Disruptive children in restaurants

[phorsenuf]

There's a great discussion about all this here; http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?t=2551659
You should come join us.

 

[TinkerBelle_325]

I have been refraining from posting on this thread, but here goes. These are my opinions, based off of countless encounters with both good and bad children and good and bad parents. They are not in direct response to any poster on this thread.

My parents and I have been to WDW more than 40 times. I will say right off the bat, the majority of children in table service restaurants at WDW are very well behaved.

Secondly, I have no issue with Nintendo DS, Personal DVD players, iPhones, iPods etc being used as a means of aiding the children in behaving.

That being said, the above mentioned devices should NOT be a crutch for bad table manners etc. I think that being taught how to act in a restaurant (sit still, have quiet conversation, elbows off the table etc.) is vital to all children. Everyone will eat in a restaurant as an adult, might as well learn the etiquette as a child.

Now, the main issue I have encountered at WDW is less to do with the children and more to do with the parents. WDW is an overstimulating environment. It is hot, crowded and filled with fun and exciting experiences. Children are going to get tired, but there is no excuse for a full on crazy meltdown in a restaurant. You know your kids, (proverbial “you” being used here). You know their schedules and how much they can take. Keeping them out to the point of a meltdown is poor parenting. Yes, yes, there are exceptions, of course. But how those exceptions are handled is another story.

I have seen children screaming bloody murder, running through the aisles, playing under tables etc. This is not acceptable and it is unsafe! Wait staff are walking those aisle with plates of hot food. If they trip over a child they could:

A. Hurt themselves
B. Hurt the child
C. Break dishes and hurt surrounding guests
D. Spill hot food on themselves, the child, surrounding guests

It never ceases to amaze me that some parents ignore their children’s meltdowns! They just let them have at it! The ONLY acceptable solutions are as follows:

A. Warn said child that if they don’t calm down in count of 5 that they will be taken to time out
B. Follow through and have a parent remove that child from the restaurant for a 10 min time out
C. If A and B don’t work, LEAVE. That’s right, the entire party, or at least 1 parent and the child should leave.

Lastly, I cannot stand the “But Disney is for kids” excuse. No, Disney is not “for kids.” Disney is for every paying guest.

As an aside: I cannot stand poor behavior by adults either and I think that the proper course of action with a misbehaving adult (typically an intoxicated one) should be for the person to be asked to leave if they are disrupting other patrons.

 

[CrabbyPatty]

Now, the main issue I have encountered at WDW is less to do with the children and more to do with the parents. ... I have seen children screaming bloody murder, running through the aisles, playing under tables etc. ..... It never ceases to amaze me that some parents ignore their children’s meltdowns! They just let them have at it!

YES - good commentary! I will say, though, that during our August trip to WDW, we experienced a kid so obnoxious and spoiled that he is now our example of How Not to Act at Disney (or anywhere for that matter).

During our Cape May breakfast, this brat was loudly telling his mother and grandmother "I HATE you, I HATE you" and walking around stomping his feet and running after characters, while the two adults just sat at the table and did nothing. And this was NOT a young child either.

My DD was appalled .... and this kid became a good object lesson on bad behavior, so as a learning tool, it was an EXCELLENT experience. But I don't pity that mother one bit, because she raised that kid, and guess what, it's not going to be better as that brat gets older. Whew!

 

[gillenkl]

I have to tell this about our recent experience at Mama Melrose. While we were being seated the child at the next table (maybe 10 yrs old) spilled his glass of soda on my husband and myself. Great, now we're sticky for the rest of our meal. But, accidents happen so we didn't make a big deal about it. For the entire meal this child roamed all around the tables in our area and the adult never once asked him to sit - mind you, this was after the soda spilling incident. Hello? SIT DOWN. He was literally standing next to our table while we're trying to eat. Lastly, he takes an ice cube out of his cup and rubs it on his feet while saying "aah this feels so good". Then he puts the ice back in his cup and takes a nice long drink Oh my goodness. All I'm saying is that I have a son who's on the autism spectrum who we have trained to behave in restaurants and use manners - it can be done, it just takes a little effort on the adults part. I don't blame kids for what they haven't been taught.

