|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Hell: Bad parenting 101 (formerly Control your spoiled brat, please!)
|
chive
Ship's nude
# 208
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Rev per Minute:
IIRC the PanAm/Lockerbie disaster was caused by luggage checked in and the passenger not boarding - so perhaps it's not quite so theatrical.
I thought it was a bomb.
--------------------
'Edward was the kind of man who thought there was no such thing as a lesbian, just a woman who hadn't done one-to-one Bible study with him.' Catherine Fox, Love to the Lost
Posts: 3542 | From: the cupboard under the stairs | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amorya
Ship's tame galoot
# 2652
|
Posted
I don't think the screaming is the main issue. The issue is the child not sitting in the seat.
From the flight attendants' point of view, here are the options:
- Ignore the brat running around the floor
- Tell the parents to control their child
- Physically restrain the child themselves
- Eject the family from the plane
1 is not an option since it's a safety risk and against the law. 2 had been tried for a considerable amount of time. 3 would result in them getting arrested for touching someone else's child. So what else could they do?
Now, the parents had these options:
- Ignore the brat running round the floor
- Talk to, reason with and coax the child into the seat
- Physically restrain the child
- Leave the plane on their own volition
1 is still illegal. 2 is a great idea, but it seems they tried that. I don't know if they tried 3, and if not they should have done. But if both methods 2 and 3 do not result in a child remaining in the seat, the only reasonable option is to leave the plane.
OK, it may mean a baggage search, but if the plane can't take off until the child is restrained anyway, it's probably the best option... who knows how long the tantrum may go on for?
I've just remembered another option... drug the child. Get some of that headache medicine that makes them drowsy. Would help with the ear problem _and_ reduce tantrum energy.
Amorya
Posts: 2383 | From: Coventry | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Melon
Ship's desserter
# 4038
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by the_raptor:
It also completely ignores the fact that there are plenty of just as good terrorist targets, that have next to no security (movie theatre's, shopping malls, the queues before the security checkpoint, etc)
Probably because they are only targets if terrorists target them, and, on the whole, they don't. When they have been targetted (as in Northern Ireland), security around those targets increases. The current batch of terrorists seem to want to blow up planes, so it makes sense to try to stop them from blowing up planes. Your complaint would make sense if there were weekly bombings in European or American cinemas. There aren't, so it doesn't.
--------------------
French Whine
Posts: 4177 | From: Cavaillon, France | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
the_raptor
Shipmate
# 10533
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Melon:
Probably because they are only targets if terrorists target them, and, on the whole, they don't. When they have been targetted (as in Northern Ireland), security around those targets increases. The current batch of terrorists seem to want to blow up planes, so it makes sense to try to stop them from blowing up planes. Your complaint would make sense if there were weekly bombings in European or American cinemas. There aren't, so it doesn't.
There aren't weekly bombings (or even foiled bomb plots) on airlines either. And it is better to prevent bombs getting on board at all, rather then worrying that the bomber is not aboard.
--------------------
Mal: look at this! Appears we got here just in the nick of time. What does that make us?
Zoe: Big damn heroes, sir!
Mal: Ain't we just?
— Firefly
Posts: 3921 | From: Australia | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
Originally posted by the Raptor:
quote:
No, it is theatre because if a bomb gets on a plane you have already lost. It isn't that hard to set up a patsy to physically get the bomb aboard (or infiltrate the cleaning staff). Worrying about people leaving bags on planes, takes brain power and eyes away from worrying whether a bomb is on aboard the plane.
No it's security because it means that a terrorist cannot board a flight and then suddenly get a phone call from his aged aunt telling him to rush home at once, conveniently leaving a suitcase full of nitroglycerine in the hold. If terrorists of the 'don't blow up your own militants' school of thought want to blow up a plane they cannot use that method of getting luggage on board.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
the_raptor
Shipmate
# 10533
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Amorya:
I've just remembered another option... drug the child. Get some of that headache medicine that makes them drowsy. Would help with the ear problem _and_ reduce tantrum energy.
And then get sued when a child has an adverse reaction. Oh and all the press about "AIRLINE DRUGS CHILDREN".
--------------------
Mal: look at this! Appears we got here just in the nick of time. What does that make us?
Zoe: Big damn heroes, sir!
Mal: Ain't we just?
— Firefly
Posts: 3921 | From: Australia | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
the_raptor
Shipmate
# 10533
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
No it's security because it means that a terrorist cannot board a flight and then suddenly get a phone call from his aged aunt telling him to rush home at once, conveniently leaving a suitcase full of nitroglycerine in the hold. If terrorists of the 'don't blow up your own militants' school of thought want to blow up a plane they cannot use that method of getting luggage on board.
