Since I cannot sleep, I'd also like to add that more than likely everyone had to endure everyone else at the gate for 11 hours due to the delay. To say that it had just been "10 minutes" is shortsighted, it isn't like she just showed up and walked on the plane.

I do have to ask since others state my expectation is that I be more tolerant, just how long should I be tolerant for? Is 11 hours enough?

An actual number might be difficult to set, but let's draw the line when your eyes start to look like your avatar's

I'm not saying that it people don't have the right to become annoyed. What i'm saying is that i don't necessarily care if someone becomes annoyed at things a child does, especially when that child is just being a normal, behaving child, like the one in the op. Anyone who leaves their house with the expectation that they shouldn't be subject to annoying behavior could perhaps benefit from a ride in the waaaaaaaaaaambulance to the fantastical hospital of make believe - it's just up the street. Nobody becomes annoyed without, at the very least implicitly, deciding to.

The older i get, the more people i meet, the less i choose to get annoyed by all of the potentially annoying shit they do. You know why? Because getting annoyed is generally a giant fucking waste of time. Not to mention the fact that it's completely arbitrary- the fact that i might be annoyed by something says just as much about my coping skills as it does about the behavior that i find annoying. Like you said, everyone's pet peeves are different - the annoyance is found in the person, and not the behavior.

Yes, everyone has pet peeves, but as far as i can tell, no one has gotten kicked off of a plane because they were listening to country music. Sometimes handicapped people make me uncomfortable, perhaps if i ever start up a restaurant i'll follow cyn's aunt's lead and put up a sign prohibiting handicapped folks.

I agree.

Sorry sports fans - this is not an "adult lifestyle condominium" nor a bar, nor anywhere else with age restrictions. Families have to fly, just like everyone else. If you want a super quiet flight, pay for the privilege and go sit in business class.

What's next, kicking a baby who cries off a local bus or the food court? Stopping the subway?

This kid was apparently, by all accounts, just talking - it might be slightly annoying, but hardly out of control.

The airline is about to get its ass sued off, and rightly so.

well apparently busses are next... if a plunging neckline is a "safety reason" a crying baby will be as well.

Yeah, I don't buy that. You may adjust, after a period of time, to a state of indifference with regard to certain stimuli (like certain types of people, etc), but that does not mean that the things people find annoying are "chosen", or "decided upon".

There's a huge difference between "just talking nonstop" and "repeating the same sentence over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over...

for ten minutes or more." A huge difference.

And for someone who is getting up on the high horse about others' dislike of children, you're certainly quick to point out that you have an odd dislike for the handicapped... which I frankly find bizarre as all hell. You basically call us whiny for our pet peeve of annoying children, but your pet peeve is handicapped people? I don't care how old a person is, they've got some growing up to do if someone in a wheelchair weirds them out.

I'm sorry ma'am but your two year old is acting too much like a two year old. I thought the airline went a little overboard and removal was a bit extreme but you do get a lot of leeway and some parents cross the line. Then I saw the mum and her kid on some morning show and he was completely out of control.I think some parents forget how annoying their kids are and this one was completely out of control. A parent shouldn't allow kids to babble/shout incoherent shite for hours on end during a flight. Just because its a kid doesn't mean a completely different set of rules applies. Is it too outrageous to tell a kid to "shutup"?

Kids on planes do my head in generally. I never make eye contact with one..Maybe put them in the cargo hold?

I'm am going to guess that the kid and others that have been mentioned are not very well disciplined. Why do I make that assumption? I base it off the fact that the parents are willing to go on the national news to tell everyone their boo-hoo sob story about how they got kicked off a plane because their kid wouldn't shut-up.

I know that when I was young, if I EVER acted in a manner that caused a plane to be turned around, 1) my parents would be apologizing profously for the trouble that I caused. 2) My rear end would have been padled (probably in front of the passengers) with out question, resulting in a very sore behind.


Any parent thats worth a damn would have been very embarassed that their kid caused such a commotion, and if they felt it was wrong, probably would seek to settle things with management instead flaunting their lack of parental abilities all over the news.

