To think the person who brought their baby to Wimbledon should be ashamed

[StunningCunt]

Crying in the middle of the point, 17-16 in the final set of the semifinal, do people have no sense???

[SDTGisAnOlympicWolefGenius]

GoldenBear - I don't think you can measure how much a parent loves their child, based on whether they take them to events that are not suitable for them, or not, or whether they have their child with them at all times.

For me, the bottom line is that there has to be thoughtfulness and respect for others in these situations. I don't think it shows respect for the competitors if you make unnecessary noise when they need quiet so they can concentrate and produce their best performance. The same goes for the actors or musicians in plays or concerts. And there are times and places where noise can spoil the enjoyment of others - in the cinema, at a play or concert, at some sporting events, in a posh restaurant - and I would not put my desire to keep my screaming baby with me (or my desire to gossip or take phone calls) ahead of other people's right to enjoy something that may well be costing them a lot of money.

But the flip side of that is that we accept that quiet children have every right to be at events requiring quiet, and that in other circumstances there will be noise of all sorts (not just crying babies), and that is a part of normal, daily life.

[shockers]

I haven't had time to read all of this, so apologies if I'm going over stuff that's already been said.

It's lovely that babies are welcomed almost everywhere, but what I don't understand is, if your baby crying is stopping other people from enjoying an event, surely it's hard for you to enjoy it also. The baby won't be having any fun either!

At our year 6 leavers' play, a baby cried all the way through. It was a real shame for the children who had spent weeks rehearsing, and for their parents who had come to watch. The worst part about that story is that the baby was the sibling of someone lower down the school, who was singing in the choir. Those parents weren't there to watch their child's final performance.

[SDTGisAnOlympicWolefGenius]

Vess - maybe those writing the rules assumed (obviously erroneously) that people would have the sense to stay quiet during play, and would take a crying/screaming baby out, rather than letting it disturb the players' concentration. Maybe they assumed people would have a modicum of common sense and thought for others.

If it had been you, watching that semi final, and your baby was screaming, would you think that your 'right' to be there outweighed the players' need for quiet so they can concentrate, and everyone else's right to watch a tennis match that isn't being disrupted/affected by noise, or would you take your baby out if you couldn't calm and quieten them quickly in situ?

[janey68]

Obviously they need to amend the rules then vess and add a clause saying 'unless you are a fucking idiot who can't judge when its not a good idea to bring your kid along'

[marquesas]

I suspect that when the fuss was made about babes in arms not being allowed in LOCOG (or however decides such stuff) were forced to change the original rules and just overlooked the fact that some sports/venues should have been excluded from the relaxation of the rule that allowed them in.

No doubt when the Olympics comes to London again they will ensure that there is no repeat

[vess]

So how long did the baby in question cry for then?

[janey68]

You don't actually know vess? That's interesting, since you've been quite happy to state on the thread that it was 'just a bit of crying ' and nothing to worry about

[SDTGisAnOlympicWolefGenius]

Aren't you going to answer my question, Vess?

[vess]

Well, personally I wouldn't take a baby to watch tennis, and even if I did, and she started crying, I would take her out. But that still means some crying snd some noise.
But, if I was there watching and a baby cried, I would try not to be annoyed. Babies are babies, they sometimes cry. They didn't stop the match because of it, did they?

[ilovesooty]

Yes: they sometimes cry. So any sensible parent should realise that it's not appropriate to take them in the first place.

I suspect that when the fuss was made about babes in arms not being allowed in LOCOG (or however decides such stuff) were forced to change the original rules and just overlooked the fact that some sports/venues should have been excluded from the relaxation of the rule that allowed them in

I imagine that that is exactly what happened. And obviously some entitled parents can't be trusted to make responsible and considerate decisions.

[janey68]

You obviously didn't watch the match so its difficult to take your opinions seriously.
And you've now admitted you would take a baby along and try to leave if it cried. Damage already done I'm afraid, once you've disturbed the players and spectators. Plus you aren't allowed to get up and move around mid game.

