Child-free flight zones: what do you think?

Where did I say that children are second class citizens?

Frankly, I'd confiscate your 'diapers' if you told me to go fuck myself in the course of trying to do my job.

Wow - want2bsuperman What a vile attitude and atrocious display of behaviour towards someone who was doing her job, protecting the public. No wonder your DH was annoyed.How was the lady at customs responsible for the fact that you only had 3 nappies?
Security do check peoples bags for a reason. Explosives can be carried on board a plane in many different guises. Limits on liquids/lotions permitted are there for a reason.

Oh and I would also like airlines to resume carrying diapers. If they can carry tampons and sanitary towels I don't see why they can't carry diapers. We got caught short on a trip back from Denmark when the stupid lady at security pulled apart our diaper bag and was inistant that butt paste was a threat to security. DH and I shoved everything back in (yes I told her to go f herself which is why DH was super annoyed with me) and only realized just before boarding when we were changing DD that we only had 3 diapers for a flight to New York after I had packed more than a dozen... Poor kid had sanitary towels strapped to the inside of her diaper and a horrible rash due to no barrier cream. The air pressure does funny things to babies. Luckily on that flight she peed a lot but only pooped once.

Good idea as long as anyone with kids over 12 have to sit away from me. Bloody more annoying than babies IMO.

And they always amble up late, crush your bags and climb over you.

Give me a baby over a bloody teenager any day.

Another approach might be for airline to (shock, horror) INCREASE SEAT PITCH!

Though what I would really like to see is entirely child-free flights!

You may change your mind about children being treated as second class citizens should you ever have some.

But of course, only those adults who have never been children should qualify to fly child free.

Well, of course!

I'm in two minds about this: if it means large clean bathrooms, with proper changing facilities, and well stocked nappies and wipes supply, being allowed to bring food and liquids aboard, having your buggies aboard and having floor space for sleeping children, well then there might be some merit to having an area designated to families.

If it means that families are treated even worse than usual by the airlines, (not having priority boarding, and having to wait for buggies, not being able to bring liquids needed for the infants and children aboard, in case you want to blow up the plane with them?!, (I mean seriously, wtf)) then no.

It will be MY children who will be paying for these miserable peoples pensions/wiping their arses/providing them with vital medical care etc etc......if I want to fly with them AND pay for it then I will, give me all the dirty looks you like, bring it on.

Children as a lifestyle choice, like having a fucking dog, awful attitude.

But of course, only those adults who have never been children should qualify to fly child free.

F*** ridiculous - children are a part of life, without children none of us would be here and in the future we won't have anybody to empty our bins, drive our trains, fly our planes, nurse us, doctor us etc When did it become an acceptable part of society to treat children like smoking?

Just makes me bloody cross tbh.

I am more often annoyed by children on flights than any other group of people (drunks, businessmen, etc) so I think it's a fab idea. Though what I would really like to see is entirely child-free flights!

No fatties. No body odour. No one who leaves the lavatory worse than they found it.

I have flown twice with children.
The first time was with a 7 week old. He was silent, I was crying as I had a migraine. Putting me surrounded by children would have finished me off. I had left my other three at home for a break.
The second time I flew on my own with all four. They behaved brilliantly. Sat and read, played their games or watched DVDs with headphones and didn't disturb a soul. Unlike the screechy slight drunk grown up woman a few aisles away.
I will admit my two year did cry for a couple of minutes as we were coming into land as the pressure hurt him but it was hard to hear him against the noise of the engines. Can't have been that annoying though as a businessman in the row in front congratulated me on my children's behaviour. I can't imagine how idiotically they would hav e behaved if they had sat with a load of other children to mess around with and to show off to. (Btw my children are never normally so perfect, they had just been given very very strict instructions)

Thinking of other flights I've been on its never been children who have annoyed me. Pervy men, drunk stag and hen dos, panicky people, constant complainers, snorers, seat hoggers all have but not children.

Haven't read the entire thread stopped around pointless lifestyle choice argument I support this but I also...Don't. Helpful data eh? I support it purely because my DTs are going through that soul chilling squealy phase. Yes, I am pulling my hair out teaching them not too. But as someone who is already a nervous flyer, the trauma of having a little next to me shriek ended me in tears. I felt so awful as the littlie was just being friendly and the mum was mortified.

So I support it because I would never want my DTs to do that, and also because to this day I feel so guilty how I made that mum feel. I don't support it however because it's not the children who are the issue, it's parents with headphones who ignore them. Then of course they're going to be loud and naughty! Don't blame the child for the adult's lack of parenting skills.

Oh and don't let them ruin my anniversary dinner by having them run around overtired at 10PM

TenthMuse = "Sorry, but children are a lifestyle choice". Really??? I thought they were people

I find it hard to comprehend this general attitude towards children in this country. Thankfully.

The last flight we took without children we were in the second row back. The people in the first row, with tons of legroom decided to recline their seats so that we were squashed (it was daytime). They filled up their own overhead locker and most of ours as well. They were up and down like a fiddlers elbow all flight.

The person sat behind me must have got up about 500 times during the flight. Each and every time they got up they yanked on the back of my seat. I was ready to punch them before we were halfway.

Still the tax on flights is now so high that I don't think we'll ever be able to afford to go again, so it probably won't affect us :(

No its not an option its a 'rows 1-7 no children allowed'

Clearly children are a choice although I don't really see why people keep dredging this up.

They're here, they're people and they need to travel just as much as everyone else needs to travel. Not to mention they have paid virtually the full fare like everyone else.

Travelling for work is still a choice. Choose a new job if you don't like it. Video conference. But don't imagine yourself to have more rights than anyone else on the plane.

Hahahahaha! Sorry but I just nearly died laughing at that one.

Its as bad as the 'children are a lifestyle choice' argument.

Both are bollocks.

Why do people feel flying for work makes them more entitled?

On the contrary, you've not even paid for your own flight and you're being paid to be there.

No one is on that flight for 'leisure' just as a means of transport to get them to a destination which may be work, family, holiday etc.

Travelling for work is still a choice. Choose a new job if you don't like it. Video conference. But don't imagine yourself to have more rights than anyone else on the plane.

Same applies to parents obviously. Plan for the trip, get stuff they can entertain themselves with, plenty of attention (rather than getting pissed up and ignoring then). Offer rewards for good behaviour at the destination.

Wow, I never thought of that littleducks. It's a very good point! I don't think every row of seats has extra oxygen masks either.