Now where's my ice and cup of soda?

 

[yankeepenny]

just my penny's worth of thoughts:
a couple of years back, we were eating at Kona one night. a baby, around 6 months of age, maybe less, was fussy.
I could tell the "new "parents were a little fraught over the crying and looking around to see if anyone was upset, but I smiled at them and a few other folks gave sympathy looks and the baby did settle down. It and only took a few minutes, and everyone in the place had a good meal.
I undestand a baby can cry.

It is the unrly age 5 and up crowd with no boundaries that gets me going.
THe screaming, yelling and running around and then, when still not getting their way, throwing themsleves on the floor next to your table really , really bothers me. Especially when the parents do nothing. Yes, at Disney. Yes, in a restaurant.

 

[luvthemouse71]

I can't blame the kids in this scenario because how can we expect a child to have manners when the parents have no clue? I have had (older)kids bump into my chair, kick me etc. I have no problem calmly telling the child what they did wrong and to please stop. This works...in all cases, the kid in question apologized(on their own!) and stopped the behavior. And in all cases, the parents were completely oblivious. I waited for the parents to say something, they didn't, so I did.

 

[Dizny Dad]

I'm surprised this thread is only 6 pages long . . . .

 

[mrsltg]

I can't wait for some of you with these rules to have children.

I've got three of them. Most of the posters here have kids, too. This is not a place for "One day you'll understand". Rather, most of us do understand, and take steps to avoid inconveniencing someone else. I love my girls but God knows they are far from perfect! If they are bold enough (speaking mostly of the older two) to misbehave, they know there are immediate consequences and those consequences are no fun. I removed my three-year-old from MGM one day - yes, I pulled the nuclear option - because she was being such an unruly beast. We spent the entire day in the hotel room - no tv, no games, no toys, just one crayon and a coloring book. That was the last time we had a problem with her!

As a parent I recognize my responsibility to parent. The reason for a tantrum doesn't matter. If it's happening, you need to pull your kid out. It might not be fun for you, but that's really not the concern of any other diner.

 

[Uncleromulus]

When I was a kid my dad (on the rare occasions we went out to eat) was always fond of saying that children were made to be seen--not heard.

Which of course meant we were to basically shut up, not run around, and eat dinner quietly. And that's exactly what we did.

 

[indimom3]

We won't take our children to Signatures for dinner anymore. It's too much of a gamble that they won't be overtired or overstimulated from the day, and it is stressful on us to manage the 3 of them in nice restaurants. I think we will wait a few more years for my 2yo to grow out of the banshee stage. We do take them out to nice restaurants at home, but we have learned to anticipate their manners and behavior becoming more difficult to predict at Disney.

My husband and I went to Artist's Point by ourselves this past trip, and there was a restless child at the table next to ours. He was pretty well behaved, and the parents were actually engaged in trying to keep him occupied, but by the end of the meal he was just done. The waiter brought over a plate for him to paint. It was an amazing little thing, and it kept him occupied and quiet for 30 more minutes - I think his parents even had coffee after their dessert.

I do think the Signature restaurants can do more to assist parents, and they should do more. You're paying a whole lot of money for that meal, and they know their restaurants will have a ton of kid customers. Why not prepare for them? We bring coloring books or other small toys when we take our kids out. I think to make it a Signature experience for a child, sometimes a small toy or other take-away (like the wishing stars at CRT) makes a huge difference for younger kids.

I also think it's ridiculous that staff doesn't step in to stop children from running around other people's tables or the aisles. That's unacceptable and actually dangerous. A few words to the children and their parents would stop a lot of that, IMO. And if the incidents continue, those people should be asked to wrap up their meal and get on with their day.