If he got a bomb on-board there are half a dozen other scenarios he could pull off that don't involve killing himself.
EDIT: I am finished discussing this here, because I realise I am pissing off the purg hosts.
[ 31. January 2007, 12:07: Message edited by: the_raptor ]
--------------------
Mal: look at this! Appears we got here just in the nick of time. What does that make us?
Zoe: Big damn heroes, sir!
Mal: Ain't we just?
— Firefly
Posts: 3921 | From: Australia | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
I think the parents' fundamental mistake was failing to prepare the child for the plane trip.
If she had had severe ear pain on her last flight, it was natural for her to fear that the same thing would happen again. Her tantrum was probably brought on by this fear.
The parents should have talked to the child about her bad experience and told her they would get her some medicine to make sure it didn't happen again.
Parents need to anticipate problems and, if possible, solve them before they happen.
Moo
[ 31. January 2007, 12:08: Message edited by: Moo ]
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Melon
Ship's desserter
# 4038
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Amorya:
From the flight attendants' point of view, here are the options:
- Ignore the brat running around the floor
- Tell the parents to control their child
- Physically restrain the child themselves
- Eject the family from the plane
You missed
5: Help the parents to sort out the situation to everyone's satisfaction
which is what every cabin crew I have ever observed does. There's no evidence that this happened, let alone that it happened "for a considerable time".
My reading of the various articles is that the plane was delayed for other reasons, boarding was eventually allowed and whoever was on the other end of the cabin staff idiot's walky talky said "we can hit our slot if the cabin is locked down in 90 seconds, otherwise we'll have to wait another half an hour". At that point, the cabin crew panicked, cocked up big time, and the airline apologised for the cock-up.
--------------------
French Whine
Posts: 4177 | From: Cavaillon, France | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
Originally posted by the raptor:
quote:
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
No it's security because it means that a terrorist cannot board a flight and then suddenly get a phone call from his aged aunt telling him to rush home at once, conveniently leaving a suitcase full of nitroglycerine in the hold. If terrorists of the 'don't blow up your own militants' school of thought want to blow up a plane they cannot use that method of getting luggage on board.
If he got a bomb on-board there are half a dozen other scenarios he could pull off that don't involve killing himself.
Yes, but not that one.
quote:
EDIT: I am finished discussing this here, because I realise I am pissing off the purg hosts.*
Really? the Purgatory Hosts have mounted a hostile take-over of Hell? When did that happen?
*Translation: I'm losing the argument so I'm not going to play anymore.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Melon
Ship's desserter
# 4038
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by the_raptor:
I am finished discussing this here, because I realise I am pissing off the purg hosts.
Are the purg hosts running hell now? Is that a new security measure?
--------------------
French Whine
Posts: 4177 | From: Cavaillon, France | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erroneous Monk
Shipmate
# 10858
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Rev per Minute:
IIRC the PanAm/Lockerbie disaster was caused by luggage checked in and the passenger not boarding - so perhaps it's not quite so theatrical.
Yes. If Al Meghrahi is the bomber (and he was convicted of the crime) then it seems he checked the case on to a plane in Malta, for a flight connecting to Pan Am 103 in Frankfurt. He did not, I think, then even leave Malta.
The case was transferred from one plane to another at Frankfurt, and then remained on the plane at Heathrow. So there were three opportunities for three different teams of baggage handlers to note that one passenger had apparently not boarded the flight despite checking his luggage on board.
But tragically, no-one either noticed or thought anything of it.
--------------------
And I shot a man in Tesco, just to watch him die.
Posts: 2950 | From: I cannot tell you, for you are not a friar | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Melon
Ship's desserter
# 4038
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by The Man With No Name:
So there were three opportunities for three different teams of baggage handlers to note that one passenger had apparently not boarded the flight despite checking his luggage on board.
But that's ok, because they could have blown up a cinema instead, so there's no point in trying to stop them from blowing up a plane. Makes perfect sense to me. No, really. And of course the owner of the bags wasn't a three year-old, so why would they expect him to be homicidal?
--------------------
French Whine
Posts: 4177 | From: Cavaillon, France | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tubbs
Miss Congeniality
# 440
|
Posted
Returning, to the OP …
The deal, as far as I see it, is that we have a right to take our child on long-haul holidays. We have the responsibility of ensuring that she follows the rules and is strapped in at appropriate times. And that she behaves reasonably well. We also have the responsibility of bringing toys and books, something to drink and a snack, enough drugs to stun an elephant etc. And anyone else has to accept with the fact that she may whine occasionally as it’s a long flight. You cut her the same slack as that grown up four rows back snoring really loudly.
