Your opinion: Should parents be required to buy a plane ticket for children under 2?
Holiday travel season is upon us and a polarizing debate has resurfaced: Should children 2 and younger be restrained in their own seat on an airplane?
On Thursday, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) held a forum on child passenger safety in Washington D.C. MSNBC.com travel writer Harriet Baskas wrote about the hotly-debated issue:
The NTSB has repeatedly pushed for a rule requiring all airline passengers — including infants — to be restrained in a separate seat. However, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) still allows children 2 years and younger to travel unrestrained on airplanes if seated on an adult’s lap. The NTSB submitted its latest safety recommendation to the FAA in August, citing plane crashes where young children held on a parent’s lap were injured or killed.
My friend Jennifer Miner of The Vacation Gals website is in favor of a rule requiring a seat for every passenger.
As parents, our number one concern is child safety. While there’s an added cost to buying an additional seat for your tot, the potential danger of not doing so far outweighs the pinch you’ll feel in your wallet.
I gave the dissenting view. From a financial standpoint it makes it that much tougher for parents to afford air travel if they have to pay for a seat. From my experience, the infant likely won’t want to stay in it anyway (and then there’s the whole other issue that the entire cabin will suffer if the fussing baby is restrained). And what about mothers who nurse during take-off and landing to offset the change in cabin pressure?
Of course I also see the safety side of it. But very rarely do you ever hear about an unrestrained infant dying in a plane crash, juxtaposed against the thousands of injury-free flights every year. And for those who are ardent supporters, I have two questions to ask you: 1) Have you ever flown with an infant on your lap and 2) Would having to fork over an extra $500 for a plane ticket for your infant deter you from flying?
Some people are encouraging the airlines to offer free travel for infants or some kind of discount. I don’t blame the airlines one bit for not jumping on this, which would result in a huge loss in revenue in an industry that is already fighting to survive.
Now that my kids are 4 and 6 we fly a lot less than we did when they flew free as infants. This summer I am taking them to Canada.
And with a $700 per person ticket, you’d better believe we’re driving.
Where do you stand on the issue? If it became a requirement to purchase a ticket for a children 2 or younger, would it impact the frequency of your air travel?
Photo: Southwest Airlines.
I already despise the whole air travel experience. Just gives me one more reason to take a road trip.
No. Keep the rules as they are. On top of that, how do you equalize an infants ears on decent for a baby that won’t take a pacifier or bottle?
If we are talking safety, do you know how many adult passengers that don’t obey the rules? Should we just chain everyone to their seat, you know, for safety?
My son flew on the plane A LOT better when he was in his carseat. Granted, it make it easier for him to kick the seat in front of him, but he ended up falling asleep after awhile which was nice.
Agree. My kids both did WAY better in their seats. They just thought it was a long car ride, and they were in the element.
Just my opinion, but no, I don’t. I think it might cause more situations of babies crying and fussing. I traveled quite a bit with my young kids. I felt it was easier and better to be able to hold and comfort them. Some parents might just stick the child in the car seat in order to have a “break” from them. That’s when the crying and fussing could get out of control.
Yes, it’s safer!
Its easier and safer. But I’m glad it isn’t required, as I wouldn’t always be able to foot the bill for another ticket!
Is it going to make travel safer? Yes.
A pleasant experience? No.
I understand them being more safe in turbulence but many times you hit clear air turbulence and are not able to give parents a heads up to put the kids back in the seat anyway.
We all know there is nothing other passengers love more than a screaming baby and there will be more screaming babies if stuck in their seats.
And if the plane is really going down, it’s a RARE instance if that seatbelt and baby seat actually save a life.
I am not opposed, as long as they require the airlines to offer a set 2 & under fare of say $100 maximum. And offer nursing moms the opportunity to bring their own infant harness for use in flight. I think the biggest safety concern is turbulence.
yes! I’ve flown both ways and, while the extra money sucks, I believe it’s much safer for them to have their own seat.
I sure enjoyed not having to pay for the extra seat when my kids were 2 and under.
Yes, they SHOULD be restrained. It’s so much safer. However, it is a very expensive prospect.
I think the safety argument is bogus. “Severe” turbulence does happen, but to the point of injuring passengers is very infrequent. If that is the argument, maybe we should put our kids in a bubble until they are 18 or 25, and never go outside April to Sept because we may get stuck by lightning. Oh and avoid Oct. through Mar. because of the risk of frostbite.
