Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to think small children shouldn't take up Tube seats?

308 replies

MrsRupertCampbellBlack · 04/03/2015 16:17

genuinely interested as I'm currently six months pregnant with my first child and I know this is going to be me in a couple of years!

But I keep seeing mums at rush hour on really busy Tubes sitting with a small child next to them taking up another seat. Surely the nicer/politer/more sensible thing to do would be for the mum to have the child on her lap and free up a seat for someone else?

OP posts:
expatinscotland · 07/03/2015 12:51

Some people on this thread seem to really hate young people and have a real grudge against them.

UncommonSense · 07/03/2015 13:14

There are a lot of generally obnoxious people on here. Children are entitled to sit as much as an adult.

I, personally, would give up my seat for anyone less able to stand than myself. This would include the elderly, disabled, pregnant AND children. anyone who doesn't is selfish, IMO.

I would never ask my kids to give up seats for someone more capable of standing than they are but would absolutely encourage them to do so for those less able.

Vickisuli · 07/03/2015 13:17

From a commuter point of view I can see why someone would be irritated by a child 'taking up' a seat. But for my 3 kids going on the Tube is a very rare and exciting occasion, and they like to kneel up on the seat and watch the walls rushing by. If they want to each sit on a separate seat then I will let them because it is part of their day out. Plus, obviously I could only have one on my lap in any case.

ingridmouse · 07/03/2015 13:17

VeryAgedParent, I had to commute at rush hour, with my DS, to take him to nursery in time for me to start work at 9am. Not every public transport journey, with small children, can be scheduled away from busy times

mazwa3779 · 07/03/2015 13:24

my lb is 3. if it is quite and there is room i let him have his own seat. if it is busy and standing room only then he has to sit on my lap, after all he's got on for free so why should i expect him to have the right to his own seat. if we have a seat that is. there have been times, even when he wasn't walking were I've had to stand, holding him cos not one considerate person has been on the bus or train and vacated their seat.

GreenShadow · 07/03/2015 13:38

As a child growing up in the London suburbs we were always expected to offer our seats to adults. It is called respect. This does not mean that children are lesser people, just that they have to grow into the privileges of adulthood. They learn this by being taught to think of others before themselves and if they don't start young, then when will they learn.

Anyone too small to stand safely will, in most cases, be small enough to sit on laps (assuming there are enough adult laps available for each child). Alternatively they could sharing a seat with their siblings.

Certainly those children who travel for free should not be sitting on seats if it leaves fare-paying adults to stand. (And please no-one jump on this and say pensioners travel for free...)

expatinscotland · 07/03/2015 13:59

As an able-bodied adult, I don't see why I am due a child's seat as a mark of 'respect'. Respect is earned, not given with their seat. OAPs don't pay, either, so by your logic they should not get a seat, either.

Methe · 07/03/2015 14:04

Respect is something you earn not something you are entitled to just because you are over 18.

It is good manners to offer a seat to someone who needs it more that you, not wants it.

Quietattheback · 07/03/2015 14:04

I never understand this. How have we got to a place where the onus to take care of an elderly or disabled person is placed at the feet of children?

If someone elderly gets on a tube that is packed, presumably most of the seats are taken by able bodied adults. They should be the ones to give up a seat not a child who is vulnerable on public transport.

I find it weird that children are thought of as less worthy of safety and comfort.

Methe · 07/03/2015 14:06

Quite right Quiet' well said.

Mackereloffact · 07/03/2015 14:23

I live and work on the Central Line, and am perfectly able-bodied. If I have a journey where I'm not in actual physical pain from contorting myself into impossible postions to be able to stand in the available space and hold onto something, or feeling sick from being overheated and thrown about, then I'm pretty happy to be honest!

The tube in rush hour isn't a comfortable way for anyone to travel. You just have to get on with it, whatever your age. Giving up seats is good in theory but half the time the people sitting down won't even be able to see most of the people getting crushed in the doorway area, let alone be able to perform the necessary manoeuvres to be a to give them their seat.

Longtime · 07/03/2015 15:20

I would rather see a small child sitting on a seat and an able bodied adult standing up than the other way round. Much less dangerous for the latter than the former. I do travel on the (Brussels) metro fairly regularly and would always give my seat up for a small child.

Lweji · 07/03/2015 15:25

In fact the busier the transport, the more a child should have a seat. Most adults won't see or notice that what they perceive as a space is taken by a child. I'd rather have my/any child not crushed in rush hour by him having a seat.

Lweji · 07/03/2015 15:27

I have always been a regular commuter, and I am speaking as someone who often has to stand and be crushed, as well as a parent.

skippingdolefully · 07/03/2015 15:37

I agree with a previous poster, I regularly travel on the Victoria line in rush hour, whilst pregnant and now with my DS and we are virtually always offered a seat. London commuters are very courteous IMO.

Levyboarder · 07/03/2015 16:00

If they're are small on the lap, if not they're entitled to a seat same as anyone else.

merrymouse · 07/03/2015 16:41

"OAPs don't pay, either, so by your logic they should not get a seat, either."

Or sit on somebody's lap Grin

Tusty · 07/03/2015 22:56

If the tube was busy, then on my lap if room, or I'd sit him (he's 4) and I'd stand. I wouldn't want him standing.

If quiet, then I would let him have his own seat.

My mum used to say that we should sit on laps or share a seat (mostly on train rather than tube) because we hadn't paid. I think it is polite, but then I'm not fussed if I don't get a seat and a child does, so it doesn't bother me. If I was pregnant or elderly then yes, I'd appreciate them giving up a seat.

BathshebaDarkstone · 07/03/2015 23:00

I was once told to put DD2 on my lap on the bus when I was 8.5 months pregnant with DS2. Sometimes it's just not possible.

Happy36 · 07/03/2015 23:03

Don´t come to Spain! Here the child is king (which is nice philosophy, in most other areas of life) and all 3 to 12 year olds get their own seats on the metro whilst their pregnant mums, hobbling grandparents and the general public stand up. It is really quite a thing to behold. I´ve also regularly seen children throw a tantrum when getting into a crowded metro carriage and therefore not having their own seat. I always thought it was a Spanish thing but haven´t been on the tube regularly for 9 years so maybe it happens now in the UK too. Ridiculous...as the OP says they can sit on their parents´ laps or stand up for short journeys if the carriage is crowded or particularly if there are others more in need of the seat.

keepitsimple0 · 07/03/2015 23:25

This does not mean that children are lesser people, just that they have to grow into the privileges of adulthood. They learn this by being taught to think of others before themselves and if they don't start young, then when will they learn.

it doesn't mean they are lesser people? What does it mean then?

it teaches them to think of elders, not others. it teaches them that authority and might make right. it teaches children that instead of using a meaningful indicator of who should sit (people who can't stand safely) that some other, somewhat demeaning, indicator should be used.

PilchardPrincess · 08/03/2015 10:49

Happy I really don't understand how you feel that way. I am sure you know what a packed tube looks like but have found one anyway for reference.

You think it is a good idea for a 4yo to be standing in the middle of that? They will not have anything to hold on to. The people trying to get on will be looking for gaps at adult height and shove if they see a space, they will not be able to see and will not know that what they see as a gap is actually occupied by a child. I don't understand why you think this is a good thing for anyone? It would be terrifying, being squashed tight amongst all those legs with nothing to hold on to.

This is why people on the tube give up their seats for younger children. In London they are classed as vulnerable people by commuters and others. The sight of a young child having to stand to let an able bodied adult sit would be shocking and others would immediately stand so the child could sit again.

Even on a less crowded train (depending on the line) many of the handholds are high up and cannot be reached by a child. The trains can stop quite suddenly and people fling around. Children are at the right height to be hit in the face with a bag or an arm, if someone crashes into them they will be affected more as they are more likely to fall or get wrenched as the person falling into them is much much heavier than them.

I don't know why there are some (thankfully few) people who think all this is a good thing and how it should be Confused and also thankfully on both the tube and the commuter train line I travel on it is the norm for people to give up seats for children who look like they will have trouble holding on safely and I think that is a really good thing.

If there are some of you sitting there tutting when you see it well you're in the minority quite frankly and I believe you're wrong.

to think small children shouldn't take up Tube seats?
PlebsLeague · 08/03/2015 11:18

But in that scenario princess would you rather have a 2 year old toddler on your lap, or sitting on a seat on their own. I would always have them on my lap. TBH I would never even get on a train like on my own or with any child. I would rather walk.

PilchardPrincess · 08/03/2015 11:27

I rarely travel with the kids on public transport but I commute and have done for 20 years, via tubes & commuter trains. If I am out with the kids personally I prefer to stand and let my 2 share a seat.

Also my legs aren't great so even with one I prefer to stand and let the little one sit. You often see children sharing seats or sitting and the adult standing in front to sort of guard them from any pushing etc.

In the rush hour most people travelling are fit and able. There are more than enough seats for everyone who is more vulnerable to sit and that includes little ones.

If I saw one of the posters on this thread telling a 4yo to stand so they could sit I would then offer my seat to the child. It boggles me that they would rather see a 4yo stand than ask someone who looks able-bodied.

And like I say on the lines I travel on it is generally accepted that children who look like they will have trouble holding on safely are treated as a more vulnerable group of people and get offered a seat. Probably moreso than pregnant (without badge) women and older people who I think people can be wary that they might put their foot in it. But little children, people jump up.

I just can't see anything wrong with avoiding having children standing or think "society's going to the dogs" or whatever when I see children being offered a way to make them safer and more comfortable when travelling. Because it is definitely not comfortable to travel with nothing to hold onto pressed in amongst a sea of legs.

PilchardPrincess · 08/03/2015 11:36

You would walk 15 miles with a 2 year old?

OK you and your child are both impressively athletic!