Childfree people ranting about parents

[the7Vabo]

Came across a thread on another site full of people ranting about children entitled “parents not everything is about you.” I get it to a point, as a parent I think society has become somewhat a overly child-centred. I assume however that the odd stories you see about parents demanding people give up train seats for ten year olds are just that, the odd story of unreasonable behaviour that people in all groups can be guilty of.

The extent of the comments on that thread baffled me. Full of I’m so glad I don’t have children because X, Y. It’s one thing to want to be child free which to me is a perfectly valid life choice, but I’m baffled by the level of bitching about parents & children. If someone wants to be child free why can’t they simply be child free & accept that others didn’t make that choice instead of ranting about how parents are always on at them about how fulfilled they are while at the same time ranting about how terrible it would be to have kids.

Because I wasn't having an asthma attack prior to having an asthma attack so i didn't know I needed a seat

I have other invisible disabilities which mean that I could do with a seat, but I got on at Wolverhampton and so I knew that most people would get on at Birmingham new street whilst I was going to to Birmingham International. So I judged that I could cope with my discomfort until Birmingham new street

But then I had an asthma attack and the situation changes

And my explanation of why it would have been easier and less disruptive for the parents to help is already answered in another post

Pressed enter too soon, if he had a temp he could seize, much safer if he's on a seat than stood up other epileptic children have other triggers.

You don't know that parent or her children, you've no way of knowing if it would be less disruptive

@Forgooodnesssakenow question for you. Your child is on the bus, in a seat, just in case. An adult gets on and asks for his seat. I'm assuming you'll say no because he needs it in case he has a seizure? What, then if the adult says "well, I have a bad back now, so I think your son should give me his seat." Would you agree?

I'd say, have my seat, move my kid to the outside seat and stand to guard him from falling off his seat. If he was sat on the only free seat I'd have to say no, I too have hidden disabilities and he's a very tall 5 yr old, when younger I'd have put him in a toddler back carrier or similar but now it's impossible. Equally if I tried to get on a bus in that situation and no seats available I'd wait for the next bus if possible.

The real problem is lack of seated provision on public transport especially since covid.

I'd also maybe shout into the bus, excuse me would someone mind vacating a seat for a passenger with a bad back or my child who is at risk of a seizure just now? And someone would give up a seat, because I live in glasgow and people are often lovely and considerate.

And how is that different to the poster who didn't give up a seat for a child?

She was already seated so she took precedence

The mother didn't know her needs

She might have had invisible disabilities that could cause a seizure how would that have helped the situation

You seemed to have missed my entire point. which was that posters were telling her than she should have had consideration for parents and children's needs but that they didn't have to have consideration for her needs

I and other posters were explaining that consideration goes both ways, and I was explaining a situation which showed where consideration didn't not go both ways.

You are arguing for the same thing as me, that people should assume that other people may have needs they don't know of but that is true of both parties. so in my case maybe the adults didn't move the children because they had additional needs.

Maybe if you stop attacking me and having expectations of me and my asthma that are very unreasonable you can read back through the posts and see the trail of the conversation and why I said what I said

The difference is you're assuming parents are entitled and adults unaccompanied have other needs, why not extend the same benefit if the doubt to the parent and child?

If he was sat on the only free seat I'd have to say no, I too have hidden disabilities and he's a very tall 5 yr old, when younger I'd have put him in a toddler back carrier or similar but now it's impossible.

So even though the other person still thinks their need is greater than yours/your son's, you still said no, because the other person's judgement of your/your son's needs isn't relevant. Do you see why I'm saying it isn't necessary for the person already in the seat to tell the seatless person about their disability or reasons for saying "no"?

No I am explaining a scenario where the same assumptions didn't go the other way

You are victim blaming and having expectations of someone with asthma that is unreasonable

No.i don't because at least the person would have an explanation.

Why does that matter? It doesn't help them get a seat, nor will they think any differently about you, and your son's privacy is maintained.

Do you know what I'm going to try this once more

A poster said she didn't give up her seat for a child. And then she got told that that child probably had disabilities and that she should have given up her seat because a child probably had a greater need than her. even though there was no evidence this child was disabled

And another poster said it would be nice if the courtesy always went both ways. As its often women without children who are expected to give up their seats to those with children.

And I gave an example of how it went another way. Where I, as a person with an asthma attack, was in greater need of a seat than a lot of other people around me, but despite that the parents didn't give me the same courtesy that is being demanded from childless women on this thread.

I didn't actually expect the parents to be at any greater reason to give me a seat than anyone else. In fact I wasn't even the one demanding the seat, someone else was on my behalf.

