• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Would you go to a restaurant that banned crying and screaming children?

Would you go to a restaurant that banned crying and screaming children?

  • Total voters
    85
Aunt Spiker said:
Just because a child acts out does *not* mean they're disabled in any way . . . it's quite "normal" for kids to throw a fit, toss food and things liek that - which is why many parents spend exhaustive long hours teaching their children *manors* in various ways.

Nor does being disabled *mean* that a child does not know how to control themselves.
Click to expand...

The point would then be made that your two were not as deep on the spectrum as the children who could not be taught were.
 
Mickey Shane said:
The sound-proof room wouldn't work. Parents with screaming kids cannot stand to hear other people's screaming kids, and are usually the first ones to complain.

I've seen a few posts where "my kid" never yells and screams in public like "other people's kids". Note the use of singular and plural. I was an only child. Screaming in public would have resulted in me getting something to really scream about. Outside of course.
Click to expand...

When my mom was hospitalized, my daughter was two. She went to one of 'those homes' to stay for a week. When she got home, she thought a tantrum could be fun. She threw herself on the ground, and as she was drawing breath for her air raid siren, I hoisted her up by the cross straps of her coveralls, bounced her off her feet and landed her again while simultaneously hissing at her "We don't do that". Shut her RIGHT the hell up. That was her only tantrum and yes; she's an only child.
 
justabubba said:
here's a clue. if he cannot be made to behave, take him to a restaurant where good behavior is not an accepted standard until he can learn to behave
Click to expand...

Exactly. Get a sitter, leave the child home. Restaurants are not one-size-fits-all.
 
Gipper said:
I seriously doubt that. There are completely smokeless establishments that thrive due to their selective standards, and there is a higher percentage of smokers that eat out than parents who take children not of the appropriate age that eat out.

And, as bubba has suggested, there should be implicit "rules". One might expect this at a McDonalds or equally low-brow establishment. However, if I'm dropping 40 bucks a plate on a meal with mellow ambience and upper-tier clientele, I'd be incredibly pissed at this happening.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Age has nothing to do with it.

And sort of apropos of nothing, my sister the waitress has repeatedly bitched about the people who are the most hassle, with the most ill-mannered little brats, generally leave the worst tips. YMMV.
 
ludahai said:
Of course not... and with all of the anti-Children remarks in this thread I have seen in the first page, I am truly disappointed with our human species in the 21st century... thank goodness I live in a country where people realize that kids will be kids and that active kids are NOT a result of bad parenting...
Click to expand...

I've yet to see a "breeder" comment in this thread. It's not anti-children, it's anti-RUDE. It is rude to allow your child to behave like Hellen Keller before the intervention. It just is. Nobody else should pay for the pleasure of listening to someone else's offspring have a full-blown meltdown.

And to introduce another side to this issue, some adults with anxiety disorder can be triggered by the sensory overload caused by said child.
 
Responsible parents don't take kids out to nicer restaurants until they're old enough to behave and sit still through a longer meal. Some kids never make it. For them, there are plenty of family restaurants available for family dining:

Red Robin
Applebees
Cracker Barel
Cocos
Bob's Big Boy

Anyplace that gives the kids their own menu and crayons... that's where you take your kids. Most parents know that. A few don't get it and drag their little ones out to the Country Club or other upscale places. It's selfish on the part of the parents who are too clueless to realize their kids aren't ready.

Selfish parents who are dragging their little kids to upscale nicer places should pay for a babysitter. Don't show your bad parenting skills off in public.
 
Last edited:
Orion said:
We all agree the restaurant has the right to do it, but we can still comment on the motivations behind it.

I think people need to be more tolerant of each other. I've been in situations with screaming children and yes it's taxing on the nerves, but children are part of our society and our communities. Shutting them out just because they are children does not make sense to me.

This restaurant's policy would make more sense if it targeted bad parenting, i.e. if a child is screaming and misbehaving, and the parent is doing nothing about it, then they should be asked to leave. I can only think of a handful of instances where I've been in populated, closed space (like a bus, restaurant, etc.) where a child was going crazy and the parent did nothing. MOST parents get stressed out by the idea that their child is annoying others and they want to put a stop to it right away.

Target the bad parents, not all children. Anyway, from the looks of that diner, they don't exactly have the look and level of service that would demand more etiquette. They're a BBQ house and the owner is a little hoity toity.
Click to expand...

The rule is targetting the parents, as I doubt the kids care one way or the other whether they eat at home or at a restaurant. And if a kid screams a lot in restaurants, chances are, he doesn't want to be there.

