Dad on bus 'look at all these people sitting who won't let a child have a seat'

[Pipistrelle40]

Just that really, he got on with two boys aged about 10 and 8. People looked at each other and laughed. Old enough to stand surely.

I certainly wouldn't let my 5 year old get up for an adult. She has several medical issues relating to her balance and directly to one perticular leg. She doesn't look disabled and in fact would love to stand up on the bus. However I'm not putting her though operations (if she falls) 0just so some adult can feel oh so much superior to children.

My 7 year old I would get to stand If needed, I'm often standing with the pram anyway so he would just join me blocking the gangway no doubt.

All the trains and tubes I go on are majority medium age type people most of whom probably haven't got disabilities. More than enough to let the odd elderly / wobbyy / pregnant / etc people sit down. These threads always seem to come out like it's a battle between the vulnerable for the seats. Why aren't the non-vulnerable being tutted at and glared at and so on. It's a bit of a microcosm of society, with the less able people all pitted against each other while the able just swish through with never a thought for any of it.

Totally agree 70s I find it slightly implausible someone would argue it is safer for small children to stand just so that they can justify why they deserve a seat

There have been way too many people on here saying their child "deserves" a seat more than an adult because of ASD/disability - that's not what was under discussion. The OP opined that some people - and I have seen this with my own eyes as well - think that ADULTS should get up for children. I'm 50:50 on whether already seated children should get up for adults, but I am 100% against adults standing up for children who are capable of standing themselves. That is frankly ridiculous.

It's up to people to decide who to give a seat to, riceuten. If a person decides to let a child sit down then they are free to do so. You don't get to be "against it". The idea of anyone being against another doing something that is motivated by kindness is the weirdest thing of all.

There is nothing whatsoever ridiculous about an adult standing for a child too short to reach a support to help keep them steady when the bus/train/tube jerks to a stop or starts off again. Nor is it ridiculous to give up your seat to a child if it is very crowded and they are being squashed between far larger adults. Even as an adult, when people pour on and off the tube at busy times, I have nearly been dragged right off the vehicle because of the force of the flow. It is unfair to leave children at risk of being physically separated from their parents as they are dragged off public transport by a seething mass of humanity - better to give them a seat where they can rest secure from the shoving masses.

Exactly round

Uni

There is nothing whatsoever ridiculous about an adult standing for a child too short to reach a support to help keep them steady when the bus/train/tube jerks to a stop or starts off again.

If they're that short, surely they'd be holding an adult's hand. That's their 'support'.

It's up to people to decide who to give a seat to, riceuten. If a person decides to let a child sit down then they are free to do so. You don't get to be "against it". The idea of anyone being against another doing something that is motivated by kindness is the weirdest thing of all.

70s i don't think riceuten is against someone deciding to let a child sit down in their seat, just those who expect others to get up for their children.

Of course pregnant women, people with very children or children with disabilities should expect to be offered a seat and should get it.

*very young children

Koala - and how many hands is this adult supposed to have? Or are adults only allowed to travel with one small child where you are from? Or not need support themselves?

I suppose the next rule invented will be that children must never travel on public transport when it is extremely crowded, because that isn't safe, given that's they must always stand for their olders and betters, whatever the situation...

Koala - and how many hands is this adult supposed to have?

Two, I expect. One to hold the pole and one to hold the child. Or the child could hold a pole, since they go all the way to the floor.

So you are assuming one child only. Do you live in China?

Which pole would this be :D

Not only do some people have more than one child, but public transport comes in many different forms.

On my commuter train, often I can't reach and if I'm in a spot between seats there's nothing else to lean on either! And I'm not that short - 5'3.

I honestly think that most people use common sense don't they - most people can tell whether a situation is a bit iffy or not. On my commuter train, people tend to offer seats to younger children. I think this is good, as it's clear that it's not so safe for them.

I agree with roundabout - I think there are some people who would state that children must stand and then if anything happened say "what was their parent thinking taking them on a crowded train in the first place" etc etc

Fact is it's a busy world and we all have to rub along together, most buses and trains have plenty of people who are not vulnerable to falls etc, and therefore there does not need to be a fight between who gets the seat, the elderly person or the 3yo. Trick is for people to ask young fit people, rather than this business we have with vulnerable groups getting angry with each other.