It's nearly 20 years but British Airlines had this in a covert way at least on domestic flights: I tried to book for 2 adults and 1 child and got "no seats". When you entered 3, 4, 5 adults seats were available.
As a father I was not amused: The reputation damage has costed BA many flights tickets from my family and UK tourism at least one journey to the country. Probably more.
I don't deny that children can be disturbing: But 99% it's their stupid parents' fault. Instead of interacting with their children they concentrate on the so-called entertainment system or nowadays their so-called smartphones. Their has been recent research that generation Z has lower social skills and more mental health problems than the previous generation that grew up mostly without electronic devices. Of course it's only a correlation, but causality seems pretty obvious to me.
Perhaps the only seats left were in an emergency exit row?
Depending on the country and airline, passengers seated in the emergency exit rows need to be at least 12 (EU, UK) to 15 (US, Australia) years old. The IATA definition of “child”, for the purpose of fares, is under 12.
Thus, a narrowbody jet with 3-3 seating could have room for up to six adults but not a single child.
That said, exit rows usually get snapped up quickly so this may be unlikely.
Also possible the only seats left are seats in the middle of a row and they wouldn't let you book a child seat without booking an adult seat immediately next to it.
We don't need to assign blame you know. Many things aren't anyone's fault.
I don't think most parents want their kids to be noisy of whiny either, it's just how kids often are! Plus, they've just been inserted in a confining and boring environment, perhaps for quite a while, it is only natural that it upsets them a bit. I don't like being in a plane either, I just have the benefit of self control and understanding that it'll be over soon. Kids just don't. Not a whole lot a parent can do about that.
I'm not a parent, but I do seem to notice a correlation between annoying kids and parents being glued to their smartphone, scrolling facebook or whatever like no tomorrow.
I also understand that it's hard being a parent, and sometimes you need some time to do something, anything, else. But the issue is that you're not just letting your kid scream in your house, where you're the only one bothered. You're in an enclosed vehicle with many other people who had no say in the matter and didn't know beforehand what they were signing up for. I think it's your responsibility to make sure you're not a PITA to them.
As an example, where I live, there usually are cinema showings where children will show up. You know that if you go and there are a whole bunch of rowdy kids, you won't be seeing the movie quietly. But you know this going in, and can choose to go some other place or time. When you find out there's a screaming brat on a plane, it's already too late for you to make any choice.
> I don't deny that children can be disturbing: But 99% it's their stupid parents' fault (...) electronic devices
Tell me you don't have children without telling me you don't have children.
My kid is 2 years old and never touched a phone in his life. Still, some times he cries for reasons we don't understand or know how to address, or maybe for no reason, as children have been doing for hundreds of thousands of years before phones where invented.
I travelled with a group of adults on a couple of beers heading to a bachelor party. Despite continued excuses, I find most children more tolerable. And I agree that it's almost always the parents' fault.
So a crying baby is the parents fault? A crying toddler is the parents fault. Before having kids I might have agreed with you. Since having kids, I know it's not always the parents fault. Read any book on raising kids you'll see parents don't have some magic remote control over the children.
This seems like another example of the airline industry’s process of enshitification or premiumisation as it’s called in business. Make your core service shittier and provide endless charges and fees for upgrades or enhancements, some of which were previously bundled with the core service.
I’m not a father but something about this rubs me the wrong way and feels anti-social.
Since it's an airline flying between the Netherlands and the Dutch Caribbean, I doubt there's a big demand for the "business" seating at the front of the plane. All they've done is rebrand it.
How's the core service any shittier with this than without?
It's a fact that there are numerous people who, for whatever reason, don't take care of their kids while on a flight. That's already a nuisance right now, even though there's no kid-free zone.
Since it's impractical to ban "bad parents" from a flight, they chose to ban kids altogether. This is why we can't have nice things. But "this" are the bad parents, not the companies trying to make a buck. Although I doubt that if everyone was a "good parent", they wouldn't look for some other way to nickel and dime us.
Who chooses to go in the "not quiet" coach? And is the quiet one actually quiet? Here in France, trains are nominally "call-free" zones, you have to use your phone on the platforms. In practice, nobody does that, and it's not particularly enforced.
I would pay $100 for this, perhaps more on long-haul flights. I don't have a problem with children per se. But some kids have behavioral issues and/or clueless, exhausted parents without the self awareness to recognize as much.
Honestly, some "adults" are just as bad nowadays. Jamming their legs up against the seat in front. Vigorously smashing the - admittedly sluggish - touch screens. Talking loudly for an entire 5h overnight flight. And worse...
If it's such a jam for tall people just to get their "legs in the area of the seat", how are they managing to put their feet - not legs - against the back of the seat in front? Curled up basically lying on their back?
Ah! Isn’t this more for the benefit of the Airlines and neither the passengers nor the kids and their parents?
Imagine if they introduce stashes of assorted candies, crayons, painting books, and other activity stuff to give it for free to the kids. A tad controversial but as a last resort, what about internationally accepted kid’s medicated cough syrup — will likely make the kid drowsy enough for a calmer experience.
Just thinking out loud. I have two daughters who have been flying around since zero-years. I empathize with other parents, and always see if I can help them if needed when their kid starts the routine.
As a parent of a Special Needs child with behavioral issues:
I love this. I would pay for it when traveling solo, and when traveling with my child it would alleviate at least some of my anxiety knowing that those who really hate being around the issues I'm likely to be dealing with should be in a different section.
I don't like that it's pay gated though. That means someone less well off who has issues with it is likely to be MORE upset.
Of course they do. They hold a power that people will give them money for, they'll go for it. I'm surprised we don't get more of these - pet friendly zones, smoke friendly zones, peanut free zones and peanut allowed zones, and so on. We're so disturbed by anything anyone else is doing that asking for a premium to get any sort of angle is always a profitable
Great idea. I would also add option to stay away from people who allegedly never heard of headphones invention. Affordable internet in the sky makes bring issue of those people in the sky.
As a father I was not amused: The reputation damage has costed BA many flights tickets from my family and UK tourism at least one journey to the country. Probably more.
I don't deny that children can be disturbing: But 99% it's their stupid parents' fault. Instead of interacting with their children they concentrate on the so-called entertainment system or nowadays their so-called smartphones. Their has been recent research that generation Z has lower social skills and more mental health problems than the previous generation that grew up mostly without electronic devices. Of course it's only a correlation, but causality seems pretty obvious to me.