Just reading through the NTSB report regarding the UAL flight 232 crash at Sioux City and a few passages have really reinforced my opinions that allowing lap children should be banned. Though I'd share this one with you all...

"Current FAA regulations allow occupants who have not reached their
second birthday to be held in the lap of an adult. The Safety Board believes
that this regulation does not adequately protect occupants under age 2 and
urged the FAA to require that infants and small children be restrained in
child safety seats appropriate to their height and weight. The Safety Board
believes that time consuming flight attendant duties, such as providing
special brace-for-impact instructions for unrestrained infants, answering
questions about those instructions, and distributing pillows in an effort to
enhance the effectiveness of adult lap belts on small children, could be
reduced if child restraint was mandatory. Thus, flight attendants could
devote more time to other important duties while they prepare the cabin for
an emergency landing."

Parents it's the holiday season many of you will be traveling with small children. I beg of you, If you love your babies please buy them a seat and use an FAA approved restraint system to keep them safe. You will not be able to keep them safe in an accident with just your hands alone and they will be crushed if you belt them in with you. You and your baby will both be more comfortable with your baby safely belted into a restraint system.

I am in firm agreement and I am a pediatrician.

And, I totally agree with the above post - I always feel so sorry for both parents and children when the child is a 'lap' child. To add to the issue here is the comfort/well being of the other passengers. Most of us try and help single parents traveling with multiple small children, but really, do babies need to travel during the holidays? Let the grandparents visit the children, not the other way 'round, and as far as international travel is concerned, please have people who are moving to another country not fly during the holiday season

Lap kids scare the hell out of me...

Question.

Isn't there some strap on papoose-like FAA approved restraint system for use during takeoff and landing? Like the kid is strapped to the stomach of the adult during TO/LD/cruise/whenever... I think I remember reading something about this vis-a-vis evacuation regulations or times...

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 3): Isn't there some strap on papoose-like FAA approved restraint system for use during takeoff and landing?

How about making use of the overhead bins ? 
Oh wait... they're full of enormous rollerbags, never mind...

Again, why travel with the babies? let the rest of the family come to them, don't put the babies through this kind of torture (to say nothing of what the parents go through)

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 3): Lap kids scare the hell out of me...

They are really a pain in the neck. When I worked for Continental as a gate agent, it was very common for the parent to board the airplane first, put the lap child in an empty seat next to them, and pretend that the child had a ticket.

My computer system and ticket count would show that I had enough seats for all the people on the plane. I would have to go onboard at "go time", demand that the parent show me a valid boarding pass for the child, and if there wasn't one, insist that the parent put the child in their lap. Frequently, the parent would then argue with me and make a scene for forcing them to give up a seat they had not paid for.

On several occasions I had to pay compensation to an "overbooked" passenger in order to not take a delay when the parent pulled this stunt. This was terrible because I had to close the flight in my computer system showing an empty seat, yet still pay compensation for the overbooked passenger because I did not have time to check the parent's ticket.

The only thing that saved me sometimes was if I was boarding a plane with a very senior flight crew and the flight attendant was savvy enough to know what was going on. They would take care of the problem for me and the flight would leave on time.

I also had many parents with children who able to walk and talk like a four year old tell me that their child was under two. This was very difficult to handle because you can't exactly ask for the child's driver's license to prove their age and the parents never bring a birth certificate.

I have flown with little ones before and it is scary. When you take off and land it is hard for the child because they are bouncing around and it is hard for parents to control them. I believe the child should have their own seats. Although the airlines should not make parents pay in full. At least give them a little break. It is hard enough for big families. Hope to see more on this topic in the future.
Sully

Quoting Jetblueguy22 (Reply 7):

Quoting Jetblueguy22 (Reply 7): I believe the child should have their own seats. Although the airlines should not make parents pay in full. At least give them a little break

I disagree. You should not get special treatment as far as paying for seats go, just because you chose to have a family. If this became practice, we would all have to make up the difference by paying more for our seats.

Quoting Letsgetwet (Reply 8): we would all have to make up the difference by paying more for our seats.

