Family kicked off plan because they can't control child... [Archive]

BPSCG

23rd January 2007, 12:20 PM

Am I being unfair to the "love me love my child" crowd?Yes, you are, but #$% 'em.

ETA: Mrs. BPSCG and I attended an Alexandria Symhony Orchestra concert some months ago, which included Beethoven's Ninth Symphony. First part of the concert, the kid sitting in front of me with his dad, about eleven years old, was bouncing around in his seat litke a bobblehead doll, leaning over to talk to his dad repeatedly, generally being a nuisance.

I finally leaned over between them, tapped the kid firmly on the shoulder, put my finger to my lips, and shushed him.

Peace ensued until the intermission.

After the intermission, during the Beethoven, he started up again (in retrospect, considering the offense, he's lucky I did not slay him in his seat). When I decided he wasn't going to settle down, and I'd had enough, I tapped him on the shoulder again, rather harder this time, and when he turned around, hissed at him, "Knock it off!" loud enough to be heard by the couple sitting next to me.

At the end of the concert, the lady sitting next to me turned to me and said, "I'm so glad you said something to him!"

Dad and boy were not at the next concert; I guess they aren't season subscribers.

Don't #$% with my Beethoven.

Dancing David

23rd January 2007, 12:28 PM

Sorry parents, you loose. You had fiveteen minutes to calm your daughter. You could have practiced and watched multiple vedios of "Smochie Rides the Plane". They are also numb skulls, "Can she ride on my lap?" is not an option.

Garrette

23rd January 2007, 12:33 PM

Yes, you are, but #$% 'em.

ETA: Mrs. BPSCG and I attended an Alexandria Symhony Orchestra concert some months ago, which included Beethoven's Ninth Symphony. First part of the concert, the kid sitting in front of me with his dad, about eleven years old, was bouncing around in his seat litke a bobblehead doll, leaning over to talk to his dad repeatedly, generally being a nuisance.

I finally leaned over between them, tapped the kid firmly on the shoulder, put my finger to my lips, and shushed him.

Peace ensued until the intermission.

After the intermission, during the Beethoven, he started up again (in retrospect, considering the offense, he's lucky I did not slay him in his seat). When I decided he wasn't going to settle down, and I'd had enough, I tapped him on the shoulder again, rather harder this time, and when he turned around, hissed at him, "Knock it off!" loud enough to be heard by the couple sitting next to me.

At the end of the concert, the lady sitting next to me turned to me and said, "I'm so glad you said something to him!"

Dad and boy were not at the next concert; I guess they aren't season subscribers.

Don't #$% with my Beethoven.While I agree with your sentiment and with the need to take action, had that been my son, you'd have had a much bigger problem.

If my child is acting inappropriately in a way that interferes with your activity, you are free to tap me on the shoulder and insist that I do something about it (I probably already will be, but just in case I'm not, feel free), but I would react harshly to you taking such action for me.

That being said, I don't think you did anything out of line, which is inconsistent, I know, but my fatherly emotions don't always bow to reason.

headscratcher4

23rd January 2007, 12:39 PM

Yes, you are, but #$% 'em.

ETA: Mrs. BPSCG and I attended an Alexandria Symhony Orchestra concert some months ago, which included Beethoven's Ninth Symphony. First part of the concert, the kid sitting in front of me with his dad, about eleven years old, was bouncing around in his seat litke a bobblehead doll, leaning over to talk to his dad repeatedly, generally being a nuisance.

I finally leaned over between them, tapped the kid firmly on the shoulder, put my finger to my lips, and shushed him.

Peace ensued until the intermission.

After the intermission, during the Beethoven, he started up again (in retrospect, considering the offense, he's lucky I did not slay him in his seat). When I decided he wasn't going to settle down, and I'd had enough, I tapped him on the shoulder again, rather harder this time, and when he turned around, hissed at him, "Knock it off!" loud enough to be heard by the couple sitting next to me.

At the end of the concert, the lady sitting next to me turned to me and said, "I'm so glad you said something to him!"

Dad and boy were not at the next concert; I guess they aren't season subscribers.

Don't #$% with my Beethoven.

By the same token, my wife and I were at the Kennedy Center last year during a complicated, interesting rendition of the Canterbury Tales. The couple next to us brought along their young son...maybe 8. I thought to myself: this is going to be a disaster. But the child was quiet, intent, listened, didn't fidget and saved his questions till intermission.

His mom said they'd been taking him to theater for years and worked very hard to train him how to behave at a public performance or in a public place. Clearly it can be done...by parents who care about their children and how their children interact with the rest of the world.

Even though I had doubts about the appropriateness of the material for this kid, the parents seemed to have things well in hand.

Spindrift

23rd January 2007, 12:47 PM

While I agree with your sentiment and with the need to take action, had that been my son, you'd have had a much bigger problem.

If my child is acting inappropriately in a way that interferes with your activity, you are free to tap me on the shoulder and insist that I do something about it (I probably already will be, but just in case I'm not, feel free), but I would react harshly to you taking such action for me.

That being said, I don't think you did anything out of line, which is inconsistent, I know, but my fatherly emotions don't always bow to reason.

If a child is acting that way and the parent hasn't already done something to control the child then the correct assumption would be that talking to the parent isn't going to do anything.

And yes, I'm a parent.

Back to the OP: I applaud AirTran for what they did. The parents are probably indignant but if they can't control a child at three, I pity them when the kid is thirteen.

Garrette

23rd January 2007, 12:51 PM

If a child is acting that way and the parent hasn't already done something to control the child then the correct an assumption would be that talking to the parent isn't going to do anything.Fixed it for you.

Back to the OP: I applaud AirTran for what they did.I agree.

The parents are probably indignant but if they can't control a child at three, I pity them when the kid is thirteen.A one-time issue is not necessarily indicative of generally poor parenting skills. But it is not the airline's job to determine if it's systemic or a one-off. They did the right thing.

Spindrift

23rd January 2007, 12:52 PM

By the same token, my wife and I were at the Kennedy Center last year during a complicated, interesting rendition of the Canterbury Tales. The couple next to us brought along their young son...maybe 8. I thought to myself: this is going to be a disaster. But the child was quiet, intent, listened, didn't fidget and saved his questions till intermission.

His mom said they'd been taking him to theater for years and worked very hard to train him how to behave at a public performance or in a public place. Clearly it can be done...by parents who care about their children and how their children interact with the rest of the world.

Even though I had doubts about the appropriateness of the material for this kid, the parents seemed to have things well in hand.

You are right, it takes work, too many parents don't want to invest in the effort. We've taken our kids to restaurants (real restaurants) since they were very young. You could see the people at the nearby tables rolling their eyes when we were seated. However my kids sat in the seats, talked in a moderate tone and did not throw fits. I can't tell you how many times we had people come up to us and say, "We just wanted to compliment you on how well-behaved your children are." I think it's sad that being well-behaved is that unusual that people feel compelled to comment on it.

Spindrift

23rd January 2007, 12:56 PM

Fixed it for you.

I agree.

A one-time issue is not necessarily indicative of generally poor parenting skills. But it is not the airline's job to determine if it's systemic or a one-off. They did the right thing.

"she was climbing under the seat and hitting the parents and wouldn't get in her seat"
A child hitting the parents is generally indicative of poor parenting skills.

Garrette

23rd January 2007, 12:57 PM

I agree. I rarely have behavioral problems with my three kids, and never for long.

But I have to admit that my outlook regarding other people's kids changed after having my own. Now in restaurants when I see a young couple with an infant or toddler they are having trouble with, I tend to empathize more than get angry.

rikzilla

23rd January 2007, 12:57 PM

I never had any trouble controlling my girls when they were small. Both of them were exceptionally quiet babies and docile children. Good kids all around...I almost always felt pity for my friends who had kids who acted insane compared to my girls.

Then came the teenage years....(shudder) :eek:

They were both horrible teenagers...practically uncontrollable. My wife and I were such good parents...envied by all...and then what happened???? It's as if we suddenly became the worst parents on the planet!! I still can't quite figure it out.

Luckily our first is out of the house and suddenly is acting as if she recently visited a particularly talented exorcist. The other is only a High School freshman...so our torment there is just beginning.

But at least we haven't been kicked off a plane.....yet.

-z

Garrette

23rd January 2007, 01:01 PM

headscratcher4

23rd January 2007, 01:05 PM

You are right, it takes work, too many parents don't want to invest in the effort. We've taken our kids to restaurants (real restaurants) since they were very young. You could see the people at the nearby tables rolling their eyes when we were seated. However my kids sat in the seats, talked in a moderate tone and did not throw fits. I can't tell you how many times we had people come up to us and say, "We just wanted to compliment you on how well-behaved your children are." I think it's sad that being well-behaved is that unusual that people feel compelled to comment on it.

Both my wife and I make it a point to compliment both parents and child/children when we see well-behaved younger children in situations such as airplane travel, movies, resturaunts, etc. Parents need all the help, support and compliments they can get. I know it is as hard a job to do right as there is.

Z: love the line about a particularilly talented exorsist. I wonder if it is the same one I visited after I left home? He must be 1000 year old now. :)

Garrette

23rd January 2007, 01:05 PM

A child hitting the parents is generally indicative of poor parenting skills.At three? In what may well have been a first-time, highly disorienting experience? I disagree.

My wife is working on her PhD in early childhood education. Some studies I discussed with her involved the effect of external stimuli in the form of unfamiliar people and unfamiliar surroundings on tired children.

Short form of the findings: The same toddler who at home calms down and falls asleep when tired is likely to physically act out in unpredictable ways when tired in a crowd, particularly when not at home, separate from level of parenting skill or socioeconomic status or other controllable variables.

TragicMonkey

23rd January 2007, 01:20 PM

The Victorians, though much-maligned, had a few good notions. One was that children below a certain age are not yet civilized enough to venture into certain public venues. This wouldn't apply to airplanes, unfortunately, but it would to restaurants and the like. Proud parents: just because you go somewhere, doesn't mean your kid has to come along. If they're that bratty, wouldn't you want some time apart anyway? And would they really enjoy whatever it is anyway? Kids like McDonald's. Do they have to come to the fancy Italian restaurant?

But then I was raised with the clear understanding that any crime or sin or misbehavior merited its own rewards, and those rewards would have a whole new dimension of unpleasantness if the act occurred in public. Embarrassing Mom In Public was pretty much the worst possible crime. (Except when it was really funny, like when I was a toddler and I ran down the aisle in church and confronted the priest. He stopped dead, mid-rite, and my mom was so embarrassed she sent my sister to go get me and bring me back. All I did was stand there and stare at him, but he apparently found it unnerving. I like to think he realized at that moment that his god wasn't powerful enough to protect him from such awful visitations of Monkey.)

marksman

23rd January 2007, 01:20 PM

I've flown AirTran many times. I think they acted appropriately. "I just need more time" is not sufficient.

I don't know if this is the first time the child acted inappropriately or if it is a repeated problem. It doesn't matter. The child had already delayed the flight by 15 minutes. They weren't even entitled to that much time.

I have two children, the youngest is five. I know the difficulties of flying with children. Thankfully, my children love flying and are generally well-behaved. (I attribute this mostly to genetics, not my child-rearing skills.) If we were ever kicked off a plane for my child's misbehavior, I would be chagrined, but I don't think I could blame the airline for it.

At the same token, I think it unfair to blame the parents for every misbehavior of the child, particularly in situations where this no option not to bring the child outside. As others have said, some children act up when they are in unfamiliar places.

And while I don't condone lax parenting, I've seen the opposite as well. I have a friend with a severely autistic child. This past Christmas season, she took the child Christmas shopping with us. In the toy store, the child was running around in circles, as she is wont to do, humming her repetitive tones. A lady -- not with children -- chided my friend to control her child! In a freaking toy store!

If my friend could never bring her child to a public place, she'd be a prisoner in her own home. She would never bring her child to a symphony (don't worry Beeps!) or a fine restaurant. But if you go to a "family" restaurant, I think people have to expect that there might be raucous children there. (My friend has horror stories of people screaming -- and I mean this literally -- because her child was rocking back and forth in her high chair at a collection of "family" restaurants, such as TGIFs, McDonald's and even Chucky Cheese.)

So, if that offends you, too fricking bad. I'll suffer through the ocassionally loud dinner if it means my friend can ocassionally get to act like a human being rather than a prison warden.

TragicMonkey

23rd January 2007, 01:32 PM

Yeah, you wouldn't expect rowdy children at sophisticated venues like Chuck E Cheese's.

A coworker once asked another coworker, in a conversation about children's birthday parties, "Exactly how bad is Chuck E Cheese's?" The reply was "they sell beer by the pitcher there for a reason."

BPSCG

23rd January 2007, 01:39 PM

My parents used to take my sister and me to restaurants, even when we were small, with no problem. It might have had something to do with the fact that as we walked in, my dad would point to the largest waiter he could spot, and tell my sister and me, "You see that man over there? If you don't behave, he's going to put you in that room" (indicating a closed door) "where there's a spanking machine."

He left the rest to our active imaginations. I envisioned some strange, steam-powered device, with pulleys and belts and large whirling paddles. :eek:

I read a long time ago about some kid who was misbehaving on a plane, and the cabin attendant shut him up by warning him that if he didn't settle down, they'd make him go outside.

If it isn't true, it should be.

Cleon

23rd January 2007, 01:48 PM

And this, ladies and gentlemen, is why I loooove flying Airtran. Good prices, good policies.

Darth Rotor

23rd January 2007, 01:52 PM

A coworker once asked another coworker, in a conversation about children's birthday parties, "Exactly how bad is Chuck E Cheese's?" The reply was "they sell beer by the pitcher there for a reason."
I confirm this as fact, not rumor.

DR

luchog

23rd January 2007, 01:54 PM

They were both horrible teenagers...practically uncontrollable. My wife and I were such good parents...envied by all...and then what happened???? It's as if we suddenly became the worst parents on the planet!! I still can't quite figure it out.