Okay, Steven, melodramatic enough? That’s like saying, we didn’t ride in car seats at all and are just fine, so car seats are unnecessary. Umm, no, we just got lucky and it doesn’t change the fact that car accidents are the leading cause …of death for children under the age of 11. The people who ARE commonly injured with sever turbulence injuries are the unrestrained passengers, specifically, young CHILDREN! So, if this helps to prevent serious injuries, than why not. It’s an easy way to prevent injuries. What the question should be is if there could be a less expensive seat for children under the age of two or some other benefit to have properly restrained and SAFER children.
You have some zealous friends.
LOL, OK jumping in here. All are excellent points and I can see both sides. What is comes down to is cost vs. safety. No one argues it will cost a lot more to require children to have their own seat. I guess it boils down to safety. I’d be interested to see the statistics that were presented at the forum. All experts agree that air travel is exponentially safer than being in a car but the question is just how safe?
And for those who are arguing the safety side, have you always bought a seat for your infant?
The times I travelled by air with my infant, I never bought their ticket. I brought my car seat with me to the gate, and if there was an open seat next to me, I put my child in their car seat. This pleased my child, and he wasn’t particularly fussy being in it.
Now that my kids are older, we don’t fly. Simply can’t afford 4 plane tickets for our family.
I did always bring my son’s seat and I had an infant harness that you attach to your seat belt (except for landing/take off) that I also brought, just in case there was not an extra seat available for his car seat. In general, he’d spend some time in his seat and on my lap, but generally slept in the seat. The time that I got squished in the back row and had to gate check his seat, he slept sprawled out against me with his leg on the person next to me. Every time I moved his leg off, he fussed and moved it back; thankfully, the passenger assured me it was okay, he understood (so much for sterotypes about huge guys with piercings and tatoos), but it could have been an awful ride if he’d been annoyed!
Cars travel is very unsafe “According to the National Center for Statistics and Analysis (NCSA), nearly 250,000 children are injured every year in car accidents” and “Of the 250,000 kids injured each year, approximately 2,000 die from their injuries.”
And if you Google the Geneva air crash record office you’ll see that world wide, fewer people die in plane crashes each year than kids die in car crashes in the US. For example, of 122 airplane crashes in 2009 world wide, 1,103 people died.
And so, my fear is that if they require folks to by even $300 seats for their infants, more people will drive and more children will die in car accidents.
And or, more grandparents will die before they can see their grandkids(my MIL died last year and only had a chance to see her grandson a few times, because he flew FREE). She had health problems and couldn’t fly or drive, but he saw her about 3 x a year for his first 2 years. Without free flights for kids under two she probably would have seen him only once or twice.
We never had the opportunity to travel via plane when my daughter was under 2yrs-old, but had that been the case, I would have bought her a seat and taken our car-seat with us. (The one we had was granted a safe option by the FAA). As it was, we took LONG road-trips with her (8+ hours in the car) when she was really small, more than once, and she was a rock-star. She was really comfortable in her seat. As long as we would have been allowed to unbuckle her and sooth her if necessary on a flight, or unbuckle her to feed her, I don’t see a problem with it.
(This is, of course, just my personal opinion, and we only have 3 people in our family, so an extra plane ticket probably wouldn’t break the bank in the grand scheme of things…)
We’ve traveled a few times by plane since then (when she was older), and she loved sitting in her own seat and buckling her belt. We had no problems.
I’ve been through rough turbulence on a plane, and I can’t imagine holding on to my child during that. Because of my experiences, I always keep my own belt buckled when I’m in my seat!
Here on MHM, we had the opportunity to review the Baby B’Air, a flight vest that hooks into the parent’s seat belt, and I think that’s a great alternative to people who want their babies to be safe and can save on the ticket cost.
Great insights, everyone. Alison, I’ve never thought about it in that way.
JoAnn, I had completely forgot about that product. For anyone who wants to check out the Baby B’air flight fest, go here: http://www.milehighmamas.com/2009/10/03/win-a-bundle-of-products-for-your-bundle-of-joy/
Just a thought, my kids are old enough that the 2 year old, lap seater is not an option anymore, but we’re flying this Christmas to visit family. There is at the moment no guarentee that you will be seated by your child. On one leg of our trip, each way my kids none of us will be sitting nearer than a row. 5 years ago, the last time we made this trip, my then 4 year old with ADHD was sitting by himself – the other passengers would not trade. Unfortunately for his seatmates, he was much addicted to Jimmy Neutron at the time…his favorite line “llama, llama, LLAMA!” and repeat and repeat and repeat. Poor seatmates, I told them they should have traded.
