Full price babies at the Olympics

[littlepinklizard]

I'm shocked by the conversation I just had with the London 2012 ticketing poeple. My dh and I were lucky enough to get tickets to the horse jumping on 8 August. Our baby is due 2 June, so was enquiring about what I need to do about tickets for the new baby.

They said eveyone needs a ticket - fine.
Children's tickets are £1 - fine.
But there are no children's tickets for the horse jumping so I have to pay £95 to have a 3 month old in a sling!!!
I said I was planning to bf and couldn't go without the baby.
They said the only alternative was to re-sell my ticket or give it to someone else.

I can't justify £95 and I know lots of people who would love the ticket so I guess I just have to transfer it. But I am fuming.

AIBU or are the 2012 people?

I agree - it does feel like discrimination. We are lucky to have 4 tickets for the sailing, which as far as I understand it doesn't even come with seating (am presuming someone will correct me if this is wrong!). We will apparently need another ticked for a baby not even born yet and certainly not conceived when we bid for tickets. Apparently we will need to bid again in April when more tickets go on sale, although priority will go to those with no tickets at the moment. Not holding out much hope there.

If I cannot get another ticket, then it looks as though the baby won't be able to go and so neither will I. I normally keep well clear from the breast vs bottle discussions, but this does feel like discrimination against those people who are breast feeding. And those unable/unwilling to leave a very small baby in the care of someone else.

So I hear the fire safety issue - but surely selling tickets over a year in advance must have raised the possibility of this happening? For what its worth, I would be taking a buggy for my existing children regardless of the new baby.

I think babes in arms could be free if cinemas can manage this.

Just read the sub title for this thread on discussion of the day. Am not objecting to being charged for an as yet unborn baby (am not even aware of the charge if any that such a ticket would cost) but I am objecting to the fact that I now need to get another ticket that in all probability won't exist. Stopping me and potentially my family from going. Will presumably be harder for those with allocated seats (unless they want to leave the baby in a seat rows away from them ).

It will be a while until I know if I can even get another ticket (April, provided the website is working by then), regardless of the cost, and probably too late by then to be able to re-sell any tickets we are subsequently unable to use.

tilder - if you're taking a buggy, take a Phil & Teds or similar and hide the baby in the bottom. If the buggy's searched and the baby found, express astonishment, turn round and berate one of the older children: "I told you to leave the baby at home today!" . Then if you're not allowed to take the baby in, hand him/her to security guards and give them a couple of spare nappies. Bet security guards would change their mind quickly!

I can't understand the inconsistency here. There is no logic behind charging a nominal rate for children at one event, an age-based fee at another event and having no child rate at a third. If children have to pay full price because they're taking up a seat, then any child not requiring a seat shouldn't have to pay.

Either children are allowed or not. But saying that babies are not allowed when children are is blatant age discrimination; arguing that a ticket should have been booked before that baby was too young to exist is further evidence of age discrimination, not defence against it.

Not that I'll be going to any Olympic events. I would be taking DD and newborn DC2 to the playground in the park except that our park will be full of bloody jumping horses and closed for months, and the roads are all being ripped up and designated 'special VIP routes', with buses diverted, so we won't be able to enter or leave our own neighbourhood for the duration. Still, at least we'll enjoy the legacy... except that there isn't one, apart from a promise that the park will be returned to its original state. Possibly. I think we'll get the train to Paris for a month or so

Theres a thought! Would be an interesting reaction.

Didn't mean to rant, this has just really irritated me.

Aishling, I have not been able to get tickets, and my youngest would be three so I'm not breastfeeding any longer. But what I would say is that DS1's theoretical half hour East Anglian journey to school has been hellish for the past year because of the engineering work on train lines in preparation for the Games. We end up having to drive him quite often, even though we have paid for a season ticket. The replacement bus service is a joke. He is absolutely furious that he is expected to put up with all the discomfort and inconvenience when the Games are so London-centric, and children across the rest of the UK are effectively excluded and disenfranchised as a group from the whole thing. And I agree with him. I think it's actually put him off sport to a large extent, and he is not alone amongst his friends. Great legacy, that.

FWIW you can't take a buggy into the olympic venues either.

We're in the same situation and decided that we'd be better off getting our money back - feels very sad that the olympics is going to be on my doorstep and I'm not going to attend...

I've thought about this some more and come to the conclusion that it must be the particularly noise-sensitive events they're effectively excluding babies from.

But we are going to watch sailing. Not particularly noise sensitive and we are effectively being excluded from that.

Didn't know about the no buggy rule either - will have a look to see if that applies to Weymouth as well.

