cheryl

I cannot believe the comments that have turned up over this question. Apparently, MDA and others believe that no one with a toddler should ever leave their homes, just in case it disturbs someone else. Believe it or not, peoople who live in cities have to take children on public transportation on a daily basis. In fact, most of the strollers I saw in italy "forcing people to step off the curb and accomodate" them were natives, not tourists. Should they not leave their houses either, to leave the sidewalk free for tourists? I have more sympathy than ever for parents of young children if this is the kind of attitude they have to deal with on a daily basis.

marilyn

Yes, Cheryl, this IS the attitude parents with young children have to deal with on a daily basis. As I discovered on becoming a mother after 10 years in the workplace, I had NEVER had a job at which perfect strangers felt so free to criticize me so much! People really DO seem to feel that children should never be taken anywhere, either because 1) the child MIGHT infringe on another's right to enjoy a child-free atmosphere and/or 2) if you brought your child to most things it meant you were being selfish, not that you might possibly wish to BE with your child, or you were too cheap to get a babysitter, not that you couldn't find a responsible one. People yelled at me for everything from having the baby in the frozen food section of the grocery store (too cold, apparently) to having the audacity to let a toddler be loud in the playroom section at McDonald's--an elderly lady actually came into the separate, glass-walled room within which my 18-month-old was (admittedly loudly) enjoying the little merry-go-round thing, and got right in her face and shushed her! Maybe people unaccompanied by children shouldn't try to have a quiet lunch at McDonald's! <BR> <BR>Our theory on taking vacations when the children were very young was either to go somewhere low-key and inexpensive so that we wouldn't feel bad if we didn't have a great time, or to do a friend-and-family thing like a cottage on a lake. Had we been able to afford it, I think it would have been wonderful if the lake could have been in Italy--yes, I know sometimes children are annoying on planes, but so are drunks, of which the supply seems to be as ample on some flights. We did once go to Mexico, on the theory that it was a child-friendly country, and it was true, the people were WONDERFUL to our children there. We tackled Europe for the first time when the girls were 9 and 6.

AJ

MDA, reread your own message. It is dripping with vitriole and bigotry. <BR> <BR>You could say the same thing about elderly people - why should we wait while they hobble onto the plane with their canes?

AJ

MDA, Or for that matter, why should we let handicapped folks travel - their wheelchairs take up way too much room on the street, and it's not appropriate to take a seeing-eye-dog into the fine churchs of Europe. And I also believe that travel adventurers should be banned. I just hate it when they won't trust the airline cargo hold, and insist on carrying on their kayak paddles, climbing gear and Bubble Burners, plus they insist on taking up the entire armrest with their bulging muscles. And what about the art intellectuals. All you can hear in museums are these psuedo-artists talking in loud voices, trying to impress everyone around them with their knowledge. (Well, that's of course only when all the children in the museum stop screaming for one second to take a breath.)

AJ

MDA, just one more thing - remember, you are your mother's "precious spawn". And Kim, yes, we've taken our kids on overseas flights, and other very long flights. The kids do fine, it's my hubby who gets ancy. Actually, in truth, there was one trip where our middle son cried under his seat for 1/2 hour. We still laugh about that one today. But for all of our travels with kids, perhaps 25 big trips in the last 15 years, only having one bad event is fine with us.

dan

Sure, there are places that you maybe shouldn't take your two year old, such as a very expensive, quiet restaurant where people go to have some peace and quiet or a big classical music performance. However, for the most part, I say take them and who cares what others think. I completely agree with those who pointed out that Europeans have kids too, and believe me kids pretty much act the same everywhere. It will enrich your childrens' lives immeasurably to take them along with you. Don't we always complain here about the attitudes of people who have never stepped foot out of the country - well, this is one way to help your own children to not end up that way. Maybe when they go to school, they will actually care about world history and other such things - wouldn't that be amazing?

MDA

AJ, I'll bet every other passenger on that flight has the same fond and amused memories of your crying child that you do! How adorable! A child under the seat who is crying nonstop for half an hour! What could be cuter or more pleasant, especially when you're trying to sleep? Did you laugh about it then or just smile indulgently at your little angel? You are exactly the type of self-centered parent that everyone complains about.

AJ

MDA, you are so funny. You really do not have a clue, do you?

