Soft Play - Age Discrimination

[Humphflumph]

Please bear with me on this. Not sure I’m I am being unreasoned or the company.

Soft play type centre. Activity for under 7 years old. For health and safety reasons. Absolutely fair enough. However children age between 8 and 18 are not allowed entry to the site at all. They can’t even sit and have a drink with the adults.

DD4 has been invited to a party. I am required to attend because understandably the party mum can’t look after all the small children alone. But DD10 isn’t allowed in.
She’d happily sit and play her iPad or do some art whilst the little ones played. I imagine in the past lots of bored and then subsequently badly behaved older children have run amok. But this seems discriminatory on the basis of age surely?
Obviously the solution is to sort child care for the oldest. But I’ve used up all favours and play dates for the days and work. It’s the holidays and the juggle is hard enough.

What a weird set up if they aren't allowed on the premises

That sounds really annoying - even though it is entirely up to the business how they want to operate - but how frustrating for you. How strictly do you think they will enforce it… could you go in first with little one, order two coffees… DD then gets out of the car and joins you for a coffee… basically just don’t mention her age and act as though she is an adult…

As you say, they have probably had issues in the past with older kids coming in and then making their way into the soft play area anyway, which isn’t great for the smaller kids. So I expect the rule is there to protect the smaller kids and make sure they can enjoy the equipment.

That seems barmy from a business perspective - it’s hardly rare to have one kid under 8 and another over 8. Have you tried calling them and asking what the rationale for this is?

Ultimately there’s not much you can do if they’re steadfast on it but party mum may find that other guests are in the same boat so it may be worth tipping her off too. Better to take business elsewhere and I’ve heard these parties aren’t cheap!

I can understand them not being allowed on the equipment I suppose, but not to sit at tables is really bizarre!

And what if a 16/17 year old had a child? They wouldn't be able to take them at all!

Could she sit in the car with her iPad

I imagine in the past lots of bored and then subsequently badly behaved older children have run amok.

There's you're answer.

But this seems discriminatory on the basis of age surely?

No, it's perfectly legal to discriminate against under 18s, otherwise you couldn't stop them from voting, buying alcohol etc, have different aged school teams etc. Children are and have to be treated differently to adults.

Thanks everyone for your perspectives.

Unfortunately she won’t sit in the car because she gets too anxious. It’s a long time, 2 hours.

A mum friend has kindly offered to take DD4 now. But obviously it’s not ideal.

I've been somewhere like this before. There wasn't a whole lot of seating space for parents plus older siblings to sit and watch younger kids play.

To answer your question on whether it’s discriminatory or not, it isn’t as per the current law….

”Coverage of the ban

1. The ban does not apply in respect of children aged under 18.

This means that people and organisations can continue to provide different services at different rates or on different terms and conditions for children of different ages, or can refuse to serve children – for example, 'no children' hotels can continue as now and newsagents can still restrict the number of children entering their shops”

I imagine it’s because they’ve had people flouting it and claiming that their child will be fine and do no harm - only then to prove that they’re not fine, because everyone thinks they’re the exception. Probably more important for them as a business to ensure they can keep the younger, smaller children safe.

Our local soft play has the same rules. The seating is within the area with all the play equipment. I think it’s because some people probably say their eight / nine year old will just sit there and then let them play on the equipment which the soft play don’t have the staff to regulate at busy times when the age of the child isn’t obvious either.

Well if its a public venue and the child is not on the equiptment they can't ban them.

You can't say only 0-8's and 18+ allowed to enter the cafe bit or sit down because that is discrimination.

Is this exclusively hired where its shut to the public though, if its a PRIVATE party they can ban anyone non invited from entering.

"Unfortunately she won’t sit in the car because she gets too anxious. It’s a long time, 2 hours"

you can always go out to check on her regularly. At 10 she's got to be able to spend a bit of time by herself.

Well if its a public venue and the child is not on the equipment they can't ban them.