I am not saying you pay 300 dollars for that coach ticket and since my child is under two I should only have to pay 150. I believe in something like a twenty dollar difference which for a family of 5 can be a big difference

Quoting Jetblueguy22 (Reply 9): I am not saying you pay 300 dollars for that coach ticket and since my child is under two I should only have to pay 150. I believe in something like a twenty dollar difference which for a family of 5 can be a big difference

I agree that every person on a flight, regardless of age, should have a seat, and that for young children, there should be a discount of some sort. To make sure that airlines aren't losing money or making the flight more difficult for other passengers, however, there would have to be restrictions in place, e.g: no discounts on the lowest fare classes (no reason to give a discount on a 100-dollar economy ticket), and no discounts in business/first, and no upgrades on Y children tickets (children that young really don't have a place in F/J... that's a discussion for another thread, however).

Quoting Nwafflyer (Reply 5): Again, why travel with the babies? let the rest of the family come to them, don't put the babies through this kind of torture (to say nothing of what the parents go through)

  

Quoting Letsgetwet (Reply 8): I disagree. You should not get special treatment as far as paying for seats go, just because you chose to have a family. If this became practice, we would all have to make up the difference by paying more for our seats.

  

Quoting Jetblueguy22 (Reply 9): I am not saying you pay 300 dollars for that coach ticket and since my child is under two I should only have to pay 150. I believe in something like a twenty dollar difference which for a family of 5 can be a big difference

NO!!!

I am saying that kids regardless of age pay adult fare.

If a family of 5 cannot afford to fly, then maybe they should either drive or stay home.

If planes were falling out of the sky left and right, I would agree with banning lap kids. But they aren't.

Maybe we should ban escalators. I think they kill a couple kids a year...

Quoting Beefstew25 (Reply 12): If planes were falling out of the sky left and right, I would agree with banning lap kids. But they aren't. Maybe we should ban escalators. I think they kill a couple kids a year...

On my last transpac flight we had pretty bad turbulence, a few people screaming and crying for maybe 30 minutes or so over the Bering Strait. If I was traveling with kids they'd be in a seat with a belt. But I guess it's all YMMV...

In several videotaped interviews one of the FAs on 232 has talked about how horrible it was emotionally to have all of those lap children and how inadaquate she feels (felt?) the policies were for protecting them in an emergency. That has stuck in my mind and the first thing I thought of when I saw the thread title. (As a side note, did you know that UA was running some kind of 'children's promo' (I forget what the exact details were, but I tink it was a children-fly-free/at steep discount) leading to a higher-than-normal number of children on that flight.

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 3): Isn't there some strap on papoose-like FAA approved restraint system for use during takeoff and landing? Like the kid is strapped to the stomach of the adult during TO/LD/cruise/whenever... I think I remember reading something about this vis-a-vis evacuation regulations or times...

IIRC, in certain other countries such a strap is used, but the FAA has prohibited it for one reason or another related to emergencies/evacuation...

pauses...
Checks the FARs...

14 CFR 121.311(b)(2)(ii)(D): "Except as provided in §121.311(b)(2)(ii)(C)( 3 ) and §121.311(b)(2)(ii)(C)( 4 ), booster-type child restraint systems (as defined in Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 213 (49 CFR 571.213)), vest- and harness-type child restraint systems, and lap held child restraints are not approved for use in aircraft;..." (emphasis mine); (c)(3) and (c)(4) only allow those for which the airline provides it and where it has been approved by a type certificate or supplimental type certificate

Quoting Letsgetwet (Reply 8): I disagree. You should not get special treatment as far as paying for seats go, just because you chose to have a family.

I agree with Letsgetwet -- if you are occupying the seat, you should pay the cost associated with that seat. Regardless of if you're 4 or 40 if you're strapped in to that seat you're consuming the same service (+/- a 100 pounds or so) and preventing the airline from realizing revenue by having another warm body stapped in to that seat.

What about the extra child belts parents are normally handed out? They are a separate loop with buckle. The adult's seatbelt is threaded through a loop on the childs belt. The child therefore is not restrained by the parent's seatbelt but restrained by their own seatbelt affixed to the parent's seatbelt.