In other words- it is not a suitable environment for a baby. Especially over 4 hours of it

[wanttomakeadifference]

I was at the dressage phase of the three day eventing last weekend.

There was a rule that whilst each competitor carried out their test spectators were as quiet as possible. We were also asked to move from our seats during any tests, but to wait until the gap between each competitor before moving. Most of the time the arena was almost silent.

A baby of about 3 months was in a fling with its mother in front. Initially the sun was beating down, there was no shade and they were obviously concerned about him overheating or getting sun burn.

Later the baby began crying really really loudly. Mother got up and jiggled baby, blocking others' view. She eventually left mid-test with her screaming bundle.

Later we had a thunderstorm, baby was getting soaked. Mother resorted to SN umbrella which helped, but blocked others' view again- hardly anyone else used SN umbrella.

It was impossible for the parents of this baby to behave in a considerate way and keep their baby cool, dry and happy. IMO babies did not mix with that particular event.

[wanttomakeadifference]

That should read not to move from our seats during any tests....

[EmpressOfTheSevenFlames]

It's mad that babies are allowed into events that need quiet, though. It should be specified at point of sale whether an event is suitable for babies or not and if not, it should be clear that they won't be admitted. It's not fair on anyone and the parents would still have plenty of choices.

[VolAuVent]

I agree with vess and Empress. They should have stuck to not allowing babies into events which need quiet.

Obviously babies cry sometimes, and once they start, that would have distracted the players already if it was going to, regardless of whether the parents then take them out.

[vess]

If it's not suitable then they shouldn't let people take babies. But they do, so the baby's parents were not in the wrong. Especially if they couldn't take the baby out.
Doesn't sound like there was any 'damage'. And I'm sure players don't need outraged mumsnetters to speak for them.
Don't really want to argue anymore, though. Different oppinions and all that.

[ilovesooty]

If it's not suitable then they shouldn't let people take babies. But they do, so the baby's parents were not in the wrong. Especially if they couldn't take the baby out.

Rather confirms my point about entitled parents unable to make appropriate decisions. However, I agree they shouldn't have been allowed in in the first place.

[Aboutlastnight]

I think it's hard for some parents to accept that there are some things that you cannot do when you have a baby - I think going sknedhers where you have to be sit still and bd quiet for a length of time is one of them.

Baby + three day event cross country or triathlon or swimming etc, noise us expected. Not so tennis. As for cinema... Well I would also be concerned at noise levels on little ears

Was in a bar enjoying some child free time with friends and a couple with a baby which looked six months were therd with friend's and were continually up and down with it, sometimes in the pram, and I just thought oh go home, you are not enjoying this, baby is not enjoying it and this isn't a suitable place for babies or children.

[janey68]

I think what this thread confirms then, is that because of a small minority of parents, we really do need things run by nanny state, spelling out every little rule. Which is a shame, because when there is a blanket ban on things eg: no children at events, it means that responsible parents of older children who can be relied on to behave appropriately, miss out.
It would be a whole lot simpler if there was a 'do you have an overblown sense of entitlement / are you a fucking idiot?' test people had to pass before conception really .

[ilovesooty]

Absolutely, janey. It appears we need rules and bans in place because a minority of parents are selfish, stupid and entitled.

[Aboutlastnight]

I don't think there should be a ban - I think some people need a reality check.

The whole ' this baby will not change our lives' thing is ridiculous.

[50shadesofslapntickle]

I'm still reading this and I still can't quite believe that there are so many ignorant people out there who think taking a baby to certain events where hush is needed is ok. Instead of seeing that their pig ignorant way of thinking is utterly selfish, they bleat that we don't want babies out and about - that is, they resort to stupid, non-sensical arguments when they are so wrong about this


It's selfish, ignorant, stupid and an entitled way to think - open your eyes!

[TheCatInTheHairnet]

Having seen the link, that is not a newborn baby. At one point, they scream, "NO!"

I'm guessing a 1 year old. 1 year olds are a right pita and shouldn't be taken anywhere...unlike newborns, who are very portable!