Well, you really did answer your own question:
Then came the teenage years....(shudder) :eek:

HTH, HAND :D

More seriously, I've helped raise my partner's three kids, the youngest of which is now in her mid teens. Two of which turned completely crazy, one of which has been pretty mellow. It's just their particular temperament, and the changes they go through. Some cope better than others. It also helps to realize that the things that worked when they were children absolutely will not work once they hit puberty and beyond.

casebro

23rd January 2007, 03:08 PM

Sorry, I mis-read the mis-spelled opening Subject- "Family kicked off PLANET..."

I thought YEAH!. Darn, another small disapointment.

Piscivore

23rd January 2007, 03:22 PM

I don't want to hear this. My daughter (the youngest of my three kids) is about to turn ten.

My daughter turned thirteen last Friday, her brother was eleven on the Monday of the same week. He's already starting to show signs of surliness and rebellion, but she's a perfect angel.

And that is what I'm worried about. When that cork blows it's going to take out a few city blocks. :)

Garrette

23rd January 2007, 03:23 PM

My daughter turned thirteen last Friday, her brother was eleven on the Monday of the same week. He's already starting to show signs of surliness and rebellion, but she's a perfect angel.

And that is what I'm worried about. When that cork blows it's going to take out a few city blocks. :)I'm thinking a business trip until she's 23 is in order.

Polaris

23rd January 2007, 03:38 PM

So, if that offends you, too fricking bad. I'll suffer through the ocassionally loud dinner if it means my friend can ocassionally get to act like a human being rather than a prison warden.

Begin rant: (not intended as a shot at marksman) The problem is the number of parents who openly espouse this sentiment for every aspect of daily life - "I'll take my kids where I please. Deal with it." These are the same people who get physically confrontational when told to rein their children in - I'm sorry, if you foist your children on all of us, don't expect us to take it lying down.

On the flight from Washington DC to Dallas this December a couple with a young daughter (maybe 3 or 4 years old) obviously couldn't have cared less about the feelings of the other passengers. The father and the kid were in the double seats on the port side, and the mother was in the triple seats starboard, with me and another passenger.

Kid would not stop screaming. Mother responded by frequently smacking kid. Other passenger said something. Father and mother both went ballistic on other passenger, and father would not shut up about how rude other passenger was during remainder of flight. Brat never stopped screaming and shouting. All brat wanted was to sit with both parents. I and my neighbor passenger switched seats with the father and brat, allowing this. Kid stopped screaming. Problem solved (this took several requests before the stupid parents agreed, btw). Airline was American.

I applaud AirTran, and will fly them more often knowing this will be the case with unruly children and idiot parents. Now if only we could get nice restaurants and concert halls to do something similar when parents let their children clomp around the aisles and shout at the tops of their lungs.

End rant.

Learning Phase

23rd January 2007, 04:17 PM

Not too long ago I was drifting through the local Wal-Mart when I came upon a scene that shocked me and left me laughing at the same time.

The mother was attempting to force her child to do something he didn't want to do. (child about 10 years old). He angrily turned to his mother and screamed "I told you NO!!!!", using an authoritative voice.

Shocking because I never thought I'd hear a child talking to his parent like that.

Laughing because the parents brought this upon themselves, and deserved every bit of it. Failure to maintain even the slightest discipline for your children will return to haunt you, big time. I can only imagine how much of an adventure their home life is.

Too bad Wal-Mart won't throw them out like Air Tran (My new favorite airline)

drkitten

23rd January 2007, 04:33 PM

If my friend could never bring her child to a public place, she'd be a prisoner in her own home.

You know, there's this wonderful new invention I read about somewhere.

It's called a "babysitter."

Just because your friend goes somewhere does not mean that the child needs to go there, too.

a_unique_person

23rd January 2007, 04:42 PM

drkitten

23rd January 2007, 04:50 PM

We caught a plane once with our 1 year old. He had never been in a plane before, had only just started walking, couldn't talk much. As soon as the plane started moving, he didn't like the motion, and screamed. He kept this up for about an hour. There was nothing we could do to console him.

There's a difference between an inability to get a child to shut up and an inability to get a child to sit still.

From the cited article:

"The flight was already delayed 15 minutes and in fairness to the other 112 passengers on the plane, the crew made an operational decision to remove the family," AirTran spokeswoman Judy Graham-Weaver said.

[The child] was removed because "she was climbing under the seat and hitting the parents and wouldn't get in her seat" during boarding, Graham-Weaver said.

Daynalooney

23rd January 2007, 04:55 PM

I can't believe that the parents are claiming that they will never fly with the airline again even after being offered free round trip tickets to anywhere. Sounds as though they are as spoiled as their child. I'll have to take my kids on that airline and ask one of them to pitch a fit.

Daynalooney

23rd January 2007, 04:57 PM

Tmy

23rd January 2007, 04:58 PM

4 words, "Five across the eyes!!!"

Stupid Oprah. She ruined corporal punishment. Now if you tap a kid, people call the cops on you! No wonder you get out of control brats. They have no fear of authority.

fuelair

23rd January 2007, 05:06 PM

You are right, it takes work, too many parents don't want to invest in the effort. We've taken our kids to restaurants (real restaurants) since they were very young. You could see the people at the nearby tables rolling their eyes when we were seated. However my kids sat in the seats, talked in a moderate tone and did not throw fits. I can't tell you how many times we had people come up to us and say, "We just wanted to compliment you on how well-behaved your children are." I think it's sad that being well-behaved is that unusual that people feel compelled to comment on it.

And I never roll my eyes at kids coming into a restaurant - but that's 'cause my wife and I like kids and most of the time the kids are fun to be around. I would say I have been annoyed much more often annoyed by cell-phoning, pointless complaining, cursing, relationship discussing (last one of those I had a terrible desire to put the gentlemans head through the plate glass window next him - but enough of happy thoughts) adults. I do make a special effort when the kids do something/everything right to congratulate the parents and the child. So far, no one has been annoyed or insulted by that.:) :) (but it isn't all that unusual in my experience for the kids to behave quite reasonably - they're kids! _ in public):) :)

The Mutha

23rd January 2007, 07:01 PM

I'm one of those single mothers who took the kiddo to the fancy restaurants from an early age and am so glad that I did. She's 17 now and has never embarassed herself or me in a restaurant setting. I've gotten compliments from teachers when a field trip returned from eating out... apparently I'm one of the few parents who have taught their children not only how to behave in a restaurant and respect the wait staff, but also to teach kiddo that it's generally necessary to tip and how to figure out a reasonable tip.

Dolly tells me that she's the one who has taught the majority of her friends how to tip and how much to tip.

I'm waiting for her head to start turning around Linda Blair-esque style... hasn't happened yet, but I'm on guard.

The OP reminds me of a story that an old colleague tells. She, her husband and the nanny were escorting their 18-month old quads from Houston to Florida to visit family. The kiddos screamed the entire way on the trip over. As the plane was landing, Irene got up, apologized for the screaming and announced what flight they were booked on for the trip back, in case anybody wanted to change their own flight plans.

thaiboxerken

23rd January 2007, 08:27 PM

I hate loud kids. Kids should be seen and not heard.

EGarrett

23rd January 2007, 08:29 PM

The family won't be flying Airtran, but I will!

I went to a movie theater to see Apocalypto a month ago, and some (god-damn stupid @%#@#$@) parents had brought their 7 or 8 year old KID with them. To see APOCALYPTO. He was scared out of his wits and whimpering and ruining the movie for everyone else. They ********** up the movie for everyone in the movie and scarred their kid.

Let Airtran be the guide and start kicking these ****s OUT.

Tony

23rd January 2007, 09:36 PM

ETA: Mrs. BPSCG and I attended an Alexandria Symhony Orchestra concert some months ago, which included Beethoven's Ninth Symphony. First part of the concert, the kid sitting in front of me with his dad, about eleven years old, was bouncing around in his seat litke a bobblehead doll, leaning over to talk to his dad repeatedly, generally being a nuisance.

I finally leaned over between them, tapped the kid firmly on the shoulder, put my finger to my lips, and shushed him.

Peace ensued until the intermission.

After the intermission, during the Beethoven, he started up again (in retrospect, considering the offense, he's lucky I did not slay him in his seat). When I decided he wasn't going to settle down, and I'd had enough, I tapped him on the shoulder again, rather harder this time, and when he turned around, hissed at him, "Knock it off!" loud enough to be heard by the couple sitting next to me.

At the end of the concert, the lady sitting next to me turned to me and said, "I'm so glad you said something to him!"

Dad and boy were not at the next concert; I guess they aren't season subscribers.

Don't #$% with my Beethoven.

Ludwig Van's 9th will always remind me of A Clockwork Orange.

timhau

23rd January 2007, 10:48 PM

Recent experience: my wife and I went to have dinner in the Chinese restaurant where we got engaged 13 years ago to the day. In the table next to us there was a family with two young kids. Loud.

Ordering their food was a show already. The kids wanted this and that from the kiddie menu, but the father always came back with "Are you sure you want that? If you don't eat it, you don't get dessert." Which, by the way, sounded a lot like my parents when I was a kid -- just many, many decibels louder.

Anyway, their food arrived. The kids played with it, tossed it around, moaned about wanting something else, didn't eat much. Dad says "Remember, if you don't eat it, there's going to be no dessert." Fine.

They finish eating. The issue of dessert comes up. Dad says no. Kids start to wail like two little banshees and whack their parents. Mom convinces dad to let the kids have dessert in short order. The kids tone their wailing down somewhat.

Dessert menu arrives. The kids want ice cream. Vanilla. Chocholate. No, strawberry. Raspberry. WAAH! OK, chocholate and vanilla it is.

Ice cream arrives. It turns out that the kids want what the other kid is having but don't want to give up their own portion. They see red ice cream served to a table across the room. They want that too. Wailing and whacking starts again. Dad starts looking like he's about to blow any minute. In a strike of genius, mom orders strawberry and raspberry because that's what the kids really want, and another chocholate since the one they got is now distributed around the table, seat, and floor.

At right about this time, my wife and I decide to forgo dessert for some peace and quiet, so I don't know how this all ended. Probably reasonably well, since the papers didn't mention a restaurant massacre the next day. Anyway, on our way out I have to force myself not to congratulate the parents for teaching their kids that NO really means YES, at least if your tantrum is loud enough. Good luck trying to reign them in when they're teenagers and the same size as you.

SkepticSteph

23rd January 2007, 11:36 PM

I used to work as a waitress at a high-end brunch restaurant. Usually, kids were well behaved, but I remember one child. His mom would come in, hook up her laptop, and do her work. Her son, meanwhile, would run around the restaurant at will, yelling, bothering other patrons, trying to trip us, etc. I was visibly pregnant, and the mother was always telling me that I should "stay home" with my baby, and then espouse the evils of day care. She bragged that she had never had a sitter watch her child. (Well, SHE didn't watch him either...)

One day, when I was about 8 months pregnant, her son finally succeeded in tripping me. I was carrying hot water for tea, and, in an effort to avoid spilling on him, I spilled the water on the front of my blouse. I ended up with severe burns on some sensitive parts of my body that required skin grafts.

I went off on the child. I yelled at him and told him to GO. SIT. DOWN. NOW. Then, I headed off to ER.

Later (I never returned to work) I heard the mother was very upset that I "abused" her son and said she would never return to that restaurant. The manager did nothing to try to calm her down, and explained that her son's behavior caused injury to one of his staff people, and that might be best.

So score one for the airport. Unfortunately, the parents will STILL not see that their child did anything wrong, and it is the big, bad, unreasonable airline's fault.

Art Vandelay

23rd January 2007, 11:41 PM

"They also were offered three roundtrip tickets anywhere the airline flies, Graham-Weaver said."
Hmm. Sounds kinda profitable.

Now if only we could get nice restaurants and concert halls to do something similar when parents let their children clomp around the aisles and shout at the tops of their lungs.If you really want it to stop, you have to make sure that they understand that they will suffer economically from it. Remember: when you're in a restuarant, you're not buying food, you're buying a good time.

Hmmmm.... ever tried to get a babysitter for an autistic child? My parents couldn't for my autistic sister.So it's so difficult to deal with her that people aren't willing to do it, even when paid, but the general public should do it for free? I think that you really mean is "My parents couldn't find anyone for a price they were willing to pay".

Later (I never returned to work) I heard the mother was very upset that I "abused" her son and said she would never return to that restaurant. The manager did nothing to try to calm her down, and explained that her son's behavior caused injury to one of his staff people, and that might be best.She should consider herself lucky that she didn't face civil or even criminal charges.

steverino

24th January 2007, 12:15 AM

I hate loud kids. Kids should be seen and not heard.

That explains your bizarre views on the abortion issue.

timhau

24th January 2007, 01:04 AM

So score one for the airport. Unfortunately, the parents will STILL not see that their child did anything wrong, and it is the big, bad, unreasonable airline's fault.

Such is the world of parents who 'love their children more than anything in the world' or 'do everything on the child's terms' and the infant kings that are their offspring.

BTW, the thing that really gets to me is this:

The Orlando-based carrier reimbursed the family $595.80, the cost of the three tickets, and the Kuleszas flew home the next day.

They also were offered three roundtrip tickets anywhere the airline flies, Graham-Weaver said.

So you can't control the kid and delay the flight, and you get better compensation than those who are denied boarding due to overbooking? Feh.

Haywire

24th January 2007, 02:30 AM

Last Summer, I was having a post-run lunch with my running buddy when five women came into the restaurant with five young children, who proceded to cause a five child riot.
"Gee, " she said, "I didn't know we were on an airplane."

SkepticSteph

24th January 2007, 02:33 AM

"
snip
She should consider herself lucky that she didn't face civil or even criminal charges.

Actually, the restaurant very well could have filed a civil case, since they ended up paying a (voluntary) settlement for the pain and suffering. (Loss of work and medical bills were covered through workman's comp.) I never would have sued my employer, but THEY could have sued her. I think since they are a small chain, it was just cheaper and better PR to just pay me out.

This was a very long while ago. I wonder if the kid is in prison yet?

TragicMonkey

24th January 2007, 02:44 AM

She should consider herself lucky that she didn't face civil or even criminal charges.

I was just thinking that true justice would require the lady to supply the skin for the required skin grafts.