Most 3 year olds will have times when they will not be strapped willingly into their car seat. In our house, this is usually dealt with a combination of brute force, shouting and threats / bribes. Not being strapped into the car seat before setting off is not an option.
Most 3 years olds are also capable of picking up when mummy or daddy is stressed and riffing on that. And most 3 year olds are also total drama queens who have absolutely no shame about playing to the gallery. From the news articles, not only were there two parents, there were attendants and other passengers all trying to “help”.
There are few things worse than when your child has a public meltdown. You don’t only have to deal with the meltdown – you have to deal with the reactions of people around you. Most of whom are giving it some serious “tut” because they would never have let their child behave like that / behaved like that when they were children / handled it that way as it was totally wrong …
It sounds, from the news articles, that it was six of one and half a dozen of the other.
The parents didn’t respond to the situation quickly enough to take control and get the child into the seat. (There is usually a window of opportunity between the start of the tantrum and total meltdown but you do need to be quick). They weren’t familiar with safety rules for children – if they’d flown with her when she was under two, they might not have realised that now she was three, the rules were different.
The flight attendants seem to have been very heavy handed. They weren’t familiar with the seating plans. They talked into walkie talkies while interacting with the parents. And it isn’t clear how much they tried to help the parents calm the child down or how much information they gave them.
The ground staff don’t sound much better from the parent’s account – no one needs a lecture about child behaviour after an experience like that. And basically announcing that there are no flights cause you're banned and you’re stranded for 24 hours – well, that’s marvellous that is! No wonder the airline is frantically back-peddling.
Tubbs
[ 31. January 2007, 12:31: Message edited by: Tubbs ]
--------------------
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am
Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erroneous Monk
Shipmate
# 10858
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Melon:
And of course the owner of the bags wasn't a three year-old...
...especially a three-year old who'd just assaulted his own mother...
quote:
...so why would they expect him to be homicidal?
Indeed. ![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif)
--------------------
And I shot a man in Tesco, just to watch him die.
Posts: 2950 | From: I cannot tell you, for you are not a friar | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rat
Ship's Rat
# 3373
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by the_raptor:
It also completely ignores the fact that there are plenty of just as good terrorist targets, that have next to no security (movie theatre's, shopping malls, the queues before the security checkpoint, etc)
Many such places do have security measures. For instance, last time I checked, we still don't have litter bins in UK train stations, because people used to put bombs in them, and station concourses are regularly checked for abandoned luggage. (ETA: as are airport concourses, before security. It was rather unreported, but Edinburgh airport was closed and evacuated last week because a new rucksack was found abandoned in the pre-security area, and was destroyed in a controlled explosion. The city bypass was closed and blocked off on the same day due to a 'related incident'. Further details have, rather mysteriously, not been forthcoming.)
A car parked in a sensitive place is likely to be checked out, because people have, quite regularly, put bombs in cars and blown up shops, the BBC, etc.
Besides, the consequences of a plane blowing up can be rather less contained than those of a building or a train blowing up. Any of the surviving residents of Lockerbie will tell you that.
Not letting people put mysterious packages on planes then wander off to watch from a distance is plain good sense. Assuming that all bombers are suicide bombers is, well, suicidal.
[ 31. January 2007, 13:02: Message edited by: Iole Nui ]
--------------------
It's a matter of food and available blood. If motherhood is sacred, put your money where your mouth is. Only then can you expect the coming down to the wrecked & shimmering earth of that miracle you sing about. [Margaret Atwood]
Posts: 5285 | From: A dour region for dour folk | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Laura
General nuisance
# 10
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Melon:
quote:
Originally posted by the_raptor:
I am finished discussing this here, because I realise I am pissing off the purg hosts.
Are the purg hosts running hell now? Is that a new security measure?
Yes. And there's a secret ship-tap program now, too. It takes pictures of what you're really doing while posting on the ship.
--------------------
Love is the only sane and satisfactory answer to the problem of human existence. - Erich Fromm
Posts: 16883 | From: East Coast, USA | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Tubbs:
We also have the responsibility of bringing toys and books, something to drink and a snack,
We are not allowed to take drinks on airplanes in this country. ![[Frown]](frown.gif)
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Melon
Ship's desserter
# 4038
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by MouseThief:
We are not allowed to take drinks on airplanes in this country.
