grandparents finding grandchildren difficult

Torry_Quine

Nicki wrote: »

But you said you were also not tall enough to hold on! Does that mean you should sit in the lap of a taller travelling companion if all the seats are already occupied by grown ups

I said I was too short to use the overhead straps but hold on to a seat like most people do. :rotfl::rotfl:

peachyprice

Torry_Quine wrote: »

I haven't actually said my age or health but they aren't relevant.

you have on other threads though

If a child can't hold on then they should be on the lap of the adult.

But you said if they are too big to sit on a lap they are old enough to give up their seat for you. There's a vast difference between being too big for a lap and being strong enough to hold on tight.

Torry_Quine

peachyprice wrote: »

you have on other threads though



But you said if they are too big to sit on a lap they are old enough to give up their seat for you. There's a vast difference between being too big for a lap and being strong enough to hold on tight.

In which case you would know that I'm neither healthy or elderly!!:o

I don't agree. Surely a pre-school child can sit on a lap and a school age child can stand. Using both hands if needed.

Nicki

Torry_Quine wrote: »

In which case you would know that I'm neither healthy or elderly!!:o

I don't agree. Surely a pre-school child can sit on a lap and a school age child can stand. Using both hands if needed.

A lot of parents decide to have more than one child however, and a fairly common age gap is 18-36 months. So how does your plan work when mum is travelling with her 5 year old child and their younger sibling who will most likely be aged 2-4? Or indeed with the 2 year old and the newborn baby being carried in a sling to avoid inconveniencing those who don't like others taking pushchairs on public transport?

I don't think the situation is as black and white as you would like.

Torry_Quine

Nicki wrote: »

A lot of parents decide to have more than one child however, and a fairly common age gap is 18-36 months. So how does your plan work when mum is travelling with her 5 year old child and their younger sibling who will most likely be aged 2-4? Or indeed with the 2 year old and the newborn baby being carried in a sling to avoid inconveniencing those who don't like others taking pushchairs on public transport?

I don't think the situation is as black and white as you would like.

They really need to think before they travel so as to inconvenience as little as possible. Lets be honest here the people you describe are unlikely, though not impossible, to be travelling at peak times.

I'm sorry if that sounds harsh but why should fare-paying adults be standing in place of children.

Nicki

Maybe the mum could stay at home at the tax payers expense rather than drop the kids off at nursery or childminders by public transport on her way to a full day at work then! 6-7 years until the youngest starts school should do it nicely. I am sure the working public wont mind paying a lot extra on their taxes so long as they increase their chances of getting a seat on the bus to and from work!

plumpmouse

Torry_Quine wrote: »

They really need to think before they travel so as to inconvenience as little as possible. Lets be honest here the people you describe are unlikely, though not impossible, to be travelling at peak times.

I'm sorry if that sounds harsh but why should fare-paying adults be standing in place of children.

Do you believe then that disabled or the elderly should think before they travel or is it just parents who need to plan their days around "fare-paying" adults so they don't "inconvenience" them? Why do the elderly need to travel at peak times anymore than parents??

Also should we all not be giving up seats to our elders if this is just a case of "respecting your elders". If I was a 40 year old fit adult and someone at 45 got on the bus should I give my seat to them?

And when does a child become deserving of a seat 16/18/21/40???????

365days

I'm sorry if that sounds harsh but why should fare-paying adults be standing in place of children.[/QUOTE]

Because some fare paying adults (myself included) perceive a child to be more in need of a seat than they are, just as they may see an elderly, disabled, or for that matter someone holding loads of shopping in more need. That for me is common courtesy and manners. If I don't think the persons NEED is more than mine why should I move?

For me, its irrelevant what age the person is it's about need. A healthy adult is no more in NEED of a seat than ANYone else - children included.

Torry_Quine

Nicki wrote: »

Maybe the mum could stay at home at the tax payers expense rather than drop the kids off at nursery or childminders by public transport on her way to a full day at work then! 6-7 years until the youngest starts school should do it nicely. I am sure the working public wont mind paying a lot extra on their taxes so long as they increase their chances of getting a seat on the bus to and from work!

Interesting that no mention of the dad! :eek:

Sambucus_Nigra

Torry_Quine wrote: »

I'm sorry if that sounds harsh but why should fare-paying adults be standing in place of children.

By your logic, fare-paying teenagers should have a seat in favour of non-fare-paying oldies.