I don't care if you buy it, i'm not really expecting a large return. It's not that important.

Well, to be honest with you, i don't really have a problem with the handicapped, it was more an embellishment for the sake of argument, i.e. if we treated handicapped people the way some of you want to treat children simply because they might make some of us uncomfortable then there'd be a fucking public outcry. This is because people are expected to overlook violations of social norms in the context of interacting with handicapped people. I certainly don't advocate banning people from otherwise public places simply because their presence makes me uncomfortable or annoyed.

You're comparing the mere existence of a handicapped person with the outward, inescapable noises/behavior of a child. That's not nearly the same thing.

Experiencing discomfort because a person is handicapped is your own personal issue with that person's existence, at all, in your life. Being annoyed by a child in this context is not simply because they're sitting there, existing where you can see them, but because they are actively (mis)behaving in a manner you dislike- i.e., making noise.

Using this example, your discomfort with the handicapped is your own; they are doing nothing to provoke or instill that discomfort. They are just "being". The child, however, is providing auditory stimuli that affects you negatively. It is not you who decided the existence of the child annoying, it is the child's behavior that makes them annoying. Huge difference.

Not everyone is annoyed by the same things. As stated, I'm annoyed by certain types of music that many others love; I'm sure the feeling is mutual in a reciprocal fashion for some of those people and my musical preferences. No one judges people for being annoyed by things, but the fact that I'm annoyed by loud, misbehaving children seems to make people think they're then empowered to go right ahead and judge me.

Me finding loud, misbehaving children annoying is no less legitimate than someone finding standing in long lines to be annoying. Like any other topic, the universal truth seems to carry on; just because it's a kid, people feel justified in talking down to you and disregarding you because you have anti-kid opinions.

[rant]
And you know what? I'm not anti-kid. I'm anti-being-annoyed, and ANYONE being loud, obnoxious, misbehaving in public annoys me. I deal with children on a somewhat regular basis with my clinicals, will deal with them more once I'm actually out in the field working, and I couldn't be happier to be helping them. I rather enjoy helping kids, actually, because they're actually grateful for the help (even if still scared), more often than not, whereas "adult" patients tend to do nothing but try to lie to me, and are more often rude, indifferent, or grumpy that I'm trying to help them... and I'm happy to help them as well.
[/rant]

I disagree. Many so called "handicapped" people make noises, drool and moan as part of just "being". If I were someone who gets annoyed with this, I am in my right to ask them to, "Stop with the moaning and twitching or we're turning this plane around!"

I don't think so.

Kids can be annoying. So can other people. Suck it up or fly business.

i can't say what really happened here from the links - but as a rule of thumb i have to side with the family in this case on general principle. for me to feel comfortable advocating turning a plane around and removing a family, on father's day weekend, this kid would have had to be strapped with c4, spontaneously excreting and puking, singing 'spice girls' lyrics through a portable kareoke machine...something.

in my experience...flying these days sucks for everyone involved. it's uncomfortable, people are pushed up on you the whole time. your flight is delayed, you have to switch gates...the chick next to you is reading some odd religious text in large print and wants to talk about it, the guy on the other side is wider than all outside and keeps putting his sweaty elbows up on you. kids behind you are kicking the seat, old lady in front of you smells like rotten cabbage and has protruding nose hair...and needs to shave a little on her upper lip. maybe i'm a weirdo, but i tend to rather feel like if everyone just chills the fuck out and doesn't get too pissy with each other, everyone pulls through this thing easier and faster.

i don't really expect flying to be like a handjob in a 5-star hotel. i just expect it to get me where i'm going. i know that it's going to be a pain in the ass before i walk into the airport. if i was on this flight, i might have been annoyed by the kid. sure.

i would have been much much more annoyed by the flight attendant turning the plane around and showing her ass. I would have demanded a refund from the airline too. fuck them. it would be like going to the dentist, getting jacked up on nitrous, having the novacaine injected, just getting started with the filling (after a 4 hr wait or so reading 'reader's digest')...then having the dentist and the attendant get into a fight because the attendant doesn't like my 'antrax rulz' t-shirt and she refuses to help the dentist, and so i have to go back to the waiting room until another attendant is available and i can change t-shirts. its just fucking unprofessional. as a professional, you deal with the fucking public if that's your job.

i guess i find it difficult to understand the sanctimonious attitude of some of you. i can understand you being annoyed by someone's behavior. so fucking what? i don't understand expecting everyone else to give a shit because you're annoyed - and certainly not enough to fuck up everyone else's day so you can get satisfaction for your pet peeve. if traveling in comfort is really that important to you, i suggest you avoid public transportation in coach.

pig, where have you been all my life?