All this is annoying, but what if it was a 1 year old? A baby? Until airlines a family seating policy they cannot seriously require parents to buy tickets for their littlest children.
Actually, I read that such a policy could make travel LESS safe for children.
Raising the cost to fly means that more families drive. Driving is less safe, statistically, than flying. So the policy is self-defeating.
My son immediately falls asleep on my lap as soon as the plane takes off. If I were to put him in a seat, I think the trip would be a much longer, noisier ride. He is now over 2, and the next time we fly I will have to buy him a ticket. Blech… First, I doubt he will stay in it, he will want to be on my lap the entire time. Second, we will not be able to do nearly as many trips as we have the past 2 years. Bummer.
Excellent discussion. I think I’d move the required seat age to 18 months. At that point, kids are big enough that it really is a blessed relief to a parent to have extra room for them and it’s difficult to keep them from bothering your fellow passengers.
And speaking of that, I can’t imagine how rough it would be if flight attendants had to enforce a rule that kids were in their own seat at the same time they’re doing the “turn off your MP3 player” gig. It would be a whole new level of hatred-toward-flying-parents if you couldn’t hold/comfort your child for the 15-30 minutes before takeoff (depending on where you are in the line-up).
But I also agree that charging would’ve taken out half the trips we made with our kids. It’s just enough to make the trip financially impossible. Now that all 3 of ours are paying passengers, we think long and hard before we book a flight.
To Sketchy, what a nightmare! Next time, maybe you could pay for at least one assigned seat so you can sit by your most needy child? Most people would trade an aisle for an aisle.
I believe the fact that driving is statistically much more dangerous than flying, and that the additional expense would mean many families would opt to drive, is why the FAA has yet to make it mandatory for infants to ride in their own seat, in an FAA-approved child safety seat.
There’s also the issue that lots of parents may not have a car seat, or weren’t planning on bringing one if they won’t need it at their destination. Should airlines then be required to supply car seats for infant passengers?
The Baby B’Air is not approved for use during taxi, takeoff, and landing. Quoting from the FAA’s website, it sounds like they’d prefer you not use it at all:
“While booster seats and harness vests enhance safety in vehicles, FAA prohibits passengers from bringing these types of restraints on airplanes for use during taxi, take-off and landing. These restraints should be checked as baggage.”
I know Southwest won’t let you use it at all.
Of course I recognize that my baby is safest on an airplane in his own seat, restrained in his car seat. They only time he’s ever flown that way has been when there was a free available seat on the plane. I wish I was flush enough to not care about the expense when making travel plans, but the reality is most families aren’t either.
I agree a car seat is probably safer, but I do not think it should be required. My son is 19 months old now and we haven’t traveled with him on a plane since he was 1 month old. When he was a month he was in our arms the entire way and slept through the trip there and back. If I wanted to travel with him now, I’d probably bring his car seat along just to have him stay in one place otherwise he’d be a nightmare to the other passengers.
I have yet to travel in a plane with so much turbulence that it would injure someone, but I guess I’ve been lucky.
Regarding airlines that won’t allow the Baby B’Air during flight, the FAA guideline is printed on the vest (to show Flight Attendants who have never seen the vest), and there is also a separate card. The FAA HAS approved it for use DURING the flight. This does not include take-off and landing, but MOST injuries occur during flight (turbulence) and not during take-off or landing anyway. According to the Baby B’Air website, if you’ve run into an airline that won’t allow you to use the flight vest during flight, you can return it for a $50 refund.
It’s not something that can really be “checked,” because it’s just a little vest that would slip inside a babybag or purse anyway.
Just an FYI for those parents who are looking for a more affordable safety option.
For your enjoyment and entertainment, some information from: PlaneCrashInfo.com
Odds of being killed on a single airline flight
Top 25 airlines with the best accident rates – 1 in 9.2 million
Bottom 25 with the worst accident rates – 1 in 843,744
Odds of being on an airline flight which results in at least one fatality
Top 25 airlines with the best accident rates – 1 in 5.4 million
Bottom 25 with the worst accident rates – 1 in 159,119
Source: OAG Aviation & PlaneCrashInfo.com accident database, 1985 – 2009
Serf’s Assessment: Fly on airlines with good safety records to increase your odds of not having a “problem”.
