Babies/Children in Restaurants (merged topic)
#1
Posted 26 December 2003 - 12:56 AM
#2
Posted 26 December 2003 - 01:04 AM
#3
Posted 26 December 2003 - 01:08 AM
Can a restaurant not refuse children?
There are restaurants here in Japan, not even that fancy, that have signs saying they don't allow children......
Even one of the restaurants at the Tokyo American Club has that sign....
Personally I would not take my current 3 kids to a restaurant of a level higher than Denny's unless I had too, and I have been to some nicer restaurants with my in-laws and I spend the whole time fretting about keeping the kids occupied that I can't enjoy myself.
The moment anyone of my children starts fussing, crying, throwing things (even in a Denny's) it means it is time to take that child outside for a little while.
Kristin Wagner, aka "torakris"
Manager, Membership
kwagner@egstaff.org
#4
Posted 26 December 2003 - 01:19 AM
Most high-end US restaurants, in my experience, choose inaction or various forms of passivity in these situations: they either do nothing, or if they're not full they'll move people to different tables (primarily, they'll move the people who are upset by the noise, rather than the noisemakers).
Co-founder, Society for Culinary Arts & Letters, sshaw@egstaff.org
Proud signatory to the eG Ethics code
Director, New Media Studies, International Culinary Center (take my food-blogging course)
#5
Posted 26 December 2003 - 01:24 AM
There are two things I don't understand, or at least for which I have no sympathy. That's management that has strict rules about infants and children regardless of their behavior and parents who bring their particular child to a place that is either not fit for the child or for which the child is not fit. Come to think of it, I guess the latter breeds the former.
WorldTable
Recent WorldTable posts include: comments about reporting on Michelin stars in The NY Times, the NJ proposal to ban foie gras, Michael Ruhlman's comments in blogs about the NJ proposal and Bill Buford's New Yorker article on the Food Network.
My mailbox is full. You may contact me via worldtable.com.
#6
Posted 26 December 2003 - 01:43 AM
I remember going with a friend to a Mobil 4-star restaurant in Lenox, Massachusetts, when I had some spending cash left near the end of a stint in Tanglewood as a 15-year-old. My friend was also 15. The staff seemed a bit nonplussed by our presence unaccompanied by adults, and I recall that the service was palpably rude as a result, but we didn't let that spoil our enjoyment of the food and etting, and from what I recall, we dressed up some (we were 15-year-olds but musicians!) and behaved appropriately. I feel sure that was the first time I went to a restaurant of that category without an adult (IIRC, the bill for my food was some $22.50 in 1980), but I'm equally sure that I had already been taken to some fancy restaurants in New York by my parents; I just don't remember which ones.
Edited by Pan, 26 December 2003 - 02:31 AM.
#7
Posted 26 December 2003 - 02:11 AM
-Dick
#8
Posted 26 December 2003 - 03:52 AM
#9
Posted 26 December 2003 - 06:28 AM
I love visiting high end restaurants. I don't live in a city that has much in the way of culinary offerings, so for me this means I'll often seek out a special occasion restaurant when I travel. Next year, I'll likely have a little one travelling with me some of the time, and I won't always be in a situation where there will be qualified child care available to me. I'd like to not have to abandon fine dining altogether in those situations, since my opportunities to indulge are so limited!
Anyway, I'm interested to hear what people have to say. One thing I've seen suggested frequently is to aim for the earliest seating, so I'll be finished by the time the dining room fills up. And obviously the 4-5 hour many course tasting menus are completely out of the picture.
#10
Posted 26 December 2003 - 07:16 AM
It is really a shame that clueless parents put the restaurant staff in the proverbial rock-and-a-hard-place situation. Maybe they were raised the way they are raising their kids. That is a scary thought. A second generation of self-absorbed navel gazers that have no social skills? Bleah! Put up a sign... NO CHILDREN!
Is it any coincidence that the newest burdgeoning cottage industry is "etiquette training" for new hires in the corporate world?
BTW... My applause to those parents out there that are still raising their kids the "old fashioned way".
"Having spent most of my life searching for truth in the excitement of science, I am now in search of the perfectly seared foie gras without any sweet glop." Linda LaRose
#11
Posted 26 December 2003 - 07:27 AM
While we are in the restaurant the must stay in their seats and we bring things for them to play with quietly at the table. We also never ever take them to places that allow kids to run around, like Chuck E. Cheese, because they will think that wild behaviour is appropriate sometimes.
The US seems to be full of parents who think that thay can have children and still lead the lives they had when they were single. Inappropriate restaurants are just on aspect of that, along with dragging the kids out to the mall obviously well past their bedtimes and taking them to inappropriate movies...
