Businesses saying keep the rowdy children at home.

I am the mother of a 26 year old so I don't have to worry about him acting up in public ;)

When he was little I often took him to resturants and he behaved because he knew if he didn't he would have to go sit in the car. This rule was enforced regardless of where we were a nice resturant or Wendy's.

I tried to take him to the movies when he was three he was fine until the popcorn and M&Ms ran out. He got bored so I spent the rest of the movie in the lobby with him waiting or my husband and friends to come out. We didn't go back again until he was around six and he did fine then.

He also had a bedtime of 7:30 which meant even if Wal-mart had been opened 24 hours he would not have been there.

A lot of parents today make me crazy with how they ignore their child's bad behavior there is a difference between a child talking loudy and having a tantrum while the parents just sit there and ignore it. Get off your lazy butt and pick the child up and go outside until he calms down.

I know a lot of people use the term brats but it is not really the kids fault it is the parents. When you see a screaming whiny child running around at 10:00PM its not that the kid is behaving badly it is that the dumb parents have no business having a child up that late. I have heard all the excuses that they work and this is the only time to shop. BS I worked and did not keep my child out so late. It is silly that so many kids are sleep deprived.

Now on the other hand I get annoyed with people who get so eaily bent out of shape over normal noise a child makes. Kids are louder than a lot of adults so they sometimes yell happily or say no rather loud. This does not bother me as long as the parent does not let it get out of hand. Remind the child to use their public voice. I used to do that with my son. How else are they supposed to learn proper behavor?

Also sometimes babies fuss. Again I can ignore it as long as it does not become 20 minutes of screaming. In that case the baby is obviously in some kind of discomfort take the baby home so you can deal with it.

So much of this is just comman sense.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

StupidSmurf said:
Personally, I lump the parents who won't lift a finger to at least try and control their spawn in the same category as people who:

Park in handicap spaces
Cut in line very deliberately
Block an entire lane of traffic so they can talk to a friend of theirs who's standing at the curb
People who bring a full, and I mean a FULL, shopping cart into the 10 items or less line
People who talk loudly on their cel phones in a movie theater

For me it's worse 'cause the kid's being hurt as well. Albeit subtly. I don't like to watch.

And I tend to think that, considering all that I've read here, people are more appalled at parental indifference and uncaring, as opposed to being angry at the kids themselves.

Of course. Obviously the kid doesn't know any better because the adult's let 'em down in that department. The kid can't do what's appropriate if not ever taught.

joe b.
 



I brought this up in my ethics class yesterday. The general consensus was that in order to make the rule ethical, he'd have to extend it to all rowdy people, not just kids.
 

jaerdaph said:
I can't wait to some of you have children of your own someday. Boy will you be in for a shock. :)
Everybody is in shock the first time they have kids, I think. Probably the second too--going from one to two is a major change. Going from two to three is tough too--that's when your parenting has to switch from man-to-man to zone defense.

Going from three to four, though--that wasn't a big deal for us.

You do know, I hope, that many of us who have chimed in on this thread do indeed have kids already, and are thereby long past the shock phase?
 

Xath said:
I brought this up in my ethics class yesterday. The general consensus was that in order to make the rule ethical, he'd have to extend it to all rowdy people, not just kids.
I think that most store owners would throw out an adult that runs around screaming and bangs his head over the counter.

Actually, the whole point is that the owner is extending to rowdy children the rules that normally are implicit when dealing with rowdy adults.
 

BiggusGeekus said:
I have a 23 month old daughter and I don't have a problem with this.

A diner who has paid for a meal has paid for the ambiance of the restaurant as well.

Personally, I'd like to see more no-child places. When I take the wife out on a date it's no fun sitting next to a family with a screaming kid. I just shelled out $50 for a babysitter and I still have to put up with a toddler? No thanks.

Perhaps, but the guy who tried to get a woman to stop breast-feeding ought to be tarred and feathered.
 

Parents who don't teach respect and cultivate discipline are doing their children a grave disservice. As I've told my youngest, we (her mom and I) come down on her for her bad behavior for a number of reasons, and one of them is that it's better to have people who love and care for you be the ones criticising you, as opposed to having a stranger who doesn't care about you personally, and may in fact actually dislike you, doing it.

Because, let's face it, even though most people will simply roll their eyes and/or click their tongues in disgust at a teenager or young adult openly practicing antisocial public behavior, odds are there will eventually be SOMEONE who brings a more, shall we say, confrontational reaction to the table...either verbally or physically. And I can see the chastened/beaten/whatever obnoxious kid sitting (lying?) there, going "Why didn't anyone give me a clue that this wasn't a cool thing to do?"
 

Elf Witch said:
So much of this is just comman sense.

Indeed. If only it were more common.

And by the way, I haven't seen you around the boards much Elf Witch. Am I not looking in the right places? Regardless, I always enjoy your posts so don't be a stranger.
 

Remove ads

Top