bw99

I am giving my son and his family a weekend break to Italy in March. They can't decide between Rome or Venice. It is such a long time since I've been to either I can't help them. The 3-yr old is very active and loves London and Paris. They would appreciate help with this pleasant quandary.

peterkant

Definitely Rome. Much easier on a small active kid. Check company www.vaticantoursandbeyond.com for kid friendly guides.

Peter

ira

Hi bw,

A 3-year old will be happy wherever he/she is.

The pigeons at San Marco, Venice are a real hoot for little kids, as is a ride on a boat.

Huitres

I was just returned from Italy in spending the months of August and September there with my 3-year old. In addition to Rome, Naples, Florence, etc., I went to nearly all the hill towns in Tuscany/Umbria, toting the stroller up hill and down was arduous to say the least. However, in Rome I took her to the Zoo there and the Borghese Gardens and she absolutely loved it. We also went to the Campo dei Fiori market; walked along the Tiber River, even took the boat that goes up and down the river, etc. Also, when visiting Trevi Fountain (she loved it, putting her hands in the ice-cold water), several of the "gladiators" from the Forum area had placed themselves adjacent to the fountain for the tourists. I am sure your grandson will get a kick out of those guys as my daughter did. It was a thrill for her, and they actually performed for her!

Overall, Rome would provide your son and grandson with more activities and things to do. They'll have fun!

amcc

When I was in Venice, all I could think of was how difficult it must be for Venetian moms to keep their kids on dry land. I would be scared to take a 3-year old to Venice simply because they are so active and fast! Venetian children grow up with the canals and are used to them, but there are no guardrails, nothing to keep a little kid from falling into them and I would imagine my child would be so fascinated by them that I would spend the entire time trying to keep him away from them. Rome, I think my kid would love.

ira

amcc, aren't you worried about the kid being run over?

ellenem

While Rome is far from flat, I think toting a stroller up and down bridges would get tired pretty quickly.

amcc

well, I don't think they compare. If my son is running around in a park in most cities, I can usually find a nice field or area for him to do that. If he is running around a piazza in Venice, many, many times one side of that piazza will be a canal.

I live in an area with water all around, and many kids drown every year. Kids tend to love water and it attracts them like a magnet. Actually, that is the first word that my son said (yeah, made me feel real special) and he can spot a body of water before I can.

But, besides this, Venice has a more quiet charm. It's lovely, but it doesn't have the hyper sensory experience that is sure to keep a small child entertained. For an adult it is one magical moment after another, but maybe these charms would be lost upon a child. Of course, I think that a child could be perfectly safe in Venice, but it is something that I commented on numerous times with my husband.

Grinisa

While my four year old enjoyed chasing pigeons in Piazza San Marco and rides on vaporetto, two days of that was more than enough. Plus, my husband and I did get very tired of carrying that stroller up and down bridges. Then we went to Rome and she loved it. Watching perfomance artists in Piazza Navona, going to the zoo, riding the little bumper car in the Borghese Gardens and the tiny roller coaster in Villa Sciarra. Riding the big rides at LUNA park. There is a children's museum in Rome too if you get a rainy day. She's been to Rome twice now and there is still so much more to do. Pick up a copy of Fodor's "Around Rome with Kids" for more ideas.

MFNYC

Also consider in Rome there are taxis that can take you from door to door if need be. If you are taking a stroller, it would be tough in either places. All those cobblestones and narrow sidewalks would make it difficult. In Rome I had my kids (older than yours, 10 and 12 at the time), run up and down the Spanish steps to count them just to use up some of that accummulated energy from spending so much time touring and seeing museums (they never did get the same answer)

mmr41

bw99 -- IMO if you really wanted to give your son and wife a break, you would babysit the active 3 year old while they enjoyed Venice.

MFNYC

mmr41, that thought had entered my mind too!

janelp

We had our 4 1/2 year old-grandson with us in Italy and Spain for 6 weeks last May-June and had a great time. We took him to Venice but not Rome. Venice is more compact and visual for a child. If interested in our experience including a section on traveling with a child, plus good photos, you may want to check out my website. Hope it helps. http://www.janeandken.com/Italy2003/Italy2003.html

Tat

Not every parent happy to get rid of a child while on the trip.
Just FYI ...

mmr41

Jane -- I have read your wonderful trip reports and also viewed your fotos. They are great. Thanks.

As you well know, an active 3-yr old is much different than aa 4 1/2 yr old. Especially when so described by a loving grandparent.

My thought that for a "weekend break", the parents might enjoy the trip together.

We must also remember that the effects of jet-lag are magnified on the very young. And amplified on those around them on the plane.

bw99

Thank you very much for all your help. Funnily enough, they do want to take him with them! It looks like Rome and I'm sure they'll have a wonderful time.
No jet lag -they'll be flying from London.