You wouldn’t leave your luggage in the middle of airport for people to fall over, so why your child?
In most cases a child doesn’t have a responsibility to be aware of its surroundings, its too young to comprehend. Which is why it is a parents responsibility to keep an eye out and make sure the kid doesn’t get under anybodies feet.
Not to mention, if I’m behind someone and saying “Coming through,” most adults can get out of the way. Not so with toddlers. Plus, as I’m hurrying, I can see most people in front of me if they’re at least three-and-a-half feet tall. Again, not so with toddlers.
Listen Death of Rats, if I’m strolling through the mall or Ikea on a Sunday afternoon, I’m not running into toddlers. But if I’m trying to go clear across Ohare Airport in 15 minutes or less during a rush, the last thing I want to do is make sure I’m not tripping over a little kid. So why don’t you go roll your eyes elsewhere.
There’s a difference between parents are 100% responsible for their kids’ safety (my position) and parents have to keep their kids safe 100% of the time. Crowded malls, restaurants, and airports are not the places for their toddlers to learn to experience the world. That just inconveniences everyone around them and increases the danger for the kids (and makes other people, like serving staff, feel bad if a kid gets hurt).
You may not want to be inconvenienced by others (who does?), the issue is whether you have a right to demand not to be inconvenienced by others.
Presumably, the elderly, blind and deaf are allowed to share public spaces, in spite of the fact that they cannot hear, see or easily make way for you?
So what is the solution, considering that parents have no real choice but to use these spaces? Carry their kids everywhere? That just isn’t realistic.
To my mind, attempting to impose hard and fast rules in absolute terms is just asking for silly unintended consequences. What happened to using common sense?
Apparently it died a quiet death. Along with community spirit and neighbourly love.
Anyways, I’m glad I’ve chosen to live in a country where people see a small kid running around as a nice thing.
Common sense doesn’t appear to be all that common among the public these days.
As for your first question, part of the problem is that it’s an inconvenience for the adult, but dangerous for the child, and most caring people would feel horrible if they inadvertently hurt a small child. The child isn’t aware enough to be able to avoid those situations without adult intervention, and random strangers shouldn’t have to worry about stepping on your child while trying to get through a busy airport. Any crowded area is going to be a danger to a young kid because you can’t see them until you’re on top of them.
It died in the same plane crash that killed personal responsibility.
This isn’t about inconveniencing me. It’s about me (or anyone) inadvertantly hurting a little kid. It’s a safety issue. If I’m hustling to the next gate, I can both see adults and let them know I’m coming up behind them. I can do neither to a two-year-old.
To bring it to an extreme: Creating laws which limit pedestrian traffic on certain roads-- is this an inconvenience to pedestrians, or is it necessary to ensure both the safety of drivers and pedestrians? Or, should we just let pedestrians walk where ever they want, and let it be up to the drivers to make sure they don’t hit someone walking down the middle to the road?
Busy airports aren’t the place for little Tina or Mickey to learn how to navigate around big people. It’s irresponsible for parents to let their little ones toddle and waddle around while people are moving fast with heavy luggage in-tow, carts are zipping through, etc. And yet parents still let them do it. It boggles my mind.
Of course it’s asking for it, and it’s sad that common sense isn’t used. There shouldn’t be a need for any rules or terms - it’s not hard to see that when you’re in a crowded area, that’s dangerous for a child to be underfoot, then that child should be within in a reasonable grasping distance of the parent.
The point is though, some people will let their kids run wild anywhere, not just in the places where it is safe for them.
I know children will dart off towards something that catches their eye, without thinking of the consequences, because they’re too young to know the consequences, so they should, in a busy area, be on a leash until they understand why they shouldn’t run off.
Fine. But when your child isn’t looking and runs into ME and starts crying, don’t glare at me as if it is MY fault.
I must be an inhuman monster because my initial reaction was vigorous laughter. Then I felt really bad for the child. Then the sidebar revealed the baby was OK in the end and I had to laugh more.
Oh, and it reminded me of this: [Southpark Clip]Kick the Baby[/SC]
One ticket to Hell please. Yes, economy class.
As someone in the safety profession, I’d like to make it abundantly clear that “accidents” are extremely rare. Most times when someone gets hurt or something gets broken, the incident was 100% preventable. Provable negligence exists in virtually every incident; maybe not criminal negligence, but at the very least poor judgment on the part of one or several persons. In all my years in my field, I’ve seen plenty of injuries, some minor, some gruesome (one near fatality, but no deaths… yet), but I have never once seen an “accident.” Accidents don’t just happen; they are caused.
Oh, and as for the whole common sense thing, it doesn’t exist. There is good judgment and there is bad judgment. Common sense doesn’t exist, it never existed in the past, and it isn’t likely to spring up any time soon.
If it wasn’t your fault I won’t glare. Why would I?