In Good Thyme
#12
Posted 26 December 2003 - 07:30 AM
You shouldn't bring really small kids to premium restaurants like Daniel in New York, or Mark's place in D.C. You just shouldn't do it. Other diners have likely reserved a lot of money for a special night out, and they don't want to hear your kid screaming, even for a second. They don't need the stress of WORRYING that your kid might start behaving badly and ruin their special night. It isn't fair to them. If you can afford a night at such a restaurant, you can afford a babysitter. And if you can't leave your kid with a sitter, there are numerous-- hundreds, thousands, it doesn't matter where you live-- of places you can eat that are very nice and are known to be family-friendly.
I also think Bux's example may be the one exception to the rule I outlined above. Very small infants-- I mean less than four months old-- often sleep for long stretches of the day. During such times, I believe it might be acceptable for a parent to bring the child to a premium establishment for lunch or a very early dinner. But even then, I wouldn't begrudge any super-fancy restaurant the right to say "sorry, no infants." Restaurants have no reason to trust what parents say about their kids' behavior.
There seems to be a creeping permissiveness towards children (and I mean real youngsters, not 10 or 12 year-olds) in places like high-end restaurants, movie theaters, even (as I saw once, to my extreme displeasure) in concert halls. I have no patience for this phenomenon. Parents with young kids are deprived of certain entertainments they once took for granted. This has always been true. With time, freedom returns. In the meantime, there are many ways to seek entertainment and good eating without spoiling others' pleasure.
but we like hot butter on our breakfast toast!"
#13
Posted 26 December 2003 - 07:30 AM
Clearly, it is not the case that parents are the best judges of their own children's behavior, otherwise we would not see children running around a dining room, throwing food (and leaving the mess behind for someone else to clean up), or screaming. Or perhaps they judge their own children's behavior well, but fail completely on the question of how that behavior should fit into a restaurant situation.As the mother of 3 children under the age of 7, I feel that the parents know their children the best and should give consideration to the other customers. If have a 6 year old who can sit quiety and enjoy the meal then fine, but if your 3 year old has an attention span of 30 seconds and enjoys flinging things across rooms.
The important thing is that you need to be flexible. You need a backup plan if the child is unexpectedly cranky, and can't be expected to sit for an hour. You probably won't ever be able to plan a meal much more than an hour's duration between the time when your child is 6 months old and becomes completely adult-like in behavior, except when you can arrange for child care.This is an interesting question for me, since in a few months I'm going to be a parent and having to make those choices.
I love visiting high end restaurants. I don't live in a city that has much in the way of culinary offerings, so for me this means I'll often seek out a special occasion restaurant when I travel. Next year, I'll likely have a little one travelling with me some of the time, and I won't always be in a situation where there will be qualified child care available to me. I'd like to not have to abandon fine dining altogether in those situations, since my opportunities to indulge are so limited!
Anyway, I'm interested to hear what people have to say. One thing I've seen suggested frequently is to aim for the earliest seating, so I'll be finished by the time the dining room fills up. And obviously the 4-5 hour many course tasting menus are completely out of the picture.
If you are willing to be flexible with their bedtimes and naps, you can often arrange wakeup periods to occur coincidentally with the time you wish to be at the restaurant. By keeping a child up late, and delaying a nap, you can often arrange to have them well-rested and happy when you need them to be.
If you do not have a dining partner who is willing to share the responsibilities of taking the child outside, there is no way you can count on being able to remain at a restaurant when your child's behavior is intolerable.
#14
Posted 26 December 2003 - 07:35 AM
#15
Posted 26 December 2003 - 07:44 AM
Children do not belong in upscale restaurants until their manners and attention span are developed. We take our kids out for pizza, to Friendlys or to diners. If one misbehaves, I take them out to the waiting area or the car. They're way too young (the oldest is 4) to even consider going anywhere else to eat.
I think diners are a good training ground for kids.
"I can't believe a roasted dead animal could look so appealing."--my 10 year old upon seeing Peking Duck for the first time.
#16
Posted 26 December 2003 - 07:45 AM
The Adventures of Bond Girl
I don't ask for much, but whatever you do give me, make it of the highest quality.
#17
Posted 26 December 2003 - 07:48 AM
Seth, as a musician, I disagree with the idea that kids shouldn't be brought to concerts. Kids are the audience of tomorrow and should be introduced to live music. If you think your kid will behave reasonably, bring him or her. Your responsibility as a parent, then, is to take the child out of the hall immediately if s/he starts crying or otherwise starts making noise and won't stop, and to stay out until or unless the child is ready to be quiet. Any parent who doesn't take that responsibility should be thrown out of the hall by management. But the fact is, musicians don't expect absolute silence at concerts, and hearing coughs and such-like proves that you are listening to a recording of a live performance, not a spliced studio recording.There seems to be a creeping permissiveness towards children (and I mean real youngsters, not 10 or 12 year-olds) in places like high-end restaurants, movie theaters, even (as I saw once, to my extreme displeasure) in concert halls.
