toddler travel solutions limited image
Q. WHAT DO YOU THINK?
Poll: Overwhelming majority want families with kids segregated in own section
Dad air traveler: "No one under 12 should be in first class"
Mom: "These questions about kids and flying are frankly disrespectful"
Airlines don't have age limits for first-class seating
(Tribune Media Services) -- The most embarrassing moment of my life? That's easy
Our son, Aren, had just turned one and we were flying from New York to London on an airline whose name I've promised never to mention.
We'd managed to score an upgrade -- seats 1A and 1B -- and to ensure Aren had a pleasant trip, we offered him a nip of Benadryl. Most kids fall asleep when they're given an antihistamine.
Not mine.
The medication had the exact opposite effect: Aren turned hyper, tearing down the aisle of the first-class cabin, shrieking and bumping other passengers. He woke up the person sitting next to us and drooled on the passenger behind us.
All of which brings me to the issue at hand: Kids in first class. Should we or shouldn't we? And if so, when?
Allow me to state my completely unbiased opinion right up front. No. We should not. At least not mine. I downgraded myself on the flight home, that's how badly I felt for the other London-bound passengers that day.
What was I thinking, trying to bring a toddler into first class?
I'm not alone.
An overwhelming majority of air travelers to a recent survey by Skytrax -- 9 in 10 respondents -- said families with children should be seated in a separate section on flights, presumably not in first class.
Another poll by corporate travel agency Carlson Wagonlit found that business travelers, who are most frequently found in the business- and first-class cabins, believe crying babies are the second-most annoying aspect of air travel. The first? Air travelers who carry too much luggage on board.
Several years ago, a United Airlines flight attendant just came out and said it: no children in first class. A passenger disagreed, sued the airline -- and lost.
In my last column, we argued about whether kids belong on planes, and resolved that although many of us would like to keep the little ones from flying, it's just not practical. Now, we're having a more nuanced and civil discussion about children in the good seats.
Well, sort of. I asked some of my readers for their opinions of kids in first and got an earful.
"No, no, no, no, no," says Mona Palmer, an administrative assistant from Friendswood, Texas. "First-class tickets are too expensive to have the investment destroyed by an unruly kid whose parents think they've paid for the privilege of ignoring their kids' rotten behavior."
The other side of this argument is equally vehement.
"Give me a break," says Jennifer Thomas, a mom who describes herself as the owner of a public relations firm. "These questions about kids and flying are frankly disrespectful. Let's see, kids in first class or terrorists allowed to fly on planes? Or how about just plain rude adults who take to the friendly skies? I would take a child any day over previously mentioned. Why not ask questions about those two
audiences?"
Kids! Kids! Can't we just get along?
Instead of spending the rest of this story fighting (as entertaining as that might be to some of you, dear readers) let's instead focus on three solutions to this problem.
No children in first class
One of the most persuasive arguments for limiting first class to adults is that the premium cabin is essentially an adult product. Which is to say, it's difficult for a youngster to appreciate a wine list or a gourmet meal. It's just no place for kids. Plus, it's pricey -- even if you're using miles to upgrade.
Rosanne Skopp, a grandmother who says she "really loves kids," puts it this way: "If I'm going to be sitting next to a screaming baby, at least let me feel good that I haven't paid for a first-class ticket, only to be tortured."
No airline that I'm aware of has banned children from first class or business class, but it wouldn't be accurate to say any of them have opened their arms wide to their junior passengers, either. Like a five-star restaurant or a luxury resort, the first-class cabin is not particularly welcoming to young fliers. Or, for that matter, their parents.
Age limit for premium seats
Here's another suggestion: If we can't ban minors, then let's at least prevent the littlest passengers from sitting "up front." Babies and toddlers are too disruptive to the other passengers, who are paying a premium for their seats.
"No one under 12 should be in first class," says Richard French, an anesthesiologist from Christchurch, New Zealand, who by way of full disclosure, is himself a father.
"I pick that age because kids are essentially self-caring by that age and that is the age that airlines start charging an adult fare. It is really depressing when you have treated yourself to a very expensive far
The question isn't too detailed, it is one sentence long. I added the news story about the topic to go along with the question, obviously.
Poll: Overwhelming majority want families with kids segregated in own section
Dad air traveler: "No one under 12 should be in first class"
Mom: "These questions about kids and flying are frankly disrespectful"
Airlines don't have age limits for first-class seating
(Tribune Media Services) -- The most embarrassing moment of my life? That's easy
Our son, Aren, had just turned one and we were flying from New York to London on an airline whose name I've promised never to mention.
We'd managed to score an upgrade -- seats 1A and 1B -- and to ensure Aren had a pleasant trip, we offered him a nip of Benadryl. Most kids fall asleep when they're given an antihistamine.
Not mine.
The medication had the exact opposite effect: Aren turned hyper, tearing down the aisle of the first-class cabin, shrieking and bumping other passengers. He woke up the person sitting next to us and drooled on the passenger behind us.
All of which brings me to the issue at hand: Kids in first class. Should we or shouldn't we? And if so, when?
Allow me to state my completely unbiased opinion right up front. No. We should not. At least not mine. I downgraded myself on the flight home, that's how badly I felt for the other London-bound passengers that day.
What was I thinking, trying to bring a toddler into first class?
I'm not alone.
An overwhelming majority of air travelers to a recent survey by Skytrax -- 9 in 10 respondents -- said families with children should be seated in a separate section on flights, presumably not in first class.
Another poll by corporate travel agency Carlson Wagonlit found that business travelers, who are most frequently found in the business- and first-class cabins, believe crying babies are the second-most annoying aspect of air travel. The first? Air travelers who carry too much luggage on board.