That does make sense: the drink is the favourite weapon of the homicidal three year-old. If a toddler can spill orange juice over those she loves, just think what she could do to other people!!!
--------------------
French Whine
Posts: 4177 | From: Cavaillon, France | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Adam.
Like as the
# 4991
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by MouseThief:
quote:
Originally posted by Tubbs:
We also have the responsibility of bringing toys and books, something to drink and a snack,
We are not allowed to take drinks on airplanes in this country.
Yes, you are (or atleast, you were last weekend when I took three domestic flights in the US); you're just not allowed to take drinks through security (except for baby milk; and unless you're diabetic). Anything you buy in the terminal is yours to carry on (subject to size restrictions).
--------------------
Ave Crux, Spes Unica!
Preaching blog
Posts: 8164 | From: Notre Dame, IN | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Melon:
quote:
Originally posted by the_raptor:
I am finished discussing this here, because I realise I am pissing off the purg hosts.
Are the purg hosts running hell now?
If only. Because then you'd have to provide some support for your half-assed opinions.
quote:
Originally posted by GrayFace:
I've got news for you - parenting is a project that lasts at least until your kids are adults. You don't start with a clean slate, a perfectly behaved, perfectly intelligent, infinitely educated and trained child that will act with perfect sense and zero disruption to anyone unfortunate enough to encounter said child unless and until one of the stupid or lazy parents makes a mistake and fucks up its pristine perfection.
I'm sure all the parents on this thread who hadn't figured this out yet are deeply grateful for your willingness to enlighten them.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
GreyFace
Shipmate
# 4682
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
I'm sure all the parents on this thread who hadn't figured this out yet are deeply grateful for your willingness to enlighten them.
No charge for the service.
It's a slippery slope though. It starts off with complaints about kids on planes, and before you know it you're sunk in the depths of moaning at us for putting our kids in buggies.
![[Snigger]](graemlins/snigger.gif)
Posts: 5748 | From: North East England | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
luvanddaisies
the'fun'in'fundie'™
# 5761
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Melon:
quote:
Originally posted by MouseThief:
We are not allowed to take drinks on airplanes in this country.
That does make sense: the drink is the favourite weapon of the homicidal three year-old. If a toddler can spill orange juice over those she loves, just think what she could do to other people!!!
no, no, no Melon - the toddler can now take a drink on board, but only up to a set number of mililetres of it, the bottle of which must be in a bag. Even if the devious little creature can get the bottle out of the bag, the bottle opened (and it must be sealed, remember) they can only make a limited amount of sticky spillage.
FWIW, I personally don't mind a kid yelling on a plane - I mean, it's not ideal, and I'd rather not have my entire head reverberate to the racket a disgruntled miniperson can make - but tantrums do happen (that bloody 'no' word had a lots to answer for).
I would, however, be very pissed off if the plane I was on missed its takeoff due to a child refusing to be belted in and the parents not taking responsibility for it by either calming the situation or physically restraining the child.
It is the parents' responsibility to care for their child and the cabin crew's responsibility to care for the whole planeload of passengers. The parents should have known their child well enough to forsee that the flight back might be a flashpoint and mentioned this at check-in - so the cabin crew were prepared to help out. It's not fair to expect cabin crew to be able to deal with someone else's toddler as the parents are the ones who know the child. The parents should also have known how best to prepare their child for the return flight, and be willing after the event to own up to the fact that they, as the adults directly responsible for the child, are the ones upon whom the onus falls. For them to complain and grumble about the airline is unreasonable in the extreme, and they should be amazed that they were offered any sort of compensation at all - whether they accepted it or not.
[ 31. January 2007, 15:55: Message edited by: luvanddaisies ]
--------------------
"Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines, sail away from the safe harbour. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover." (Mark Twain)
Posts: 3711 | From: all at sea. | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Melon
Ship's desserter
# 4038
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
If only. Because then you'd have to provide some support for your half-assed opinions.
The onus of proof is on those who claim to know that It Was The Parents' Fault, but who have also decided to discount any statements by the parents as well as any statements by the company, ie all the information we have from which to form an opinion.
--------------------
French Whine
Posts: 4177 | From: Cavaillon, France | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Melon
Ship's desserter
# 4038
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by GreyFace:
It's a slippery slope though. It starts off with complaints about kids on planes, and before you know it you're sunk in the depths of moaning at us for putting our kids in buggies.
Unless the kids are adults, in which case you would have a God-given right to break the law and endanger the lives of everyone else in the plane, building, whatever by blocking the fire exits with their wheelchair.