When I was 8, my attention span was too short to sit through a whole concert at Tanglewood, so my parents and I came to an agreement: I wouldn't bug them and would sit quietly for the first half, and then I would walk home a few hundred yards to the house we lived in for the summer and let them enjoy the second half of the concert in peace. The following summer, when we were at Yale Summer School at Norfolk, I was mature enough to sit through concerts quietly. I also began studying the flute that summer.
#18
Posted 26 December 2003 - 07:49 AM
I also think it's important to point out that sometimes parents just have to deal with the genetic hands their children are dealt. Quite aside from all issues of good parenting and judgment, some kids just have strong propensities towards quietness and calmness, and some will be poorly behaved even if you religiously apply every known form of behavior modification.
Tammy, here's hoping you get a quiet baby!
Co-founder, Society for Culinary Arts & Letters, sshaw@egstaff.org
Proud signatory to the eG Ethics code
Director, New Media Studies, International Culinary Center (take my food-blogging course)
#19
Posted 26 December 2003 - 07:50 AM
People should not be offended by the fact that breastfeeding is occurring, but at the same time, breasts need not be displayed for breastfeeding to occur.I am also somewhat conflicted about women who insisted on breast feeding their child in a high end restaurant. On one hand, I think it's every woman's right to breast feed their child whenever and whereever she feels like, on the other hand, I find sitting at a table with woman opening breast feeding her child is somewhat embarrassing. Then again, I don't have any children.
#20
Posted 26 December 2003 - 07:51 AM
"Having spent most of my life searching for truth in the excitement of science, I am now in search of the perfectly seared foie gras without any sweet glop." Linda LaRose
#21
Posted 26 December 2003 - 07:51 AM
and on the "third hand," breast-feeding, even at the table, is probably one of the most effective ways of quieting a wailing baby in a restaurant.I usually do not mind babies, infants and toddlers in a high end restaurant as long as the parents know their children and can control them reasonably well. What I can't deal with parents who insisted on taking their obviously cranky child into a restaurant and then ignores all the screaming, crying and wailing. I am aslo somewhat conflicted about women who insisted on breast feeding their child in a high end restaurant. On one hand, I think it's every woman's right to breast feed their child whenever and whereever she feels like, on the other hand, I find sitting at a table with woman opening breast feeding her child is somewhat embarrassing. Then again, I don't have any children.
#22
Posted 26 December 2003 - 07:54 AM
Co-founder, Society for Culinary Arts & Letters, sshaw@egstaff.org
Proud signatory to the eG Ethics code
Director, New Media Studies, International Culinary Center (take my food-blogging course)
#23
Posted 26 December 2003 - 07:56 AM
One thing to realize, in my experience a poorly behaved child in a restaurant is not a pleasant experience for the parents either.
"Remember that a very good sardine is always preferable to a not that good lobster."
- Ferran Adria on eGullet 12/16/2004.
Docsconz - Musings on Food and Life
Slow Food Saratoga Region - Co-Founder
Twitter - @docsconz
#24
Posted 26 December 2003 - 08:13 AM
1) high end dining is not for kids. Until a person is old enough to sit still, help hold up a conversation, and read and be interested in a menu and at least some parts of a decently prepared and served meal, I do not believe that parents should subject either the children or the other diners to "an attack of the bored, unhappy children".
2) The other thing is that, while I am hardly a poor person, I am not willing to shell out the big cheese for a meal that is likely to be constantly interrupted by bored children or shortened by my worries about annoying other customers (I am, after all, Southern and rediculously worried about being polite and not being a nuisance) .
How old is old enough? I think that depends entirely on the children and the dining situation at hand. Both of my boys are at this point, fairly well traveled by pretty much any standard and have eaten in some wildly varying situations (street food in the third world to white linen in the first) and are pretty comfortable trying new things and rarely scream out "eeeeuuuuwwww!!that's gross!" (just don't EVER put any escargot in front of them
We did not take them on anything above the level of local family places until the oldest was ten or so (they are now 14 and 11) and the first time either of them saw really good sit down dining involved a couple of Holiday situations in New Orleans that were pretty good practice, as there were lots of other children and they were all expected to behave, so there was lots of peer pressure and that helps.
Do you have to make some personal sacrifice and maybe not go to some of the places that you would normally go when traveling? Yes, but so what? We just looked at it as an opportunity to try something new. I really don't like sitting next to ill behaved children in restaurants and don't want to subject anyone else to the bored quirks of mine and expect the same in return.