Survival rate of passengers on aircraft involved in fatal accidents carrying 10+ passengers
Decade % surviving
1930s – 21%; 1940s – 20%; 1950s – 24%; 1960s – 19 %; 1970s – 25 %; 1980s – 34 %; 1990s – 35 %; 2000s – 24 % (basically – 3 out of 4 don’t make it!)
Survival rate of passengers on aircraft ditching during controlled flight 53%
Source: PlaneCrashInfo.com accident database
Serf’s Assessment: Having Personal Involvement in an airplane crash reminds me of that black light poster I saw down at the “head shop” back in the late 60’s which said something to the effect of: “Directions – IN CASE OF NUCLEAR ATTACK – 1. Sit down and bend over; 2. Place head between legs; 3. Kiss your (word deleted) GOODBYE!”
Summary: Chance of going down – small. Chance of walking away if you go down – small. Chance your unbelted kid has – much smaller. Do not be deluded into thinking you can hold onto your kid during a crash. It ain’t happening. You probably can’t even hold onto your 8 ounce cell phone during a 200 mile per hour impact since that 8 ounce cell phone suddenly exerts over 146 foot pounds of force in a split second.
Opinion: Do not require a parent(s) to purchase a seat for Junior, but do require them to sign a Waiver of Release that they understand Junior is at much greater risk without a seat. I suspect the uber safety conscience parents already get Junior a seat anyway. The rest of us just choose to walk by … er, fly by faith.
Do you know what flight attendants call lap children? Missiles. Nice, huh?
While air travel is statistically safest, crashes do still occur. The majority of those are on the tarmac, and completely survivable if properly restrained. They are most common during taxi, take off, and landing – which happen to be the exact times the FAA put their foot down regarding the Baby B’air. The dynamics of those crashes are similar to those in a car. I’m pretty sure no one here would go speeding around in the minivan with an infant on their laps – or even tethered to a seatbelt.
No one is saying your child has to be strapped in a carseat for a 5 hour flight. No passenger is expected to remain seated through that. But remember that you can’t even have a handbag on your lap through certain parts of a flight. If the fasten seatbelts light is on, your infant should be no less secure than any other passenger.
One last note on checking a child restraint as baggage. Have you seen the way suitcases are thrown around? If you need it at your destination, consider using it on the flight. As others have said, my children are much easier to travel with when they have their familiar seat on the plane.
No Way! Airlines are already financially raping everyone- now they want to charge for a kid who will most likely want to be held the entire flight anyway? COME ON! I have a 3 and 1/2 year old and a 22 month old. All I can say is that my older one never sat in her own seat until she was 3! We felt like we were wasting money because she always wanted to be held. My younger one is the same way. Here’s the deal people re: safety- you gotta balance that with COMMON SENSE AND FINANCES. In the end, the chance that a car seat will save a child when the plane is REALLY in trouble are slim to none. I think COMMON SENSE and FINANCES win. We never travel with car seats either- we rent them there or my families have some there we borrow. So…. while, safety in a car is one thing, in a plane, it’s a whole ‘nother story – my 24 month-old is safer in my arms. Not to mention, stop charging for everything and then maybe I will consider buying a seat for my 23-month old. Oh, and this comes from an insane mommy who is well-travelled with kids, both domestically and internationally.
JoAnn, here is a quote from Southwest’s website:
“The FAA has banned the use on board aircraft of certain types of CRSs that may be harmful to a child in the event of an aviation emergency. These include backless booster seats, safety belt extensions (commonly referred to as “belly belts”), and vest or harness devices that attach to an adult. Although some that were manufactured before the FAA’s ban may carry an insignia and/or language indicating they are approved for aircraft use, please understand that they are no longer permitted.”
While the FAA doesn’t actually say they are banned, it’s highly unlikely that a Southwest flight attendant would allow you to use a Baby B’air. It’s not an affordable option if you’ve purchased it and are unable to use it. Good thing they’ve offered that refund.
Corinne, I think the way they can get around it is that the Baby B’Air doesn’t actually attach to the adult? (I was just passing along the information. It does look like a great product to use when you have a baby on your lap, in the case of turbulence.)
Regardless of the finer print, either way, if we would have traveled via plane when my daughter was an infant, we would have used our car-seat and purchased an extra seat…but, like I said above, that’s just me.