 

[TinkerBelle_325]

I do think the Signature restaurants can do more to assist parents, and they should do more. You're paying a whole lot of money for that meal, and they know their restaurants will have a ton of kid customers. Why not prepare for them? We bring coloring books or other small toys when we take our kids out. I think to make it a Signature experience for a child, sometimes a small toy or other take-away (like the wishing stars at CRT) makes a huge difference for younger kids.

Let me preface this by saying, thank you for knowing your children and knowing that it is too much of a gamble for them to be well behaved at a signature restaurant.

However, your comment above is exactly the kind of attitude I don't understand.

Why should a restaurant be responsible for providing entertainment to a child to ensure that child behaves well? Children's behavior is the responsibility of the parents.

You are paying money for the meal not for distraction for your children. Signature restaurants have higher price points because they feature more rare menu items (buffalo, ostrich) or because they keep up with seasonal, local or organic ingredients.

As far as a signature experience for the child....the view at CG is part of it's signature status, that can be enjoyed by child and parent alike. And, the signatures have more complex and creative children's menus, featuring items like Rice Crispy Sushi with Chocolate "soy" sauce and Green Marshmallow "wasabi" that make the experience "signature" for children.

It is a parent's choice to bring their child to a Signature restaurant and in that token they should be the ones who are prepared to distract or otherwise occupy their children.

 

[clanmcculloch]

I can't wait for some of you with these rules to have children. Unfortunatley we cannot control everything. Yes my children have been disiplined over the years. But what do you do when your child has done well all day and then it just takes one thing to turn the tables. Are you suggesting we don't eat. Do you tell the parent with the ADHD child they can't eat somewhere. Or maybe you want those of us who have a child with Asburgers and doesn't quite get the social cues they can only eat in their hotel rooms or at a food court. I have taken a screaming child out of the room many times.I think that we need to be tolerant of each other also. Not be automatons. Lets try to enjoy ourselves also. I get more usped by seeing the LOUD, Obnoxious, Drunk, Rude, Demanding Adults with no maners. I am more upset about the adults who chew their food with their mouthes open. Or the ones who feel it is okay to have an entire conversation with it full of food then I am with a child having a tantrum. They have somewhat of an excuse, they are tired, hungry and cranky and presumedly still learning how to behave. It is the adults who should know better that have the appaling behavior that shouldn't be tolerated. Okay I have had my rant. I usually try to ignore these threads but just had to answer this one.

The special needs card doesn't fly with me. My 12 year old has Asperger Syndrome and you won't catch her doing anything that will disrupt other guests' meals. I go out of my way to ensure that. I book our meals for our normal, at home, meal times which are earlier than the crowds typically dine, I make sure she gets plenty of rest, I make sure there will be things on the menu that she'll like before booking the ADR and I make sure that the environment of the restaurant isn't likely to set off something to do with her autism. This means we don't get to eat at every single restaurant that we'd like to try and we eat at off times compared to most people but it's important to ensure she can cope. In addition, during our meals we actually talk with our kids. We've also taught them proper table manners and acceptable public behaviour. I do everything I can do to ensure we aren't intruding on others as well as to ensure WE will be able to enjoy our meal. I do also understand that kids will be kids and things will happen beyond our control but I take responsibility and yes in that rare event we have gotten our food boxed and left the restaurant. My daughter having a disability is NOT an excuse.

I'm very tollarant of families who are clearly trying their best to work with their child. Every parent has likely been in a similar situation. I have no tollerance for kids roaming restaurants or being ignored when they're clearly looking for attention or need something. These parents have no respect for other patrons or for their own kids.

 

[nbs2]

The restaurant bears responsibility to do what it can to ensure that all customers have a pleasant dining experience, based on the experience that the restaurant is trying to provide. That includes being prepared for scenarios that may not be anticipated.