Jaggy Bunnet

24th January 2007, 03:01 AM

As someone with no kids, my experience is based on eating out in the UK and elsewhere in Europe where I notice a big difference.

In the UK, it is relatively uncommon to have young kids in nice restaurants. In most of the European countries I have been to, it is normal. No prices for guessing which ones behave better.

Maybe we are expecting too much of young kids to expect them to understand that when they are eating out in McDonalds they are expected to behave differently from when they are eating out in a restaurant? If every time they have been out to eat before they have had crayons/colouring in/a play area/a clown as part of the trip, is it surprising they get bored when told to sit quietly?

timhau

24th January 2007, 03:04 AM

The Don

24th January 2007, 03:24 AM

I'd also question the role of the parents if they take their kids to a high-end restaurant and proceed to ignore them. Many's the time I've seen one or more parents conversing among themselves and just excluding the kids. No wonder they kick-off.

My experience in Italy however is that children are doted upon at every turn and are consequentially little ********s who have no concept about how to behave in public

Pyrrho

24th January 2007, 03:36 AM

timhau

24th January 2007, 03:40 AM

My experience in Italy however is that children are doted upon at every turn and are consequentially little ********s who have no concept about how to behave in public

My first reaction was to answer "...and that's how they train a new generation of Italians".

Then I decided not to, because I really like Italy. It's a fantastic country with history and tradition second to none. What's more, they have the best food in the world. Wherever you are, find the Italian community and you'll find great food. But they do live their daily lives in a manner very different from my stoic, silent, boring Nordic way.

timhau

24th January 2007, 03:42 AM

Heh. I'm from an Italian family, and I can safely say it doesn't change when we/they grow up.

Phew. Now I feel a little bit less guilty about thinking such nasty thoughts about your kind.

Katana

24th January 2007, 04:58 AM

I have had terrible experiences with AirTran, but they were in the right here. The kid's behavior threatened to delay the departure of the entire flight (actually it sounds like it was already 15 minutes late because of her). There is no reason to interrupt travel plans for everyone because of a misbehaving child.

BPSCG

24th January 2007, 05:07 AM

Ludwig Van's 9th will always remind me of A Clockwork Orange.Kid's lucky me and my droogs didn't engage in a wee bit of the old ultraviolence on him and his pappa.

marksman

24th January 2007, 05:51 AM

You know, there's this wonderful new invention I read about somewhere.

It's called a "babysitter."

Just because your friend goes somewhere does not mean that the child needs to go there, too.

My friend cannot afford a babysitter who is qualified to deal with a low-functioning autist. You can't hire the 15 year-old down the block to handle a six-year old who can climb out second-story windows shimmy down a gutter pipe and run into the street because she heard a truck go by and the sound fascinated her.

Maybe you missed the part where I mentioned the low-functioning autism. She also can't hire a babysitter everytime she needs to go to the supermarket or shopping for holiday gifts.

I'm sorry if you feel the need to have peace and quiet in McDonald's or Toys 'R Us or PathMark. As I said, she doesn't bring the child to fine dining establishments, movies or symphonies. For that, she and her husband will save up for a specialist babysitter for a once-in-a-blue moon date night.

Clearly, I'm not defending the parents in the AirTran situation. That child was not handicapped or disabled and had already held up the plane long enough. But I think it arrogant and self-absorbed to expect never to see a rowdy child in places were families are expected and encouraged to go.

marksman

24th January 2007, 05:57 AM

So it's so difficult to deal with her that people aren't willing to do it, even when paid, but the general public should do it for free? I think that you really mean is "My parents couldn't find anyone for a price they were willing to pay".
No, what he means is that there isn't anyone available and qualified, unlike the parents.

You're saying that the fact that you can't abide hearing a child in a place where children are expected and encouraged to be found, that parents of children with severe problems should be locked in their homes. No supermarkets, no fast food restaruants. Just for your peace of mind.

My answer to that is too frickin' bad. I have no sympathy for parents who don't discipline their able children. But the world could use a helluva lot more sympathy for parents of disabled children.

Garrette

24th January 2007, 06:08 AM

I find that I am in 100% agreement with marksman.

fuelair

24th January 2007, 06:38 AM

Spindrift

24th January 2007, 06:49 AM

At three? In what may well have been a first-time, highly disorienting experience? I disagree.

Not a first time experience, it was their return flight.

fuelair

24th January 2007, 06:50 AM

bluess

24th January 2007, 06:53 AM

No, what he means is that there isn't anyone available and qualified, unlike the parents.

You're saying that the fact that you can't abide hearing a child in a place where children are expected and encouraged to be found, that parents of children with severe problems should be locked in their homes. No supermarkets, no fast food restaruants. Just for your peace of mind.

My answer to that is too frickin' bad. I have no sympathy for parents who don't discipline their able children. But the world could use a helluva lot more sympathy for parents of disabled children.

I find that I am in 100% agreement with marksman.

Double ditto.

We take Blue2 a number of places. And what always accompanies us is her 'going out' bag. She picks the things to go in it, and then when a restaurant meal turns into an extended event, she is relatively happy. The usual bits and pieces are a coloring book and pencils, this nifty magnetic fashion doll set, and maybe a reading book. In a mashed up quote from the book "Linnets and Valerians" - "Uncle Andrew was the first adult to understand you couldn't be good unless you had something to be good with."

bigred

24th January 2007, 07:02 AM

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070123/ap_on_re_us/flight_tantrum

My reaction is good. I can't abide people who are unable to control their children in public...whether on a plane, a resturaunt, a supermarket...it is the Parents who should control the situation not the kids.I agree only with the intensity of my feelings about that turned up, oh, perhaps 10,000% (not a slight to you).

As for "We weren't given an opportunity to hold her, console her or anything" - where to start:

1 - You were given FIFTEEN MINUTES. ie at least 12-13 more than you deserved. You knew the flight was about to take off and people want to get going. If you can't grab your own 3-yr old child and control her, then you are unfit parents (shocking news) and should give her up for adoption.

2 - lol @ "console her..." ...yes that's what screaming brats need, "consoling." If they had any functioning brain cells they'd know that's the very LAST thing she needs - in fact it's probably why she's a screaming brat in the first place, you pamper the (rule 8) out of her you morons. I wish I could be there to enjoy your misery when she becomes a teen.

What she clearly needed was (gasp) a spanking - or at least a MUCH firmer attitude taken by the parents (eg grab her, PUT her in the freakin seat, and cover her mouth the whole time if you have to - or get off the freakin plane on your own if it's so impossible to control the brat). But if (as is likely) your brilliant selves find that too horrific or "abusive," then have a favorite toy at the ready, dope her up - whatever you have to do to keep her QUIET...and have this plan ready to go long BEFORE you get on the plane. Same goes for being anywhere else in public, really (except obvious stuff like playgrounds etc).

In fairness to the kid, none of it is her fault. It's her "we should've been neutered at a young age" parents.

This story could have only been better if it ended by saying the couple was run over by the plane as it taxied down the runway.

/rant

shuize

24th January 2007, 07:04 AM

There's a difference between an inability to get a child to shut up and an inability to get a child to sit still.
When I first read the article, I thought "Oh, crap. That's us." But on rereading it, I realize it's not. We take our 2 year-old daughter out to dinner other public places but work very hard not to inconvenience other people. While I can imagine a situation where she might not stop crying for 15 minutes on a plane, I could definitely make her sit down and put on a seatbelt in under 15 seconds.

Garrette

24th January 2007, 07:05 AM

Not a first time experience, it was their return flight.Okay. A three-year old's second experience in a highly disorienting, unfamiliar environment.

bigred

24th January 2007, 07:07 AM

By the same token, my wife and I were at the Kennedy Center last year during a complicated, interesting rendition of the Canterbury Tales. The couple next to us brought along their young son...maybe 8. I thought to myself: this is going to be a disaster. But the child was quiet, intent, listened, didn't fidget and saved his questions till intermission.

His mom said they'd been taking him to theater for years and worked very hard to train him how to behave at a public performance or in a public place. Clearly it can be done...by parents who care about their children and how their children interact with the rest of the world.

Even though I had doubts about the appropriateness of the material for this kid, the parents seemed to have things well in hand.
If you atheists will excuse the expression: God bless those people. And that is a good point to bring up, ie there are at least a few quality parents still out there who "get it" and I wish they'd get a lot of "recognition" too.

In fact, that reminds me of the last time I went to a circus with some friends and (as seems to almost always be the case in public events I go to) a very young kid ends up sitting next to me. Now at a circus I don't expect a kid to be perfectly quiet, but I predicted major screaming and general obnxious brattiness while the parents sat there clueless or thought it was "cute."

Nope. Barely a peep out of the kid the whole time. I was so appreciative I walked up to the wife as they got up to leave and expressed both my appreciation at teaching their kid to behave and even (only half-jokingly) suggested they teach parenting classes. Shoulda seen how they beamed.

Spindrift

24th January 2007, 07:07 AM

Maybe we are expecting too much of young kids to expect them to understand that when they are eating out in McDonalds they are expected to behave differently from when they are eating out in a restaurant? If every time they have been out to eat before they have had crayons/colouring in/a play area/a clown as part of the trip, is it surprising they get bored when told to sit quietly?

Are you saying the typical kid can't tell the difference between McDonalds and a restaurant with table cloths? Give them a little more credit, kids are a lot smarter than most people seem to believe. However, the child needs to be taught that acceptable behavior varies according to where you are. If they aren't taught that at a nice restaurant you speak quietly, then they won't.

From a purely subjective and unscientific view, it's been my experience that the more the parents underestimate their children's capacity for comprehension and learning, the more likely the kid is to be a brat. These are the parents who always say, "He's too young to understand he shouldn't do that." Sometimes it's a willful underestimation, "I don't want to have to deal with correcting him, it's easier to just clean up the mess."

bigred

24th January 2007, 07:09 AM

A one-time issue is not necessarily indicative of generally poor parenting skills. It is in this case. Do you really think they normally control the child but just decided not to bother this time?

But it is not the airline's job to determine if it's systemic or a one-off. They did the right thing.Yep exactly.

timhau

24th January 2007, 07:11 AM

When I first read the article, I thought "Oh, crap. That's us." But on rereading it, I realize it's not. We take our 2 year-old daughter out to dinner other public places but work very hard not to inconvenience other people. While I can imagine a situation where she might not stop crying for 15 minutes on a plane, I could definitely make her sit down and put on a seatbelt in under 15 seconds.

I actually don't have a problem with kid noise if the parents are making a real effort to calm the kid down. Or maybe I do have a problem with it, but the topmost feeling in my mind is compassion, not anger. It's the parents who do nothing and have that "we have a right to be here and make everyone's day a little more miserable" attitude that I hate.

Garrette

24th January 2007, 08:35 AM

It is in this case. Do you really think they normally control the child but just decided not to bother this time?It is just as likely, given the lack of information in the article, as the alternative, though I take issues with "just decided not to bother."

Without getting into a long child-rearing discussion, it is important to note that episodes of misbehavior can be simultaneously lengthy and spotty and not amenable to previously successful resolutions, particularly in an unfamiliar, chaotic (to the child) environment. You've no idea what the parents had tried before this point, nor what the child's behavior had been like. You cannot legitimately dismiss the possibility that they were trying a different tack or the possibility that they were simply too emotionally frayed from a day of such behavior to realize how bad the situation was and that it required immediate action.

Yep exactly.I agreed with the airlines' action in my very first post.

headscratcher4

24th January 2007, 08:37 AM

In fairness to the kid, none of it is her fault. It's her "we should've been neutered at a young age" parents.

This story could have only been better if it ended by saying the couple was run over by the plane as it taxied down the runway.

/rant

That is the real core of it...at that age it isn't the kid's fault. It is the parents.

I see so many who do it right and well. Kids that are polite and well behaved, from parents who are easy going and from parents who are prim and proper. It is about teaching respect, disciplin and following through and not negotiating with 3 yearolds.

When you see stories like this one, you forget those parents who by nature or because they've learned how, get it right. My compliments to them.

Finally, you can't always get what you want. We've all been on planes where a ailing, uncomfortable infant is wailing away. Its hard but I do understand. This is a kid that wasn't getting what it wanted when it wanted it in a situation where it didn't need it right then and the parents were unable to manage it, put a hundred other people at stress and annoyance and were mad because the airline wanted it to end so the flight could be safe and orderly.

Geesh, I wish airlines would give me as much as they offered these people the next time I am inconveinenced. I fear, however, if I were to act up on a plane the way this kid did, the FBI would be interviewing me...and I'd be permenantly on the no-fly list.

Beerina

24th January 2007, 08:44 AM

bluess

24th January 2007, 08:55 AM

I've been to a restaraunt with a guy whose kids are completely out of control. They run up to the buffet and poke around things. They get crab legs and leave them sticking up in a water glass at the table, uneaten, arranged like a flower vase. Parents do nothing -- nothing!

This guy told me once that he's had the owner of a restaraunt come up to him and tell him that his kids were the worst behaved he'd ever seen.

Holy FSM! And did he then take a HINT and get a parenting book?

I just had a co-worker tell me she thinks its really cute when her kid (4 yrs old) gives her attitude. After listening to her talk about the kid talking back to her dad, to her mom, to any adult, I just said that 'that behavior wouldn't cut it in my house'. But then I am the meanest mom in the whole wide world.....

Seriously, recommend that dreadful father get two books - SuperNanny by Jo Frost and Parent Effectiveness Training by Robert Gordon (Gordon is definitely the last name). And read them.

Jaggy Bunnet

24th January 2007, 09:00 AM

Are you saying the typical kid can't tell the difference between McDonalds and a restaurant with table cloths? Give them a little more credit, kids are a lot smarter than most people seem to believe. However, the child needs to be taught that acceptable behavior varies according to where you are. If they aren't taught that at a nice restaurant you speak quietly, then they won't.

The point was more that the vast majority of their experience of eating out is in a fast food joint where they behave in a certain way and nobody minds. I can understand why they think it is OK to behave that way whenever they go out for food - unless of course someone teaches them differently.

Table cloths? I can think of a lot of damn good restaurants with no table cloths.

