Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To not want baby to commute by underground regularly?

22 replies

LocalLove · 28/03/2014 02:29

LO is less than a year old. LO's Dad left when LO was 4months.

He has regular (3 times/week) contact on the 'little and often' principle.

He now wants to move over 40minutes away and take LO to his new place for contact. To me this seems like far too much time on the underground when there are plenty of (free, nice) baby-friendly places near LO's home.

Thoughts?

OP posts:
BlameItOnTheBogey · 28/03/2014 02:38

I think this is a non-issue. I used to commute to work with DS every day from when he was six months old. Babies do just fine on the tube and 40 mins really isn't that far.

ICanSeeTheSun · 28/03/2014 02:40

Are there any other issues.

Plenty of babies use the tube on a regular basis.

Why are you worried about this.

Original poster
LocalLove · 28/03/2014 02:59

Concerns about tube: Noise/crowdedness/heat in summer/air quality. Do-able if necessary but, as LO's Dad doesn't work (he could, he just doesn't want to at the moment) not something baby has to endure right now.

More generally: no baby-centred activities planned for contact visits. Refusal to do the 'harder' aspects of baby-care, e.g. putting nappy cream on, emptying potty etc leaving LO with sore behind/in a room with poop. Lack of interest in learning about baby care, not deliberate harm but giving foods without checking suitability, toys with small parts designed for older children etc.

Carelessness not vindictiveness.

OP posts:
squoosh · 28/03/2014 03:00

As long as there's plenty of credit on baby's Oyster card he should be fine.

Forago · 28/03/2014 03:09

are you really potty training your under one year old? maybe he won't do this as he realises its way too early?

Original poster
LocalLove · 28/03/2014 03:14

Potty use at under one is common in some cultures. LO's dad is happy to put LO on the potty when LO needs to go, just not to empty it afterwards. He does not share your opinion on age.

OP posts:
Thumbwitch · 28/03/2014 03:22

Carelessness by any other name could be considered reckless endangerment/neglectful parenting.

FamiliesShareGerms · 28/03/2014 03:37

This isn't about the tube travel (which is nonsense, IMO, 40 mins on the tube is Not An Issue), is it?

Wurstwitch · 28/03/2014 03:52

He's his dad. If you think he's dangerous, go through courts for supervised contact.

And stop making stupid excuses about the tube.

ComposHat · 28/03/2014 04:50

What is LO? London Overground? If so, isn't that just like a normal suburban train rather than the underground system (not that this is an issue anyway).

Doesn't commute also imply a regular home to work journey? I now have an image of a baby in a bowler hat, pinstripe suit with an copy of the times under its arm, hurrying to the office.

steff13 · 28/03/2014 04:54

I think LO=little one. But I'd be so excited to see a train full of babies in bowler hats and suits. :)

NinjaLeprechaun · 28/03/2014 04:59

steff13 I'm picturing it. Grin And they all look like Stewie from Family Guy.

adoptmama · 28/03/2014 05:02

There is no valid health reason for an infant not to travel by underground. I think it sounds a lot more like you have issues with the dad and are looking for any reason to control his access.

PlumPansy · 28/03/2014 05:08

Please tell me how you get your less than a year old to sit on a potty. My two year old thinks hers is to eat weetabix out of.

YeahBitchMagnets · 28/03/2014 05:15

Seriously? Your ex actually wants to see his son three times a week, and you are bellyaching because he needs to take him on the tube? Hmm

Lots of African people just sit (and hold) their babies onto potties after each meal, from as soon as they can sit up.

I think it's a bit odd, but no more odd than all the British people who don't think a child is capable of coming out of nappies until they are over 3.

Boobz · 28/03/2014 05:21

YABU.

RalphRecklessCardew · 28/03/2014 05:24

DS rather likes the tube. Noise! People! Trains! All very interesting. Very.

hoboken · 28/03/2014 05:44

The bus on the same route would take longer - same risk of catching colds etc, air quality also poor. The same journey in a car would also be longer than by Tube and the baby would be in a car seat rather than where he or she could engage with father, and air quality would also be poor.

Is he expected to wander the streets (air quality poor) looking for free things to do rather than take the baby to his place?

It can be difficult being parted from a LO but it is in the child's interest to have regular contact with his or her father unless there are circs such as DV. I would be glad for the child's sake that the father wants to be involved in his life. You may well find you relax about it as time goes on.

In this case I think YABU.

TantrumsAndBalloons · 28/03/2014 06:24

Dd and ds1 spent the first 3 years of their lives doing a 20 minute tube journey in the morning and again at 5pm.

They didnt suffer because of it.

It's not really about the journey itself is it?

Sirzy · 28/03/2014 06:28

I am obviously missing the issue here. Can't see any problem with taking a child on public transport

PersilOrAriel · 28/03/2014 06:52

So he'll let the baby use the potty, but won't empty it afterwards? Where is this, where he lives? Surely if he doesn't empty it then nobody will and it will smell even worse.

katese11 · 28/03/2014 06:56

This isn't about the tube travel (which is nonsense, IMO, 40 mins on the tube is Not An Issue), is it?

exactly this

New posts on this thread. Refresh page