If Signature restaurants wish to accommodate only an expected adult clientèle, then they shouldn't be offering children's menus. Additionally, one could extrapolate that to suggest they not offer an alternative meals. Many restaurants offer fare that is designed to accommodate the needs or wants of their diners. I'd suggest that a chef that is unwilling to do so is outdated or otherwise limited in his/her skills.

By having material on hand to accommodate an otherwise acceptable diner (per the view of management), restaurants can ensure that other diners have a pleasant experience. That means that V/A has jackets on hand for underdressed men (I'd suggest having some ties as well). That means that Signature restaurants, which offer enhanced, but not exclusive, experiences should have something to prepare for a worst case child scenario. Tell me, would you rather deal with a parent who is not addressing a bored child or a restaurant that makes a token level accommodation to help minimize the child's boredom? And, to be frank, I've dealt with enough stuffed-shirt swaggering peacock restaurants to have moments where I've commandeered my kids toys.

Finally, a restaurant is not something you go to to just pay for a meal. If that was the case, these restaurants wouldn't be as pricey as they are and people would have no reason to deal with their kids. Rather, you are paying a premium to obtain exclusive access to an atmosphere. That includes distractions from the world for all patrons. For everything that we do, we have to make a decision as to how much things are worth. I pay for my airline lounge access to keep away from the unwashed masses. I'm fine being part of that mass when I'm at a hotel, so I don't pay for club level rooms or Deluxe accommodations. If I want an exclusive meal, I'll pay through the nose to get it. But, if I don't, I don't pay for it. My kids get to do the same thing - they are included on my access at the airport and get benefits geared towards their needs, but they stay in regular rooms. They enjoy normal meals, but when eating at a restaurant that is built to accommodate them they enjoy the same quality benefits, but at their level.

 

[Anthony1971]

I've got three of them. Most of the posters here have kids, too. This is not a place for "One day you'll understand". Rather, most of us do understand, and take steps to avoid inconveniencing someone else. I love my girls but God knows they are far from perfect! If they are bold enough (speaking mostly of the older two) to misbehave, they know there are immediate consequences and those consequences are no fun. I removed my three-year-old from MGM one day - yes, I pulled the nuclear option - because she was being such an unruly beast. We spent the entire day in the hotel room - no tv, no games, no toys, just one crayon and a coloring book. That was the last time we had a problem with her!

As a parent I recognize my responsibility to parent. The reason for a tantrum doesn't matter. If it's happening, you need to pull your kid out. It might not be fun for you, but that's really not the concern of any other diner.

And I am sure someone said or thought how bad your children are or how bad of a parent you are for hauling your child out...
ALL children at some point behave badly... all parents make mistakes...
there are truly parents who do not care but that is very rare
I would never take my 4YO to a signiture just would rather not risk paying that kind of money if he gets cranky or has a bad day....
on the same at home for the most part he will sit there untill everyone is done... but there are those days.... yes I wil take steps when we are out and it is rare that we have a problem but we do as ALL do...
as far as Kids playing under tables ALL kids do this and frankly is no ones buisness so long as it under the table of the family who owns the child...
My point is some people have more understanding then others... and what is truly bad behavior is rare...
For those who think my child will never do this..... they will I will gladly make a bet.. and other then that one occasion every so often otherwise your child may be an angel... yes a parent needs to try to correct the problem but it does not always work and there will always be someone who thinks your child is a brat or they know how to parent better or you are just a bad parent...

 

[TinkerBelle_325]

The restaurant bears responsibility to do what it can to ensure that all customers have a pleasant dining experience, based on the experience that the restaurant is trying to provide. That includes being prepared for scenarios that may not be anticipated.

With multiple friends who are restaurant owners I beg to differ. Several do not offer high chairs. That is their choice as an establishment. They are not "required" to offer them. Patrons to the restaurant are choosing to bring their children/infants. The restaurant isn't *encouraging* them to do so.