The Central Scrutinizer

24th January 2007, 12:23 PM

While I agree with your sentiment and with the need to take action, had that been my son, you'd have had a much bigger problem.

If my child is acting inappropriately in a way that interferes with your activity, you are free to tap me on the shoulder and insist that I do something about it (I probably already will be, but just in case I'm not, feel free), but I would react harshly to you taking such action for me.

That being said, I don't think you did anything out of line, which is inconsistent, I know, but my fatherly emotions don't always bow to reason.

It was clear the father wasn't going to do anything, or else he already would have. What BPSCG did was perfectly OK, and he should be commended.

The Central Scrutinizer

24th January 2007, 12:30 PM

I went to a movie theater to see Apocalypto a month ago, and some (god-damn stupid @%#@#$@) parents had brought their 7 or 8 year old KID with them. To see APOCALYPTO. He was scared out of his wits and whimpering and ruining the movie for everyone else. They ********** up the movie for everyone in the movie and scarred their kid.

Why didn't you have them removed?

bluess

24th January 2007, 12:44 PM

headscratcher4

24th January 2007, 12:52 PM

I've been to a few 'R' movies where the family has brought their infant, toddler and elementary school children. I can understand that buying children's movie tickets is cheaper than a babysitter. But I also understand that a DVD rental is cheaper yet, and that viewing can occur after your 6 year old has gone to bed.

Oh, that's right. If you didn't mind bringing her to the 9 PM showing, she probably doesn't go to bed until 12 anyways. You'd be up too late.

[/rant, directed at none of the fine posters here, I'm sure]

My wife and I were recently at an R rated movie in Tucson where a woman was ignoring her crying two year old. (I can't imagine how uncomfortable an unhappy that poor child must have been and having to sit in the dark at a movie she couldn't possibly understand). Anyway, my wife asked her to take the baby out if she couldn't control her or calm her down -- beyond the annoyance factor, my wife was genuinely concerned about the child's unhapyness. Anyway, the woman lost it. Started screaming that it was non of our business. That if we wanted to watch a movie in peace, we should have stayed home and got the DVD, etc.

Up is down. Love me, love my child. F-you.

Number Six

24th January 2007, 01:22 PM

Tony

24th January 2007, 01:49 PM

Kid's lucky me and my droogs didn't engage in a wee bit of the old ultraviolence on him and his pappa.

Viddy well brotha.

Garrette

24th January 2007, 02:10 PM

This is with regard to the person that told the story about shushing an 8 year old kid at a public event and then another person saying basically "If it were my kid then I'd be po'ed if you told the kid to shush instead of telling me to tell my kid to shush." Count me on the side of the first person, assuming that is that the kid really was being annoying and that the shushing request was respectful.

We try to teach kids to be respectful of others but "others" can seem an abstraction to kids if the conduit for proper behavior always is the parents. Telling your own kid "Shush, you're bothering others" might not be as effective as having some stranger say to the kid "Shush, you're bothering me." In the latter case, the kid is getting the message that he really is bothering other people.

I'd go so far as to say that if you have a kid that misbehaves in public it might be good to set up a situation where you have an adult friend (that your kid doesn't know) near you at a public place and instruct that adult friend to say something directly to your kid when the kid misbehaves.As the second person (the one with whom you disagree) I thank you for your thoughts but find them misplaced. I'm quite capable of conveying the appropriate message to my child, even if I occasionally suffer the lapses that others on this thread apparently never experience.

You and Beeps (remember that I like Beeps and even agreed with his sentiment--and yours, too, apparently) seem to be suggesting that this one incident is sufficient to inform you not only that the parent is failing to fulfill his duty in this one instance but is also incapable of fulfilling his duty as a parent at all.

Since you find it so easy to make such quick conclusions you will understand when I, as the parent, make an equally quick but equally valid conclusion that this one instance of a stranger tapping my kid on the shoulder and giving a command demonstrates your inappropriately hostile intent. So my gloves will come off and stay off until you back off.

In your jumped-to-conclusion, the greatest risk to you is merely an unpleasant evening. In mine, the greatest risk is a nutball touching my kid.

I won't back off this position nor will I back down from anyone assuming they have a direct line to my kid when I am right there.

NobbyNobbs

24th January 2007, 02:36 PM

I agree only with the intensity of my feelings about that turned up, oh, perhaps 10,000% (not a slight to you).

As for "We weren't given an opportunity to hold her, console her or anything" - where to start:

1 - You were given FIFTEEN MINUTES. ie at least 12-13 more than you deserved. You knew the flight was about to take off and people want to get going. If you can't grab your own 3-yr old child and control her, then you are unfit parents (shocking news) and should give her up for adoption.

2 - lol @ "console her..." ...yes that's what screaming brats need, "consoling." If they had any functioning brain cells they'd know that's the very LAST thing she needs - in fact it's probably why she's a screaming brat in the first place, you pamper the (rule 8) out of her you morons. I wish I could be there to enjoy your misery when she becomes a teen.

What she clearly needed was (gasp) a spanking - or at least a MUCH firmer attitude taken by the parents (eg grab her, PUT her in the freakin seat, and cover her mouth the whole time if you have to - or get off the freakin plane on your own if it's so impossible to control the brat). But if (as is likely) your brilliant selves find that too horrific or "abusive," then have a favorite toy at the ready, dope her up - whatever you have to do to keep her QUIET...and have this plan ready to go long BEFORE you get on the plane. Same goes for being anywhere else in public, really (except obvious stuff like playgrounds etc).

In fairness to the kid, none of it is her fault. It's her "we should've been neutered at a young age" parents.

This story could have only been better if it ended by saying the couple was run over by the plane as it taxied down the runway.

/rant

However, with things are as they are nowadays, any more forceful solution (covering her mouth, spanking, etc.) would likely have resulted in someone on the plane calling Youth Services to have the child taken away from such "abusive" parents. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

It is just as likely, given the lack of information in the article, as the alternative, though I take issues with "just decided not to bother."

Without getting into a long child-rearing discussion, it is important to note that episodes of misbehavior can be simultaneously lengthy and spotty and not amenable to previously successful resolutions, particularly in an unfamiliar, chaotic (to the child) environment. You've no idea what the parents had tried before this point, nor what the child's behavior had been like. You cannot legitimately dismiss the possibility that they were trying a different tack or the possibility that they were simply too emotionally frayed from a day of such behavior to realize how bad the situation was and that it required immediate action.

I agreed with the airlines' action in my very first post.

Agreed. My kids are generally well behaved, but it's amazing what tiny little impetus, or even none at all, can set them off. Sometimes it's impossible to tell why they suddenly lose it, and sometimes there just isn't a reason other than overtiredness.

As the second person (the one with whom you disagree) I thank you for your thoughts but find them misplaced. I'm quite capable of conveying the appropriate message to my child, even if I occasionally suffer the lapses that others on this thread apparently never experience.

You and Beeps (remember that I like Beeps and even agreed with his sentiment--and yours, too, apparently) seem to be suggesting that this one incident is sufficient to inform you not only that the parent is failing to fulfill his duty in this one instance but is also incapable of fulfilling his duty as a parent at all.

Since you find it so easy to make such quick conclusions you will understand when I, as the parent, make an equally quick but equally valid conclusion that this one instance of a stranger tapping my kid on the shoulder and giving a command demonstrates your inappropriately hostile intent. So my gloves will come off and stay off until you back off.

In your jumped-to-conclusion, the greatest risk to you is merely an unpleasant evening. In mine, the greatest risk is a nutball touching my kid.

I won't back off this position nor will I back down from anyone assuming they have a direct line to my kid when I am right there.

Garrette, I am of the same mind. You just said it much better than I could.

I recall not long ago being on vacation with my friends and their kids. While I was cooking in the kitchen, I repeatedly told their son to leave the kitchen. I was chopping stuff and moving hot pots of water and so on, and didn't want him hurt. Yet he kept running through the kitchen. Finally I said, "Junior, if you don't stay out, I'm gonna swat you on the backside."

My friend pulled me aside and explained that he doesn't believe in corporal punishment and that I should never, ever take his kids' punishment into my own hands, and that I should have talked to him first if there was a problem. He was absolutely right.

Patsy

24th January 2007, 02:51 PM

:mghissyfit

My husband and I used to foster parent. I was the last chance foster home for some of the kids that came my way; seriously troubled teens, wee young'uns with reactive detachment disorder, you name it. Much, much more difficult children to deal with than your average Tommie or Susie.

I was always able to take these kids anywhere without trouble, along with my kids, their friends, anyone, regardless of their problems, because I expected good behavior from the biggest to the smallest, and they knew it.

I never threatened, never yelled, never screamed, and never hit. What I did do was explain the rules of behavior day one, explain the consequences for breaking the rules, and followed through every single time, no execeptions, and regardless of any personal inconvenience to me.

No, it isn't convenient to leave a restaurant or a movie theater. Yes, it is faster to pick up their mess yourself than stand over them until they do it. No, it isn't fun to ground them then stay home to insure they comply. It is indeed annoying to take away toys or privledges and listen to them whine.

But even a toddler who knows you are the boss, not him, and even a difficult teenager who knows you will discipline consistently every single time can be taught to behave and follow their parents' instructions if you are always calm, firm, reasonable, and consistent.

This kind of parenting is a lot harder work and requires more sacrifice than indulging your children and turning them into self-centered monsters, but it is worth the effort. The general public should not be expected to put up with being deafened, run down, splashed with food and drink, and deprived of the movie, concert, dinner, or whatever that they have paid to see because you can't be bothered to raise your children properly.

</rant>

WildCat

24th January 2007, 06:13 PM

</rant>
Hey, we have a real rant tag:

Use the damn rant tag!

j/k :p

Mycroft

24th January 2007, 09:00 PM

My parents used to take my sister and me to restaurants, even when we were small, with no problem. It might have had something to do with the fact that as we walked in, my dad would point to the largest waiter he could spot, and tell my sister and me, "You see that man over there? If you don't behave, he's going to put you in that room" (indicating a closed door) "where there's a spanking machine."

He left the rest to our active imaginations. I envisioned some strange, steam-powered device, with pulleys and belts and large whirling paddles. :eek:

Wouldn't work with my kid. She'd misbehave just to see the machine.

Mycroft

24th January 2007, 09:17 PM

Hmmmm.... ever tried to get a babysitter for an autistic child? My parents couldn't for my autistic sister.

I love babysitting for autistic children. No matter what happens, they can't tell on you. :stone028:

Mycroft

24th January 2007, 10:04 PM

Garrette, I am of the same mind. You just said it much better than I could.

I recall not long ago being on vacation with my friends and their kids. While I was cooking in the kitchen, I repeatedly told their son to leave the kitchen. I was chopping stuff and moving hot pots of water and so on, and didn't want him hurt. Yet he kept running through the kitchen. Finally I said, "Junior, if you don't stay out, I'm gonna swat you on the backside."

My friend pulled me aside and explained that he doesn't believe in corporal punishment and that I should never, ever take his kids' punishment into my own hands, and that I should have talked to him first if there was a problem. He was absolutely right.

What you're describing is different. Your friend didn't object to your talking directly to his kid, your friend objected to your using a threat he found objectionable.

I disagree with your friend too. Whenever our kid spent time at someone else's home, we let them know that whatever discipline they did with their kids was okay for ours too. So far its been 15 years and the issue has never come up.

:mghissyfit

I never threatened, never yelled, never screamed, and never hit. What I did do was explain the rules of behavior day one, explain the consequences for breaking the rules, and followed through every single time, no execeptions, and regardless of any personal inconvenience to me.

Amen!

Consistency is the key! Deviate just once and the next time is ten times harder.

Flo

25th January 2007, 02:43 AM

I love babysitting for autistic children. No matter what happens, they can't tell on you. :stone028:

:( ... There's a guy in France who worked as a driver for an institution for autistic and retarded girls. Used to rape, and in some cases kill, at least a dozen of them, counting on the fact they wouldn't tell on him or wouldn't be believed. Got arrested when he somehow boasted about it, believing it was covered by prescription, he even admitted his crimes to the police before retracting himself when he realized some of them could still be acted upon. He's serving life for abduction, and for incest, among other things ...

BPSCG

25th January 2007, 05:15 AM

I recall not long ago being on vacation with my friends and their kids. While I was cooking in the kitchen, I repeatedly told their son to leave the kitchen. I was chopping stuff and moving hot pots of water and so on, and didn't want him hurt. Yet he kept running through the kitchen. Finally I said, "Junior, if you don't stay out, I'm gonna swat you on the backside."

My friend pulled me aside and explained that he doesn't believe in corporal punishment and that I should never, ever take his kids' punishment into my own hands, and that I should have talked to him first if there was a problem. He was absolutely right.Not the same thing. At the concert, I asked (all right, told) the kid to quiet down. That's the equivalent of your telling your friend's kid to stay out of the kitchen.

I did not threaten the kid (even though choking the living @#$% out of him and his father would have been an unalloyed delight), which is what you did with Junior, and which I agree, was over the line. "Joe, keep Junior out of the kitchen; I don't want to trip and fall on top of him while I'm carrying a pot of boiling water, capisce?" would have done the trick (and would have pre-emptively taken you off the hook for any lawsuit Joe might file over Junior's second- and third-degree burns).

Though I can certainly sympathize with your desire to inflict mayhem...

headscratcher4

25th January 2007, 06:20 AM

Saw the parents on CNN this morning. Seeming very reasonable...our daughter was an angel...if only they'd given us a little more time. Indignation flowing all over the place. Very pro them piece. However, at the end the anchor said they had contacted AirTran and that the thousands of people contacting the airline were overwhelmingly on the side of the airline.

BPSCG

25th January 2007, 06:34 AM

Saw the parents on CNN this morning. Seeming very reasonable...our daughter was an angel...if only they'd given us a little more time. Yes, hundreds of passengers have to be inconvenienced, have to arrive late, have to miss their connecting flights, the airline has to juggle its flight schedule, the arrival airport has to rearrange the arrival gates, all because the bad old AirTran people wouldn't give them a little more time. Because, after all, the sun shines out of Our Little Angel's ass.

Passengers can be entitled to compensation if a flight is late, unless the delay is caused by circumstances out of the airline's control (weather, airport closed, etc.). Is AirTran supposed to set themselves up to have to give free flights to dozens of people because Our Little Angel is freaking out?

Nobody exists but us and Our Little Angel, and there are no problems anywhere in the world except for ours and those of Our Little Angel. We are self-centered bastards.

headscratcher4

25th January 2007, 06:53 AM

You know, according to the parents, she likes to fly and they've never had this problem before.

I suppose that is possible...but even so, you still have to wonder why 100+ other people should have to put up with it even if it is a one time/first time thing.

I hope that other airlines see what Air Tran has done...and get a little more serious about it. Airplane travel is increasingly horrible as it is, having to deal with uncontrolled/able kids is like taking another 5 inches away from knee space.

bigred

25th January 2007, 11:18 AM

Yes, hundreds of passengers have to be inconvenienced, have to arrive late, have to miss their connecting flights, the airline has to juggle its flight schedule, the arrival airport has to rearrange the arrival gates, all because the bad old AirTran people wouldn't give them a little more time. Because, after all, the sun shines out of Our Little Angel's ass.

Passengers can be entitled to compensation if a flight is late, unless the delay is caused by circumstances out of the airline's control (weather, airport closed, etc.). Is AirTran supposed to set themselves up to have to give free flights to dozens of people because Our Little Angel is freaking out?

Nobody exists but us and Our Little Angel, and there are no problems anywhere in the world except for ours and those of Our Little Angel. We are self-centered bastards.
Finally, somebody gets it!

Saw the parents on CNN this morning. Seeming very reasonable...our daughter was an angel...if only they'd given us a little more time. Indignation flowing all over the place. Very pro them piece. However, at the end the anchor said they had contacted AirTran and that the thousands of people contacting the airline were overwhelmingly on the side of the airline.
CNN takes the moronic bleeding-heart touchy feely side, what a shocker :rolleyes:

My hatred for the media knows no bounds (from either biased extreme)

bigred

25th January 2007, 11:21 AM

Not the same thing. At the concert, I asked (all right, told) the kid to quiet down. I rarely eat out and it's been years since I've been to a concert (ie sit-down, not a rowdy rock type concert)....or even a movie theater. Little monsters and their obnoxious mindless parents are why.

Can we capture them and tar n feather them? Can we please? Can we? huh?

Forty-Two

25th January 2007, 11:57 AM

Embarrassing Mom In Public was pretty much the worst possible crime. (Except when it was really funny, like when I was a toddler and I ran down the aisle in church and confronted the priest. He stopped dead, mid-rite, and my mom was so embarrassed she sent my sister to go get me and bring me back. All I did was stand there and stare at him, but he apparently found it unnerving. I like to think he realized at that moment that his god wasn't powerful enough to protect him from such awful visitations of Monkey.)
That reminds me of a story my parents told me from a time when I was too young to remember what happened. Apparently, one time when I was about two years old, I was getting fussy in the middle of a church service. I was starting to get loud, so my dad picked me up and carried me out of the sanctuary.

Right when we got to the exit, I squirmed around, waved over my dad's shoulder, and shouted, "BYE-BYE!" to the entire congregation. They laugh at the story now, but knowing my parents, they probably turned bright pink with embarrassment at the time.

Oh, and to stay on-topic: Yes, the airline did the right thing. Absolutely.

bluess

25th January 2007, 12:41 PM

That reminds me of a story my parents told me from a time when I was too young to remember what happened. Apparently, one time when I was about two years old, I was getting fussy in the middle of a church service. I was starting to get loud, so my dad picked me up and carried me out of the sanctuary.

Right when we got to the exit, I squirmed around, waved over my dad's shoulder, and shouted, "BYE-BYE!" to the entire congregation. They laugh at the story now, but knowing my parents, they probably turned bright pink with embarrassment at the time.

Oh, and to stay on-topic: Yes, the airline did the right thing. Absolutely.
I wonder if the pastor announced that Elvis had left the building?

That's a great story.

Katana

25th January 2007, 01:36 PM

{snip}

This kind of parenting is a lot harder work and requires more sacrifice than indulging your children and turning them into self-centered monsters, but it is worth the effort. The general public should not be expected to put up with being deafened, run down, splashed with food and drink, and deprived of the movie, concert, dinner, or whatever that they have paid to see because you can't be bothered to raise your children properly.

</rant>

I wonder if it is so much more difficult than the alternative.

I have no doubt that it feels harder at the time that you're disciplining the children and every time that you would rather just let something go, but it seems like you might get far more back in the end. Perhaps your relationship with the children was a lot closer than it otherwise would have been, especially given their backgrounds. One would think that many of them would welcome some order and discipline in their lives (although I doubt that they would agree 100% of the time ;)). You cared enough about them to take interest in their behavior, and you consistently followed through on consequences for bad behavior, thereby, gaining their trust and respect.

Wonderful job, by the way. I commend your willingness to be foster parents and your ability to do it so well. That is an incredible gift.

NobbyNobbs

25th January 2007, 01:49 PM

I disagree with your friend too. Whenever our kid spent time at someone else's home, we let them know that whatever discipline they did with their kids was okay for ours too. So far its been 15 years and the issue has never come up.

It was actually occuring at a place that didn't belong to any of us. It was a third-party sort of place. But I know what you mean.

Something just occured to me. At some point, the airline said, "Get out", and the parents grabbed their kid and left the plane. So if they were able to grab their kid to get off the plane, why couldn't they grab their kid to put a seatbelt on her?

Patsy

25th January 2007, 02:24 PM

I wonder if it is so much more difficult than the alternative.

I have no doubt that it feels harder at the time that you're disciplining the children and every time that you would rather just let something go, but it seems like you might get far more back in the end.

You are probably quite right. It just appears to me to be the lazy way out, not taking the bother to discipline the kiddies at the moment. There also seems to be a selfishness factor of not wanting to interrupt what you are doing, instead of letting your children bother everyone else.

Perhaps your relationship with the children was a lot closer than it otherwise would have been, especially given their backgrounds. One would think that many of them would welcome some order and discipline in their lives (although I doubt that they would agree 100% of the time ;)). You cared enough about them to take interest in their behavior, and you consistently followed through on consequences for bad behavior, thereby, gaining their trust and respect.

Most of them did seem to thrive on finally having a structured environment and loving discipline. Proper caring discipline does let children know they matter, and that you care what happens to them and how they turn out.

Wonderful job, by the way. I commend your willingness to be foster parents and your ability to do it so well. That is an incredible gift.

My husband and I no longer foster. There is a definite burn out factor, not so much with the kids, but more with a court system that allows the most heinous of offenders too many "do overs" and a child welfare system that has over-focused on reuniting families (not that reuniting families is always bad, mind you) and not enough on protecting the little victims.

Case in point, we had a little boy, born to a mentally retarded woman, fathered by her brother, who was the fourth child that had been removed. Two more children were born and had to be removed after him. He had been in and out the foster system for four years (he was five) and had not had his parental rights terminated so he could be placed in a permanent adoptive family. He had been, during the various periods he had been returned to his mother, duct taped to a chair, beaten to the point of being hospitalized, molested, raped by an uncle, locked out of his house while mommies boyfriends were visiting and handed over to police by the neighbors, and dog only knows what else that we didn't even know about. Not suprisingly, he had many severe issues, including retardation and reactive attachment disorder, and had to be institutionalized in the end.

Funding is a terrible issue, with services so poorly provided that your child's case worker may be handing 150 families or more, and their guardian ad litem may never have seen them. It is frelling heartbreaking after a while.

Katana

25th January 2007, 02:32 PM

You are probably quite right. It just appears to me to be the lazy way out, not taking the bother to discipline the kiddies at the moment. There also seems to be a selfishness factor of not wanting to interrupt what you are doing, instead of letting your children bother everyone else.

Most of them did seem to thrive on finally having a structured environment and loving discipline. Proper caring discipline does let children know they matter, and that you care what happens to them and how they turn out.

My husband and I no longer foster. There is a definite burn out factor, not so much with the kids, but more with a court system that allows the most heinous of offenders too many "do overs" and a child welfare system that has over-focused on reuniting families (not that reuniting families is always bad, mind you) and not enough on protecting the little victims.

Case in point, we had a little boy, born to a mentally retarded woman, fathered by her brother, who was the fourth child that had been removed. Two more children were born and had to be removed after him. He had been in and out the foster system for four years (he was five) and had not had his parental rights terminated so he could be placed in a permanent adoptive family. He had been, during the various periods he had been returned to his mother, duct taped to a chair, beaten to the point of being hospitalized, molested, raped by an uncle, locked out of his house while mommies boyfriends were visiting and handed over to police by the neighbors, and dog only knows what else that we didn't even know about. Not suprisingly, he had many severe issues, including retardation and reactive attachment disorder, and had to be institutionalized in the end.

Funding is a terrible issue, with services so poorly provided that your child's case worker may be handing 150 families or more, and their guardian ad litem may never have seen them. It is frelling heartbreaking after a while.

:mad:

That's so sad. :(

Polaris

25th January 2007, 04:17 PM

If you really want it to stop, you have to make sure that they understand that they will suffer economically from it. Remember: when you're in a restuarant, you're not buying food, you're buying a good time.

I have done that one time, when a couple of scumbag white trash parents let their 3 year old clomp around the restaurant, run up to other patrons' tables and babble on at them, and didn't bother to restrain her until her diaper needed to be changed - at which point they lifted her up and changed the dirty diaper on a table in the literal middle of the place. I let the manager know very clearly that if they were going to let one patron interfere with the others' meals and allow them to expose us all to their child's feces, they would lose my business. I never went back.

luchog

25th January 2007, 04:59 PM

Funding is a terrible issue, with services so poorly provided that your child's case worker may be handing 150 families or more, and their guardian ad litem may never have seen them. It is frelling heartbreaking after a while.
Around here, the lack of funding has also resulted in a woeful lack of oversight and caregiver screening as well. There have been some notable cases of serious neglect and abuse of children by foster parents. At it's worst (some years back, I don't recall the exact period) it was estimated that up to one third of all the children in the foster care system in this state had been abused in their foster homes. Had a friend who was bounced around several foster homes about that time. No serious abuse, but a lot of neglect before she found a decent family. There was one notable case that got quite a bit of local notoriety, but i can't find the info on it no.

OTOH, we also have one of the best private foster care organizations in the nation.

Patsy

25th January 2007, 05:21 PM

Around here, the lack of funding has also resulted in a woeful lack of oversight and caregiver screening as well. There have been some notable cases of serious neglect and abuse of children by foster parents. At it's worst (some years back, I don't recall the exact period) it was estimated that up to one third of all the children in the foster care system in this state had been abused in their foster homes. Had a friend who was bounced around several foster homes about that time. No serious abuse, but a lot of neglect before she found a decent family. There was one notable case that got quite a bit of local notoriety, but i can't find the info on it no.

OTOH, we also have one of the best private foster care organizations in the nation.

When I was licensed for foster care (in Ohio) it was quite a process in the county I lived in. By the time we completed all the required classes, background checks, home visits, etc., it took nearly a year to be licensed as a foster family. I understand that the requirements vary from state to state and even district by district within each state in some places. I think that perhaps having more stringent requirements in all places might help the situation somewhat.

The foster families in my county were awesome, a great network of support for each other, and really dedicated people. I think the mere fact that there were a not inconsiderable amount of required courses you had to go to and additional training required each year to remain licensed in our county helped weed out the knuckleheads that think fostering is easy money.

Putting our money where our mouth is when it comes to the importance of children would help too. No doubt in my mind that hiring enough social workers to allow for better oversight would make the system much safer for the children caught up in it. We had to cajole, beg, stomp and threaten when we or our children needed support from their social workers. I'm not at all sure they ever would have checked on the children and their progress if we hadn't been such squeaky wheels.

One of my girls was scheduled to go back to her mother, and her social worker was so unaware of what was actually going on in that family that he did not know that the mother had become homeless since her daughter had been taken away.

Oxymoron

26th January 2007, 07:36 AM

I have a Goddaughter,( yes I know, but it's a family tradition) anyway, she will be 5 years old in March. She probably has frequent flyer miles already, and in saying that, the times I have flown with her, I have never seen her behave badly on an airplane. Nor have I seen her "act out" in a resturaunt or in a store or any other public place for that matter.

No I don't have children, but I was one, and I remember being threatened within an inch of my life if I behaved badly in public. :covereyes

I lean towards believing that the childs behavior is a direct representation of the parenting skills or a mimicking of the parents behavior. I could be wrong, but if you see a child mis-behaving, take a look at how the parent behaves and I'll bet you'll see some similarities. Of course there are children with behavior disorders; however that doesn't jive with the news report I saw. No disorders known for this child. So, really no excuse.

:yikes: It's just like teaching your child not to chew with their mouth open, or elbows on the table, or teaching them to say excuse me, please, and thank you.

I think the airline was correct in the action taken, and it should be a wake up call for society.
(And yes, my grandmother does agree, kids just don't have manners these days. LOL.)

It's just my opinion. :D

bigred

26th January 2007, 07:38 AM

You are probably quite right. It just appears to me to be the lazy way out, not taking the bother to discipline the kiddies at the moment. There also seems to be a selfishness factor of not wanting to interrupt what you are doing, instead of letting your children bother everyone else.

Most of them did seem to thrive on finally having a structured environment and loving discipline. Proper caring discipline does let children know they matter, and that you care what happens to them and how they turn out.
Wow. Another one that gets it. Thx folks, sometimes I feel like none of us are left. Pls......reproduce more. Teach classes. Make flyers. etc etc. We are in more than desperate need. The tidal wave of morons must be stemmed (better yet, snipped). Seriously.

Case in point, we had a little boy, born to a mentally retarded woman, fathered by her brother, who was the fourth child that had been removed. Two more children were born and had to be removed after him. He had been in and out the foster system for four years (he was five) and had not had his parental rights terminated so he could be placed in a permanent adoptive family. He had been, during the various periods he had been returned to his mother, duct taped to a chair, beaten to the point of being hospitalized, molested, raped by an uncle, locked out of his house while mommies boyfriends were visiting and handed over to police by the neighbors, and dog only knows what else that we didn't even know about. Not suprisingly, he had many severe issues, including retardation and reactive attachment disorder, and had to be institutionalized in the end.I think I'm going to be ill. The fact that this guy wasn't sterilized (or even apparently jailed and the key thrown away) is itself a crime. Such "judges" should be pushed off a cliff. And I'm not sure that's even an exaggeration.

Funding is a terrible issue, with services so poorly provided that your child's case worker may be handing 150 families or more, and their guardian ad litem may never have seen them. It is frelling heartbreaking after a while.
If I could only be king for a day.....you'd see greatly increased funding (and perhaps just as importantly, attention) given to this. Not just because of the terrible crimes and victims themselves (as if that's not enough) but (perhaps as a "selling point" to help justify more funding) because of the great cost - in more ways than one - to our society as well.

Bull13

26th January 2007, 06:41 PM

Does Airtran fly to Montana by any chance. Need to visit my grandsons and new granddaughter in April. No-neither will be allowed on the plane lol

Polaris

26th January 2007, 07:04 PM

Clearly, I'm not defending the parents in the AirTran situation. That child was not handicapped or disabled and had already held up the plane long enough. But I think it arrogant and self-absorbed to expect never to see a rowdy child in places were families are expected and encouraged to go.

I don't think anybody's expecting that - it's the people who take their kids to places you wouldn't expect people to go, and let them run wild like it was McDonald's or Chucky Cheese: places like Broadway or R-rated movies or fancy restaurants and then getting sometimes physically confrontational if you dare say anything to them about their little brat's behavior.

The tidal wave of morons must be stemmed (better yet, snipped). Seriously.

We could start by crop-dusting the stands at NASCAR events with sterilization agent. Maybe use the same stuff in the air ducts at mega-churches too.

If you atheists will excuse the expression: God bless those people. And that is a good point to bring up, ie there are at least a few quality parents still out there who "get it" and I wish they'd get a lot of "recognition" too.

In fact, that reminds me of the last time I went to a circus with some friends and (as seems to almost always be the case in public events I go to) a very young kid ends up sitting next to me. Now at a circus I don't expect a kid to be perfectly quiet, but I predicted major screaming and general obnxious brattiness while the parents sat there clueless or thought it was "cute."

Nope. Barely a peep out of the kid the whole time. I was so appreciative I walked up to the wife as they got up to leave and expressed both my appreciation at teaching their kid to behave and even (only half-jokingly) suggested they teach parenting classes. Shoulda seen how they beamed.

At a Chinese buffet tonight I couldn't help but think of this story while I was sitting across from a single mother with two well-behaved children, and a large family the next table over which had two kids (about 5-7 or so) who were running around shrieking between the tables. The bit....mother of the little angels repeatedly threatened them with spankings that never came.

I gave the woman with the well-behaved kids some similar praise as you did. I liked the results, and I'll do it more often when the occasion comes up.

Art Vandelay

26th January 2007, 11:31 PM

No, what he means is that there isn't anyone available and qualified, unlike the parents.So these are the only two people in the entire world who can handle autistic children.

You're saying that the fact that you can't abide hearing a child in a place where children are expected and encouraged to be found, that parents of children with severe problems should be locked in their homes. No supermarkets, no fast food restaruants. Just for your peace of mind.Gee, thanks for telling me what I think.
:rolleyes:

Got arrested when he somehow boasted about it, believing it was covered by prescription,Do you mean "statute of limitations"?

marksman

27th January 2007, 01:25 PM

So these are the only two people in the entire world who can handle autistic children.
That they can afford and who is in their vicinity for the necessary trip to the supermarket or Christmas shopping? Yes.

I already stated that they do save their money for a qualified babysitter to watch their child once every other month or so so they can go out to an adult dinner. That money wouldn't come close to getting a qualified full-time babysitter to watch their child so they could go shopping for food and clothing.

But I suppose it's more important that you have a peaceful lunch at McDonald's or Chuck E. Cheese, then ever have to be in the vicinity of a severely autistic child. Poor you.

Gee, thanks for telling me what I think.
:rolleyes:
I might not be able to read you mind, but it's painfully obvious you lack empathy for the parents of severely disabled children.

Bruce

28th January 2007, 07:01 AM

My 3 yr old is the poster child for perfect etiquette most of the time, but when she's tired or in a situation that is uncomfortable for her, she's the poster child for tantrum-throwing brats. This could easily have been my family. The only difference is that after 15 minutes, I would have voluntarily taken my family off the plan. I would never have flown AirTran again either, not out of indignancy, but out of embarrassment. :(

Art Vandelay

28th January 2007, 11:39 AM

That they can afford and who is in their vicinity for the necessary trip to the supermarket or Christmas shopping? Yes.So I say that the real issue is that there is no one that they are willing to pay for, and you disagree, and give me the runaround, and then eventually admit that the issue is that they're not willing to pay that much.

But I suppose it's more important that you have a peaceful lunch at McDonald's or Chuck E. Cheese, then ever have to be in the vicinity of a severely autistic child. Poor you.And where have I said that?

I might not be able to read you mind, but it's painfully obvious you lack empathy for the parents of severely disabled children.It obvious that you are putting words in people's mouths.

luchog

28th January 2007, 03:38 PM

When I was licensed for foster care (in Ohio) it was quite a process in the county I lived in. By the time we completed all the required classes, background checks, home visits, etc., it took nearly a year to be licensed as a foster family. I understand that the requirements vary from state to state and even district by district within each state in some places. I think that perhaps having more stringent requirements in all places might help the situation somewhat.
The requirements have tended to vary rather a bit over the last few decades; and even at their most stringent aren't often enforced as strictly as they should be, due to a lack of funding and a dearth of available foster families. The system is overloaded and underfunded, and a lot of problems have occurred on both sides. Add to that some serious problems with the CPS department, and it's periodic domination by seriously woo-woo social engineer types.

Social and family programs in this state are seriously messed up; and the people that staff those programs are often some of the most insensitive, chip-on-the-shoulder burnout petty fascist bureaucrats you will ever have the misfortune to meet. They do have some good people, but not many, and they have a tendency to get brought down by the system if they stay in it too long.

One of my girls was scheduled to go back to her mother, and her social worker was so unaware of what was actually going on in that family that he did not know that the mother had become homeless since her daughter had been taken away.
From my reading, one of the biggest problems with the local foster care system is that it's flooded with kids who are in the system solely because of poverty, because their parents are poor and unable to provide for them adequately, rather than because of abuse/neglect. The local CPS is seriously messed up. I've seen them completely ignore kids who were obviously abused and neglected (quite badly), while harassing good parents of "special-needs" kids.

My partner had her autistic son removed by CPS and placed in an institution because she refused to let his social worker stick in in a completely woo (and rather expensive and not covered by her insurance) program that claimed to be able to cure his autism by tapping on his head.

marksman

29th January 2007, 06:01 AM

So I say that the real issue is that there is no one that they are willing to pay for, and you disagree, and give me the runaround, and then eventually admit that the issue is that they're not willing to pay that much.
It's not a matter of being unwilling, but being unable. They don't have the money.

In the same vein, I am not unwilling to pay $5,000,000 for a house in the Hamptons. I am unable to pay that because I don't have the money. Nor could I get a house in the Hamptons for less than that.

My friends are more than willing to hire a qualified babysitter to watch their child when they have to go shopping for necessities. They cannot afford it.

The most they can afford is a qualified babysitter once a month for one evening. By necessity, she must bring her child out of the house ocassionally, where, due to her child's medical condition, she will engage in behavior that might annoy some people. What would you have her do?

Do you not understand the difference between "unable" and "unwilling"?

Flo

29th January 2007, 06:09 AM

Do you mean "statute of limitations"?

Yes. Thanks.

bigred

29th January 2007, 07:39 AM

At a Chinese buffet tonight I couldn't help but think of this story while I was sitting across from a single mother with two well-behaved children, and a large family the next table over which had two kids (about 5-7 or so) who were running around shrieking between the tables. The bit....mother of the little angels repeatedly threatened them with spankings that never came.

I gave the woman with the well-behaved kids some similar praise as you did. I liked the results, and I'll do it more often when the occasion comes up.
Bravo! Maybe if more people did this - ie publicly expressed appreciation or similar praise to parents of well-behaved kids - the morons with the brats might take notice and start to wonder why nobody ever says something like that to them. :cool:

bigred

29th January 2007, 07:47 AM

My friends are more than willing to hire a qualified babysitter to watch their child when they have to go shopping for necessities. They cannot afford it.

The most they can afford is a qualified babysitter once a month for one evening. By necessity, she must bring her child out of the house ocassionally, where, due to her child's medical condition, she will engage in behavior that might annoy some people. What would you have her do?

Coming in on the middle of this, but....

How about having one parent watch the kid at home while the other does the shopping?

Also what about a relative or trusted friend watch her for a short while?

Don't know the specifics here and I'm speaking generally now, but it drives me nuts when people say stuff like "we brought our little baby with us to the movie because we couldn't find/afford a babysitter!!"

Well then STAY THE (rule 8) HOME!!!

Meadmaker

29th January 2007, 09:30 AM

In fairness to the parents....oh wait. There is no need to be fair to the parents. If I read the story correctly they got the cost of their flight refunded, plus a flight the next day, plus three free plane tickets. Did I miss something? And they're mad?

In honest fairness, I will say that now that I have raised a child for eight years, I'm much more forgiving of annoying kids than I used to be. I understand that there is no magic button to press, whether its frowning, spanking, threatening, yelling, bribing or whatever else, that will stop a kid every time from crying/acting out/making noise, etc. Kids are kids and they do things, and there's no switch (no pun intended) that will make them stop every time.

On the other hand, I am, if anything, much less tolerant of parents who don't make the effort. I've been in the place where my kid is the difficult child, and I'm trying to do something, anything, to not be the embarrasment in the place. I've pulled out my hair (figuratively) trying to make a bad situation ok, and I have missed dinners and movies and weddings because I removed the kid when it was obvious that this was not going to work out and my kid would annoy everyone. It's usually pretty quick, too. I also know my own kid, and wouldn't take him anywhere that I don't think he could handle, and I always make sure there's a rapid exit available if it turns out I'm wrong. I understand that sometimes you can't get the kid to shut up, but I expect parents to try, and if it fails, I expect them to be the ones that suffer. Not me.

In this particular instant, what really amazes me is that the issue involved was that the kid wouldn't wear a seat belt. The way I see it, there isn't a three year old in the world that I can't get into a seat belt. I might still get thrown off the plane because he wouldn't shut up, but three year olds are small and weak. I can get him in the seat belt, and at the end, he will at least understand that the seat belt is not optional.

thaiboxerken

29th January 2007, 09:36 AM

While there might be no magic button, there is duct tape.

Katana

29th January 2007, 09:42 AM

While there might be no magic button, there is duct tape.

There's also Children's Benadryl.

BPSCG

29th January 2007, 09:47 AM

In honest fairness, I will say that now that I have raised a child for eight years, I'm much more forgiving of annoying kids than I used to be. One thing I do forgive is an infant or toddler crying on a plane, particularly on takeoff or final descent. They're feeling the cabin air pressure mounting in their ears and don't know how to relieve it, and since they're getting increasingly uncomfortable, all they can do is cry. Happens all the time.

But they always settle down after a few minutes.

But a three-year old who won't get into her seat? Sorry, mom and dad, there are occasions where you have to use force. Doesn't mean you have to smack the kid (though my mom was fond of the warning, "Stop crying or I'll give you something to cry about..."), but a three-year-old throwing a tantrum is impervious to reason, and has to be taught that a tantrum isn't going to work.

BTW, is there a YouTube of the interview with the parents? My blood hasn't boiled in several days and I'm feeling the need for a dose of Righteous Indignation.

headscratcher4

29th January 2007, 09:56 AM

BTW, is there a YouTube of the interview with the parents? My blood hasn't boiled in several days and I'm feeling the need for a dose of Righteous Indignation.

Is it the one from CNN? I noted there wasn't any interviews with passengers...maybe they should have asked a passenger worried about making a connection if he/she'd give up their place in the taxi line so that the parents could get their darling angel under control?

I am with you 100%.

And, as you noted, there is a difference between a child not in control because they are uncomfortable and /or in pain and one out of control because the parents haven't the tools or ability to get the child in control. WOuld they let her roam around in a moving car? Would they not make her sit in her car seat because she was screaming? At least in that situation, they wouldn't necessarilly inconvienence people who will never see their little angel again....

Patsy

29th January 2007, 10:17 AM

One thing I do forgive is an infant or toddler crying on a plane, particularly on takeoff or final descent. They're feeling the cabin air pressure mounting in their ears and don't know how to relieve it, and since they're getting increasingly uncomfortable, all they can do is cry. Happens all the time.

For infants and children over 1 year old you can purchase Earplanes earplugs that regulate the pressure in their ears. They do work wonderfully to keep the little ones from having ear pain.

thaiboxerken

29th January 2007, 10:21 AM

Maybe this is the difference between European and Asian cultures. and Japan I saw a mother can correct it on how to discipline her child on a train and the mother took the advice and apologized and said she would do better. that would not happen in western cultures, the mother would get upset, angry , and tell the guy to bind his own business.

BPSCG

29th January 2007, 10:23 AM

For infants and children over 1 year old you can purchase Earplanes earplugs that regulate the pressure in their ears. They do work wonderfully to keep the little ones from having ear pain.You're right; I've used them, and they work as advertised.

Now all you gotta do is persuade the toddler not to ynak them out of his ears... :D

Patsy

29th January 2007, 10:39 AM

Now all you gotta do is persuade the toddler not to ynak them out of his ears... :D

You are on your own there ;) .

marksman

29th January 2007, 11:17 AM

How about having one parent watch the kid at home while the other does the shopping?
They do that when they can, but they have to earn a lot of money to pay the medical bills necessary for their child. So often that's not possible.

Also what about a relative or trusted friend watch her for a short while?
They don't have friends specially trained to take care of a severely autistic child.

