Do parents have a right to take unruly kids on a plane?

[Chip R]

This writer doesn't think so.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/...,2649186.story

[Razor Shines]

I guess I don't really remember the story she's referencing, but agree with her somewhat.

When I was a kid I knew better than to act up in a public place, I knew what'd happen when I got home. And my 3 younger brothers knew the same. Most times I'm sure you could see people cringe as my parents brought 4 young boys into a restaurant or airplane, but I can't count the number of times before our meal was over that people came up to my parents and made comments on how they couldn't believe how well behaved the 4 of us were. And it wasn't because we were anything special, it was that we knew the consequences of embarrassing our mother.

[GAC]

I'm wondering if they have a right to take them to the grocery store, restaurants, and a lot of public places. Geez!

Ran into one such situation yesterday at WalMart. These two children, both pre-school, were yelling, crying, and screaming the whole time they were in the store. Even when you were a distance away you could still hear them. And the parents did nothing. A couple times the kids would lay on the floor throwing a tantrum with the parent trying to get them to stand up, but to no avail.

Me? I'd have picked the kid up, told the spouse we'll be out in the car, and when we got home, the kid would have got it big time. But that's just me.

These kids were old enough to know that what they were doing was wrong. They ain't as stupid as some may think. And when they, with predetermination, knowingly cross that line, and question authority, that's when the "authority" needs to let them know it will have consequences.

[Joseph]

Spare the rod, spoil the child.

[SunDeck]

I once was on a flight and a woman behind me with a toddler tapped me on the shoulder and offered a pair of ear plugs BEFORE the child started crying. As it turned out, the kid wasn't much of a problem, but I respected the fact that she wanted to get on our good side before any problems occurred.

[RedsManRick]

Flying on a plane is not a right -- it's use of a private service. If the airline wanted to bar the kid & family from flying, they would be perfectly within in their rights to do so (presuming a non-discriminatory basis).

Southwest made a completely reasonable decision to place the experience of the rest of its passengers ahead of this family. The burden should fall on the parent to find the best way to make things work.

[Falls City Beer]

I guess I don't understand the idea that you have to hit in order to teach a child to behave. My parents never laid a hand on me or my siblings, and we NEVER made these kinds of displays in public or otherwise. We were taught the meaning of the word "No," and both my parents put up a universal front against us kids that enforced the "No." No triangulation, no "but MOM lets me!!!" crap. No means no. Plain and simple. No paddles, belts, nothing. We knew our limitations as long as it was consistent.

My wife and I have done the same with our two daughters, and...wonder of wonders--it works!

[Chip R]

I guess I don't understand the idea that you have to hit in order to teach a child to behave. My parents never laid a hand on me or my siblings, and we NEVER made these kinds of displays in public or otherwise. We were taught the meaning of the word "No," and both my parents put up a universal front against us kids that enforced the "No." No triangulation, no "but MOM lets me!!!" crap. No means no. Plain and simple. No paddles, belts, nothing. We knew our limitations as long as it was consistent.

My wife and I have done the same with our two daughters, and...wonder of wonders--it works!

Interesting but off the point.

[Falls City Beer]

Interesting but off the point.

I was referring to "Spare the rod, spoil the child." It's like child-rearing discussions are either "Let him do whatever he wants; never say 'no.'" or "Whip his arse!"

I say neither, and I know it works.

To the other topic, RMR is right of course. They are totally within their rights to turn unruly customers away.

[Chip R]

I was referring to "Spare the rod, spoil the child." It's like child-rearing discussion are either "Let him do whatever he wants; never say 'no.'" or "Whip his arse!"

I say neither, and I know it works.

So, do you believe parents have the right to take children out in public if they are prone to be unruly?

[GAC]

I was referring to "Spare the rod, spoil the child." It's like child-rearing discussions are either "Let him do whatever he wants; never say 'no.'" or "Whip his arse!"

There has to be a balance there. And not all children are the same. There is such a thing, at least IMO, as the strong-willed child.

You obviously, at least IMO, don't spank a child under the age of 2. We never did. But I have always followed the below....

Set reasonable boundaries in accordance to the child's maturity level, and insure they understand them.

Never spank in anger.

Never spank because of actions that result from childish immaturity - spilling a drink, leaving their bike out in the yard, etc.

But when that that child KNOWS those boundaries, and decides they are going to try and stand "toe to toe" with that parental authority, put their foot across the line, and see ifn what the parent says should be taken seriously, then, IMO, definitive action by that parent needs to be taken.

An it may be, depending on that particular child, that "alternative" corrective action will work. Children's dispositions vary.

But afterwards, always follow it up with positive reinforcement with the child.

We spanked. But we did it in accordance to the above rules. And our kids have turned out just fine.

My parent's spanked us. We weren't spanked in every situation. Only when it deserved it. And when I look back on it, BOY did we three boys deserved it every time we got it. It didn't mar us.

[TeamSelig]

The best way to get a kid to stop throwing a tantrum is to ignore him/her. Tantrums are to get their way or receive attention. If they don't get either, they realize it doesn't work.

[SunDeck]

I don't see the problem with the airline giving them a voucher. It's a way of saying "let's try again some other time", and it at least acknowledges the fact that the kid might have been acting out because of factors other than just being a brat. I've schlepped my kids across the country a couple of times and thankfully people have always been very understanding of the situation. Take a two year old out of their routine, introduce them to a seemingly limitless amount of new stimuli, limit their movements...it's a recipe for a meltdown.

As to the question of whether parents have a right to take their kids into public places...I think the question answers itself. At the same time, parents have a responsibility to pack it in and go home when they realize they've extended their kids too far. No need to tan a hide- just admit defeat, retreat and regroup for another day.

[Falls City Beer]

I don't see the problem with the airline giving them a voucher. It's a way of saying "let's try again some other time", and it at least acknowledges the fact that the kid might have been acting out because of factors other than just being a brat. I've schlepped my kids across the country a couple of times and thankfully people have always been very understanding of the situation. Take a two year old out of their routine, introduce them to a seemingly limitless amount of new stimuli, limit their movements...it's a recipe for a meltdown.

As to the question of whether parents have a right to take their kids into public places...I think the question answers itself. At the same time, parents have a responsibility to pack it in and go home when they realize they've extended their kids too far. No need to tan a hide- just admit defeat, retreat and regroup for another day.

Be honest: have your non-infant children caterwauled at the top of their lungs in public--with you unable to control it? I'm going to say that it hasn't happened to you before. I certainly could be wrong, of course. And I realize there are always exceptions, and it's the good decent thing to put yourself in the other parent's shoes and all, but really, should anyone have to tolerate unremitting shrieking in a cramped space? I agree with your point about giving the woman another ticket for a later flight--sure, it's good politics and general civility to allow the woman to transport her kid; just at a later time when the kid is sleeping or something.

[SunDeck]

Be honest: have your non-infant children caterwauled at the top of their lungs in public--with you unable to control it? I'm going to say that it hasn't happened to you before. I certainly could be wrong, of course. And I realize there are always exceptions, and it's the good decent thing to put yourself in the other parent's shoes and all, but really, should anyone have to tolerate unremitting shrieking in a cramped space?

I have, but one of my kids is on the autism spectrum, so I'm probably not a fair representation of the point you're trying to make. But that is probably the reason I don't get all bent out of shape when someone's kid is raising the roof with their lungs- I've been there, and I'm also a little thankful that it's not my kid this time.
Anyway, if you're trying to say that most people should be able to get their kids to quiet down, I agree.