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

Thrown out of restaurant for bringing newborn baby

687 replies

toddlermom · 10/11/2019 13:39

Hi all,

Just need to vent and wondering if I should complain and if so who to. We went to one of my (ex) favourite London restaurants (Amaya) last night (wearing 5 week old baby in cloth sling, as I often do).

Walked in, got to our table, I took off my jacket and went to sit down but the waitress stopped me and said I couldn't sit down and had to leave the restaurant as she could now see (that I had taken off jacket) that I had a baby and 'children aren't allowed in the restaurant". I said it was a baby - who was asleep - and unlikely to wakeup - and she said it didn't matter, they don't let any children in the restaurant.

The manager came over, said the same thing, they were really, really rude and unfriendly. Didn't say sorry or sympathise, empathise in any way.

They don't have any social media presence so I can't even tweet them and vent on social. I could write a letter to the owner? Or is there anything else I should do? Or AIBU and just not go there again? Any advice welcome!! Thank you!

OP posts:
Rainbunny · 11/11/2019 11:10

As many pp's have already stated, their website clearly states no children under 4 years old. Perfectly reasonable and actually makes this restaurant more appealing to me tbo. I have nothing against children in some (appropriate) restaurant environments but in a nice Michelin starred restaurant in Belgravia, well let's just say that in your place I would never have presumed that it would be okay.

Footiefan2019 · 11/11/2019 11:10

I’d love to hear their side of the story .. why should they apologize and fall over themselves with sympathy for your tragic situation (lol not ) when their rules are clearly outlined. You’re going to have to cook for yourself for a while now you’ve had a baby I’m afraid , eating out every night is not always conducive to parenthood. Or get a babysitter.

ClaraThePigeon · 11/11/2019 11:11

To be fair to the OP she accepted that she was being unreasonable a few hundred posts ago.

JacksonPillock · 11/11/2019 11:45

I wonder how many people would actually take babies/young kids to a fancy restaurant in a posh area (especially in the evening when most kids are asleep anyway) even if there were no rule?

Because I've never had any issued with kids disturbing me when eating out, and I always assumed it was because of the above.

IrmaFayLear · 11/11/2019 11:55

There's always one who thinks the rules just don't apply to them. I posted upthread about someone who turned up to a spa day with their baby. In spite of the spa stating clearly at every turn that under 18s were not allowed, they thought that because the baby was breast fed that made them exempt. I mean, really, this was a fancy spa (god, I hate spas) and this woman was there with a mahoosive 4x4 pushchair and changing bag the size of a Grand Tour trunk and fully expected that she was going to be welcomed by women who had paid a hefty price for peace and quiet (pan pipes).

Contraceptionismyfriend · 11/11/2019 11:58

@IrmaFayLear what happened?!

BrightYellowDaffodil · 11/11/2019 12:00

Good grief at some of the responses on this thread. Of course no one is stopping parents going out for a meal but why not go to any of the myriad restaurants that are child friendly? Or can I go to a child-friendly restaurant and insist that it’s my right to eat in hushed, Michelin-star-style quiet?

This thread reminds me of an acquaintance who announced that she and her partner had decided they deserved a meal out when their youngest was a newborn. She thought it was “fine” that said child screamed all the way through the meal because “Well, we needed to get out of the house”. She was oblivious to everyone else’s meal/evening being ruined.

IrmaFayLear · 11/11/2019 12:07

Woman had to sit in the foyer. It was a dud day because everyone else felt bad and so sat with her in the foyer too (with the icy wind from the front door whipping up our bathrobes...).

Contraceptionismyfriend · 11/11/2019 12:08

I'd have left her to it! @IrmaFayLear I can't imagine the money wasted on that day.

IrmaFayLear · 11/11/2019 12:09

Sadly I still can Angry

shearwater · 11/11/2019 12:21

It's really up to the restaurant if they want to exclude a good customer because she brings her baby.

Most places are child friendly as they think it is better business not to exclude part of their customer base. Like a lot of places now saying you can bring in dogs. They think the dog lovers will outweigh the dog haters.

