Should single men be able to sit next to unaccompanied kids on planes ?

[marg4000]

Frankly if I was a male I would refuse to sit next to an unaccompanied child. Airline seats are so squeezy that any movement could possibly be misinterpreted by the child and all hell break loose.

I have done lots of (work related) child protection training and it is always stressed to us to never be alone with a child of either gender.
Marg

 

[rugrat]

Maybe I should crack the *****s about being discriminated against. Flew on a couple of planes this weekend. I was dictated by airline policy that I had to sit down the back, as I had a baby with me. No 'if' 'buts' or 'maybe's'. Its airline policy. I was even asked to move from a seat with extra leg room, because it was near an exit, and I am a female with a young child - airline policy put a young man there instead. I wonder if the media would be interested in my story of discrimination.....

(Although, I might just get them to cover the ludicriousity of being forced to take bubs out of my secure baby carrier and forced to use those infant seatbelts that slip of at the slightest movement, and would do jack in the event of even the slightest bump).

 

[turk]

Maybe I should crack the *****s about being discriminated against. Flew on a couple of planes this weekend. I was dictated by airline policy that I had to sit down the back, as I had a baby with me. No 'if' 'buts' or 'maybe's'. Its airline policy. I was even asked to move from a seat with extra leg room, because it was near an exit, and I am a female with a young child - airline policy put a young man there instead. I wonder if the media would be interested in my story of discrimination.....

(Although, I might just get them to cover the ludicriousity of being forced to take bubs out of my secure baby carrier and forced to use those infant seatbelts that slip of at the slightest movement, and would do jack in the event of even the slightest bump).

Are you saying this policy only applies to females with babies but not males?

 

[bump]

I was even asked to move from a seat with extra leg room, because it was near an exit, and I am a female with a young child - airline policy put a young man there instead. I wonder if the media would be interested in my story of discrimination.....

Women with babys shouldnt be put in the emergency exit seats because they are too weak. These seats should be given to young men who have the strength and agility to pull the door open in a cool manner without getting flustered or freaking out.

 

[bcole2012]

Outrageous! Society has gone crazy. What do they think is going to happen with a plane full of passengers around.

 

[rugrat]

Women with babys shouldnt be put in the emergency exit seats because they are too weak. These seats should be given to young men who have the strength and agility to pull the door open in a cool manner without getting flustered or freaking out.

But its discrimination. How do they know I don't bodybuild in my spare time?



(((by the way; just in case my sarcasm isn't translating well in the written word, I actually have no real issue with the policies, just as I have no issue with the policy about unaccompanied children - although it certainly would have been nice if they had organised the seating pior to me boarding and getting comfortable with my baby on my lap, rather then moving me after the fact. It was a PITA. And FWIW, I actually do have very good upper body strength - for a girl - but I understand they cann't go around checkking out each indvidual for strength, and generalisations need to be made when developing these policies. )))

 

[BayView]

Interesting hearing how the different views on how the wider policies affect the individual in their particular case..

In the end; the airline is always going to do what is deemed the best course of action for the majority; especially where safety is concerned.

The solution is get a boat, a bus, drive, ride a bike or walk.

These seats should be given to young men who have the strength and agility to pull the door open in a cool manner without getting flustered or freaking out.

Not one of your more sensible comments. I know yer taking the p.i.s.s

 

[turk]

Interesting hearing how the different views on how the wider policies affect the individual in their particlular case..

In the end; the airline is always going to do what is deemed the best course of action for the majority; especially where safety is concerned.

The solution is get a boat, a bus, drive, ride a bike or walk.

Always???


Pilots stood down after dispute in cockpit

http://www.theage.com.au/travel/tra...-after-dispute-in-cockpit-20120820-24inx.html

 

[BayView]

Always???


Pilots stood down after dispute in cockpit

http://www.theage.com.au/travel/tra...-after-dispute-in-cockpit-20120820-24inx.html

No doubt an operations/human resource policy regarding behavior etc - we don't know the full story.

I'll say this; if I was a CEO or Board Member of XYZ Airline, every decision would be based on making sure the plane stays in the air until it is supposed to land and not before, and second decision would be to protect the airline from litigation at all costs.

 

[Sunfish]

(((by the way; just in case my sarcasm isn't translating well in the written word, I actually have no real issue with the policies, just as I have no issue with the policy about unaccompanied children - although it certainly would have been nice if they had organised the seating pior to me boarding and getting comfortable with my baby on my lap, rather then moving me after the fact. It was a PITA. And FWIW, I actually do have very good upper body strength - for a girl - but I understand they cann't go around checkking out each indvidual for strength, and generalisations need to be made when developing these policies. )))

That was the original complaint wasn't it?