MDA

Well AJ, we can only hope to aspire to the perfection of parenthood that is you. You seem to spend more time posting messages on the internet that parenting though.

martha

MDA, aren't you late for shushing the children at McDonald's? Don't let us hold you up.

Helen

Martha, I didn't realize McDonald's serves crabs!

Valerie

I think we are simply talking about very young children here. Does a 2 or 3 year old really enjoy the experience of a European trip? I think a 10 year old might one day look back on it in his adult life as a good memory. But if it is a question of distracting other people and the little one isn't fully aware of his experience nor happy about it, then wouldn't it just be easier to wait a few years then go on that vacation? Or perhaps vacation in the USA first? I know I want to whine and cry on an 8 hour flight trying to sit still, so I can imagine how a 2 year old must feel. I don't know, perhaps a parent can tell me who really benefits from such a vacation, if it is not the small child, nor the outsiders who feels bad when they hear a child cry or watches them being disciplined? Who really benefits here? I always feel sorry for the unhappy little ones.

dan

The parents benefit from still being able to travel and from being able to do it without staying away their child for long periods. The child benefits from not being away from the parents for a long period while they are travelling. In addition, the child can have fun if you pick the right activities. Other than the flying part, which I am sure is tough for some children, what's the difference of travelling to let's say Boston vs. travelling to Paris. I am sure children are prevalent in both already. Do you think parents should just stay within driving distance of their homes while their children are growing up? I would think most people on this forum would have a hard time with that one. I will say that I will probably not take my own daugther to Europe until she is a few years old (she will stay with relatives), but if I could go only if I took her, she would be going. Of course, you have to know your own child too. Some can handle the travel better than others. I wouldn't do it if my little girl was going to be completely miserable. Children can be so different from one another, even in the same family.

Ginny

I'm 40, two things my stupid generation contributed to the American way of life: <BR>1. All-terrain stollers - why is it that most - and I know there are exceptions, think that it is ok to take them everywhere...in crowds, in bars, in restaurants, etc, etc, etc (and don't forget running over the backs of peoples heals) <BR>2. Thinking that it is ok to take children everywhere, anytime, no matter what. My parents didn't allow us to go to restaurants with them till we were old enough to BEHAVE (and if it took till we were 6 years old, so be it). They employed people who are called BABYSITTERS... <BR>I guess babysitters are a dying breed. <BR> <BR>-Please don't bring your children on a long journey to Europe - not good for them, not good for me.

mwg

We took our young child to Portugal. We spent a lot of time on the beach and visiting old towns and castles. We also took him to Charleston South Carolina and visited the beaches and old towns and plantations, although in some cases one of us would stay outside with him during a plantation tour. Why would I take him to one place and not the other. Because its in Europe? The plane ride? He slept on the plane. Why would a young child not enjoy going to the beach and climbing on ruins or old walls. There was a wonderful miniature village near Coimbra buit especially for children, which he (and we) loved. Non-parents concern about sparing young children from unpleasant experiences are interesting in the abstract but leave it to us parents to make such choices for our families about what's going to work for us and what won't. I was intrigued by the irrelevant marriage example. But I would like to ask, if someone got re-married, would they not invite their own children? It seems like a closer analogy.

dan

Indeed, there are places to take children and places to not take children. However, you are one family, and you should try to do things together when you can. Just behave responsibly (I will grant you that some parents don't). If my child was crying in a Paris cafe, I would take her outside or in a restroom, or somewhere else away from the diners until she quieted down. I really don't think a babysitter is an option, when you are going away to Europe. On the other hand, if I were to go to a movie at home, and a relative was not around, I would hire a babysitter. <BR> <BR>Really, this is a decent discussion, but it is kind of irrelevant. Parents are going to do what they think is best in the end. Only they know their children, afterall. Up to a certain limit, that is as it should be. <BR> <BR>Life is short, and there are so many places to see and experience. If you take all the childraising years out, then it is just that much shorter. Do both and be happy. If a few people have a problem with it, well...you do the best you can.

martha

mwg, how did you/do you pick a place to take the kids on vacation? Do you go back to places you liked before, or are particular guidebooks especially useful for finding destinations that will offer something for everyone? Also, what was the longest airline trip you'd done en famille before the one to Europe? In other words, do the brave souls who've taken their children to Europe have any guidelines for how far you can extrapolate from previous flight experience?

