to think that I should be able to vouch for my DS' age at a local cinema?

[peanutbut]

Yesterday I took my 12 year old DS to a local cinema to see Avatar (rated 12A) with a friend of his. They wanted to go in alone and I was happy with this.
He'd already seen the film at the same cinema the previous week ( also without accompanying adult) but during that showing the film froze for 30 minutes. Because of this, the cinema manager gave him a free return ticket to see the movie again. However, this time, despite being dealt with by the same person, my son was now deemed to be too young to see the film. I argued with her that he had bought the ticket last week with no problems and that she had seen fit to give him the return ticket just days before, but to no avail. She also refused my assurances that my DS was over 12 and that she was not allowed accept a parent's word regarding their childs age. Photographic ID was the only evidence she would accept.
Incidently DS's friend also got refused by one cashier there on another separate occasion, requeued, got a different person and bought a ticket with no questions asked.
I feel really aggrieved that the law they kept quoting at me isn't applied consistently or very often and that in these circumstances my word as a parent counts for nothing.

He wasn't looking for a new ticket. He was looking to be let in on an already issued ticket. That seems daft. YANBU.

But they can't ensure that the same person witht he ticket now is the same person who bought the ticket previously. How do they know that the same child has bought the ticket, with evidence/proof of being 12y?

It is their job to check that children who are underage and unaccompanied do not see the film.

They were doing nothing more than their job.

As I said before - it is no different to asking for ID from someone to buy alcohol, where age is uncertain.

BOF, he was not going to be accompanies throughout the film, so the cinema manager was within his rights. Bit silly, but don't know what the consequences are for the cinema. All's well that ends well.

IF YOU GOOGLE TERMS OF ADMISSION FOR A FEW CINEMAS, YOU FIND THIS CLAUSE IS PRETTY MUCH ALL (MAY BE WRITTEN DIFFERENTLY THOUGH):

We reserve the right to require you to prove your age with appropriate photographic ID if you are going to a 12A, 15, 18 film or purchasing an alcoholic drink. If you are unable to prove your age you will be not be able to watch the film or buy an alcoholic drink. We reserve the right to ask for such proof at any time you are on our premises.

What's the issue? Loads of parents would vouch for a younger child, so of course you need proof. This member of staff could have faced disciplinary procedures if she had let your child in.

I bet you would be very cross if they let him in a 15 in a couple of years...

I used to work in a cinema and it was a pain TBH - the law is the law and it's the same as ID'ing someone for buying alcohol, i.e. penalties can be applied if checks aren't carried out appropriately. Parents can't vouch for their children, anymore than they could vouch for them buying cigarettes etc. Woman isn't being daft, she's doing her job. But that said, what ID can they have? We used to accept birth certificate or if it was borderline with 12 year olds we'd just ask them to reel off their dob.

In this situation I think it was silly not to let your son in if they have given him free tickets so know they've already let him in for said film before.

BoF, he wasn't accompanied

Citizen Card - costs £10

Many Under 16ys need bus cards too, once they are 12y. I thinkt here have DOB and photos on them, so another form of ID.

I don't think it is the same as being asked for ID to buy alcohol mainly because there is a big difference between a 12 year old and an 18 year old. I'm fully responsible for everything my 12 year old DS does and am required to be by law, and society at large. In return I don't see that it's unreasonable to expect to be treated as a responsible person.

The bigger picture (forgive the pun!) here is that the law, if it exists, that prevents cinema managers from accepting parents' assurances that their child is old enough to see a film, doesn't contribute one bit to solving the problem of children viewing unsuitable material. How can it when TV and the Internet are so ingrained in our lives? By and large parents are the only means by which any significant control can be exerted.

Some of you pointed out correctly that the manager was only doing her job. The fact that she chose to 'do her job' this week and not the last is now neither here nor there. Policing what my DS watches is my job not hers'.

It can be compared with alcohol because it still comes down to licencing laws. If under agers get into a movie and are found out the cinema can lose it's licence.

I agree with you that as his parent you are ultimately responsible for him and in an ideal world your word should be fine, but the age in which we live does dictate differently. I wouldn't take it personally maybe, since last week, there had been quite a few underage kids trying to get in and the member of staff had been told to ID everyone. Maybe they were being audited by head office and had to appear more efficient than normal.

In future I would send him to the cinema with ID to prove his age.