[ 31. January 2007, 15:59: Message edited by: Melon ]
--------------------
French Whine
Posts: 4177 | From: Cavaillon, France | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Melon:
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
If only. Because then you'd have to provide some support for your half-assed opinions.
The onus of proof is on those who claim to know that It Was The Parents' Fault, but who have also decided to discount any statements by the parents as well as any statements by the company, ie all the information we have from which to form an opinion.
Bullshit. The onus shifted to you when you made this outrageous statement:
quote:
It's good to be reminded from time to time how many people hate children.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pants
Emergency underwear
# 999
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by luvanddaisies:
quote:
Originally posted by Melon:
quote:
Originally posted by MouseThief:
We are not allowed to take drinks on airplanes in this country.
That does make sense: the drink is the favourite weapon of the homicidal three year-old. If a toddler can spill orange juice over those she loves, just think what she could do to other people!!!
no, no, no Melon - the toddler can now take a drink on board, but only up to a set number of mililetres of it, the bottle of which must be in a bag.
Nope. We had a bottle of drink for Alien which we weren't allowed to take on. We were only allowed to if it was a real baby bottle with a teat.
--------------------
♣ Many big thank yous to those who sponsored us. ♣
I use Ł6m of military hardware to find hidden Tupperware in the woods.
Posts: 15217 | From: A grown up house | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by GreyFace:
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
I'm sure all the parents on this thread who hadn't figured this out yet are deeply grateful for your willingness to enlighten them.
No charge for the service.
It's a slippery slope though. It starts off with complaints about kids on planes, and before you know it you're sunk in the depths of moaning at us for putting our kids in buggies.
It's fine with me if you put your kids in buggies. You can carry them around in shoeboxes for all I care, or push them around in wheelbarrows. Just don't delude yourselves that any of them is "the apple of every grandfather's eye."
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Emma Louise
Storm in a teapot
# 3571
|
Posted
WTF has wheelchairs got to do with it?!?! You do seem to be on a crusade for the world revolving around kids.
Last time I went on a plane those immediate to the exit doors are checked to be able bodied and/or swapped so of a quick exit.
Posts: 12719 | From: Enid Blyton territory. | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anselmina
Ship's barmaid
# 3032
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Melon:
In my experience, the last people to sit down are always middle aged women without children who do not understand the concept of "stow your baggage safely", and the main role of cabin crew is to stop those women from blocking access to the entire plane for 15 minutes by standing in the aisle checking every single item in their handbags, which, inevitably, are bigger than a family suitcase.
It's good to be reminded from time to time who the middle-aged women haters are.
In my experience of travelling it's occasionally families with very young children and older people - quite naturally, I'd say - who take their time to settle down, and who need a little extra assistance here and there. I try not to hate them because in the case of the former travelling with youngsters can be stressful, and in the case of the latter I shall very soon be one of their number.
Anselmina: that awful thing ie, a middle-aged woman without children, but who knows how to pack for travel and is more than capable of looking after herself, and who reckons she's not the only one amongst this category who have learnt how to travel efficiently without becoming a burden on the worthier younger public.
Posts: 10002 | From: Scotland the Brave | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
babybear
Bear faced and cheeky with it
# 34
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
Just don't delude yourselves that any of them is "the apple of every grandfather's eye."
Awww Ruth! That was the one bit of that story that I really liked. I am sure that if my Dad were to meet this girl he too would delight in her, and be the apple of my Dad's eye as well.
Just as an aside, Melon, what were you thinking of sleeping in a cot when your son was in a double bed?! The first thing that came to mind was that double beds are meant to accommodate two adults, and can easily fit an adult and a child.
Posts: 13287 | From: Cottage of the 3 Bears (and The Gremlin) | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Autenrieth Road
Shipmate
# 10509
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Emma.:
Last time I went on a plane those immediate to the exit doors are checked to be able bodied and/or swapped so of a quick exit.
Not so on the planes I've been on in the last couple years. There was a court challenge, and now those by exit doors self-certify that they are able to carry out the requirements of sitting by an exit door. That is, "please ask us to find you another seat if you would not be able to carry out these tasks in case of an emergency {tasks listed}."
Except for Melon's initial strong statement about the events necessarily exhibiting hatred of children, I agree with everything else he's said.
[cross-posted... Oh, and I don't agree about who's last to sit down, since I've never paid attention.
There's just not enough information in the articles on a thoughtful reading to conclude that this is necessarily a case of nasty undisciplined kid and oblivious unprepared irresponsible parents.]