This is normally handed out to parents with lap children. I haven't flown in the USA with my child before, so I can't comment on that. But in Euroland and Asia/Australia, they are handed out as a matter of course.

As for the brace position - now that's scary.....

Our son now requires his own seat - at that is good. Make it mandatory for children to occupy their own seat just as soon as they cannot fit into the bassinet. Discount it by all means, say 50% of the adult fare.

Is there a statistic as to how lap children there are per flight?

NG1Fan

Quoting Lincoln (Reply 14): pauses... Checks the FARs...

ah. Thanks.   

Quoting DLPMMM (Reply 11): I am saying that kids regardless of age pay adult fare.

Bullshit. Reasons for this statement:

1. Kids are lighter, so there is more weight available for cargo and less fuel burn
2. Rip off the parent on a lowest fare leisure trip and what will he do? He will take his next full fare Y or J business trip to somebody else. Airlines know what they're doing when offering discounts for children.

Quoting Eghansen (Reply 6): On several occasions I had to pay compensation to an "overbooked" passenger in order to not take a delay when the parent pulled this stunt.

Really? If that "overbooked" pax had a boarding pass for the seat that the lap child was in then its a very simple procedure to go and tell the pax with the kid that the seat is taken and the kid must be held on the lap.

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 3): Isn't there some strap on papoose-like FAA approved restraint system for use during takeoff and landing?

Quoting NG1Fan (Reply 15): What about the extra child belts parents are normally handed out? They are a separate loop with buckle. The adult's seatbelt is threaded through a loop on the childs belt. The child therefore is not restrained by the parent's seatbelt but restrained by their own seatbelt affixed to the parent's seatbelt

They are not considered safe by US regulatory agencies and are illegal for use. The theory is that it traps the child under the parents body weight and they can be crushed.

Quoting Lincoln (Reply 14): vest- and harness-type child restraint systems, and lap held child restraints are not approved for use in aircraft;..."

To add to that I was reading some of the parent survivors accounts. One mentioned that her 11 month old was squirming tantruming, and wouldn't stay put in the proscribed brace position because she was scared. Another kept loosing grip on her son and he hit his head several times as he bounced around.

I'm not a huge fan of discounts its not like you can strap two infants into one seat making one full fare but in the interest of public safety I think it might be the right thing to offer an incentive.

To all the anti-baby crowd not a huge fan of em myself but I have no problems with them as passengers as long as they are in a car seat and their parents come prepared. In fact other than some fussing on take off and landing if they are healthy most don't make a peep most of the flight. More than I can say of our adult passengers.

Quoting Iairallie (Thread starter): Parents it's the holiday season many of you will be traveling with small children.

Flying home on the 22nd.

My wife and I debated holding our daughter or giving her her own seat.
Came down to this:
13 hours of holding an active 18 month old: Impossible
Ability to get any sleep (daughter or ourselves): Impossible
Northern Pacific Turbulence in Winter: Scary
Landing at MSP in winter when daughter will be asleep: NOT A GOOD IDEA.
Bought a great child seat that can be used in a plane: Daughter gets good seat
Daughter can look out the window and enjoy the ride: Good for all
Cars travel 60kph. Planes go much much faster: Seats are good

So...Spent an extra $1500 and got my daughter her own seat.

I am a safety freak: Daughter gets her own seat.

Down side. Seats that might go to a full fair are now going to a kid. Well better a live one than a dead one, right?
Down side. More Child meals to give out before main meal service. Better a happy smiling kid than a crying one, right?
Down side. More families wanting to board early with childseats. Well better do it early than later, right?

What should be required?
The full FAA approval and acceptance by airlines of the restraints approved on AA.
The ability to reserve those harnesses for a minimum fee when purchasing a ticket. The harness would be prepared by ground crew when servicing aircraft. Assigned to specific seat.
NO Child restraint? NO Fly.
or
NO Child Restraint? FULL FAIR FOR CHILD + Child harness rental.

