Some of these seem fine, some of them not so fine. Letting kids run around at a restaurant? I’d call that not fine. Other people are paying to be there and they probably don’t want to deal with your kids running around and past their table. The concerns about servers tripping over them are real, even if it’s not actually happening. I suspect the servers would prefer not to have to dodge someone’s kids to prevent that from happening.
The fountain? Not a problem, no one was being inconvenienced there, no one was paying to be there and having their time disrupted. They weren’t creating a dangerous situation.
The barbecue? Not a problem, they were invited, presumably by someone who understands what they’re getting into, and they can be uninvited, or not invited next time if it’s a problem.
Bottom line is, there’s places where it’s appropriate to let your kids run around and be wild, and there’s places where it’s not, and if your kids aren’t capable of not doing it in places where it isn’t appropriate, that’s a problem.
Just look at any public restroom, where the sinks are too high for them to reach
Well, maybe your two-year-old isn’t entitled to low sinks in a public restroom not specifically designed for children (e.g. at a school)? That shit costs money, why would they install low sinks just so kids who amount for a tiny percentage of the users can use them without parental assistance?
The bathroom thing just illustrates that we don’t accommodate kids in our society. There are probably more kids in the population who could use low sinks than you see because our public spaces are so hostile to them.
It’s more common in Europe (e.g. Sweden) for folks to bring their kids everywhere, and the physicality of those locations accommodates them because they are more present.
The bathroom argument that you made is akin to saying that folks shouldn’t feel entitled to bike lines / safe sidewalks because our cities were designed for cars and sidewalks and bike lanes are expensive for a tiny percent of the moving population.
Wouldn’t it be easier to have stools available that a kid could pull up to the sink to use a normal height sink, than to have sinks that are exclusively useful by kids?
The bathroom argument that you made is akin to saying that folks shouldn’t feel entitled to bike lines / safe sidewalks because our cities were designed for cars and sidewalks and bike lanes are expensive for a tiny percent of the moving population.
Bike lanes are installed by the government using taxpayer funding. Bathrooms (in non-public spaces) are installed by private companies. Difference in expectations there, for sure.
Some of these seem fine, some of them not so fine. Letting kids run around at a restaurant? I’d call that not fine. Other people are paying to be there and they probably don’t want to deal with your kids running around and past their table. The concerns about servers tripping over them are real, even if it’s not actually happening. I suspect the servers would prefer not to have to dodge someone’s kids to prevent that from happening.
The fountain? Not a problem, no one was being inconvenienced there, no one was paying to be there and having their time disrupted. They weren’t creating a dangerous situation.
The barbecue? Not a problem, they were invited, presumably by someone who understands what they’re getting into, and they can be uninvited, or not invited next time if it’s a problem.
Bottom line is, there’s places where it’s appropriate to let your kids run around and be wild, and there’s places where it’s not, and if your kids aren’t capable of not doing it in places where it isn’t appropriate, that’s a problem.
Well, maybe your two-year-old isn’t entitled to low sinks in a public restroom not specifically designed for children (e.g. at a school)? That shit costs money, why would they install low sinks just so kids who amount for a tiny percentage of the users can use them without parental assistance?
The bathroom thing just illustrates that we don’t accommodate kids in our society. There are probably more kids in the population who could use low sinks than you see because our public spaces are so hostile to them.
It’s more common in Europe (e.g. Sweden) for folks to bring their kids everywhere, and the physicality of those locations accommodates them because they are more present.
The bathroom argument that you made is akin to saying that folks shouldn’t feel entitled to bike lines / safe sidewalks because our cities were designed for cars and sidewalks and bike lanes are expensive for a tiny percent of the moving population.
Wouldn’t it be easier to have stools available that a kid could pull up to the sink to use a normal height sink, than to have sinks that are exclusively useful by kids?
Bike lanes are installed by the government using taxpayer funding. Bathrooms (in non-public spaces) are installed by private companies. Difference in expectations there, for sure.
Stools are a great solution!