[ 31. January 2007, 16:25: Message edited by: Autenrieth Road ]
--------------------
Truth
Posts: 9559 | From: starlight | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pants
Emergency underwear
# 999
|
Posted
Families and disabled (or whatever the politically corret term is) get to board first so they get longer to get themselves sorted.
--------------------
♣ Many big thank yous to those who sponsored us. ♣
I use Ł6m of military hardware to find hidden Tupperware in the woods.
Posts: 15217 | From: A grown up house | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Autenrieth Road
Shipmate
# 10509
|
Posted
What's missing in the articles is any indication of actions by the cabin crew in assisting with the sorting, or alerting the family of impending timetables of when they needed to be sorted by apart from "NOW!", or any useful interaction at all before the boom was lowered.
There are gaps that can filled in either way. I'm surprised at the almost universal willingness here to fill in the gaps in the most critical way possible to the family.
For example -- the plane was 15 minutes late. We don't know if it was late because everyone had been strapped in already for 15 minutes waiting for one last child to be seated, or if it was 15 minutes late for other reasons already.
--------------------
Truth
Posts: 9559 | From: starlight | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by babybear:
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
Just don't delude yourselves that any of them is "the apple of every grandfather's eye."
Awww Ruth! That was the one bit of that story that I really liked.
It made me want to hurl. Grandparents who think everyone will adore their grandchildren the way they do are like pet owners who think their pets are just the most specialest animals on the planet.
[ 31. January 2007, 16:45: Message edited by: RuthW ]
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
BroJames
Shipmate
# 9636
|
Posted
Almost every ocurrence of this story is obviously from the same original. There is a slightly different take - on the parents side - from Dianne Williamson of the Worcester Telegram and Gazette and a slightly different take from the Orlando Sentinel from which it appears that the trouble with the toddler had gone on for fifteen minutes. I have huge sympathy for the parents here, but I can see why (if this is the accurate picture) after fifteen minutes of attempting to resolve the situation and perhaps with no end in sight, the airline took the action it did. I guess the airline may have thought something more could have been done because none of this could have been ggood for them either.
Posts: 3374 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Autenrieth Road
Shipmate
# 10509
|
Posted
OK, something I agree with RuthW on.
I wanted to hurl because, even if true, it was utterly irrelevant.
[cross-posted with BroJames]
[ 31. January 2007, 16:46: Message edited by: Autenrieth Road ]
--------------------
Truth
Posts: 9559 | From: starlight | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erin
Meaner than Godzilla
# 2
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Autenrieth Road:
We don't know if it was late because everyone had been strapped in already for 15 minutes waiting for one last child to be seated, or if it was 15 minutes late for other reasons already.
I don't see how that matters. Even if the plane had been delayed for 15 minutes due to the mechanics having to duct-tape the wings in place, the parents still had those 15 minutes (plus the previous 30, at least) to deal with the child. I've flown enough to know that you get on the plane and you sit your ass down in the seat and you stay buckled until the captain tells you that you are free to move about the cabin. It's uncomfortable as hell, my knees are always jammed into the back of the seat in front of me, I hate the whole experience, and I want it over as soon as possible, so everyone on the plane needs to sit down and shut the fuck up. Even adults, whom I've been known to holler at when they've taken too long to sort their 90,000 carry-on bags (hell, once I was screaming from the MSP jetway because it was -10ş out and the asshat frat boys couldn't figure out where to put their ski gear).
--------------------
Commandment number one: shut the hell up.
Posts: 17140 | From: 330 miles north of paradise | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
luvanddaisies
the'fun'in'fundie'™
# 5761
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Pânts:
quote:
Originally posted by luvanddaisies:
quote:
Originally posted by Melon:
quote:
Originally posted by MouseThief:
We are not allowed to take drinks on airplanes in this country.
That does make sense: the drink is the favourite weapon of the homicidal three year-old. If a toddler can spill orange juice over those she loves, just think what she could do to other people!!!
no, no, no Melon - the toddler can now take a drink on board, but only up to a set number of mililetres of it, the bottle of which must be in a bag.
Nope. We had a bottle of drink for Alien which we weren't allowed to take on. We were only allowed to if it was a real baby bottle with a teat.
How odd. this is what the dept of transport says.
That said, the rules for carry-on have changed so often recently that not all check-in staff know exactly what's what. When I fly, I tend to have a viola/violin/saxophone/sundry other instrument with me, and the Musicians' Union produced a really handy little laminate flyer quoting the DFT regulations on instruments.
quote:
Musical instruments are, as an exception, allowed as a second item of cabin baggage, but will need to be screened and passengers should check with their airlines if special arrangements (e.g. purchasing an extra seat) for these large instruments will be required.
