how impossible it may be to hold onto a child (especially a heavy one) in a crash or high-speed aborted takeoff, etc. I fear I'd never forgive myself if something like that happened and I wasn't physically able to keep my kid in my arms.

Blumie

My wife and I have taken our daughter, now 5, everywhere. Is it necessary? No. But that's what we want to do, and airlines exist to provide transportation, not isolation from kids. That said, it is parents' responsibility to plan when traveling with young kids. We always bring plenty of activities and snacks to keep our daughter occupied. We police her behavior to ensure that she does not kick people seats or otherwise disturb other passengers (although we certainly have no objection if she chooses to engage another passenger in a conversation or an activity and the other passenger appears to be willing). When she was young enough to be a lap child, we always purchased a seat for her nonetheless. AA's policy allows you to purchase a seat for an infant at half what the fare would otherwise be. So you can find the cheapest fare available and AA will cut it in half for an infant, which always struck us as a far better option than a long flight with a squirming child in our laps.

Ken in Phx

** i agree with most of what Blumie says before me **

Our son goes everywhere on vacation we go. He is not yet 5 but has traveled 10-12 trips. Its called a family vacation, so we bring the family ( currently 3 of us).

He is typically a great flyer, but there have been times when he isnt cooperating or not feeling like flying. Unfortunately, I think I would have told the OP off and asked them kindly to keep your comments to yourself.

I think some people have a bizzare sense of self rightousness or over inflated self worth to decide who can and cant fly on a plane.

IMO travel in the "old days" was limited due to the expensive ticket prices not out of some misguided courtesy to other passengers.

Ken in Phx

pinniped

I'm calling BS on this one. Sorry.


Folks, if you don't feed and water them, they'll eventually go back under the bridge.

BearX220

I guess I miss the good old days when family units were the subject of community support and admiration, not muttered insults and attacks from strangers, but times have changed.

The parents should have bought seats for 20-month-old kids. It's not only uncomfortable to keep them as lap passengers, it's completely unsafe in the event of turbulence or a rough landing.

But that doesn't mean kids shouldn't travel with their parents, for goodness' sake. There must be hundreds of threads like this on FT. My answer to all of them is the same: obnoxious, rude, arrogant, or drunk adults are far worse inflight companions than restless children. My kid is certainly more fun to fly with than most of the adults I know.

JS

Actually, there was a problem in this situation in that there was one more person in that row than is allowed. Each row of an airplane has one additional oxygen mask for lap babies. Thus, two people in the same row (and same side of the plane) cannot both be holding a lap child. One parent and lap child should have been moved to another row by the flight attendant.

Other than that, I don't see what the problem is, and your unnecessary comments towards them were quite deserving of their reply.

greenery

I believe the parents were being selfish by bringing their 20 month old twins on a plane with full knowledge that they would be making the people sitting around them nuts. Everyone in the area (many I suspect parents) were angry with these little boys behavior and the inability of the parents to control them.

I do not think I was rude to the parents, they were rude to everyone sitting around them.

My question about little kids being out of control in previously quiet locations-- still stands.

CPRich

I agree - 2 lap children aren't allowed in the same row per FAA regulations - as pointed out above, there are only oxygen masks for the number of seats plus one.

As to why bring kids on leisure trips - because they are part of the family, not a pet that you can just leave at home for someone else to take care of.

jfe

You don't think that was rude

PremEx2000

It's going to take some time to respond to this post!!

First, I miss the good old days on Flyertalk (long before April 2005 when you registered) when you could tell another Flyertalker to **** *** without worrying about getting suspended. So I won't tell you to **** ***.

Second, as a parent of 17 month old twins (only 3 months younger than the ones you describe), I think that I have a fair amount of experience and am qualified to address your points. Apparently the New York Times agrees because they quoted me on this very subject--travelling with young children--a few months back.

So on to the rebuttal. Assuming you were flying in the United States or on an American airline, let me be blunt: You are either lying or or the airline was violating FAA rules. Let me say that again: YOU ARE EITHER LYING OR THE AIRLINE WAS VIOLATING FAA RULES. Both are major transgressions--one under Flyertalk ethical rules, the other under FAA legal rules. (And if you were not flying either in the U.S. or on an American airline, I apologize if I have unfairly characterized you or the airline).