And Yes! I did understand the sarcasm.

 

[willair]

Women with babys shouldnt be put in the emergency exit seats because they are too weak. These seats should be given to young men who have the strength and agility to pull the door open in a cool manner without getting flustered or freaking out.

You would not want the US Visa service to read something like that,prior to turning up at the US Embassy to get a Business Entry Visa..

 

[Peter 14.7]

Women with babys shouldnt be put in the emergency exit seats because they are too weak. These seats should be given to young men who have the strength and agility to pull the door open in a cool manner without getting flustered or freaking out.

OMG I am agreeing with Bump.

This is what i said with discrimination versus being practical.

There is no way a woman or man carrying a child would be put in the exit row and if put there by mistake, they would and should be moved. WHY You cannot open one of these doors with one hand. But the request should be done respectfully. Which was not in the orignal topic hence the issue.

Average Men are stronger than the Average Woman. Fact.

Some women could open the door and some ladies are seated in the row but rarely right next to it in my experience. The Attendants are not stupid, when the make this call they look at the woman and man in question, and I note they look at the Womans shoes as well as teetering high heels dont give a good grip to flip a airline door. Of course, again what is not said, is that veyr often these seats are given to very tall person due to the leg room and most of these are pretty strong individuals.

Peter

 

[Dazz]

Wouldn't be surprised though Pete to have some smart-@$$ lawyer come along and say they know a midget high heels wearing female dwarf who just won the State powerlifting championship and was refused the prime seat next to the door, and they are now representing their client against Qantas, in an attempt to sue them for 100K for "demeaning...blah blah blah"....and win.

This is the drivel from the lawyers that companies face constantly, which forces them to react in such a way that defies common sense.

Unfortunately, those who make to the bench, haven't got any common sense and actually entertain this drivel, instead of simply throwing it out. This is the fundamental root cause of the problem.

 

[Peter_Tersteeg]

1. It pisses me off that as a male (married or otherwise) I can't be trusted to be left alone with a child in most circumstances.

2. Is there any actually documented cases of children being molested by a member of any sex on a crowded commercial flight?

3. I flew business class recently. I paid extra for the comfort only to find that there were two children in the same section who spent a significant amount of time screaming. I could accept it in ecconomy, but I did pay extra for the comfort so why should small children be allowed in business class at all? (Playing the devils advocate here, the kids actually quietend down after 30 minutes, my wife was more annoyed than I was and I imagine it flight was worse for the parents than me).

4. If put in this possition, Virgin are welcome to ask me to move - to a premium economy or business class seat.

 

[BayView]

It pisses me off that as a male (married or otherwise) I can't be trusted to be left alone with a child in most circumstances.

Yep. Sad state of affairs. But I'm a male too, and I can live with it all.

2. Is there any actually documented cases of children being molested by a member of any sex on a crowded commercial flight?

Don't know...probably not. Policies must work then, and the airline hasn't been sued into extinction.

Smart Board of Directors and lawyers. I might buy shares. Actually; no. How can they survive when the plane is full of folk who want next-to-free air fares and 110% safety, and will sue if things aren't to their liking?

I heard someone whining because there weren't any pillows on the last flight I was on...I mean; FFS; the flight was cheap as chips and it was cattle-class. Fork out yer extra $2k or whatever and get the 5-star seat.

3. I flew business class recently. I paid extra for the comfort only to find that there were two children in the same section who spent a significant amount of time screaming. I could accept it in ecconomy, but I did pay extra for the comfort so why should small children be allowed in business class at all? (Playing the devils advocate here, the kids actually quietend down after 30 minutes, my wife was more annoyed than I was and I imagine it flight was worse for the parents than me).

The airline will take anyone's money to fill a seat. It's how they stay in business and provide us with flights to go places.

Next we'll have a child-free flight, or a child-free section. This'll mean less seats available on already over-crowded flights and longer delays most likely.

4. If put in this possition, Virgin are welcome to ask me to move - to a premium economy or business class seat.

I agree, and mentioned it a few posts ago. Easy consolation prize for most...
Next we'll have blokes requesting to be sat next to the unaccompanied kids so they can get a free upgrade.