But it's very telling that one woman without children has been told she is at fault because she should have assumed that someone else had disability

And another woman without children has been told she's at fault because she should have assumed other people's disabilities (and here again we are assuming that the children must be disabled and that's why the adults didn't help) were more important than her own

Because women with children are always less important no matter what

I see the the same fault from a minority on both sides. You have people prepared to argue that children don’t pay for seats therefore shouldn’t get one when the elderly don’t pay for seats & I rarely see a situation where someone wouldn’t stand for an elderly person. And saying that they are not obliged to be kind, when again I don’t think they’d say that about an elderly person. The reality is that children have needs the adults don’t, if I’m on train home from work at 7pm and a five year old beside me is going home from nursery he’s probably going to need a seat more than I would given how close to bedtime it is and how tired children get after a long day. I myself am no stranger to middle age but I would give up a seat if asked. I would be slow to ask for one for my 5 year old. But people are prepared to factor in the needs of other groups - elderly, disabled but are won’t consider including children.

On the other side parents not picking up a child into their lap for someone who is having a medical emergency is utterly gross, and I do think society as a whole has become very child centred.

If you are disabled you are perfectly entitled to ask for a seat. But I’d say a parent is also entitled to ask, although I’d be slow to myself. And I think both should be meet with consideration - I’d someone explains they have a disability I stand up, in fact I wouldn’t ask I assume if you are asking for my seat you need it. Equally if a parent asks for a child who is is say up to 10 ish maybe people need to be kinder and a bit less of it never did us any harm, and extend the same courtesy as they would to someone else.

To be fair though many bus companies did ask children to give up seats. Not sure if they still do!

The poster was horrified the woman asked for the seat.

You are saying a person needing the seat should have to explain why, the one already in the seat doesn't need to defend their use of the seat.

Except you think the parent who didn't move her child to give you a seat was also rude? Because the child clearly could have been moved.

My point was the child in the original comment may have needed the seat more. The adult seated may have needed it more or not needed it. The poster herself says she needs it because she's in her late forties. Not because she has a hidden disability etc.

Assumption from the poster being the kid didn't need the seat, they didn't look disabled.

In your case you assume the mum could move her kids easily, you don't mention details of any of the other adults in their seats, just that a mum didn't move her kids. Despite that kid already being in the seat, which you say means the person in the seat doesn't have to defend keeping the seat? Whether you consider that person the adult or the child. You assume the mum was unreasonable, as you do when it was the mum asking for the seat.

You're not thinking equally at all.

You are saying a person needing the seat should have to explain why, the one already in the seat doesn't need to defend their use of the seat.

Where have I said this?

@Forgooodnesssakenow what ConfusedNT is saying is that she is expected to assume that the family on the train needed the seats, whereas the parent on the bus wasn't expected to assume the same.

It was me who said that. And I stand by it. As people like to say on MN, "no" is a full sentence.

Fair enough. I disagree with that though. My train company has very good signage about invisible disabilities. I don’t see why such policies shouldn’t be extended to children who need seats.
That’s what I find odd that children are almost like a step too far for some people, happy to look after the elderly & disabled, but point out that children are more needy than able bodied adults and it descends into well back in my day children didn’t need seats and we were grand etc.

So are you saying it was fine for the original mum to ask for a seat, no further info? Fine for the original poster to not move no explanation at all? Fine for you to ask for a seat and fine for the munwith the kid not to move it? Because I agree with all of that actually, I think the mum asking for the seat and ccepting a no was as reasonable as the poster saying no and remaining seated.

yet your original post very much seemed to hold the expectation that it would never be an issue for a mum to just move a kid to her knee, despite knowing nothing of the mum or kids?

As an example My kid with seizures if I moved him to my knee would freak out, not what you want when having an asthma attack in the aisle and not no or minimal disruption which was your assumption, I also can't twist to lift them onto my knee from a seated position right now due to my back injury.

My point is your view is as ableist as you claim mine is because people assume kids are fit and healthy of they look fit and healthy just as they do with adults. Or maybe they don't care and kids should just suffer regardless as they're kids and don't matter as much I'm not 100% sure.

You still haven't managed to quote where I have said this You are saying a person needing the seat should have to explain why, the one already in the seat doesn't need to defend their use of the seat.

Which seems to be your basis of where I am not thinking equally

Then you agree the person asking, who may have had a child with an invisible disability also didn't have to explain why she was asking? And given she accepted no without question was perfectly reasonable too? If not why not?

I Amy be confusing you with another poster, I'll go check just now.

However my view of you as not being equal is your assumption the mum with kids could move them more easily and with less disruption than an able bodied adult on the same.train could.move. I'm pointing out your assumption about hidden disabilities is different for children and their.parents than for unencumbered adults.

Yes I agree. No one needs to tell anyone anything.

"Can my child have your seat?"
"No, sorry."

The end. No drama. No attitude.