Weekend away

[hargreaves30]

My husband and our 1 year old (2 in Nov) are going to Amsterdam for the weekend. My husband thinks it's OK to get a Wi-Fi baby monitor and set it up so we can leave our son in the hotel room so we can go downstairs and have dinner. We'll be able to see him the whole time, presuming the Wi-Fi works, but I don't feel comfortable leaving my son alone in the hotel room, even if I'm watching him. I'd love some other mums views.

Please tell Me this is a joke. Don't do this.

Also maybe ask Mumsnet to move this out of baby names topics.

No.

I wouldn't do it. You can have dinner earlier with baby.

Each to their own. I've done this in a small family run hotel in the U.K., it would depend on the size and layout of the hotel for me. Sounds like you're not comfortable with it though so the the answer should be no!

I personally wouldn't do this, what if there was a fire alarm and they didn't let you back up to the room?

No way would I do it. We're going away to a hotel soon, DH and I are invited to a wedding evening party and I'm still not 100% comfortable leaving my 7 year old upstairs with my 12 year old! I wouldn't leave my 7 year old alone

I either room service, have a v early dinner I can bring the baby too or have a nice lunch out and for dinner just bring bread/cheese/wine back to room. No way would I leave the baby alone in a hotel room.

It takes all sorts I suppose.

But why would you want to leave your baby alone?

Don't be ridiculous 😡

We've done this regularly over the years, our dc are teens now. If you dont feel comfortable though, don't do it.

God, no!

Is this a joke thread?

No. don't be so silly. Who leaves a 2yr old upstairs in a hotel room in a foreign country on their own?

Don't do it. In the event of a fire alarm, you probably wouldn't be able to go and get them.

Imagine the worst thing that could happen. Is it really worth the risk?

What Annette said.

OP if you are real considering doing this you are fucking stupid.

I probably wouldn't do this, but to be honest it would be more out of fear of people's reactions than because I actually thought there was a real risk! Does depend on the situation. I would be more likely to do it in a small hotel, and with a baby (ie no chance they could get out of the cot).

The risks as I see them (in a small hotel) are fire (very small risk, even smaller risk that you would be unable to get the baby out), and someone breaking in and taking/ injuring the baby (to me the risk of this is so minuscule as to be practically non-existent and you would be able to see on the monitor anyway).

I do find it interesting that this scenario usually receives near universal condemnation on mumsnet. I have probably put my baby more at risk this morning when I pushed her buggy across two busy roads in what was a completely unnecessary journey, but if she had been hit by a car I don't think anyone would have accused me of behaving recklessly. Risk perception is very skewed!

Wtf is wrong with you both.

Superking It receives near universal condemnation because it should!
I don't think your scenario is comparable, anyway.

But why isn't it comparable? Both scenarios involve a potential risk to the baby which could be avoided. In my case I didn't need to go to buy a coffee, I had plenty in the house, I just wanted one from Starbucks. In OP's case she doesn't have to have dinner downstairs in the hotel, there are lots of alternatives, she just wants to.

And when I say I find it interesting that it receives near universal condemnation on here, what interests me is that when people ask if they should behave in other ways that have been demonstrably shown to increase risk of harm to babies (such as putting them to sleep in their own rooms at home from birth) the answers are much more mixed.

It's just an observation on the illogical approach to risk assessment that most of us (including me) have.

I think it depends on the size of the hotel. If it is a small B&B style hotel, it is not that different to being at home, obviously in a massive hotel with 80 floors it is different. I have never done it though.

Thank you for all the responses! I know some hotel offer baby listening services and lots of people use these when they go down to the restaurant for dinner. People obviously have very strong opinions on it, it's almost as if I've said I'm going to get stoned and leave the baby unattended whilst I waltz round Amsterdam. It is interesting to get people's feedback

Lots of hotels used to offer a listening in baby sitting service via the phone and I think some hotels still do -even in the U.K. In those cases it is usually one person at the desks who checks the room every 5-10 minutes or so for crying.

I am in two minds and it would depend on the size and layout of the hotel. All in all it's a bit crap going to a hotel room a baby or young child, lots of sitting around quietly in the dark with headphones on. Only did it once myself and have been self catered since.

You could also FaceTime between two phones if the wifi is crap.

I think there is a big difference between leaving an immobile baby in a cot when the worst that can happen is that they wake up and cry a bit, to leaving a mobile 2 year old in a room. even with a listening service the first you might know that there is a problem is when they have stuck a biro in the plug socket!

how can you possibly eat and relax under these circumstances? many places don't offer the kind of listening in service that you describe for this very reason. that if something goes wrong in the 15 minute window it is their fault.

what some hotels do offer is a baby sitter who stays in the room with the child. its expensive and a bit of a faff in my opinion.

but this is what having kids is all about. things change. you don't get cosy dinners for 2 in a hotel any more that's the deal that you sign up to when you have them unfortunately.

My one year old can't get out of the cot, I'd he could obviously I wouldn't leave him alone! Wherever we were staying I'd try and make it child friendly anyway.