On the other hand, an older adolescent or a young teenager can be an excellent dining partner. They are inquisitive and,if they have been fed a fairly diverse diet at home, will be interested in just about any kind of food that looks good (and sometimes even more interested in something that looks scary-and that can be fun too- "Here bubba, these fried crickets are reaalllly gooood with hot sauce"
Anyway, to sum up the dining with kids deal-don't do it until they are old enough to behave and enjoy the experience. It is a waste of money, a waste of your time and thiers, and really not fair to the other diners or to the young people in question. There are plenty of places that are kid friendly and still nice places to dine. There will be lots of time for fine dining later. Spend the first few years trying to broaden their tastes for different kinds of food and give them a wide range of experience. You will be glad you did this later on when it is time to start eating a little more upscale.
Sushi is a great place to broaden children's experience. Sushi bars are generally extremely kid friendly and there is plenty of stuff for them to eat besides sashimi. Tapas is another good place to start. Actually, any ethnic food with a wide variety of choices can be very helpful to broaden the experience. My kids both love Thai food and actually scan strip malls for likely looking spots (all truly great Thai Family Dining occurs in suburban strip malls
Anyway, start em out young and give them as broad a range of experience as you can, both at home and away, but keep the kiddies out of the sit down and pay big places until they are lod enough to enjoy it. It is not fair to them or to the other diners around them.
Edited to say that while I was typing Dsconz said the same thing but in a much more concise manner.
There's a train everyday, leaving either way...
#25
Posted 26 December 2003 - 08:17 AM
#26
Posted 26 December 2003 - 08:18 AM
Co-founder, Society for Culinary Arts & Letters, sshaw@egstaff.org
Proud signatory to the eG Ethics code
Director, New Media Studies, International Culinary Center (take my food-blogging course)
#27
Posted 26 December 2003 - 08:31 AM
Mark, I strongly believe that management can, and should, ask that a disruptive child be removed from the dining room until the child's behavior is appropriate. Whatever ill will you might create with the child's family will be more than compensated by the appreciation (and potential return visits) of the other diners. If the family refuses to do so, they should be asked to leave. Comp part of the check if necessary. I mean, what would management do if two adults kept up a screaming argument or insisted on wandering uninvited from table to table? I also think it's perfectly ok for a restaurant to set whatever policy they would like concerning children, although I would focus on behavior rather than an age limit.Some of you know, I work in a very high end restaurant. I had the pleasure of working Christmas Eve and Christmas this year. This happens occasionally in our place, but, these two days saw lots of infants. I'm not talking about quiet, sleeping, adorable babies. I mean the kind that are squalling, talking loud, cholicy, throwing food and untensils, and screaming. What do you do? What can you tell these parents? Lots of other clients were visibly unhappy about the noise. People don't expect babies at Daniel, Jean-Georges, Bouley, Trotter's, or my place. What the hell do you do? Can't tell people not to bring babies. Can't throw them out. Real dilemma. What do you think? Have you had an expensive meal ruined by an innocent baby?
"A vasectomy might cost as much as a year’s worth of ice cream, but that doesn’t mean it’s equally enjoyable." -Ezra Dyer, NY Times
#28
Posted 26 December 2003 - 08:31 AM
(I don't have kids)
GROWWWWWLLLLL!!
#29
Posted 26 December 2003 - 08:33 AM
I think that the burden is on the parents, but since some people are so callous towards the rights and privacy of others that there needs to be policy.
Seat them as best you can away from other diners. Provide what you can in the way of efficient, speedy service, and get em out as quickly as you can. Is this fair to the parents? Yes. They are the one's that brought the kids, so they can hardly expect to linger at a table for three hours over coffee and after dinner drinks.
If a baby gets loud and stays that way? Ask the parent to remove the child from the dining room until the child calms down. Once again, remember, they brought the kids. It is not the restaurant's fault that the child is cranky (nor is it the childs fault) so, in my mind anyway, the reponsibility is all on the parent. If they are unhappy with the service as it relates toward them and the child, too bad for them. They brought the child, they should be expected to do their best to keep the other diners from being annoyed.
The dining establishment should certainly excercise their right to ask a patron to remove his or her self from the dining room until the child calms down. Or for good if it continues to happen. And yes, the diner who brought the child should still be responsible for food ordered even if they have to leave due to a child that is annoying other diners.
There. I've solved that. Next Problem?
There's a train everyday, leaving either way...
#30
Posted 26 December 2003 - 08:33 AM
It also help to distract the children. However fine an establishment, having some crayons or pencil crayons and paper around for emergencies would not be too much of a hardship.
If that fails, I don't think there's anything wrong with asking one of the adults in the group if they wouldn't mind taking the offending child(ren) out until they've calmed down. It must be done in an apologetic manner, of course, for fear of offending the adults (whom I think are offensive if they allow that type of behaviour from their children--doubly offensive for allowing it in a public place).