It's been used a good few times, and is invaluable. What I don't understand though is why cellists have to pay full-price for their cello - I've never heard of a cello having a tantrum about doing up its seat-belt, and they don't eat or drink much.
--------------------
"Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines, sail away from the safe harbour. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover." (Mark Twain)
Posts: 3711 | From: all at sea. | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Josephine
Orthodox Belle
# 3899
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Autenrieth Road:
There are gaps that can filled in either way. I'm surprised at the almost universal willingness here to fill in the gaps in the most critical way possible to the family.
I'm not. Not at all.
It seems true, clear, and blindingly obvious to most people that a child's behavior correlates precisely and directly with the quality of the child's parents. It's as fundamental and axiomatic a belief as "water is wet" or "the sun rises in the east," and more fundamental and axiomatic than anything most people believe about God.
I don't know why, since it is manifestly false. Maybe it's the baleful influence of Freud. Maybe it's the fact that it allows people to feel smugly superior, and relieves them of the responsibility to be charitable or helpful. Maybe something else.
But it certainly doesn't surprise me.
--------------------
I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!
Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
BroJames
Shipmate
# 9636
|
Posted
Further info here about third or fourth post down. [ETA clearly a v. difficult situation all round]
[ 31. January 2007, 17:12: Message edited by: BroJames ]
Posts: 3374 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Melon
Ship's desserter
# 4038
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Josephine:
It seems true, clear, and blindingly obvious to most people that a child's behavior correlates precisely and directly with the quality of the child's parents. It's as fundamental and axiomatic a belief as "water is wet" or "the sun rises in the east," and more fundamental and axiomatic than anything most people believe about God.
No, it's complete and utter baloney. If it were true, it would mean that the parents in question were of a very high quality on the first flight when the child behaved well, of a very low quality on the infamous second flight, and of a very high quality on the third flight when the child behaved herself again.
I think it's true that good parents tend to produce good children, but you have to take the long view - ie 20 years or so, not judge on the basis of one incident.
--------------------
French Whine
Posts: 4177 | From: Cavaillon, France | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Autenrieth Road
Shipmate
# 10509
|
Posted
Melon, you do realize that Josephine is agreeing with you?
--------------------
Truth
Posts: 9559 | From: starlight | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Josephine:
It seems true, clear, and blindingly obvious to most people that a child's behavior correlates precisely and directly with the quality of the child's parents. ... I don't know why, since it is manifestly false.
My mother used to say, "I don't take any credit, and I won't take any blame." However, she did take responsibility, which, to me, is what all this is about. I'm still really having trouble understanding why it was apparently physically impossible to simply pick her up, put her in the seat and do the seat belt up. She must be one of those Toddler Mutant Ninja Turtles or something. OliviaG
--------------------
"You come with me to room 1013 over at the hospital, I'll show you America. Terminal, crazy and mean." -- Tony Kushner, "Angels in America"
Posts: 5430 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Autenrieth Road:
Melon, you do realize that Josephine is agreeing with you?
Melon would have to exercise a few more brain cells to cotton on to that. Not outside the realm of possibility, but I wouldn't put money on it.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Laura
General nuisance
# 10
|
Posted
I don't take credit for my kids being generally easy going. They probably came that way. But it isn't like parents have no influence on their kids -- come on! There is no self-respecting 3 year old who doesn't know where she can push her parents. If the parents give a lot, she'll push a lot. Kids want to find where your boundaries are. Kids need to find where your boundaries are -- it's part of the process for learning to set your own boundaries when you're older. I've seen calculating behavior in a little relative when he does or says "X" to Mommy -- the look in the eyes that says "this got such a satisfying reaction last time, I think I'll see what happens when I do it again."
So it's both -- the kid and the parents, feeding that ever-turning wheel of happiness and misery that is raising children.
P.S.: Ruth -- the grandfather's comment also made me want to "call God on the big white phone". ![[Projectile]](graemlins/puke2.gif)
--------------------
Love is the only sane and satisfactory answer to the problem of human existence. - Erich Fromm
Posts: 16883 | From: East Coast, USA | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
comet
Snowball in Hell
# 10353
|
Posted
Sometimes, you all drive me completely around the fucking bend. It's a good thing I love my fellow Shipmate. *breathe in... breathe out... yes I really do love my fellow Shipmate...%^$%^&*
why do these things always have to be either/or?
I love children. especially my own. (really, I'm pretty lukewarm on everyone else's) but the parents needed to be better parents in this situation, end of story.