mwg

We did not use a special book altho' I'm sure they exist. We decided we would go somewhere with fewer museums and palaces and concentrate more on beaches, natural beauty and small picturesque towns and we came up with Portugal. We did not spend much time in Lisbon and did get a babysitter to go hear Fado music. Many similar areas suggest themselves. And you can visit museums and palaces, even if a child is prone to acting out, if you take turns staying outside wirth the child. I would say that if you would hate yourself to go a place and not see all of the musuems, then save that destination for another trip. My kids are older now and some going to museums with them is OK. For a while they will get into things and then we leave. Our longest flight before taking my then 3 year old son to Portugal was from New York City to Miami. he slept pretty much of the time. It's really not that bad, kids like the dinners in tin foil and the little cups and trays, the movies and they go to sleep.<BR>Its also better to try to stay longer in your desinations rather than spending one night in each of ten cities. Renting accomodations by the week with kitchen facilities is often economical and practical. the whole thing is very manageable or at least can be made so.

dan woodlief

You might be interested in havechildrenwilltravel.com. I have read articles saying that some cultures welcome children. One newspaper columnist, who travelled to China, said that the children attracted quite a bit of good attention from locals there and actually enriched the trip. Maybe we can tie this question in with the ones on "how to not look like a tourist." If no other tourists, but only locals, have children with them, then you should fit right in with your baby stroller. Just get the right brand of course, and stick your camera underneath. This could even help prevent theft. I think I am on to something.

Jen

Is it too late at this point to ignore the whole debate that has arisen and get back to the original query? <BR> <BR>I can't speak from my own experience, as I have no children, and I wasn't particularly annoyed by other tourists' children when I was in Europe (aside from school groups on overnight trains and ferries, but that's different). But my sister has done it both ways... taken her son once, and then, when there were two of them, left them at home -- with me! <BR> <BR>She and her husband went to England with their oldest son when he was 2. There was a bit of a problem with motion sickness, but he's a very quiet, thoughtful boy and very well-behaved. They did a lot of outdoor things (the pictures of the little tyke wandering around Hadrian's Wall were wonderful!). Another essential -- renting a car. They swore up and down they couldn't have done it by train or bus. They also stayed with a lot of relatives, or in quiet B&B's. All in all, I think they had a great time. <BR> <BR>But son #2 is a bit different from son #1. He's a MONSTER! So last fall, when my sister and her husband decided to return to England, I got hired as babysitter for the two boys, 6 and 2. She phoned home every other day, but to tell you the truth, the kids didn't really want to talk to her. Only one time did the older son get sad about it -- he told her he missed her on the phone, and then wet his pants at school that day (connected? I think perhaps...). She was so excited, before they left, about having a break from the kids and being alone with her husband for two weeks for the first time in six years. But guess what? After about the first five days she was miserable! She was very hurt that the kids weren't interested in talking to her on the phone, and she missed them dreadfully. The kids really seemed okay, but the 2-year-old was calling ME "Mom" and when my sister got home he screamed when she picked him up and reached for me. <BR> <BR>I'm surprised that in this whole debate this factor hasn't been discussed. Many people posting here haven't seemed to consider that leaving your children for two weeks could be quite traumatizing for them! <BR> <BR>So you are right to hesitate. I think you need to really consider you're daughter's personality and habits, and then consider how much you are willing to reconcile your expectations for the trip with what she can handle. If you don't think she's ready I suggest you postpone the trip for a couple of years, rather than leave her with a babysitter. Two years old is too young to be left behind for two weeks or however long you take. The last time I visited my sister, six months after her trip, her little guy freaked out, associating my arrival with her departure. But don't hold off travelling until she reaches the magic age of six, or fifteen, or twenty-one, because that wouldn't be fair to yourself. Becoming a parent shouldn't rob you of the pleasures that childless people enjoy! <BR> <BR>Good luck with your decision! Don't let the grumps in here bother you or influence your decision. No matter how many people they convince to leave their kids at home, they will still have a screaming baby on their flight, and an unruly toddler bothering them at dinner time. And if they are going to let that sort of thing bother them, then that's their problem.