My son just turned 2 so from now on he'll have his own seat, and that's better for us - we flew a few months back and keeping him coralled on our laps was a nightmare. We always used to take the car seat with us as carry-on in case there was a spare seat available on the flight, and it turned out that at least half the time that was the case. We just made an effort to book on flights that tended to have extra space on a regular basis.

There was a product we purchased, the Baby B'air I believe, it was approved by the FAA for cruise (could not wear it during take-off and landing).

Sadly, now that our flight costs will be 50% more expensive, we will be visiting family less. It comes down to the economics and logistics of families on separate sides of the continent.

Nothing worse than the parents who set up junior in a car seat despite listing him as a lap child. Pre-board, strap in and the usual mess then find out that they put him in a seat that was assigned to someone else. Of course they usually then want that person to sit elsewhere, resulting in confusion and usually anger on the part of one of the parties. Especially when the guy booked an aisle and the only other empty seat on the aircraft is a middle between two three-hundred pounders.

Quoting Centrair (Reply 20): The full FAA approval and acceptance by airlines of the restraints approved on AA

Not sure what you are talking about? I used to work for AA and the only approved restraints were the same ones accepted by the FAA and permitted onboard any American carrier. Harness type devices were not allowed.

Quoting Centrair (Reply 20): I am a safety freak: Daughter gets her own seat

Good for you! I could hug you and your wife for making the right decision!

For as long as I've had kids, I've bought seats for them, regardless of age.

If you must, think of it as a "sale" on the equivalent of a First Class seat, i.e., you and a baby sit in 2 economy seats, or you and a baby share a First Class seat? 2 econ seats are the better deal. Also, you're guaranteed an oxygen mask "in the unlikely event of loss of cabin pressure". (Count them.)

Frankly, I think the same thing should be required of large passengers. Or pax with lots of bags. Effectively, price passenger seats like cargo.

Why should a small 110 lbs lady be limited to the same 2 bags at 40lbs each as a 250 lbs "Godzilla" pax? My proposal: weigh the passenger and their bags together, and also measure their waist (or some other significant dimension) to determine if any extra charges are appropriate.

I recall that after the SUX incident the DOT did a study on the NTSB recommendation.

They determined that if infants were to be required to have seats the airlines would have to charge something for it (50% or full adult fare) which would mean that X% of passengers would choose not to fly. Of these X%, Y% would drive instead. Using available statistics they concluded if Y% would drive, Z% of these would be involved in fatal accidents. This Z% was a lot higher than the number of passengers that are involved in fatal air accidents, and therefore the NTSB suggestion was "NOT A GOOD IDEA".

Now obviously I can't remember the statistics, but I do recall that there estimate was that some 10s of people would die each year, as a result.

IMHO Infants should be required to have a seat in First and Business class and pay the relevant Child's fare. If the passengers spill because of cost, it will be into the economy cabin.

Quoting ANother (Reply 25): IMHO Infants should be required to have a seat in First and Business class and pay the relevant Child's fare. I

Sorry too late to edit. I meant to say: "... and pay the ADULT fare."

Quoting IAirAllie (Reply 19): Quoting NG1Fan (Reply 15): What about the extra child belts parents are normally handed out? They are a separate loop with buckle. The adult's seatbelt is threaded through a loop on the childs belt. The child therefore is not restrained by the parent's seatbelt but restrained by their own seatbelt affixed to the parent's seatbelt They are not considered safe by US regulatory agencies and are illegal for use. The theory is that it traps the child under the parents body weight and they can be crushed.

I had no idea!

With the benefit of hindsight, we woud have stumped up for the a separate seat. We traveled SVO-Australia via VIE about four times before our son was required to have his own seat. The hard part was when he outgrew the bassinet. That's when grandma came in handy. We then had three pairs of hands, and we always requested the bulkhead seats (and always got them).

When he was old enough to require his own seat, we was a bit puzzled why he couldn't sit on Dad's lap to see out the window. At any rate, having his own seat makes travel easier.

On OS European flights, we often got first row Y where there are only two seats with the middle seat width reduced (but big enough for a toddler to sit in). That was handy.

NG1Fan

I too remember hearing comments made by one of the crew memebers who was involved in Sioux City.