I have flown with a 3-year-old. it fucking sucks. end of story. even Mother of the Year is ready for a padded room after that experience.
before I go there, a quick reality check- airlines are not public facilities and no one on the freaking planet has any right to be on a plane and fly. they are private carriers, and if the owners say you don't get to play, tough shit. let's just be very clear on that. if some 3-year old warps out in my place of business and can't follow the rules, I can tell the parents to get the kid out of there and I don't need to justify it to the world.
okay, moving on.
there are tantrums and there are tantrums. not all three year olds have mastered this art - I'd even say most are green amateurs. I have three children. all of them pulled the tantrum card in their threes. only one earned the title of Grand Master. (Hi Chasee!) As a parent, you may think you've seen tantrums and can handle them, but you may have been dealing with your garden variety toddler.
take my word for it. After being trained by the Queen of Tantrums, my boys had no chance of getting away with anything.
The thing is - that kid may very well have been completely off-the-deep-end warping out, which is a massive stress to anyone within the same time zone - this still doesn't justify the parent's not handling it in a way that minimizes the impact on others.
they know their kid. kid has a tantrum issue? plan for it. bring benedryl if necessary. (shut up. even some doctors recommend this) don't fly with said tantrum-prone child. don't fly if kid is recovering from ear surgery (what the FUCK???).
Chasee was like this. I tried taking her to movies and quickly learned this was not an option. I quit taking her to movies. period. what's more, the following two didn't go to movies until they were freaking old enough to handle the responsibility of sitting still and being quiet in a public setting. you just don't go there.
It's not about blaming the kid. there is precious little you can really hold a 3 year old accountable for, you can't even really count on them to control their bladder yet.
the reality is, you know your child, you plan for how they will most likely react to a situation, and you plan for worst-case scenario. personally, I would say you don't put them in a warp-out situation unless you have to. (moving? okay. vacation? hell no)
and the correllary is that the airlines and their staff and the rest of the travelling public did not chose to have your children and does not have to put up with their rotten behavior. Don't wait to be kicked off the plane - if you can't unemotionally control your child, you ask to be let off. (how humiliating to have to be asked to leave!) You make it clear to said child, once you are out of the situation, that their behavior led to these consequences. again, unemotionally - this isn't a fucking drama play, it's life skill training.
and just to be clear - I don't support those judgemental fucks who go around grumbling about how rotten other parents are either.* get some fucking tolerance. have some compassion. a tantrum is sheer parent torture and a violation of human rights. (well, it should be!)
three year olds are hell, as has been pointed out already. luckily, they are still cute while sleeping - it keeps them alive. So, the world needs to be patient, and parents need to quit being apologists and start being teachers/guides/disciplinarians/drill instructors.
[tangent]
and furthermore - all the talk of abusive parenting is such a wad of horseshit and just shows how those who brought it up haven't got a real argument to stand on here. Erin's post was illustrative, but not exactly meant to define the terms, you narrowminded twats. I was raised with zero physical discipline in my home. my parents chose this. I never got away with shit behavior and had an extremely strict household. my husband and I have actually tried both styles - discipline with and without spanking. we found that 100 percent of the time with our children, physical punishment did not produce the desired results so we don't do it, and we get better results. That is our family, and our choice, and there are more ways to skin a cat. I'm not making a judgemnt on anyone else's methods.
effective discipline does not mean abuse. please, cease the polarizing bullshit. you're embarrassing yourselves.
[/tangent]
most certainly I've crossposted with the world here. so be it.
* Laura, this isn't directed at you - more towards those people who see your kids running in the grocery store aisle and start making loud remarks to their neigbors about how "some people" should control their spawn, etc etc. I'm sure you know the type.
--------------------
Evil Dragon Lady, Breaker of Men's Constitutions
"It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.” -Calvin
Posts: 17024 | From: halfway between Seduction and Peril | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
babybear
Bear faced and cheeky with it
# 34
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
It made me want to hurl. Grandparents who think everyone will adore their grandchildren the way they do are like pet owners who think their pets are just the most specialest animals on the planet.
It made me want to hurl too, but as far as I could tell it was about the only part of the story that didn't have any spin on it.
Posts: 13287 | From: Cottage of the 3 Bears (and The Gremlin) | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
comet
Snowball in Hell
# 10353
|
Posted
and one more thing, dammit, what kind of freak allows the airline to seat their child away from themselves? what the fuck is the matter with these people?
ahem.
thank you.
--------------------
Evil Dragon Lady, Breaker of Men's Constitutions
"It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.” -Calvin
Posts: 17024 | From: halfway between Seduction and Peril | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