Don't know the specifics her...
Clearly. I'm not talking about a kid who is hypoeractive. I'm talking about a kid who needs constant specialized supervision. Training that these parents have and I and their other friends simply don't.

As I wrote, but since you decided to opine on the matter without reading the thread you didn't know, they don't take the kids to the movies or to the theater. They take them to the supermarket and to fast-food joints. But apparently, even that isn't good enough. To not inconvenience anybody who can't handle seeing a disabled child, they should never leave their home. Ever. Got it. I'll let 'em know.

Well then STAY THE (rule 8) HOME!!!
Compassion noted.

bigred

29th January 2007, 12:05 PM

In fairness to the parents....oh wait. There is no need to be fair to the parents. If I read the story correctly they got the cost of their flight refunded, plus a flight the next day, plus three free plane tickets. Did I miss something? And they're mad?

In honest fairness, I will say that now that I have raised a child for eight years, I'm much more forgiving of annoying kids than I used to be. I understand that there is no magic button to press, whether its frowning, spanking, threatening, yelling, bribing or whatever else, that will stop a kid every time from crying/acting out/making noise, etc. Kids are kids and they do things, and there's no switch (no pun intended) that will make them stop every time.

On the other hand, I am, if anything, much less tolerant of parents who don't make the effort. I've been in the place where my kid is the difficult child, and I'm trying to do something, anything, to not be the embarrasment in the place. I've pulled out my hair (figuratively) trying to make a bad situation ok, and I have missed dinners and movies and weddings because I removed the kid when it was obvious that this was not going to work out and my kid would annoy everyone. It's usually pretty quick, too. I also know my own kid, and wouldn't take him anywhere that I don't think he could handle, and I always make sure there's a rapid exit available if it turns out I'm wrong. I understand that sometimes you can't get the kid to shut up, but I expect parents to try, and if it fails, I expect them to be the ones that suffer. Not me.This post was so spot on and a thing of beauty I dang near cried. :cool: Why is it I always end up living near/dining near (ad nauseum) people like the ones on this plane instead of ones like you??

In this particular instant, what really amazes me is that the issue involved was that the kid wouldn't wear a seat belt. The way I see it, there isn't a three year old in the world that I can't get into a seat belt. I might still get thrown off the plane because he wouldn't shut up, but three year olds are small and weak. I can get him in the seat belt, and at the end, he will at least understand that the seat belt is not optional.You mean you would GRAB the bra...errr kid and FORCE it into the seat?? GASP child abuse!!

bigred

29th January 2007, 12:06 PM

While there might be no magic button, there is duct tape.

There's also Children's Benadryl.

And the pearls of wisdom just keep on comin. You just can't buy info like this.

bigred

29th January 2007, 12:07 PM

One thing I do forgive is an infant or toddler crying on a plane, particularly on takeoff or final descent. They're feeling the cabin air pressure mounting in their ears and don't know how to relieve it, and since they're getting increasingly uncomfortable, all they can do is cry. Happens all the time.This is true.

But they always settle down after a few minutes. This is not.

Katana

29th January 2007, 12:08 PM

And the pearls of wisdom just keep on comin. You just can't buy info like this.

I was actually being serious.

BPSCG

29th January 2007, 12:13 PM

But they always settle down after a few minutes.

This is not.For me it is. You know, you are allowed to bring a sock and a roll of duct tape onto a plane.

Shuts the li'l darlins' up right quick, it does. If the parents complain, you just ask them, "You want some of this too?" Helps if you look a little wild-eyed and wave your arms around.

bigred

29th January 2007, 12:15 PM

They do that when they can, but they have to earn a lot of money to pay the medical bills necessary for their child. So often that's not possible.Fair enough.

They don't have friends specially trained to take care of a severely autistic child.Or family? OK, just a thought.

As I wrote, but since you decided to opine on the matter without reading the thread you didn't know, they don't take the kids to the movies or to the theater. They take them to the supermarket and to fast-food joints. But apparently, even that isn't good enough. To not inconvenience anybody who can't handle seeing a disabled child, they should never leave their home. Ever. Got it. I'll let 'em know.Yeah that's what I said. :rolleyes: Spare me your pretentious self-righteous BS and get someone to explain the phrase "I'm speaking generally now" to you.

Compassion noted.Lack of reading comprehension noted.

bigred

29th January 2007, 12:17 PM

I was actually being serious.
So am I. (OK maybe the duct tape is a little extreme.......)

NobbyNobbs

29th January 2007, 12:21 PM

Garrette

29th January 2007, 12:27 PM

As far as infants and toddlers go, if the mother is breast feeding, a glass of wine (for the mom!) an hour or so before feeding the child will settle the child nicely.

(Of course, now we'll hear from the righteous anti-breastfeeders.)I'm all for breastfeeding, even on planes if needed, but I would question prescribing alcohol for the child through the mother.

thaiboxerken

29th January 2007, 01:22 PM

I was actually being serious.

So was I. Why would duct tape be considered extreme? Should it be considered abuse?

Katana

29th January 2007, 01:24 PM

So was I.

:D

I stand corrected then.

marksman

29th January 2007, 01:45 PM

Or family? OK, just a thought.
If you met their family, you wouldn't want them watching non-disabled children! (Seriously, their parents couldn't handle this.)
get someone to explain the phrase "I'm speaking generally now" to you.
I apologize. I read your post quickly and missed that part.

bigred

29th January 2007, 03:48 PM

If you met their family, you wouldn't want them watching non-disabled children! (Seriously, their parents couldn't handle this.)

I apologize. I read your post quickly and missed that part.
Yeah I was hoping tha in a state of strong opinion/emotion you missed something and went off half-cocked. Personally I have NEVER done that.

:whistling

Meadmaker

29th January 2007, 04:09 PM

This post was so spot on and a thing of beauty I dang near cried. :cool: Why is it I always end up living near/dining near (ad nauseum) people like the ones on this plane instead of ones like you??
Because sometimes my wife is with me.:duck:

Seriously, that can be a factor. I've seen an awful lot of "bad parenting" where one parent is trying to be good, and the other parent won't allow it.

The other thing I have learned, and which has given me some sympathy when I see "bad parents", is that it really is difficult to be a good parent 100% of the time. Sometimes, when the phone is ringing and your spouse is complaining and there's three kids and you are preoccupied by the problem at work and....Maybe you just don't have the energy to catch the kid before he goes running away from the table. I still expect you to try, but I'm a lot more sympathetic if I see an exasperated parent being a little slow to get up.

You mean you would GRAB the bra...errr kid and FORCE it into the seat?? GASP child abuse!!

Yeah. It baffles me that adults haven't figured that one out in some cases. I can understand the parents who decide against spanking or corporal punishment. My own kid has very, very, rarely been on the receiving end of it. I'm not a big fan of it. However, for the life of me I can't understand the parents who sit and try to negotiate with a child of three years of age about whether or not the kid wants to go into a car, or a seat, or whatever. Reasoning with a three year old won't work, and it isn't necessary. They are small and weak, and can be made to do your will, even if they don't want to.

bigred

29th January 2007, 04:19 PM

Seriously, that can be a factor. I've seen an awful lot of "bad parenting" where one parent is trying to be good, and the other parent won't allow it.The pits. Every couple about to get married (esp younger ones and esp those doing it for 1st time) should have to take some kind of class where one of the first things they pound into your head is to make sure you both have similar ideas about parenting, including discipline. I've had friends (couples) where this became a BIG issue. Course this is different than a couple who consciously decide to do a "good cop/bad cop" thing, but that can be a tricky road to go down too, at least nowdays.

The other thing I have learned, and which has given me some sympathy when I see "bad parents", is that it really is difficult to be a good parent 100% of the time. Sometimes, when the phone is ringing and your spouse is complaining and there's three kids and you are preoccupied by the problem at work and....Maybe you just don't have the energy to catch the kid before he goes running away from the table. I still expect you to try, but I'm a lot more sympathetic if I see an exasperated parent being a little slow to get up.I hear you. Well kinda. If in public, there should be at least some effort made. Again....if they're that wiped out, don't go out.

I can understand the parents who decide against spanking or corporal punishment.Depends on the kid. If the kid is a brat and nothing else is working, I am utterly baffled/disgusted by people who think a disciplinary spank - properly applied mind you - is abusive. Worse still, they think excessive coddling of a child (esp when it's misbehaving) ISN'T abusive. These are the ones who need to be neutered.

My own kid has very, very, rarely been on the receiving end of it. I'm not a big fan of it. However, for the life of me I can't understand the parents who sit and try to negotiate with a child of three years of age about whether or not the kid wants to go into a car, or a seat, or whatever. Reasoning with a three year old won't work, and it isn't necessary. They are small and weak, and can be made to do your will, even if they don't want to.Preach on :cool: Seriously - reading these posts is like listening to some really good relaxing music or something.

Please have more kids, and if you're not a teacher, become one.

Tmy

29th January 2007, 04:52 PM

You know whats funny. Everyone is expected to control their dogs 100%, but people feel its acceptable for kids to be out of control.

29th January 2007, 04:57 PM

So far, I have had very few problems dealing with my kids in public. We go to movies, restaurants, shopping, etc. The ages range from 2 to 8 at the moment, six kids total, and I never have anything but compliments from store managers, etc. about these guys - with one notable exception: my three year old peed in the Disney store once.

We haven't been back in a while... :blush:

It drives me nuts to see people with ONE kid and the kid is misbehaving; I love shaming them when my six angels sit down to dinner in public.

thaiboxerken

30th January 2007, 03:17 PM

You know whats funny. Everyone is expected to control their dogs 100%, but people feel its acceptable for kids to be out of control.

And if you don't control your dog, and it bites someone, it can be put down.

BPSCG

30th January 2007, 03:24 PM

You know whats funny. Everyone is expected to control their dogs 100%, but people feel its acceptable for kids to be out of control.Keyboard.

Monitor.

Coffee.

Mess.

:D

BPSCG

30th January 2007, 03:25 PM

And if you don't control your dog, and it bites someone, it can be put down.You mean if an unruly kid bites you, you can't...

Uh-oh...:boggled:

TobiasTheViking

30th January 2007, 04:20 PM

So I say that the real issue is that there is no one that they are willing to pay for, and you disagree, and give me the runaround, and then eventually admit that the issue is that they're not willing to pay that much.
Are you being dense on purpose? What is being said that they can't AFFORD it. Not that they are unwilling to pay for it.

And there is a *********** huge difference between a young kid with autism, and a young kid that hasn't been brought up properly. A young kid with no mental problems(like we assume the girl on the plane) can actually behave properly.

Let me repeat that since it is mildly important.
normal children have the capacity to behave properly.

Whereas the kid with autism doesn't not have the capacity, the capability pr the understanding to act properly.
This same problem causes the child to act what some people would call unruly, and prevents the teenager from down the block from being a babysitter. Because the requirements are totally different.

The kid can't be left alone at home. The price for a qualified babysitter is a LOT steeper than the teenager down the block.

So, one parent is at work, the other is taking care of the kid and needs to do some shopping.. What on earth do you suggest they do? pay 50usd(yeah, i just pulled that number out my ass, i know, just trying to prove a point, deal) an hour for a babysitter to go buy groceries for 20usd.

Or take the kid with you.

This is a *********** grocery store, not a play, not a concert, and not a fancy restaurant. Can't you tell the difference?

If this was just a normal unruly child then i might agree with you(though i doubt it since we are talking about a grocerystore, or mcd), but when the child has autism the barriers become insourmountable.

slingblade

30th January 2007, 04:47 PM

and if you're not a teacher, become one.

I thought you liked the poster? Why would you want to ruin a life by making a suggestion like that??

(not really tongue-in-cheek at all, unfortunately)

30th January 2007, 05:29 PM

My friend cannot afford a babysitter who is qualified to deal with a low-functioning autist. You can't hire the 15 year-old down the block to handle a six-year old who can climb out second-story windows shimmy down a gutter pipe and run into the street because she heard a truck go by and the sound fascinated her.

Maybe you missed the part where I mentioned the low-functioning autism. She also can't hire a babysitter everytime she needs to go to the supermarket or shopping for holiday gifts.

I'm sorry if you feel the need to have peace and quiet in McDonald's or Toys 'R Us or PathMark. As I said, she doesn't bring the child to fine dining establishments, movies or symphonies. For that, she and her husband will save up for a specialist babysitter for a once-in-a-blue moon date night.

Clearly, I'm not defending the parents in the AirTran situation. That child was not handicapped or disabled and had already held up the plane long enough. But I think it arrogant and self-absorbed to expect never to see a rowdy child in places were families are expected and encouraged to go.

Autism isn't an excuse for bad behavior either. And before you get all high-and-mighty on me, I belong to the local Autism Awareness groups, and between our own (admittedly high-functioning) autistic child, and the many other autistic children I've had the joy of interacting with, I've noticed only that lazy parents have rowdy children, period - autistic or not.

Some of the best behaved kids I know are low-functioning autistic, because even in this state, certain kinds of behavior can be encouraged or discouraged, reinforced or undermined. Good parenting still applies. With autistics, good parenting is even MORE vital - for example, knowing your child's triggers, both good and bad, and knowing how to change a bad situation fast. If an autistic kid is acting up in public, and mom isn't working hard on turning it around, mom's just plain lazy. She's also criminally negligent, IMHO, and should have the kids in question removed from her care ASAP.

Of course, I'm for licensing parents to have kids in the first place, and am of the opinion that the majority of the ills in modern society are, without a doubt, a direct result of piss-poor parenting.

I have no problem with disabilities like autism and ADHD and sensory integration. With six kids, one autistic, two ADHD, and one SI, it's my opinion that disabilites are never an excuse for inappropriate behavior. Never.

30th January 2007, 05:37 PM

Let me repeat that since it is mildly important.
normal children have the capacity to behave properly.

Whereas the kid with autism doesn't not have the capacity, the capability pr the understanding to act properly.

I disagree. The kid with autism has the capacity and capability; it just takes a LOT more work, preparation, and thought on the part of the parent. I've seen it done.