However, I don't see the issue in lap restraints. In an impact, flying debris etc is just as dangerous. Bare in mind also that putting an infant in it's own (aircraft) seat is dangerous. This why in the UK, atleast, under 2's are not allowed to takeoff or land in their own seat and must be on parents lap or an approved car seat. Even then, I am scheptical as to what protection a car seat would offer.

Quoting Lincoln (Reply 14): I agree with Letsgetwet -- if you are occupying the seat, you should pay the cost associated with that seat. Regardless of if you're 4 or 40 if you're strapped in to that seat you're consuming the same service (+/- a 100 pounds or so) and preventing the airline from realizing revenue by having another warm body stapped in to that seat.

No people. The airline decides what to charge. If it want to be very family friendly they will offer something. Come on, there are so many promotions of all kinds when it comes to air fares and no one is complaining about it. So really people what is your problem with special fares for children. We have a free market and when an airline for example says children fly free than it is their choice. Your choice will be if you still want to use that airline.

My kids have always had their own seats. This has a lot to do with the fact that I've actually been in a plane that crashed and know first hand the violence of the event:

1. Mom, you can't hold on even with that superhuman Mom grip it's just not happening.
2. Deceleration when a kid hits the solid object at the other end of his/her trajectory will not be good for health.
3. Decelerating a kid impacting your body is not good for you.

Fortunately, there were no kids on board when we crashed but absolutely everything in the cabin that wasn't secure did become a projectile and many things that were secure found their way around to new locations as well. I still don't know how the hell I ended up on top of an outward opening door on the roof of the inside of the cabin but that's the kind of thing that happens.

A bigger issue though IMHO are the mini-houses people are allowed to stow overhead that will become projetiles in a crash. This is where serious regulations are needed. Some say the solution is to increase the size of the bins and design for heavier bags but this will merely make the offenders feel entitled to start cramming a f*ing steamer trunk up there.

Quoting IAirAllie (Reply 23): I used to work for AA and the only approved restraints were the same ones accepted by the FAA and permitted onboard any American carrier.

It is the CARES system. AA teamed up with AMsafe to do something with CARES. AMSafe's copy of an article signed by Arpey
American Airlines And Amsafe Introduce Child Aviation Restraint System (CARES)

CARES system is the only FAA approved harness as it attaches to the Seat and not to a person.
FAA: CRS rules

Quoting IAirAllie (Reply 23): Good for you! I could hug you and your wife for making the right decision!

Virtual hugs are okay, thank you. I am happy with my decision.

As for the cost of a child seated. My daughters ticket was 70% of my ticket maybe a little more. I paid $1800 for mine, and I believe hers was $1500 to $1600. This is fair I believe as my daughter takes up a seat but will not consume as much. She is also less weight...less fuel. She will eat 1/3 less than we will. She will consume more water but she will sleep more (hopefully). NO MOVIES FOR HER...we are on NW 744s...she won't be able to see the screen.

On domestic, the kid can be 5 to 20 dollars less than the adult. Why? Weight in fuel. If they are not using any PTVs or consuming any food. Then take off a portion because they are not wasting gas with a fat ass.

I will say it again. If an airline offered me an option of a CARES system for a fee, I would take that over carrying my daughter's child seat. Though comfortable and safe, having a few more centimeters for my little one to relax and be herself might help other pax.

When my trip is over will post a report. Should be creative.

Quoting Halophila (Reply 4): How about making use of the overhead bins ? Oh wait... they're full of enormous rollerbags, never mind...

Standard practice on Pam Ann......check out their safety guidelines on this page........
Pam Ann's New Safety Card - Funny! (pics) (by Umfolozi Nov 10 2007 in Civil Aviation)?threadid=3697011&searchid=3732690&s=pam+ann#ID3732690

Quoting GT4EZY (Reply 28): Bare in mind also that putting an infant in it's own (aircraft) seat is dangerous

Yes, it is if the are not in a proper child safety seat. Wrapping a seatbelt around an infant that cannot support it's own body weight is going to do more harm than good. Child safety seats do increase survivablity.

Quoting Centrair (Reply 31): It is the CARES system.