Several years ago, a United Airlines flight attendant just came out and said it: no children in first class. A passenger disagreed, sued the airline -- and lost.
In my last column, we argued about whether kids belong on planes, and resolved that although many of us would like to keep the little ones from flying, it's just not practical. Now, we're having a more nuanced and civil discussion about children in the good seats.
Well, sort of. I asked some of my readers for their opinions of kids in first and got an earful.
"No, no, no, no, no," says Mona Palmer, an administrative assistant from Friendswood, Texas. "First-class tickets are too expensive to have the investment destroyed by an unruly kid whose parents think they've paid for the privilege of ignoring their kids' rotten behavior."
The other side of this argument is equally vehement.
"Give me a break," says Jennifer Thomas, a mom who describes herself as the owner of a public relations firm. "These questions about kids and flying are frankly disrespectful. Let's see, kids in first class or terrorists allowed to fly on planes? Or how about just plain rude adults who take to the friendly skies? I would take a child any day over previously mentioned. Why not ask questions about those two
audiences?"
Kids! Kids! Can't we just get along?
Instead of spending the rest of this story fighting (as entertaining as that might be to some of you, dear readers) let's instead focus on three solutions to this problem.
No children in first class
One of the most persuasive arguments for limiting first class to adults is that the premium cabin is essentially an adult product. Which is to say, it's difficult for a youngster to appreciate a wine list or a gourmet meal. It's just no place for kids. Plus, it's pricey -- even if you're using miles to upgrade.
Rosanne Skopp, a grandmother who says she "really loves kids," puts it this way: "If I'm going to be sitting next to a screaming baby, at least let me feel good that I haven't paid for a first-class ticket, only to be tortured."
No airline that I'm aware of has banned children from first class or business class, but it wouldn't be accurate to say any of them have opened their arms wide to their junior passengers, either. Like a five-star restaurant or a luxury resort, the first-class cabin is not particularly welcoming to young fliers. Or, for that matter, their parents.
Age limit for premium seats
Here's another suggestion: If we can't ban minors, then let's at least prevent the littlest passengers from sitting "up front." Babies and toddlers are too disruptive to the other passengers, who are paying a premium for their seats.
"No one under 12 should be in first class," says Richard French, an anesthesiologist from Christchurch, New Zealand, who by way of full disclosure, is himself a father.
"I pick that age because kids are essentially self-caring by that age and that is the age that airlines start charging an adult fare. It is really depressing when you have treated yourself to a very expensive far
The question isn't too detailed, it is one sentence long. I added the news story about the topic to go along with the question, obviously.
Answer
I used to be a Flight Attendant and I'd have tired business people begging me to "do something" about a screaming baby in their class of service. Many were going straight into presentations and some had just finished exhausting business meetings and needed their rest. Of course, there was nothing I could do, except maybe offer help to the parents but that was also limited.
For your information, the airlines themselves don't allow their employees to sit in business and first with their own children until they are around 8-10 years old (depending on the airline and the class).
I was a Flight Attendant and I think the real issue is the fact that under 2 years old are allowed on laps. This is very disruptive and not safe for the baby anywhere on the plane. I think before we ban babies from First and Business, at least require each passenger to have their own seat. Why is it allowed on airplanes when it's not in cars?
Also, there is a huge difference between taking a child or baby to one of the higher classes on a summer flight to Hawaii vs. a Chicago-Frankfurt in the middle of winter. If you're surrounded by serious business people, the atmosphere is less baby-friendly.
Parents are much wiser using their money and/or air miles to get an extra seat in economy than a bigger seat in another class. They aren't more comfortable either, still with a child over their lap. They can't get up to use the restroom or move around. They also can't really take advantage of the perks of those classes.
By contrast, I've seen little angels "up there". Many children from about age 6 on were well behaved and enjoyed it.
It wouldn't make sense to set any age limits. It's a free market economy.
P.S. I can't believe a parent would give a child a drug on an airplane that they hadn't tried out at home first. Antihistamines often make kids hyper and she's lucky her child didn't pass out and need to go to the ER like what happened to me with Benedryl when I was 7!
I used to be a Flight Attendant and I'd have tired business people begging me to "do something" about a screaming baby in their class of service. Many were going straight into presentations and some had just finished exhausting business meetings and needed their rest. Of course, there was nothing I could do, except maybe offer help to the parents but that was also limited.
For your information, the airlines themselves don't allow their employees to sit in business and first with their own children until they are around 8-10 years old (depending on the airline and the class).
I was a Flight Attendant and I think the real issue is the fact that under 2 years old are allowed on laps. This is very disruptive and not safe for the baby anywhere on the plane. I think before we ban babies from First and Business, at least require each passenger to have their own seat. Why is it allowed on airplanes when it's not in cars?
Also, there is a huge difference between taking a child or baby to one of the higher classes on a summer flight to Hawaii vs. a Chicago-Frankfurt in the middle of winter. If you're surrounded by serious business people, the atmosphere is less baby-friendly.
Parents are much wiser using their money and/or air miles to get an extra seat in economy than a bigger seat in another class. They aren't more comfortable either, still with a child over their lap. They can't get up to use the restroom or move around. They also can't really take advantage of the perks of those classes.
By contrast, I've seen little angels "up there". Many children from about age 6 on were well behaved and enjoyed it.
It wouldn't make sense to set any age limits. It's a free market economy.
P.S. I can't believe a parent would give a child a drug on an airplane that they hadn't tried out at home first. Antihistamines often make kids hyper and she's lucky her child didn't pass out and need to go to the ER like what happened to me with Benedryl when I was 7!
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
No comments:
Post a Comment