Parents of toddlers - what do you think about this?

Question

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070123/ap_on_re_us/flight_tantrum

Answer 1

By law any passengers over 2 (and for god's sake that should be ALL) must be restrained during take off and landing.

The plane can not leave until they are. And seriously my baby kicks and screams when he doesn't want to be in his car seat sometimes, you know what if we need to go somewhere IN HE GOES, and we are 2-3 people not 112 strangers! No arguing, no calming, nothing. I am the parent and I am bigger.

Seriously you can't get a child in a seat and fasten the belt? These parents should be ashamed.

Answer 2

I think it was what the airline had to do. There are some children out there who are not responsive to their parent's "disclipline techniques", and will not cooperate. It is not the airline's problem of controlling a toddler who will not cooperate. Perhaps the child was scared, perhaps the sounds of the plane were bothering her, perhaps a million things, but in the end- the child needed to be sitting in her seat when the plane took off. Had she been in my car, she would have had to been strapped into her carseat or the car wouldn't move one inch. The airline was more than fair by flying them out the next day, giving them their money back on the tickets they had purchased and offering to give them three more tickets to anywhere they wanted in the future. If your child throws a fit in the movie theatre and you have to leave, is it the fault of the theatre if you are asked to leave? Or the other patrons? No. It is just what has to happen to resolve the situation. It is the law that children have to be strapped into a seat when the plane takes off. That is the end of the discussion. If your child cannot follow the rules, they have to go. That is the way of the real world... yes, she is " only" 3- but that doesn't mean that she receives different treatment than all the other passengers on the plane who are cooperating and waiting to fly. I'll bet the other passengers were glad they wouldn't have to be listening to the child tantrum the whole flight. I have a three year old, and I would expect that I would have to get off if my child was causing a problem and delaying a flight for other people.

Answer 3

I have a 20 mos old son. I was also a Flight Attendant years ago. So, I can see both sides to this story.

My son is a very easy child thankfully. However, even he has had moments when he is disruptive. In those moments, I have done my best to calm him so he is not a disturbance to others. Yet, as most parents already know, there are times that you just can't calm them for whatever reason. I think the airline should have given the parents more of a chance to console thier child.

Having been a flight attendant and traveling on some very long flights to Europe (lasting 10-15 hours), it was always important that we insure eevryone's comfort. You can imagine that is very hard to do in an airplane of 400-500 passengers. I would do my best but sometimes things would have to be escalated to more severe measures. I feel bad for these parents as I am sure that the whole experience was embarrasing, un-nerving, aggravating, and exhausting!

Not every parent intends for thier child to run crazy through a plane and I am sure that they probably did not want that either. the whole situation is really unfortunate.

Answer 4

The parents were weak in the first place. I have two children, 2 years and 9 years. If the boys acted up then I would expect to be excused from the airlines. These parents could not control there child it took an entire airline to put the entire family in place and I commend them for doing it. The airline was completely correct.

Let that be a lesson for every parent who can not control there own children.

P.S. Now the child will have something to talk about when she gets older......How mommy and daddy were kicked off the airplane because they could not control me!

Answer 5

i have flown with cranky kids on the flight and now i have a child of my own and have flown with her being cranky...it's up to the parents to be able to control their children...if the parent said she had an earache from flying down did they bother to take her to a doc and maybe get some antibiotics so it may have cleared up by the time they flew...every parent i know always mentions benadryl while flying..maybe a small dose would have been appropriate...its sad that these parent let their 3 y/o control them like she obviously has...and for the parents and others to say the airline was not very sympathetic to them,well too bad,next time drive to your destination,the airline can not and should not allow a 3 y/o to hold an entire plane on the ground

Answer 6

Makes sense to me. When my son and I flew we always had his car seat and made him sit in it. I think if people can't control their kids why should the whole flight delay? These parents sound like they did nothing to prepare her for the flight. When ever we fly I tell my son what's going to happen and I give him a little book or a small new toy to play with. And always chewing gum so his ears don't hurt. Really, it's simple parenting skills. I'm sure most won't agree with me but I think if you're going to put your child on a plane you should come with a plan.

Answer 7

i think the airline did the right thing. people should make their children behave in public. i have flown many time before and know that there is plenty of time for a child to be "calmed down" by then. how much time did they want exactly? it isn't fair to the other people on the plane who paid for their tickets as well.

Answer 8

They should have just strapped her in to the seat and let her scream . It's only for takeoff right? After that, they can hold their baby and calm her down.

Answer 9

they should have more control over their child. the airline gave them ample time to consoled her.

Answer 10

i dont think its right b/c some 2 year olders cant sit by there self and barly talk,.....(well some cant atleast)