I'd forgotten about that. It's relatively new. Thanks.

Let me play devil's advocate -

Some people argue that eliminating lap seating will force families on tight budgets - those who can't afford the additional seat for the child - to drive instead of fly. Given that one is much more likely to be involved in a car accident than in an airplane accident, then the overall mortality rate within this population (families going from Point A to Point B) would rise - thereby creating exactly opposite the result intended.

By the way, my daughter has always flown in her own airline approved child safety seat - never on our laps.

Quoting Jetblueguy22 (Reply 7): It is hard enough for big families

Perhaps some consideration should be given to this before having a big family....

Quoting SeattleFlyer (Reply 35): Perhaps some consideration should be given to this before having a big family....

Since when has personal responsibility ever factored into any decision?????

People talk about freedoms not obligations.

Quoting Silentbob (Reply 22): Especially when the guy booked an aisle and the only other empty seat on the aircraft is a middle between two three-hundred pounders.

Just dont move then, sit in the seat you selected and bought. I never move. Airline seating is dog eat dog. You have to look out for number 1.

Kids should be strapped in their own seats, in approved baby-seats - it just make sense, and it should be an IATA-requirement, so affecting all member airlines. But since the US doesn't force you to wear your car seat belt, why should they force you to wear one on an aircraft?

Also, as children get reduced baggage allowances, and smaller meals (where provided), and don't use the facilities as much as 'adults,' then they should pay a lower fare.

Quoting Sh0rtybr0wn (Reply 37): Just dont move then, sit in the seat you selected and bought. I never move.

Most airlines specifically state in their contract of carriage that a particular seat is not guaranteed, for example Continental Airlines Contract of Carriage states quite simply

"CO does not guarantee allocation of any particular seat in the aircraft, including advanced seat requests." (Rule 4 paragraph H)

Therefore, as long as the airline gets you from Point A to Point B, they've met their contractual obligation to you. If you choose not to accept the seat offered by the airline you may not be eligible for a refund and certainly aren't entitled to DBC (though some may offer it)

That being said, and throwing rational behavior out the window, if I had a boarding pass for the seat I selected and an infant was sitting in that seat I'd raise civilized holly hell if I had to. If travelling on an unrestricted ticket, depending on the fare rules and how much of a hurry I was in, and how much of an a--hole I wanted to be, I would consider cancelling the reservation then and there.

Fortunately that's never happened, so I don't know how I would really react.

I do make a point of getting on board as quickly as possible to make sure that (a) I can relax and (b) no one 'squats' in my seat [assuming that the seat I've selected is one that I actually have a preference for and is in limited supply, i.e. an Exit Row]

Quoting WildcatYXU (Reply 17): 1. Kids are lighter, so there is more weight available for cargo and less fuel burn

So we are going to start setting fares by weight? That is BS. If your butt takes up a seat you should pay for it.

Quoting Letsgetwet (Reply 40): If your butt takes up a seat you should pay for it.

And if it takes up two seats, you should buy two seats.

I agree with your sentiment regarding infant seats, but I just wanted to make a clarification on the following:

Quoting LHRBlueSkies (Reply 38): But since the US doesn't force you to wear your car seat belt, why should they force you to wear one on an aircraft?

Motor vehicle laws in the USA are set by the states, and many (if not most) states have laws requiring the use of seatbelts in private vehicles. (I wouldn't describe it as "forcing" us to wear seatbelts, inasmuch as enforcing such a policy would require at least one police officer for every car!)

In my home state of California, first-time violators of the seatbelt law are fined over $200. Subsequent violations can result in higher fines and suspension of the driver's license.

If I were a parent and I wanted to fly with my child, I would pay for an extra seat for him/her, and use an age-appropriate safety seat. There's no other option for me; if I couldn't afford it, then I wouldn't travel.

Quoting WildcatYXU (Reply 17): Bullshit. Reasons for this statement: 1. Kids are lighter, so there is more weight available for cargo and less fuel burn

Wow. I'll remember to provide my weight next time I book a ticket. I didn't realize that being underweight would get me a cheaper fare! Thanks!
 