Soft Play centres would very, very rarely be a public venue. it will be a privately owned business

Well if its a public venue and the child is not on the equiptment they can't ban them.

I wouldn't have called a softplay a 'public venue'. It's a service you pay for.

The soft play near us is like that. There is soft play and a cafe on one side of the building and a go ape sort of adventure/trampoline park on the other side. You have to be under whatever age to come into the soft play (it's all together in one place with cafe tables next to the soft play) and kids under whatever age cannot enter the adventure sports bit.

It's no doubt because the risk of harm to little ones by the big ones is too great and they know that if they say all age kids are allowed into the cafe, but not on the play equipment, most parents will just let them on anyway. Because, let's be honest, most will. Last time I was there for a party, there were big kids (say 7-8) in the under 18months section (which is very small) bashing each other over the head and knocking toddlers over and the parents just sat there 6 feet away staring at their phones. 🙄I suspect it's related to their insurance and this is the best way they can assure that everyone is safe because they can't rely on people to police themselves.

It's very similar to age and weight restrictions. I ride horse. Most riding stables will not allow you to ride if you are over 14 stone (I'm 15 stone, so I can't ride there). It's because their insurance only covers them if they put weight restrictions in place. It's understandable. I'm not going to break anyone's very large horse simply because I weigh an extra stone, but there has to be a cut off somewhere to keep them covered and keep everyone safe.

That's unusual, most soft plays here if they're for under 8s do let older siblings come as long as they sit at the tables but I agree with PP, it's probably to stop them getting up and going on the play equipment.

I remember when my daughter was about 2 taking her to an under 7s soft play and there being teenagers in there. I mentioned it when I went to get some drinks and the lady said "Oh we know but we can't say anything because we get grief from the parents then" - its probably just the venue trying to avoid being put in that position.

Inconvenient, sure, but probably in place because older kids will run riot, and their service offering and insurance covers younger kids.

Wish my local soft play would implement this. Sick to the back teeth of older kids barging about refusing to let the little kids play.

@Dartmoorcheffy I wouldn't leave anyone in a car for two hours nevermind my 10 year old child even with checking on them. Ignoring any health and safety concerns, and the fact the child does not like being left it is an awful way to spend two hours. 4 year old would miss party first.

OP glad a friend has offered to take 4 year old to party. I would say yes please and offer to return the favour next time.

I can see that it is very inconvenient. But people saying they cannot ban older children are very likely wrong.

Whilst age is a protected characteristic under the Equality Act, there are lots of exceptions (think financial concessions for younger and older people, regulation of entry to sporting events, holidays aimed at certain age groups etc). There is also the “defence” of objective justification. I anticipate that the owners will be able to highlight a risk assessment which supports their position. It’s a fairly low bar.

I am not saying I think it’s a good thing, but it’s highly highly unlikely the owners are acting contrary to the law.

I completely understand. Not every child would be happy to stay sitting down whilst seeing others play.

Soft play is a dumping ground for kids so I think this is a brilliant way to try and limit the boisterous behaviour by some older kids.

A mum friend has kindly offered to take DD4 now. But obviously it’s not ideal.

It sounds perfectly ideal!

And much more sensible than every parent attending.

Regarding the policy, it seems a bit surprising to be so strict, I agree. However, depending on the setup I can understand it - children over 8 are too big too play there & yet it's hard to police their behaviour & stop them.

I wouldn't leave her in the car either, it's too long & boring.

If you hadn't had the offer from the other mum, I'd simply have explained the situation to the party mum, I'm sure she'd be fine about you not being able to stay.

I'm guessing they've had bad experiences with older children causing havoc (and parents who are watching a small child cannot reliably watch their oldest as well.

I see you are sorted now, but I was going to suggest that you could allocate one parent to be in charge of older siblings and take them somewhere else :)

TBH it would be pretty dull for the older child anyway, so it's much better you've found another parent to take your DD4.

There’s a soft play here with the same rules. It’s very popular with people with only small children as in the other big one people let their bigger ones run riot.