I guess i missed the memo where you got ultimate and final pet peeve validation privileges. So pet peeves based on auditory and or visual stimulation are more important than ones that aren't? That's a pretty arbitrary line you draw there.

It doesn't matter, the important thing isn't the means of my annoyance, you said as much when you claimed that, "You need to respect that everyone's pet peeves are different." The important thing is that i'm hypothetically annoyed by a certain class of people, and therefore, as in the case of cyn's aunt, it is righteous and just of me to actively exclude said people from places i like to go, or vise versa.

Here's the thing, i used to get annoyed by kids, then i had one. Now, i don't get annoyed so much. Nothing changed about me, i just don't really get annoyed by kids anymore - even if they are actively engaging in behavior i don't like. When i see or hear a kid being rambunctious, it's more like, "What the fuck is wrong with that person? Oh, it's a kid, that makes sense."

Is that really you, analog, lamenting the how judgmental other people are? At least no one is trying to kick you off a plane because they don't like your music.

Who's talking down to you? What are you talking about? It seems to me that whenever the topic comes up there is rarely a shortage of self proclaimed experts ready to rant about how horrible the parents are, or how shitty kids are. You really have to ignore a lot of details to try and claim victimhood here.

Nobody likes being annoyed, and this isn't necessarily about anybody not having the right be be annoyed, it's about what you do with that annoyance.

Please run for public office. Eloquently stated.

...huh?

Thanks, pig - that's what I was *trying* to say, if rather clumsily.

Why should your pet peeves about kids... or anything else... take precedence? Who made you so important? We are all annoying to someone. So what? Get over yourselves. To turn a plane around is ridiculous.

I agree.

I really just had issue with the idea that being annoyed by a child was not a legitimate gripe. I very much believe the stewardess was out of line with her behavior and ultimate reaction (kicking them off).

It was wrong, and the flight attendant KNEW it was wrong. Why else would she have lied to the pilots, claiming that a woman threatened her?

Thousands of dollars worth of asses in those seats, and apparently she didn't think storming into the cabin screaming "A BABY IS BEING MILDLY UNRULY!" was going to take the cake. Wonder why?

I'm not sure I understand some people who seem to be against the mom. Anyone care to answer these?

1) The plane had not even taken off yet. Why are some people making it sound as if they had been enduring the child's jabbering for ages?

2) What gives ANYONE the right to suggest a person take medication other than a professional, let along suggest someone give their child something. While children's benedryl may be a common placater, who is to say the child doesn't have some adverse reaction, or is taking other meds that would conflict? Hell, the airline should be lucky the mom wasn't like, "Oh, really? Give me some" *flight attendant offers her bottle* *child dies on flight*

WTF?

... but, isn't explaining "the why part of it" the reason forum exists!? :confused:

I'll take the first question.

The flight was delayed for 11 hours. I have to get to the airport at least 1 hour before the flight, and sometimes I am there 2 hours because TSA sometimes takes forever to process of busy days. So sitting in the gate area, everyone was around everyone for at least 11 hours quite possibly easy to even say 13 at the absolute longest if people were there 2 hours before the flight. Again, it isn't like they showed up and got on the plane. So 11 hours of listening to this child squirm and say "Bye Bye Plane," or whatever he was doing. Again, I say watch the video of the child on Good Morning America, since the mother states that he is as fussy as he "now" as he was that day. Well the whole time he's fidgeting and moving about. 11 hours.

Here's another guess of mine, some poeple have stated in the interview that they were willing to just keep going and not turn around. A good possibilty that they are benevolent child lovers, but also the possiblity that they were just "sucking it up" because they wanted to go home and didn't want another single minute delay after enduring an 11 hour delay to get onto a 1 hour flight.

For flight attendant, I don't know if many know this but most flight attendants aren't salaried, they are also not paid hourly either. They are paid in block time. So this means that the flight attendant didn't get paid for those 11 hours standing at the gate waiting. I'd probably be just as annoyed as the passangers on the trip knowing I've been someplace for 1/2 a day for a routine 1 hour flight and only getting paid for that 1 hour.

I'm not saying that the kid wasn't annoying. I'm not even saying that the kid was very well-behaved. I'm saying that so the fuck what if he was annoying? So what if the flight attendant had a bad day? Boo-fucking-hoo. After an 11 hour delay, the only reason to turn that plane around should have been a bomb or something. Not an annoying kid.

I haven't once suggested that turning the plane around was acceptable.

so we're all in agreement on the acceptable outcomes - we only differ in whether we theoretically would have been wanting to bust a cap in this kid's ass? i can live with that.

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y29...the-a-team.jpg

I love it when a plan comes together.

oh, and filthy: i been bizzy...but i think i'm going to be able to get back on more now.

I guess that's the point.

I would be first in stating that if the flight attendant thought for a moment that the child was unruly, she should have not allowed the mother and child to board the plane. This would be the same thing that would be done for any visibly drunk passenger. It probably still would have made the news, but I think that the impact would be greatly different.

i don't know cyn - that would be an interesting precedent. what i'm wondering is whether an airline could make $$$ having a segregated 'families' section on their flights. kind of like first class - maybe still coach seats, but a little divider to separate them out and muffle the sounds.

Adults understand what they're doing and how annoying it is. They should be kicked off once the plane is at cruising altitude.
Ban them from the flight, too. People who feel entitled to conveniences and luxuries not afforded to others should not be catered to. If I fly, I shower right before I leave and use a third of the amount of cologne I usually do, if any. I don't talk to other passengers other than a quick, "excuse me" as I pass and maybe a "good morning" when I sit down next to them.
If you remove your kid from the are when she's acting up, then you're doing what you should as a parent. If a parent brings a child into a confined space, they had better teach the child to act appropriately. If the child isn't old enough to understand consideration for others, the parents shouldn't bring him into a confined space for hours with no way out. Having and raising a child is a responsibility, not a right.
No, it isn't public transportation. I pay a private company that answers only to its stockholders and customers to get me from one place to another on a privately owned vehicle. Buses and subways are subsidized to minimize costs for convenience of use and do not carry the responsibility of providing an environment that encourages repeat business. An airline that allows any sort of unpleasant environment to exist without any attempt to rectify the situation will lose customers, failing to maximize profits for its stockholders. American Airlines provided me with terrible customer service pre-flight, a rude flight attendant, allowed a man who was so drunk he could barely stand onto the flight, and absolutely no attempt to compensate me for time and money lost, not even an apology; I refuse to do business with AA because of it.

If I fly with another airline and they provide an unpleasant environment by delaying my flight and calling me with an incorrect flight time that causes me to miss my rescheduled flight, refusing to ask parents to calm loud children, allowing someone two drinks away from a coma to board and sit behind me, employing rude flight attendants who make sarcastic remarks instead of even simply apologizing for the inconvenience of sitting in a seat with a broken back, no A/C in 110° heat, a broken TV to not watch during the flight, and refusing to admit they did anything wrong, they're not getting my business, either.
I wouldn't say all of them, but at least half of people shouldn't be trusted with raising pets, never mind children.
Because the flight had been delayed for 11 hours and they had been waiting in the airport with her.
I'd pay more for either a separate area for people with kids or for a flight with a guarantee of no disruptive passengers.

msd,

just a couple of quick points:

1. i don't think it's always so easy to guess when a child is going to behave or not. even if your child is normally well behaved - sometimes funny things happen with kids. they're just not as self-aware as most adults are. i guess i don't expect them to anti-septic little fountains of placidity until it's time for a kodak moment. i don't think that's realistic.

2. i have to say i find it sort of amusing not to think of airlines as a form of de facto public transportation. they only stay in business because of bailouts at the hands of american taxpayers. i really have no idea why they haven't just been nationalized already, other than a lot of people would have ape shit fits over the semantic shift.

Rights and responsibilities aren't mutually exclusive. I would say that if you are not able to be in a confined space with people who annoy you than you shouldn't be in there either.

That being said, kids aren't computers. You can teach them shit all you want, but in they end there is always some random probability that they will do something else. The idea that a parent can always be in control of a child's behavior is an ill-informed one - kids do have minds of their own.

True, as a founding member of the Electron Club, seeking the path of least resistence I tend to leave the area immediately when screaming, misbehaving, or distressed children make themselves present. I don't immediately pack up once a child enters my 200 sq. foot perimeter.

But again, I do selectively seek out establishments that are not kid friendly to diminish my need to have to leave due to those situations.

What I can say about pricing structures is that most parents will not take children to a place that is $25+/pp for dinner. Again, it helps that I generally don't go to the corporate food establishments, Ruby Tuesdays, Applebee's, etc.

A couple years ago my sister came to town with my nephew and asked me to help her find kid friendly establishments which specifically meant they had to have at least a high chair offering. Many NYC restaurants do not have the capability to offer a single high chair that alone also works in my favor.

I love threads where non-parents bitch and moan. You're such a superior person it really is a shame you won't be contributing your genes to the future of the world. There is a certain amount of growing up that you can only get by raising kids.

There is absolutely no fucking way I'd drug my child for a flight.

I don't mind other people's kids being noisy on airplanes. It just comforting to know that it's not mine, and I don't have to do anything.

But It doesn't sound like this kid was crying or tantruming. Just your typical repetetive statements done when they are pre-occupied.

I get a strong feeling that they got kicked off because the attendant got pissed off at the mother for "talking back" instead of saying "yes ma'am".

In other words, the attendant through her own hissy fit because she didn't get her way and she had the power to invoke some policy.

Doe no one else question what type of parent volunteers to go on the national news/talk show circuit and talk about how their "angel of a child" got them kicked off of an airplane?

I am all for kids acting like kids. That's their job at that age. I just shouldn't have to be subjected to it, within reason. I think some kids can fly just fine, and others maybe not. As a parent, you may have to drive if your child isn't fit for travel. That's one of the sacrifices you make when you chose to have kids. Yes children have the right to transportation as well, but they have to follow the rules as well. I understand this is difficult and really almost unfair for a child. If I were a parent I would probably chose to drive until I was sure my kid would be quiet enough to fly. If I had to put up with him or her in the car for 10 hours, well then that's the way life goes. It's unfair to expect kids to behave all the time, they're kids! But it's also unfair to expect everyone else to put up with children misbehaving. I was at the chiropractor today waiting to get in, and there were 4 kids playing in the waiting room, being loud, screaming and fighting. I was getting very annoyed, and rather than sit there and continue to get more annoyed I simply asked the receptionist to call my cell phone when it was my turn and I went and sat in the peace and quiet of my car. Unfortunately this isn't an option on an airplane. I haven't mentioned annoying adults, as this thread is about a specific incident involving a child. I feel the same way about annoying adults as well. If they can't behave on a plane, remove them. As for someone who perhaps has a disability (I work in a group home with disabled adults), most people would not put someone with a disability in a situation where it is going to cause them stress and have them act out. If they were and it was essential for them to fly, I would think they would need something to calm them down in order to get through the flight, just like it should be for anyone else. I dunno, I guess we all have different views on the subject.

i think the idea of not bringing your kids on a plane, if you suspect one of them may actually act like a kid, is a lot more attractive....before you have kids.

all of a sudden, you have to fly from toronto to the florida keys to see dear old granddad, and you've only got a week. driving one way would almost take the entire time, and well...what are you going to do? never visit relatives who live prohibitively far away for driving? never go to europe? so much for china or japan?

i think that sounds nice, but it's completely impractical in many situations.

it's kind of funny, i can see some bastard having a heart attack next to cyn on a plane, and cyn kind of getting pissed about it ruining his day. 'hey fat man...keep it down. jesus!' :P

Actually, no. One of the sacrifices you have to make if you want to fly in perfect peace and quiet is to upgrade to business class, where there are likely to be very few children.

You see, you have a choice. You can upgrade your ticket, you can perhaps choose a flight less likely to have children on it - especially useful for short haul flights as the early morning flights are almost entirely populated by business travellers. Or maybe you can do as you suggest families do and just not fly? Drive yourself.

But if a parent wants to bring their kid across the Atlantic to see their grandparents, they have no choice. They're not taking a cruise for the most part as no one has the time. My daughter is pretty good about flying, but yeah, she might cry at some point. She might even get airsick (hasn't happened yet but it's a possiblity). First asshat that tries to kick us off a plane for her doing that is going to get both barrels from me.

I agree that if a child is being VERY disruptive - to the point where safety may be jeopardized - it is appropriate to take them off the plane, and chalk that up to a harsh reality. But little Johnny would have to be pulling open the emergency exit doors or running around with box cutters before that's likely to happen.

Actually I know many families who did not do anything outside of the house and homes of other families until the kids grew up to about 7-10 for that very reason. No, they did not travel to see sick relatives with the whole family, only sent a representative of the family when the children were young. If both parents had to attend for whatever reason, they left the child behind with other arrangements.

They didn't NEVER get on a plane. They didn't get on a plane with young children, nor go out to restaurants or movies. It was and is a simple sacrifice for courtesy. That is also another choice.

As far as some bastard (sic) having a heart attack next to me. analog would save the man's life as would I since I used to be CPR certified and analog is currently certified.

In my lifetime I did have someone have a heart attack right in front of me as I was walking into the elevator lobby going to work. He collapsed and I stepped over him. I paused long enough to see he was clutching his heart and then as I looked over the room someone else yelled out that they were CPR trained. At that point I left the scene and continued to my office. A few hours later I found out that he had died on the floor. Knowing that someone died in front of me, that ruined my day more than anything ever has.

I don't expect perfect peace and quiet. I expect reasonable peace and quiet.

I don't expect screaming uncontrollable adults. I don't expect screaming uncontrollable children.

I don't think that is unreasonable.

I would gather to say not different than you not expecting your neighbor to use power tools in the middle of the night or have a barking dog during all hours. Those aren't unreasonable expectations.

[QUOTE=Cynthetiq]Actually I know many families who did not do anything outside of the house and homes of other families until the kids grew up to about 7-10 for that very reason. No, they did not travel to see sick relatives with the whole family, only sent a representative of the family when the children were young. If both parents had to attend for whatever reason, they left the child behind with other arrangements.

They didn't NEVER get on a plane. They didn't get on a plane with young children, nor go out to restaurants or movies. It was and is a simple sacrifice for courtesy. That is also another choice. [?QUOTE]

You really think that people gave up family holidays and seeing relatives as a courtesy to those without children?

I have a large bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to sell you, if you believe that. People do make choices not to travel when they have young children. Young kids are often not terribly entertained by the Louvre, Versailles, St. Paul's, and the Great Wall of China the way older children and adults are. They don't get much out of a large expenditure and my child is pretty happy playing in the local park. But I can pretty much guarantee that the majority really aren't making your comfort part of the equation when deciding whether or not to travel.


Lovely - equating a child to a dog.

At any rate, you're back apples and oranges. Noise ordinances and nuisance pet by-laws exist for a reason in most communities. Such by-laws certainly don't pertain to children traveling on heavily government subsidized transportation.

[QUOTE=highthief]Two things, Never said a majority, just said it is a choice, some cultures take public embarassment seriously. Yours does not, but many Asian cultures do.

Second, I didn't equate a child to a dog. You did. I just stated a reasonagle expectation. I can tell you in NYC noise laws aren't as important as someone's health laws, since now you can be "prescribed" an animal as a stress reliever. It's gone to the courts and lost.