I share the sentiment of many posters on here. I think that for the safety of everyone on board the aircraft, children of all ages should have their own seat. Here's why:

Parents: Holding a baby could interfere with bracing or other important steps that one needs to take in order to provide for their own safety.

Babies: In an accident, it could be nearly impossible to hold a baby. Also, as many times babies are held from the bottom (especially if they are newborn), an aircraft going through zero or negative Gs or steep turns (in the event of a loss of control pressure, severe turbulence, etc.) could send the baby flying. Having a dedicated seat for the baby will also ensure the availibility of an Oxygen mask both for the baby and anyone who may have to use the extra mask at that row.

Other passengers: If a baby were to come loose from the grip of the person holding him or her, the baby could easily become a projectile along with luggage and anything else that isn't properly secured.

Quoting Freshlove1 (Reply 18): Really? If that "overbooked" pax had a boarding pass for the seat that the lap child was in then its a very simple procedure to go and tell the pax with the kid that the seat is taken and the kid must be held on the lap.

It was very common at the time 15 years ago for there to be two boarding passes for the same seat. I flew last year on United from LAX to NRT and when I boarded, there was a woman in my seat. We compared boarding passes and they gave both of us the same seat. The flight attendant had to take the passes out to the gate and find out which boarding pass was not valid. So the problem continues to this day.

In addition, when you are trying to turn a fully loaded narrowbody in 30 minutes, nothing is simple. The aisles are clogged with people and carry-on baggage and you can't walk to the back of the airplane to resolve a discrepancy. That is why Southwest uses open seating for its short turns.

When boarding an overbooked flight, if you have a "spinner" without a seat and it is go time, you pull the person and dispatch the flight. You don't realize until you reconcile the passenger count several hours later that you actually boarded one fewer ticketed passenger than you had booked seats.

Quoting Eghansen (Reply 45): That is why Southwest uses open seating for its short turns.

That's not going to help when you have 137 seats, 137 adults, and an unticketed baby sitting in a seat they didn't pay for... open seating doesn't defy the laws of physics.

Frankly if I'm holding a ticket with a seat number on it, you're moving your little brat.. I even like babies, but screw that, it's my seat.

I fully agree with the idea of making them get child seats, buying a seat, and strapping in.. If I try driving down the street with a 20 month old on my lap I risk some heavy fines (and maybe jail?), yet on a plane it's condoned.

Quoting NG1Fan (Reply 15): What about the extra child belts parents are normally handed out? They are a separate loop with buckle. The adult's seatbelt is threaded through a loop on the childs belt. The child therefore is not restrained by the parent's seatbelt but restrained by their own seatbelt affixed to the parent's seatbelt.

I've heard of those too, and I just don't see the safety in it.

While I feel air transportation is the safest transporation available, my wife took both our infant daughters any time she could on my airline benefits. I'd like to say it was all good on my airline becasue everyone wanted to meet my babies, and some of the mainline F/A's I commuted back and forth with just loved it. One good spin off is at least I'm getting my oldest daughter (she's almost 3 now) to become a pilot. 

My wife did something stupid on her way back from ATL to DEN and put my oldest daughter on the seat back tray to sleep. Granted, Charlotte was pretty small at the time. It pissed me off she did that, but the mainline F/A's let her do it! Ya'll, I went through the effing roof! when she told me that, and didn't see why I had a problem with it! I may not be the most professional (if you've ever flown over RIC and I point out the "girlie joints, i.e. Pure Pleasure, Candy Bar, Daddy Rabbits, etc) but I sure am safety concsious! Well, now that my kids are 2 and 1 years old, I already have the flying bug in them and unlike a lot of youngens' they like looking out the "winduh". I just hope they keep the interest and not turn into brats.