Apologies to all Mumsnetters annoyed by my journalistic inquiry. I didn't realise the form. But as a mum of two babies under 2, I agree with the overall sentiment being expressed here. I've taken both my boys to football matches (as young as 3 months) and it's been absolutely fine. I get health and safety concerns but Locog should be more practical and just issue a free accompanying 'ticket' to affected spectators

Wear a crazy hat and a big coat chances are they'll not even notice the baby in the sling

I am in this sitution too. My baby will be 4 months old when i am supposed to be attending the athletics. Bought the tickets before conception and intending to be exclusively breast feeling at that stage (third baby so have a pretty good idea). I am lucky in a way in that I could leave the baby with my mum who lives within an hour for two's journey of the Olympic park (at a guess) but actually feel really uncomfortable being away from such a young baby for at
least 6 hours.

So really I think I might end up giving away the ticket (my dad and two children and one other could still enjoy it). But it is sex discrimination and I am sure we should all be writing to our mps or something. Mind you I am also not 100% sure about the thought of battling through the crowds on the train to Olympic park with a tiny baby in arms.

Perhaps the answer is to take one or two extra people and take it in turns to watch the ticketed event and enjoy the day out in the park generally watching big screens etc.

Breast feeding that is

I'll also be in this situation. I hadn't even considered it - assuming that as my baby will only be 6 months old by this point and will be in a sling, that she would be accommodated without extra cost or fuss. How can the organisers of the London Olympics justify this when there's precedent from numerous other Olympic Games where babes in arms are accommodated without comment? Bloody ridiculous and frankly, yet another black mark against the ticketing scandal.

It's most likely a licensing issue. Every person who attends the event will have to be covered by the license otherwise the insurance is null and void. Entertainment events have to be licenced (try organising a circus at your school or a firework display or even a school fair). A baby is still counted as a person so must be covered by a ticket - whether it's £1 or £95 is irrelevant. Perhaps a small line of information next to the children's ticket option could have mentioned the need for a baby's ticket.

You wouldn't consider taking a baby in a sling to events such as a Take That concert, Chelsea v Man Utd or an Alice Cooper concert would you?

I think they did make their policy quite cla in the first round. The issue is though that the tickets were on sale so early that these babies were not conceived yet when we were making plans. I do feel very reluctant to give away one of "the greatest tickets on Earth". I feel really lucky to have a ticket and think that a baby in a sling will not cause a problem and I was looking forward to soaking up the atmosphere with my family.

I went to a take that concert just before I was pregnant and it would have been tricky with a baby but not impossible. (hmmm thinking about the queue to get out and the long walk home - maybe not)

I'm due around the time of the Olympics, we couldn't have gone anyway (cost) but had we, it's interesting to know that a late baby would be able to 'sneak in' hidden in my womb, but one born early and carried in a sling would need a ticket. Would have put a lot of pressure on baby to arrive at the right time.

Of course, I can't imagine I'd be comfortable making such a long, busy trip when there is a chance going into labour. I will enjoy the Olympics coverage on TV curled up with my new born. I enjoyed the Bejing and Vancover coverage, and at least this time there won't be the time disconnect. It would have been great to have been there though I'm a huge fan of the Olympics, but I guess I'll be busy learning how to be a mum so won't miss it too much.

Disappointed (but unsurprised) that quoting a series of posts on a forum board passes as journalism these days. Unattributed, no official response, really pathetic...

I'd also be interested in the mechanics of how one buys tickets for an un-named, un-concieved person on the off chance that they will exist.

I have to say I will have a 5 month old and didn't even think about going as I would have her/him with me. I would ask again if I were you and make a fuss as it ridiculous as it won't even be taking up a seat.

Tbh I think talk of fire safety is a red herring - if this was an issue then why do babies not require their own seats on planes? There should be no problem issuing a ticket for a babe in arms that enables them to be counted in attendance records for safety reasons, without them having to have a seat. Ditto the issue of buggies and change bags - these are more necessary for one- and two-year olds than babies, ime.

If the disruption caused by small children were really an issue in the organisers' minds then they would have not sold tickets for one to five year olds in the first place, would they? The point is that the games are an inclusive affair, comparisons to nighttime rock concerts are a bit facile.

I have written to my mp about this and she is being very helpful. I urge anyone else who is unhappy about this to do the same.

Incidentally I am the named ticket holder for my family's tickets and I understand this may mean I have to cancel all our tickets if I just want to cancel mine, so either none of us go or we suck up the cost of my ticket though I won't be there.

Another article, this one's in the Guardian

Frustrated mod - I think they have now said you can give away or sell tickets at face value to people you know so should be able to either use or sell just your ticket if you decide not to go.

Ah ok thanks nettee, that's clarified things for me. I'm still bloody pissed off that I can't go, though. I have been looking forward to it since London got the Olympics. I'm also frankly pretty peeved that I have to not go, while my husband still gets to even though he is less interested than me.