My child was not good at all in restaurants when he was little. It wasn't a matter of me being a bad parent (I dare anyone to say that to my face :lol:). The answer? I just didn't take him to restaurants. I wasn't going to listen to that crap, why would I expect anyone else to? We exclusively did take out during those years. It wasn't a hardship. It was just the best thing for everyone. :shrug:

I lived it, and I have the scars. I'll be sympathetic to a point when another parent is going through it, but my patience isn't infinite. If you can't stop it, take the kid outside. Get. It. Out. Of. My. Space.


BDBoop said:
When my mom was hospitalized, my daughter was two. She went to one of 'those homes' to stay for a week. When she got home, she thought a tantrum could be fun. She threw herself on the ground, and as she was drawing breath for her air raid siren, I hoisted her up by the cross straps of her coveralls, bounced her off her feet and landed her again while simultaneously hissing at her "We don't do that". Shut her RIGHT the hell up. That was her only tantrum and yes; she's an only child.
Click to expand...

That doesn't work for all kids, though. It would be nice if it did, but it doesn't work that way.
 
StandUpChuck said:
That doesn't work for all kids, though. It would be nice if it did, but it doesn't work that way.
Click to expand...

Yes, I know. I pointed that out in several posts before this one. Not to mention the fact that my daughter is currently up-close and personal with hell right now, as she is dealing with two unruly toddlers.
 
peepnklown said:
I voted, ‘Hell Yeah!’
This correlates to the right of a private business owner to discriminate.
Click to expand...

That would be illegal if that's what they were doing.

They're not discriminating, they're setting a very reasonable policy for their guests. Similar to 'no Cell Phones please', they advise guests to Keep your kids under control or take them for a walk. If it said 'we don't serve families' and the reason was because they are families, then they'd be in trouble.

I said no because I prefer the crayon places like Cracker Barrel -- everybody's happy and my wife and I don't have to tag-team eat.
 
ludahai said:
Of course not... and with all of the anti-Children remarks in this thread I have seen in the first page, I am truly disappointed with our human species in the 21st century... thank goodness I live in a country where people realize that kids will be kids and that active kids are NOT a result of bad parenting...
Click to expand...

Yeah, but letting active kids ruin someone else's dinner--those parents (who have learned to tune their own kids out) sit there drinking wine and pretending everything's normal because Jr. always does this at home... THAT IS BAD PARENTING. They are teaching their kids that other people don't matter, instilling a sense of entitlement (every room is your playroom) and neglecting to teach them basic manners and a respect for others.

As a parent of three and married to a 1st grade teacher, I know that 'Active kid' can be a legitimate behavioral issue or an excuse for poor and inconsistent parenting practices at home. 'Lower your voice.' 'Sit back down and finish your dinner.' Practice these at home before you take them on the road.

When my youngest daughter had to be taken outside for a walk, she would be happy at first, thinking she got her way, but when she saw her brother and sister eating desert... Now, when we say, do you need to go outside? she lowers her voice and sits still.
 
theangryamerican said:
They are entitle to post those signs all they want, it's a violation of civil rights to remove me unless it's for my safety or the safety of other patrons. Inconvenience doesn't cut it.
The Right to Refuse Service: Can a Business Refuse Service to Someone Because of Appearance, Odor, or Attire? | LegalZoom
Click to expand...

Welcome to DP - piece of advice, read the links you post and make sure they don't contradict what you're saying.

You misrepresented what the article said and left out that they listed cases where people were refused service based on dress.

'No shirt, no shoes, no service' holds. 'No blacks, no muslims, no disabled' would not be legal.

Here's what the sign should read: 'In consideration of all our guests, we ask that parents please monitor their children. And silence your cell phones. No substitutions. And absolutely NO CLOWNS!'
 
ludahai said:
I would have told my kid (i don't have a son) to sit still, but if you had been rude to my kids in any way, I would have let you have it.

For the record, I have taken my kids on flights from Asia to the US East Coast with no problems whatsoever...
Click to expand...
I wouldn't expect your kids would be a problem. I wasn't rude, just firm. And ready.
 
I don't have a problem with a restaurant making such a policy. It is their business, and they should be able to make such a rule. The rule isn't really unreasonable, and no one has to go out to eat, especially at a particular restaurant.

As for the children on airplanes comments in the first few pages, that is an entirely different story. Sometimes people do have to fly. It is no where near the same thing as going out to eat at a restaurant. There are plenty of reasons why a parent would have to fly with their children, even when the children are at ages where they are just learning to control themselves. It is obviously not practical to give the child/children a private time out on an airplane. And I can't imagine an airplane ride is all that comfortable for a toddler or baby to begin with, especially ones lasting over 3 hours. I am definitely a voice of experience, although my oldest was very good when he flew at six months old from Hawaii to Florida. I don't think I will have such good luck on this next trip though, since it will be just me flying with a 15 month old and a 2 1/2 yo from NC to San Diego. I wouldn't have a problem if they did make an airline just for adults, but it is highly impratical for anyone to think that children should not fly at all, behaved or not. Sometimes it is the most practical way to get somewhere.
 
roguenuke said:
I don't have a problem with a restaurant making such a policy. It is their business, and they should be able to make such a rule. The rule isn't really unreasonable, and no one has to go out to eat, especially at a particular restaurant.