Oh, we're talking about discounts for babies. Well, I can't speack for parents, but yeah, babies two and under should be free! It's like that on public transport worldwide. "Bebes" and the lap parent should have a better restraint system. I remember the first car accident my mom got into. It was back in the early 70's and we had a '72 Duster with only hip belts. Had a bench seat too. I was about 4 or 5 years old. I was standing up in the front seat and back then no one cared. We were coming from K-Mart off University Drive in Huntsville, AL, she put her arm out to stop me from going through the windsheild because some moron ran a stop sign. Next thing I know I'm under the dash board on the passenger side, unhurt. I don't think her arm really would have helped. Sad thing is, we all wear seat belts now, I'm almost 36, she's alsmost 55 and if we ride together, she always takes a deep breath and throws her arm around me at a traffic light. Well, it beats my dad throwing a bottle of Jim Beam in my lap when we were getting fitshaced while on leave in Nags Head, NC, before I got shipped off to Desert Sheild. We learned our lesson after the second time after we got busted in Pensecola, FL when I was on leave after Desert Storm. Like I want my babies hangin' with my foiks, who now live on a Lake Chesdin, with a Pontoon boat and Dad already promised Charlotte to drive the boat once she turns 4. Dad would do it to, just to piss Mom off because she works for the VA dept of Game and Inland Fisheries. Uh oh, I'd prbably let her fly.

Man, I really went off topic, sorry about that. I just can't take those risks with my babies. But s we live so far from family, we have no choice but to fly. An even better example is my brother -in-law Neil (who suckered my wife and me here in CO in ther first place) is stationed at RAF Feltwell, UK. His kids are 4 and 5 by now. In a way he's there voluntarily, because he volunteered to go into the USAF years ago (Jesus it just seems like 12 years ago he was a scrawny pre-teen in Germany two years after me and his sister were married in our mid-20's). I live out here in CO. We didnt' plan on having kids out here or at all after 10 years of marriage. After my brother-in-law and his family left, there's no body here but us, and my brother-in-law's wife's sister, who got suckered into coming out here. I gave up flying when my wife was pregnant with our second daughter, so I could have a real job and be home with my kids and I lost a lot of flight hours commuting and missing out on day trips. As much as I loved flying, I loved being home with my babies more. Dammit, going from being an A$hole in BDU's, to a jerk in a hard hat, to another jerk in a suit and tie on a regional airline, and now a docile creature of the night for True Value, and spend all day with my babies as a Dad I can't beat that! I sure as hell ain't gonna let my girls go crazy on a plane though!

Quoting Lincoln (Reply 39): That being said, and throwing rational behavior out the window, if I had a boarding pass for the seat I selected and an infant was sitting in that seat I'd raise civilized holly hell if I had to. If travelling on an unrestricted ticket, depending on the fare rules and how much of a hurry I was in, and how much of an a--hole I wanted to be, I would consider cancelling the reservation then and there. Fortunately that's never happened, so I don't know how I would really react.

and why would you be an idiot and jump up and down like a infant ??? All that requires is asking a flight attendant which will sort it for you !!!! Being a a--hole as you say only shows your bad manners .. Any way you could cancel the ticket then as the carrier has accepted you for carriage and given you a seat im sure there would be no refund so in the end being a a--hole never pays !!!

Quoting Sh0rtybr0wn (Reply 37): Just dont move then, sit in the seat you selected and bought. I never move. Airline seating is dog eat dog. You have to look out for number 1.

Usually i only ask passengers to swap if it will be beneficial to them .. If you never move you may miss out on a better seat .. Or better service i usually try to do something for people who help me out and move seats for me ..

Quoting DLPMMM (Reply 11): If a family of 5 cannot afford to fly, then maybe they should either drive or stay home.

Quoting ANother (Reply 25): They determined that if infants were to be required to have seats the airlines would have to charge something for it (50% or full adult fare) which would mean that X% of passengers would choose not to fly. Of these X%, Y% would drive instead. Using available statistics they concluded if Y% would drive, Z% of these would be involved in fatal accidents. This Z% was a lot higher than the number of passengers that are involved in fatal air accidents, and therefore the NTSB suggestion was "NOT A GOOD IDEA".

I remember something about this too, that if a seat for a child was required more families would drive. Statistically a child is much safer on a parent's lap in an airliner than in a child seat in a vehicle.

My wife & I have flown with lap children many times, including USA - Europe, and we've never experienced the problems expressed here. Maybe our kids are better trained!  

-TLG