Winterdaysarehere · 11/11/2019 12:25

Many moons ago we used to eat out with 2 other couples. Took turns choosing the restaurant. Decided on the evening, met up and followed the deciders car..
I admit I flounced.
Pulled up at Wacky Warehouse place 1 couple had chosen!!
A dc free evening was not going to be spent hearing other people's dc!!
Stopped going soon after as all they talked about was their dc's shoe sizes and other drivel...
Some dps do want to be adults also!!

IrmaFayLear · 11/11/2019 12:28

I hope that the average country pub is dog friendly, but I always check. I certainly wouldn't presume to take my dog into a fine dining establishment, just as someone may well assume that the local carvery was child friendly, but not necessarily a smart restaurant in the evening.

Catapillarsruletheworld · 11/11/2019 12:39

Your baby is a child and they don’t allow children. So.......

A screaming baby can ruin an evening and if I was paying large sums of money for a fancy dinner, I certainly wouldn’t want to listen to someone else’s baby/ small child playing up. I say that as a mother who once had babies and small children who played up!

There are plenty of nice family friendly restaurants to choose from, just pick somewhere suitable next time.

Wonkybanana · 11/11/2019 13:33

It doesn't matter whether the child is going to be a nuisance or not. It's the fact that the other diners don't know so if they've gone out for a quiet, adults only meal, it changes the dynamic as soon as said child enters.

The diners don't know whether little Janet/Johnny is going to sit quietly, or run round screaming, or watching cartoons on an ipad that everyone else in the place can hear too.

They don't know whether the parents are going to be the sort who will actually parent their child, or whether they'll sit and ignore them, or expect everyone else to think their children are cute (or worse, 'spirited'), or that the rest of the room will be subjected to some loud and intrusive performance parenting.

So a policy of no children removes that edginess that would otherwise be present, and allows the diners to relax.

Maursh · 11/11/2019 18:21

OP if you are still reading this then take heart: the restaurant is in the wrong here and would come a cropper if someone had the money and energy to challenge it.

There is a well known case of a bakery who wouldn't bake a cake for a gay wedding. Take that case and say that it wasn't that they wouldn't make the cake, but that they would only put a bride and groom on as policy. Would this still be challengeable: yes because the policy negatively and disproportionately affects a group with protected characteristic. This is known as indirect discrimination and is unlawful.

Your case is similar, the restaurant has a policy that only effects women. While babysitters can be obtained for older children, they cannot for nursing infants. So while a ban of children, in general might be considered reasonable, even desirable, the restaurant is on thin ice banning nursing infants.

Contraceptionismyfriend · 11/11/2019 18:26

@Maursh are you on drugs?

Sallyseagull · 11/11/2019 18:28

Your case is similar, the restaurant has a policy that only effects women

How on earth does a no child policy only affect women? You're going to have to fill us all in because I'm baffled.

Maursh · 11/11/2019 18:31

It's a no infants policy that only effects women, not a no children policy and this was perfectly clear.

@Contraceptionismyfriend
No. Are you?

Google "indirect discrimination"
It is a thing
www.citizensadvice.org.uk/law-and-courts/discrimination/what-are-the-different-types-of-discrimination/indirect-discrimination

Contraceptionismyfriend · 11/11/2019 18:32

@Maursh if you're not on mind altering drugs then how do you justify that stupid post?

Maursh · 11/11/2019 18:35

Oh dear

  1. I don't have to justify it
  2. You will have to elaborate exactly what it is that you find "stupid" in order for me to provide any justification.
FlamingoAndJohn · 11/11/2019 18:36

Well if this is age discrimination then I am off to buy and an over 60s retirement flat.

And go on an 18 - 30 holiday.

Where is my bus pass while I’m about it.

Sallyseagull · 11/11/2019 18:36

But men can take infants out, so it technically affects them too??

FlamingoAndJohn · 11/11/2019 18:37

its a no infants policy that only effects women, not a no children policy and this was perfectly clear.

How do you figure that? I know men who are more than capable of looking after babies.

Contraceptionismyfriend · 11/11/2019 18:37

Do you know that livening laws do not allow under 18s in certain venues.
What do you think of that?

I cant believe that you are real 😂