But trust me, I know and I can smell a liar and an FAA violation a mile away. FAA rules specifically limit the number of lap children in a particular row based on the number of available oxygen masks. You stated that you were sitting in the window seat. I can safely assume that this was either a single aisle airplane with 2-3 or 3-3 seating or a widebody with 3-4-3 seating (as I have never heard of and know of no airline that has rows of seats that go to the windows that contain 4 seats). So what's my point. If it was you, the two parents and the two infants in one set of three seats, there was an FAA violation or you are a liar and your story is bogus. You see, in rows of three seats, airlines are required to and do have 4 oxygen masks. None have five. Which means that had five people tried to occupy three seats, there would be no oxygen mask for the fifth passenger. This is a major violation of FAA law.

And flight attendants know it. Again, trust me. Every time we board with our twins (or even book the flights for us and the twins), they tell me that you can only have a row of three seats together when travelling with twins if you purchase all three seats. Otherwise, it will mean five individuals sharing seats. Again, the airlines are keen to this issue.

So again, I ask you this: If this were a U.S. flight or an American airline, did this really happen? If so, you would be advised to write the FAA and tell them of this VERY MAJOR rule violation. The airline likely will face punishment. You might want to copy the airline on the letter too. Or write them first and tell them that, without receiving some compensation and quick, you will send this on to the FAA. Of course, this is all assuming that your story is true.

Notwithstanding the veracity of your tale, the parents were foolish not to purchase a third seat for one of the infants at the 50% fare. As somebody who has travelled on 13 round-trips with infant twins in the last 17 months (some trips as short as Chicago-LaGuardia, some as long as Chicago-LAX-Kona and Chicago-Warsaw-Tel Aviv), I can tell you that having a carseat for one child is essential. (In some cases, such as our Kona and Tel Aviv trips, having seats for all four of us was essential). Almost all of the time, one kid will be happy to be sitting/playing/sleeping in a carseat. This ultimately means turning a trip with twins from being a lot of work to being manageable. Bottom line: Again assuming that your story is truthful and not merely troll-bait, the parents f'd up big time by not buying two seats. But again, there's no way an American airline would have allowed this to happen and at the gate or on the plaine, it would have either forced them to either move to a row without a fifth person or would have required them to buy another seat or would have denied them boarding. So assuming this happened in the U.S., you are lying.

Next point: The good old days when kids were left at home? Whaaaaat?? To me, the good old days were when families spent time together, travelled together, and yes, even visited relatives together. I find your thought process questionable--no wait--I find it moronic. Maybe you don't like kids or don't like the kids you've got. But I like the kids I've got. I want to spend time with them. I want to take them to see their relatives who live all over the U.S. and in other countries too. And if some jerkweed on the airplane doesn't like it, tough sh!t for him. (By the way, like most good Flyertalk parents, my wife and I go to very big lengths to ensure that our kids are as absolutely well-behaved as infants can be, and they almost always are angels on the flights).

Next point: I agree that poorly behaved children (and all very young children regardless of their behavior) do not belong at movies, plays, concerts, fancy restaurants, and the office (except for take-your-kids-to-work-day and for a few minutes now and then to show them off to co-workers). But do they belong in tourist attractions? Of course. Do they belong in luxury hotels? If I've got the money to pay for the room, they do.

Next point: Leave them with a babysitter or Grandma? Well, did it occur to you that they might be on the plane to actually be paying a visit to Grandma?? You speak of the good old days. You mean the good old days when extended families lived within a block of each other. But guess what? Nowadays, people don't always live right next door to all of their family members. And leave them with a babysitter? Then I guess Grandma is screwed and she just won't get to see her grandkids.

Don't like travelling with kids? Get a fractional jet or go Greyhound.

And by the way, was the airline violating FAA rules or are you just flat-out lying to bait the trolls?

Please inform us, newbie.