So let me rephrase what you stated above:

ALL children have the capacity to behave properly.

vIQleS

30th January 2007, 07:55 PM

I'm not a big fan of kids acting inappropriatly in public places, and I'm the first person to shush a child or tell them not to play with something they shouldn't (in a nice way of course).

Then there's the opposite end of the spectrum - parents expecting their kids to behave like adults all the time, and demanding that they just stand still and do nothing in an inherently boring situation.

A good example is waiting in line at the bank - inevitably a child will start to play with the 'velvet ropes' (or the new-fangled retractable type of queue thingy) and the parent will usually snap at the child and tell them not to touch anything.

My philosophy (when i'm responsible for any kids - very rarely) is, don't tell them off if they're not doing anything wrong - if they want to play with the napkin or unhook the ropes and figure out how they work, as long as they're not a danger or in danger, and not interfering with the rights of others - let them play... If they pick something up - remind thuem to put it back when they've finished (or 'ask the man if he minds if you playing with his name plaque...')

Teach manners - not introvertism (New word - yay...)

Meadmaker

30th January 2007, 08:45 PM

I thought you liked the poster? Why would you want to ruin a life by making a suggestion like that??

(not really tongue-in-cheek at all, unfortunately)

Not even tempted.

For one thing, it's much easier to deal with hypothetical children than real ones.

Meadmaker

30th January 2007, 09:02 PM

My philosophy (when i'm responsible for any kids - very rarely) is, don't tell them off if they're not doing anything wrong - if they want to play with the napkin or unhook the ropes and figure out how they work, as long as they're not a danger or in danger, and not interfering with the rights of others - let them play... If they pick something up - remind thuem to put it back when they've finished (or 'ask the man if he minds if you playing with his name plaque...')

Teach manners - not introvertism (New word - yay...)

I agree, to a point. The danger is that the difference between an innocent situation and a not so innocent situation might be a moment's inattention. You're in line at the bank. The kid is playing with the cord. You're watching. Now it's your turn at the counter. You step forward and greet the teller, taking your eyes off your young charge. He takes this moment to see what happens if you give a really good yank on the cord, sending it clanging to the floor. Not a huge deal. No real harm done, but don't be surprised if the rest of the patrons look down on your parenting techniques at that point.

vIQleS

30th January 2007, 10:56 PM

I agree, to a point. The danger is that the difference between an innocent situation and a not so innocent situation might be a moment's inattention. You're in line at the bank. The kid is playing with the cord. You're watching. Now it's your turn at the counter. You step forward and greet the teller, taking your eyes off your young charge. He takes this moment to see what happens if you give a really good yank on the cord, sending it clanging to the floor. Not a huge deal. No real harm done, but don't be surprised if the rest of the patrons look down on your parenting techniques at that point.

Good point. This is why i don't have kids... I just borrow other peoples and give them back at the end of the day. (not to take to the bank obviously...) I can pay attention because i don't have a chance to get sick of them :)

TobiasTheViking

30th January 2007, 11:30 PM

I disagree. The kid with autism has the capacity and capability; it just takes a LOT more work, preparation, and thought on the part of the parent. I've seen it done.
Yes, it requires a LOT more work, which means it will be slower. And until that work is done the kid doesn't have the capability yet.

Sorry if it came off as me saying "children with autism can never behave" that is not what i meant. But "SOME children with autism have yet to learn how to behave, and until they are taught they don't have the capacity nor the capability". Is that acceptable?

For one i would like to think that i can behave. :)

Sincerely
Tobias.

Garrette

31st January 2007, 05:15 AM

31st January 2007, 06:27 AM

Yes, it requires a LOT more work, which means it will be slower. And until that work is done the kid doesn't have the capability yet.

Sorry if it came off as me saying "children with autism can never behave" that is not what i meant. But "SOME children with autism have yet to learn how to behave, and until they are taught they don't have the capacity nor the capability". Is that acceptable?

For one i would like to think that i can behave. :)

Sincerely
Tobias.

Well said.

31st January 2007, 06:33 AM

I would add that even children (autistic or not) who have been raised properly and who are well-behaved children, are still children and therefore subject to lapses. The likelihood of lapses increases with the unfamiliarity and the uncomfortableness of the environment.

Children are not adults, and we do not expect perfection even from them. Condemnation of either a child or the parents based on one observation is an unwarranted jump.

But this isn't about one observation, is it? If the kid was acting up THAT badly, that they were put off the plane, that's not a momentary lapse. No lapse should last more than a few minutes, and it should be obvious that the parents are doing everything they can do to resolve the situation properly.

Unfortunately, most 'lapses' are ongoing and lengthy from what I've observed. If a child misbehaves and the parent does nothing, that's not a lapse. If a child misbehaves for more than a minute, and all the parent is doing is saying, "Please don't do this" or "Please do that", that's not a lapse.

A lapse is like when our seven-year-old suddenly talks at the top of his voice. We remind him that his voice is red, and he needs to use his green voice, and he quiets right down. A lapse is when my three year old slides out of his seat at a restaurant and starts to leave it; we remind him to sit and be still, and he climbs right back up and stays, OR tells us what he was intending, and we deal with it from there. A lapse is when the two-year-old picks a piece of food out and sets it on the table; a quiet reminder usually fixes that for the rest of the meal.

Those are lapses. The behavior we're talking about is poor parenting.

Garrette

31st January 2007, 06:49 AM

But this isn't about one observation, is it? If the kid was acting up THAT badly, that they were put off the plane, that's not a momentary lapse. No lapse should last more than a few minutes, and it should be obvious that the parents are doing everything they can do to resolve the situation properly.

Unfortunately, most 'lapses' are ongoing and lengthy from what I've observed. If a child misbehaves and the parent does nothing, that's not a lapse. If a child misbehaves for more than a minute, and all the parent is doing is saying, "Please don't do this" or "Please do that", that's not a lapse.

A lapse is like when our seven-year-old suddenly talks at the top of his voice. We remind him that his voice is red, and he needs to use his green voice, and he quiets right down. A lapse is when my three year old slides out of his seat at a restaurant and starts to leave it; we remind him to sit and be still, and he climbs right back up and stays, OR tells us what he was intending, and we deal with it from there. A lapse is when the two-year-old picks a piece of food out and sets it on the table; a quiet reminder usually fixes that for the rest of the meal.

Those are lapses. The behavior we're talking about is poor parenting.Yes, it is about one observation, and only one, even if it lasted fifteen minutes.

I insist you do not have enough information to make that judgment. Let me reiterate that I agree with the airline's decision, but without knowing the circumstances leading up to this misbehavior and more reliable information than is normally reported through the media, you do not know if this is bad parenting in general, bad parenting one time, overwhelmed parents after a day of hell compounded by an unavoidably vastly over-tired child acting in the manner that over-tired children in unfamiliar environments act, or something else.

I am impressed that you have managed to raise your children in such a manner that no one ever sees misbehavior beyond the mere beginnings of it. I submit you are a rarety and that the reason is not because everyone else in the world who falls short of such control is a bad parent.

marksman

31st January 2007, 09:19 AM

I disagree. The kid with autism has the capacity and capability; it just takes a LOT more work, preparation, and thought on the part of the parent. I've seen it done.
When my friend's child is out with her parents, she is behaved 90% of the time. But, as you must know, what sets off a severely autistic child is not what sets off a tantrum-prone todler.

The difference being that getting an autistic child behaved is not going to be helped by having an irate passerby berate the mother for being an incompetent parent... or worse, screaming at the child, which I have witness happen on more than one ocassion.

ALL children have the capacity to behave properly.
But no child is going to be 100% behaved 100% of the time, particularly a severely autistic child. My friend does an admirable job keeping her child behaved, better than 90% of the parents of non-autistic children. But that doesn't justify her being berated the other 10% of the time.

bigred

31st January 2007, 09:33 AM

I thought you liked the poster? Why would you want to ruin a life by making a suggestion like that??

(not really tongue-in-cheek at all, unfortunately)

Because teaching is in such desperate need. :( The good of the many and all that.

bigred

31st January 2007, 09:36 AM

Autism isn't an excuse for bad behavior either. And before you get all high-and-mighty on me, I belong to the local Autism Awareness groups, and between our own (admittedly high-functioning) autistic child, and the many other autistic children I've had the joy of interacting with, I've noticed only that lazy parents have rowdy children, period - autistic or not.

Some of the best behaved kids I know are low-functioning autistic, because even in this state, certain kinds of behavior can be encouraged or discouraged, reinforced or undermined. Good parenting still applies. With autistics, good parenting is even MORE vital - for example, knowing your child's triggers, both good and bad, and knowing how to change a bad situation fast. If an autistic kid is acting up in public, and mom isn't working hard on turning it around, mom's just plain lazy. She's also criminally negligent, IMHO, and should have the kids in question removed from her care ASAP.

Of course, I'm for licensing parents to have kids in the first place, and am of the opinion that the majority of the ills in modern society are, without a doubt, a direct result of piss-poor parenting.

I have no problem with disabilities like autism and ADHD and sensory integration. With six kids, one autistic, two ADHD, and one SI, it's my opinion that disabilites are never an excuse for inappropriate behavior. Never.I can't speak to the autism thing but that's an interesting point.

And that aside, this now makes 2 people I would vote for for President in one thread. wow :)

bigred

31st January 2007, 10:17 AM

I insist you do not have enough information to make that judgment. Let me reiterate that I agree with the airline's decision, but without knowing the circumstances leading up to this misbehavior and more reliable information than is normally reported through the media, you do not know if this is bad parenting in general, bad parenting one time, overwhelmed parents after a day of hell compounded by an unavoidably vastly over-tired child acting in the manner that over-tired children in unfamiliar environments act, or something else.Frankly, that is irrelevent to this specific situation. Whether they suck as parents in general (which I'd bet heavy money on) or they just sucked in this particular case, either way they more than earned getting the boot off of that plane. As for a long, hard day blah blah that's all an exceedingly weak excuse. In fact, if anything, that would likely make them MORE prone to handling the situation quickly, not less likely, ie their patience would be shot, as would their tolerance for such BS, etc etc.

I am impressed that you have managed to raise your children in such a manner that no one ever sees misbehavior beyond the mere beginnings of it. I submit you are a rarety and that the reason is not because everyone else in the world who falls short of such control is a bad parent.Well I'm glad you didn't twist his words or make black-and-white oversimplified conclusions here :rolleyes:

PS and oh btw: YES, everyone else in the world who would allow their kid to rant and rave like that IS a bad parent, at least in that case.

Garrette

31st January 2007, 10:50 AM

Frankly, that is irrelevent to this specific situation. I don't follow. The "specific situation" on which I was commenting was zaayrdragon's apparent condemnation of this couple's general parenting skills, to which I responded it is a hasty conclusion.

Whether they suck as parents in general (which I'd bet heavy money on) or they just sucked in this particular case, either way they more than earned getting the boot off of that plane.I have said in several of my posts including the one you quoted and including my first post in this thread that I agree with the airline's decision. I do not, however, agree with the blanket condemnation of this couple's parenting skills based on this incident.

As for a long, hard day blah blah that's all an exceedingly weak excuse. In fact, if anything, that would likely make them MORE prone to handling the situation quickly, not less likely, ie their patience would be shot, as would their tolerance for such BS, etc etc.Ah, yes. We know exactly how every parent would act in every situation and it is all exactly the same from parent to parent.

Well I'm glad you didn't twist his words or make black-and-white oversimplified conclusions here :rolleyes: So am I, as I loathe that practice. If I have done so here, it is unintentional and I will retract if shown. Your sarcasm hasn't demonstrated that for me, though.

PS and oh btw: YES, everyone else in the world who would allow their kid to rant and rave like that IS a bad parent, at least in that case.Then I suppose I can't count on your vote for president?

bigred

31st January 2007, 11:20 AM

I don't follow. The "specific situation" on which I was commenting was zaayrdragon's apparent condemnation of this couple's general parenting skills, to which I responded it is a hasty conclusion.OK, didn't realize he was condemning them as bad parents outright vs just in this specific situation...although IMO while it's not technically a given, it is a very safe bet.

Ah, yes. We know exactly how every parent would act in every situation and it is all exactly the same from parent to parent.Oh goody, more idiotic twisting of words. Pls get someone to explain the word "likely" to you.

So am I, as I loathe that practice. Yeah right.

Then I suppose I can't count on your vote for president?If you run against Hillary you probably can. Otherwise, don't hold your breath.

Garrette

31st January 2007, 11:40 AM

OK, didn't realize he was condemning them as bad parents outright vs just in this specific situationThat's my impression. If I am wrong, then I retract and apologize.

Oh goody, more idiotic twisting of words. Pls get someone to explain the word "likely" to you.You're right. I read it too quickly. My apologies. I revise my implied accusation that you were making a blanket statement to this: I think you are wrong about the likelihood, but even if you are not, my point that the one incident does not provide enough information to allow a conclusion about the couple's parenting skills in general.

Yeah right.Thanks for agreeing. Good to know we can get along.

If you run against Hillary you probably can. Otherwise, don't hold your breath.Time to disband my exploratory committee.

thaiboxerken

3rd February 2007, 10:04 PM

ALL children have the capacity to behave properly.

And if they don't, then they shouldn't be out in public.

3rd February 2007, 11:22 PM

And if they don't, then they shouldn't be out in public.

Or at least, under very controlled conditions.

Art Vandelay

6th February 2007, 04:44 PM

But apparently, even that isn't good enough. To not inconvenience anybody who can't handle seeing a disabled child, they should never leave their home. Ever. Got it. I'll let 'em know.Who has said that?

Are you being dense on purpose? What is being said that they can't AFFORD it. Not that they are unwilling to pay for it.What is being claimed is that they can't afford it. But what is clear is that they aren't willing. I'm not criticizing that. Just asking that they admit it.

What on earth do you suggest they do?Do you not understand the difference between pointing out that options exist, and suggesting them?

If this was just a normal unruly child then i might agree with youI agree with me regarding what?

I would add that even children (autistic or not) who have been raised properly and who are well-behaved children, are still children and therefore subject to lapses. The likelihood of lapses increases with the unfamiliarity and the uncomfortableness of the environment.
I think that "discomfort" would suffice in the place of "unconfortableness".

:)