 

[M.Investigator]

Others find this policy very humiliating but this is consistent with other airline protocols on child safety and well being and also echoed the concerns of most parents. In fact a well known airline company reviews this similar policy and began assigning a special section for unaccompanied minors.

 

[westminster]

There are very clear rules about Exit Row seats and one of them is that you cannot sit there if you are responsible for a child. We are flying next week (hurrah!) and I am putting DH in exit aisle (6'4" with 5 back surgeries in past 18mths) and I will be sitting with the 3 kids (4, 6 & 13) somewhere else (yay me ). DH can meet the rule of being physically fit enough/strong enough to be allowed to sit there.

A few years ago I was flying with the 3 kids by myself and due to the configuration of the plane I had to have one of the kids behind me. The rules stated that the youngest 2 and 4 had to sit with me, rather than me with the 2yo and my 10yo with the 4yo. That meant that my 10yo had to sit by himself in the row behind and I had to grant permission as there was a single male there.

I feel sorry for any adult that has to sit next to an unaccompanied child (even in my situation where I was in the row in front). However it should be pointed out that women can prey on young children too - it's not a male exclusive club.

 

[lizzie]

haha - I personally would've sat the kids by themselves in a row and sat behind the 2yr old ... having just flown international with a 9yr old this week.

I can't believe that I am paying the same price for a return flight that I was 25 years ago

 

[Blacky]

I havent read through this entire thread (too many pages), but I have skipped through it.

To me this policy screams of Western PC gone mad.

I am a 30yo single male and fly regularly. On a recent flight there was a mother on her own with 3 kids. Aged somewhere between an infant, a 2 yo and maybe a 4yo. As she was getting on the plane battling with three kids and associated bags etc, I offered to help with a bag. I was sitting next to them, separated by an isle. Anyway mid flight one of the youngsters started interacting with me (talking and playing peek-a-boo etc).
I barely spoke to the mother as she was busy with the other two. Somewhere mid flight the youngster left her seat and joined me, and mid flight she fell asleep on my lap. Mum looked over a couple of times and apologised to me.

It was fine, and the mother was very apologetic. I was quite happy to help as flying with a kid is (probably) hard enough - let alone three of the little buggers.

Its a sad world we live in when our fears of other people distract us from how good people usually are. It seems to me very western centric. In saying that though, if you harm a child in many other cultures, they make your life pretty unbearable (if you live that long) - unlike our culture which seems to support the poor perpetrator and 'rehabilitate' them back into a society while ignoring the victim.
Screw that - touch a kid and you dont deserve to be breathing I say.

Blacky

 

[tom32]

They normally do this quite discretely so no one even knows why they are being moved.

When I read this my first thought was that it had never happened to me in all the flying I had done. I then remembered that it indeed had on a trip back from HK, I just did not notice and that was about 3 years back!

My thought at the time; I was being moved so both I and the young (probably 14 odd) girl next to me got a free seat, i.e. sir there is an empty row a few rows back if you would like it. It may have been this too, I guess I will never know. There is not always free seats, so perhaps some other reward, I can serve you more alcohol if you come and sit up the back of the plane? If someone knocks that free row back or extra beers and prefers to sit with the UM the steward / esses probably should watch them like a hawk!

On the matter generally:

It has been raised elsewhere in this thread, and I agree the biggest issue with the way the world is going around protecting kids is that young children are far less influenced by men now than back in the day. We also have far more single mums than back in the day. The two of these factors in combination are going to see a whole lot of kids without any male influence.

Who would want to be a male primary school teacher for example or a male swimming instructor or a scout leader. Sure some do, and hats off to them but why would you take that risk in this day and age as a bloke? As less and less want these jobs and additionally it appears now men are not even allowed social contact with children, there will be more children who have never had a positive male influence on their upbringing, or have even been allowed to have any co-incidental contact in society.

Does this mean we are heading to a place where at some point men need to cross the street to avoid walking past children or else be seen as putting children at risk, albeit a 0.0000001% chance? Or does it mean children should not leave the home in case they come across a man at the park! Indeed as a single man I would never dream of sitting down at the beach or park and read a book unless I have my kids with me. It seems my concerns of what society sees a man in isolation as just sitting around at a place, are well founded!

While I am happy that women are generally primary care givers in most cases, surely it is better for girls and possibly boys in particular to see how men deal with situations v women. In general whether people agree with me or not, I think men tackle things "differently" to women. Are these young boys who are allowed no social contact with men going to turn out like previous generations of boys or will this have an effect on them?