I think your profession, their redefinition of “accident” and the removal of personal responsibility you just articulated, has done more to destroy America than American Idol, the George W Bush Administration and Shamwows. You’ve created a nation of wusses, so afraid of pain and death because we can’t learn how to take a fall off a playground structure and walk away with some bruises, that we watch our civil rights be taken away and don’t dare break a nail fighting for them.
Oh, don’t get me wrong, you started out with the best of intentions. Keeping carcinogens out of drinking water? That was a good one, kudos for that. Removing lead from paint? Thanks! But then to keep your own industry going, you moved onto areas that weren’t about corporate malfeasance, but just about making sure no one gets hurt ever.
But, by all means, keep making playgrounds “safe” (and so boring that they’re empty), toys “safe” (and so dull you have to jazz even the simplest toy up with electronics) and kitchen implements “safe” (so that they no longer work.) My kids and I will be out in the forest preserves (where we can climb over the safety fences), playing with dangerous pointy sticks and throwing choking hazard rocks and climbing terrifying insecure trees.
Never have, never will. I was the one apologizing profusely for my child and glaring at her, saying, “See, that’s why you don’t run off! You stay by me and you won’t get run over.” And after an incident or two learning from the natural consequences of her own actions, she stopped running off.
I’ve used a kid-leash and talked about it here. Great things, they are, and I agree that the airport is one place where they are a lifesaver. But if you over use them - if you take the attitude that the kid must be in literal arm’s reach at all times until they understand through abstract reasoning why running off is dangerous, you’re going to have to keep them at your side 24/7 until they’re about 12. Literally, that’s when their ability to do that kind of thinking ahead develops. And in the meantime, they’ve lost untold thousands of exploratory, self-reliance and independent living lessons.
Surely some middle ground - where children are restrained during lifethreatening circumstances, like parking lots or crossing the street, and let a bit free to make their own mistakes during merely inconvenient or potentially painful ones, like bumping into someone inside the grocery store, is better for all of us in the end. Unless you approve of this generation of absurdly micromanaged parenting, where an employee’s mother may call to cuss you out because you didn’t give her precious snowflake a raise.
I got glared at when an unsupervised child ran head first into my shopping cart. Mom either wasn’t watching or didn’t care that the child was running around the corner in a grocery, as I came around same corner with my cart.
I got the nasty glare when the girl ran into my cart and started wailing. Sorry, not my fault. Kids shouldn’t be running loose in stores…leave it for the park. If you can’t be arsed to supervise her, why should I? She’s not my kid, plus I had no way of knowing she’d be coming around the corned full-speed.
Then Mom was a bitch.
When I was 12 or so, I was playing at a park. I had noticed a mother and her toddler there, but the mother did a pretty good job of keeping the babe away from the older children. At one point, I moved off to the swings. I was swinging pretty high, facing away from the place where the mother had set up their picnic blanket (perhaps eight feet away from the “sandbox” that contained the swingset). All of a sudden, when I was on the backwards arc, my backside slammed into something. Surprise! It was the toddler. The mother came to comfort the crying (not seriously injured - no blood, no shrieks) child and had the gall to ream me a new asshole for not watching where I was swinging.
I wonder what she thought was the purpose of a tall swingset. 
That’s not a perfect solution. Not straying is only one part of the problem; kids on leashes can still get hurt. The child of a friend of a friend got hurt when she pulled a shelving unit on herself. Mom was a few feet away, but couldn’t stop her in time. The child escaped with a few bumps and bruises, but it could have been a lot worse.
Leashes and harnesses are fine as long as you can still control the child’s behavior. They’re not a substitute for good judgment or parental control. Kids need to learn how to behave in public, and only parents can teach that.
Robin
I think you are way off base with regards to my profession here and have missed the point of what I was saying. Nowhere did I remove personal responsibility from the equation – in fact, I think I pretty clearly stated that there is personal responsibility attached to virtually every incident; someone always did something to precipitate the incident and that behaviour needs to be addressed and corrected in the future to prevent more of the same. It’s not about the wussification of the world; it’s about getting everyone home in one piece at the end of the day. You seem to be suggesting that a few more deaths and dismemberments are somehow something to strive for, and I think that is crazy talk.
Yes, my job is about ensuring no one gets hurt ever. Our company has found, through over a century of careful record-keeping, that workers are far more productive when they work safely than they are when they’re in a hospital getting a finger surgically reattached. They’re also much more capable of lifting more weight, hammering more nails, and plenty of other macho, manly work stuff. We just happen to not believe that our guys have to learn these lessons “the hard way.”
Getting back to the OP, I think the general consensus is that care must be taken situationally. Kids need not get kicked in the head by a break dancer to learn that they shouldn’t wander around in malls. A parent needs to control that. Let the kid learn about wandering in less busy environments, where they’re less likely to suffer a concussion as a consequence.