As for the children on airplanes comments in the first few pages, that is an entirely different story. Sometimes people do have to fly. It is no where near the same thing as going out to eat at a restaurant. There are plenty of reasons why a parent would have to fly with their children, even when the children are at ages where they are just learning to control themselves. It is obviously not practical to give the child/children a private time out on an airplane. And I can't imagine an airplane ride is all that comfortable for a toddler or baby to begin with, especially ones lasting over 3 hours. I am definitely a voice of experience, although my oldest was very good when he flew at six months old from Hawaii to Florida. I don't think I will have such good luck on this next trip though, since it will be just me flying with a 15 month old and a 2 1/2 yo from NC to San Diego. I wouldn't have a problem if they did make an airline just for adults, but it is highly impratical for anyone to think that children should not fly at all, behaved or not. Sometimes it is the most practical way to get somewhere.
Click to expand...

Of course Kids should fly. I flew many times as a child. Just don't let them scream, or bounce off the seat back in front of them repeatedly. That's all there is to it.
 
hazlnut said:
Responsible parents don't take kids out to nicer restaurants until they're old enough to behave and sit still through a longer meal. Some kids never make it. For them, there are plenty of family restaurants available for family dining:

Red Robin
Applebees
Cracker Barel
Cocos
Bob's Big Boy

Anyplace that gives the kids their own menu and crayons... that's where you take your kids. Most parents know that. A few don't get it and drag their little ones out to the Country Club or other upscale places. It's selfish on the part of the parents who are too clueless to realize their kids aren't ready.

Selfish parents who are dragging their little kids to upscale nicer places should pay for a babysitter. Don't show your bad parenting skills off in public.
Click to expand...




Uhm this dive is a strp below these places and touts itself as kid friendly. :shrug:
 
Kid friendly. Not tantrum or screaming friendly.
Click to expand...

In Rev's defense, it's pretty much the same thing. You don't expect peace and quiet when you go to Chuck E. Cheese.
 
BDBoop said:
Kid friendly. Not tantrum or screaming friendly.
Click to expand...



So it's not kid friendly, it's well behaved at all times or you will be kicked out kid friendly?



Please, that place is a dive, a hole in the wall that is on the beach. It advertises on yelp as "kid friendly". either it is or it isn't.
 
I disagree.

I'm kid-friendly. I'm tantrum intolerant. And there's a lot of space in between for good, and bad, behavior.
 
BDBoop said:
I disagree.

I'm kid-friendly. I'm tantrum intolerant. And there's a lot of space in between for good, and bad, behavior.
Click to expand...



I'm not saying one should let kids run wild, but if you are at a kid friendly place that sticks a highchair at the table, occasional chirps and even short cries should not be of concern to you.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
I'm not saying one should let kids run wild, but if you are at a kid friendly place that sticks a highchair at the table, occasional chirps and even short cries should not be of concern to you.
Click to expand...

Oh, they're not. I'm generally MORE concerned with my sister swearing like a sailor in the presence of little people. I love infants, babies, toddlers, - and I can tell the difference between a cry of distress for whatever reason, vs a rebel yell.

The restaurant in question isn't concerned about chirps and cries. They're concerned about screaming tantrums.
 
BDBoop said:
Oh, they're not. I'm generally MORE concerned with my sister swearing like a sailor in the presence of little people. I love infants, babies, toddlers, - and I can tell the difference between a cry of distress for whatever reason, vs a rebel yell.
Click to expand...



Yeah that stuff bothers me as well.


The restaurant in question isn't concerned about chirps and cries. They're concerned about screaming tantrums.
Click to expand...


Actually that can be and is often dealt with discreetly, putting up a sign on your dive bar is an attempt to get attention. :shrug:
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Actually that can be and is often dealt with discreetly, putting up a sign on your dive bar is an attempt to get attention. :shrug:
Click to expand...

I tought it was a tradition to put up stupid signs in a dive.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Actually that can be and is often dealt with discreetly, putting up a sign on your dive bar is an attempt to get attention. :shrug:
Click to expand...

Right - but if the parent isn't dealing at all (which does happen) ... I mean, maybe that's why that place wound up going to these lengths.

Who knows. I've never had to deal hands on with an autistic child (my second nephew from my baby sister) but I did deal with his older brother (ADHD) and that was just **** tons of fun. I don't envy any parent walking in those shoes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom