to be annoyed that malyasia airlines

[catgirl1976]

have been allowed to ban babies in first class?? 1st airline to do it and I bet it starts a trend. How is it ok to be sat next to a crying baby if you fly economy but not if you go first? I suppose they think people travelling 1st would be happy to dump the baby in economy with the nanny. Nice family friendly policy there......

lol at the poster who buys tickets in first class and takes a toddler wearing a t shirt saying " be patient with me, i am autistic". seeing that at the start of an 11 hour flight would make me go ballistic - but it's not the poor child's fault. people have paid a fortune for their peace and quiet and it's totally unreasonable for parents to selfishly and wilfully inflict disruption onto them like that.

theinet how the hell do you propose they transport them? Via Royal blooody Mail?

they should wait until they are older.

it's all part of the "have it all" culture and sense of entitlement many feel these days.

Funny, i've never seen a toddler or child in the papers for behaving badly, being drunk on board, air rage, being foul and noisy, having sex in public, trying to open doors mid flight. Think children travelling are the least of your problems.

at selfishly inflicting disruption on anyone.

if the man sitting next to dd1 had not a) refused to swap seats so that dd2 could sit with us (well within his right to refuse, but then a little churlish to complain she was upset at not sitting with me when he had it in his power to make that swap) and b) not actively upset dd1 by intimidating and telling her off then he would not have been inconvenienced in the slightest.

yes, dd1 does wear a t shirt saying "please be patient with me" (or similar) when travelling. It is not to excuse any noise and disruption on her part - she is not a noisy child, and is very well behaved (it is possible for her, even with severe autism). It is to attempt to get people to recognise that if she does not respond immediately in a situation, it may be because she is having difficulty, and is not being rude/ignoring etc.

she does get distressed when she has someone breathing down her neck, and insisting she utters not a single sound at all (an unrealistic expectation for anyone), and she also gets distressed by loud noises, so the frankly ridiculous noise the man sitting next to her was making when spluttering and laughing over some dire comedy film bothered her, but by his estimate, she was not allowed to talk to me, as it was too disruptive

if you sat next to her and tutted and frowned at everyhting she did, she would in all probability become quite anxious and distressed.

if you treat her as a typical human being, and recognise the fact that she will talk, and occasionally move around the cabin - to go to the toilet or to go to see her dad/sibling (and I do mean occasionally - possibly moving once every 3 hours or so), then you would have a much better travelling experience. not much to ask, really.

and pmsl at "entitlement culture" and "wait until they are older" as well.

why the hell shoudl we wait, when the girls are not at all badly behaved (in the slightest). recent flight to/form Florida, dd1 sat in her seat quietly, playing on her ipad all the way. she moved twice, to go the toilet. and she did not complain even when a total fuck up by the airline meant she was left without a meal, which is more than can be said arrogant businessman 2 seats in front of me, who raised merry hell about the same issue. dd2 said "that man is very cross, isn't he mummy? is he hungry? do you think he wants to share dd1's snack?"

FFS theinet - you assume people only travel with children by choice and not necessity do you? Sense of entitlement? No no - you are right if someone hs a child they forfeit the right to move freely across the globe

I have no chance of flying first class or business class. Ryanair is about my budget. But the way I see it is first class should be a luxury for anybody who can afford it, despite age or ability.

Surely it would make more sense to make business class an adult only area and be used for what its intended for instead of second class. I dont really see why a business man/woman would need a slightly more luxurious seat in first class if they are going to be working through the journey.

To be fair, sitting in economy class would be no fun with a crying baby either.

Well anyway, what is happening is those people in 1st/business class who are inconvenienced are complaining, they are typically paying real cash for fares and not burning airmiles, and the airlines worry they just can't afford to lose that business in the long run.
.
BTW Were you using airmiles to fly 4 kids and yourself, Silverfrog? That's a lot of revenue they lost (and probably one senior guys who told them he'd never fly Qantas again).

only 2 kids, omigawd, and 4 adults. and no, no airmiles (on that flight, although it did, of course earn us a shitload which we have since used on other flights. yes, they were business/first class too, we do not ever travel economy by choice).

businessmen earn airmiles too , and when they use them, it is lost revenue as well....

I couldn't give a shit whether the man next ot dd1 felt so inconvenienced that he never flew Qantas again (although that would be an odd reaction, really) - if he had not harassed and intimidated her then she would not have been distressed (and her distress only lasted the 10 minutes or so of takeoff where she had to be in her seat; after that, she was able to move away from him, and able to see that dd2 was indeed ok)

as it happens, the man who did swap with dh, so that we were not left in the position of having to choose whether we left dd2 (just 2) seated on her own, or dd1 (4 and severely disabled), was one of the top fliers with Qantas. a very nice man, who also managed to recognise what it is like to be 2 years old and scared because you are not sitting next to anyone you know.

the "using airmiles = lost revenue" argument doesn't really stack up. if it did not make sense for the airlines to offer airmiles, then they wouldn't (and most of the time you cannot book 6 airmiles tickets at any one time - there are restrictions placed on the number of seats allocated, purely to ensure the flight does pay for itself, I would imagine)

to have enough airmiles to use in that situation we would have to have already travelled a heck of a lot (which we do, regularly).

same as businessmen.

if we have earned those miles, then yes, we are entitled to use them, whether in one all-in blowout or in dribs and drabs goign to see relatives in Scotland.

the businessmen traveling are as likely to be using airmiles (and if not then, then when going on holiday with their families) - again earned by travelling on paying flights.

Shrug, there are plenty of other airlines who like my money.

We fly first and business usually and have done so with a baby, hasn't been a problem.

Qantas in particular actively welcome children and babies with playrooms in the lounges and excellent children's meals/equipment, the flight attendant will even take your baby while you eat. So we fly Qantas whenever possible and spend a fortune in the process.

Given how empty first class usually is, I doubt all of the other airlines will follow.

I'm sure the airline have done their homework and think this is a business decision worth taking. Don't see it as any more than that. It's just like the occasional thread when people get outraged at a restaurant that doesn't welcome kids. In a crowded and very competitive market place, businesses are free to make these choices.

And in the very unlikely event of my ever flying first class, I will gladly patronise this airline.

"Nice family friendly policy there......"

Why does every business, every restaurant, every airline, etc have to have family friendly policies.

my kids pay the same in business class as anyone else and usually any children flying will be the children of these 'business' travellers. Business Class is just a name and is open to anyone who can afford it - babies , children and even 'old people' .

I happen to agree with the policy too. However, Malaysian Airlines are a teensy bit funny though.

Last time I flew with them, in Economy, a steward said "Boy, Lady, you can drink!!!" when I ordered my 2nd glass of red wine on a 10 hour flight. I was speechless, especially as he had spilled half of my first one.

Had the subsequent holiday not been so relaxing - a stern letter would have been concocted, I tell you.

Have to say I think the numbers of people who absolutely HAVE to travel with babies are limited... Mostly they are going on holiday or visit people which they are too young to remember.

My problem with babies in enclosed spaces such as trains/planes is that there is nothing you can do if your child decides to kick off, and there's no accurate way of predicting their reaction until you're actually mid-journey.

Added to that, young children aren't usually paying customers as on trains they go free or for planes don't have a seat until aged 2. So although their parents are customers, it's a business equation of how many parents who want to travel with their kids versus how many people want to travel without disruption on the flight/train.

Not unreasonable at all.

What a fuss over nothing! Choose another airline or travel economy, simples.

It's a business they can ban who they like. But judging by some people's posts, babies should be allowed to go anywhere an adult can. Does that mean night clubs should start providing baby changing facilities, and warner holidays should be forced to accept children?

it all depends on what you think the extra cost is buying you, really, doesn't it?

It isn't for the peace and quiet - most businessmen make as much noise as dd1, since the noise she makes is, err, having a conversation . same for dd2.

It is for the extra space, the extra amenities, better food, more choice of inflight entertainment, more comfortable seats etc. all these are there, whether you are a businessman or a 6 year old child.

We travel business/first so that we do have more space - dietary issues mean we often have to take dd1's meals with us, and for a longhaul flight this is quit a lot of different meals/foods - space to be able to get that all prepared is what we need. as well as space for dd1 to sit on my lap, which she still does a lot, and space to ensure she is not accidentally inconveniencing other passengers when she gets up to go to the toilet etc - children are not well tolerated in any class, imo, and an accidental jogging of a seat in economy is more likely to happen than in business/first.

the argument that an under 2 is not paying for a seat therefore shoudl not be there is ridiculous - said under 2 does not have a seat, and is sitting with another traveller who has paid.

of course malaysia airlines are well within their rights to impose whatever restrictions they like, but it is sad when hey have to take measures like this.

there is no reason for children to be badly behaved on flights, and there is no reason for people in general to assume form the off that children will shriek, run around and create havoc. it is sad that so many people see children merely as an inconvenience and a nuisance.

Enraha - I had the opposite problem on a MA flight in the 90's. I was one of the only people awake and asked for a cup of tea - lovely stewardess bought me a Brandy and Dry!....and kept bringing them.

By the time we landed I was 3 sheets to the wind facing my (very annoyed) boss AND had to get a connecting flight from KL to KK!

silverfrog - there is a world of difference between a 6 year old you can reason with and keep quiet, and a baby which you can't. I've flown with my little ones quite a lot and they love it, but there is no way in the world I would have inflicted their unpredictable baby-selves on a planeful of trapped passengers. That's just entitled and rude. We either drove or stayed at home until they were old enough to behave properly.

Yes the parent has paid for their seat - but when everyone else has been restricted to a teeny amount of carry on luggage, one bag only and quite cramped space anyway, the parent is flying with at least 2-3 extra bits of "luggage" once you factor in the child, its buggy, extra bags for nappies/food etc. (Admittedly this isn't as much of a problem on luxury airlines but try flying Easyjet.)

I couldn't agree more Northerngirl. I never understand why anyone would take a baby onto a plane unless they absolutely had to travel somewhere.

there is nothing on this Earth that would induce me to fly Easyjet - for their boarding policy alone. we have driven across Europe rather than fly Easyjet.

you cannot easily reason with my 6 year old, she is severely autistic.

and I still do not think it is particularly entitled to take up a service offered by a company.

it is just as entitled for the businessmen to ask to be left in peace - they could always (the majority of them) use video conferencing and stay at home in their peaceful quiet offices if they are so bothered, or drive (where applicable) or take the train - just like families with young children can.

when dd1 was tiny, our longhaul flights were of necessity (relocating), but from about 15 months or so they were holidays. I honestly do not see what is "entitled" about buying tickets on an aeroplane, which is offering tickets for sale to the general public.

no, I did not ever restrict myself to home only when my girls were small. I can also say in all honesty that the longest they have ever made a noise for on a flight is 20 minutes, maximum. yes, an inconvenience for those 20 minutes (although see my earlier posts about tossers interfering where they are not wanted - usually these disruptions are avoidable if people will leave dd1 alone. cabin crew included, btw - she did not take kindly to a steward snatching her ipad out of her hands and flipping her table away when she did not react immediately when asked to turn it off. she was doing so, and I was assisting her, and the impatient tut and sigh was not necessary - dd1 delayed by about ooooh, 6 seconds - her usual processing delay.) but those have been extreme situations - dd1 panicking at the thought of not sitting next to me, etc.

x-posts.

really, Hammy?

what is the age when babies/toddlers/children can be taken on aeroplanes then?

dd1 first flew longhaul at 4 months old. slept all the way, aside form feed times, and even then she didn't make anymore noise than any other passenger.

neither of my 2 have ever been nuisances on aeroplanes. maybe I am just lucky.

they also behave well on buses and trains.

other than actually breathign the air, I am not sure what problems they bring.