Do you suggest that restaurants also stock changes of clothes for adults that spill food or drink on themselves? Or worse yet, to compensate for wait staff that may spill? That is a "scenario that may not be anticipated"

What about requiring restaurants to have epi-pens on hand in case of an allergic reaction? I thought that was the responsibility of the guest with the allergy, but you suggest that restaurants should be prepared to deal with a "scenario that may not be anticipated" to cater to any guest.

If Signature restaurants wish to accommodate only an expected adult clientèle, then they shouldn't be offering children's menus. Additionally, one could extrapolate that to suggest they not offer an alternative meals. Many restaurants offer fare that is designed to accommodate the needs or wants of their diners. I'd suggest that a chef that is unwilling to do so is outdated or otherwise limited in his/her skills.

I never said that Signature Restaurants only cater to adults, I simply said that ensuring the behavior of children is the responsibility of the PARENT, not the RESTAURANT.

Also, I never stated that a children's menu *shouldn't* be offered, I emphasized that the children's menus offered at signature restaurants are more complex and creative than those in casual TS restaurants. This is one of the examples of signature restaurants catering to children as well.

By having material on hand to accommodate an otherwise acceptable diner (per the view of management), restaurants can ensure that other diners have a pleasant experience. That means that V/A has jackets on hand for underdressed men (I'd suggest having some ties as well). That means that Signature restaurants, which offer enhanced, but not exclusive, experiences should have something to prepare for a worst case child scenario. Tell me, would you rather deal with a parent who is not addressing a bored child or a restaurant that makes a token level accommodation to help minimize the child's boredom? And, to be frank, I've dealt with enough stuffed-shirt swaggering peacock restaurants to have moments where I've commandeered my kids toys.

California Grill does NOT have items on hand to suit their dress code. They don't have t-shirts for guests wearing tank tops, or pans for those wearing cut offs. V&A is an entirely different class of restaurant and cannot be compared to the Signature restaurants.

Again, it is not the restaurant's responsibility to anticipate the behavior of a child. It is the parent's responsibility.

Finally, a restaurant is not something you go to to just pay for a meal. If that was the case, these restaurants wouldn't be as pricey as they are and people would have no reason to deal with their kids. Rather, you are paying a premium to obtain exclusive access to an atmosphere. That includes distractions from the world for all patrons. For everything that we do, we have to make a decision as to how much things are worth. I pay for my airline lounge access to keep away from the unwashed masses. I'm fine being part of that mass when I'm at a hotel, so I don't pay for club level rooms or Deluxe accommodations. If I want an exclusive meal, I'll pay through the nose to get it. But, if I don't, I don't pay for it. My kids get to do the same thing - they are included on my access at the airport and get benefits geared towards their needs, but they stay in regular rooms. They enjoy normal meals, but when eating at a restaurant that is built to accommodate them they enjoy the same quality benefits, but at their level.

Once again, children are privy to the "atmosphere" in the restaurant as well, the view at CG is just as breath-taking to a child, who can see the boats on Seven Seas Lagoon, and the Magic Kingdom just as well as an adult can

Signature restaurants are not built to accomodate "children" they are built to accomodate "guests." The signature restaurants do not provide any additional entertainment or distraction for adults (outside of the view and the atmosphere, which are equally available for the child's enjoyment).

Comments in red

 

[Arielle22]

The special needs card doesn't fly with me. My 12 year old has Asperger Syndrome and you won't catch her doing anything that will disrupt other guests' meals. I go out of my way to ensure that. I book our meals for our normal, at home, meal times which are earlier than the crowds typically dine, I make sure she gets plenty of rest, I make sure there will be things on the menu that she'll like before booking the ADR and I make sure that the environment of the restaurant isn't likely to set off something to do with her autism. This means we don't get to eat at every single restaurant that we'd like to try and we eat at off times compared to most people but it's important to ensure she can cope. In addition, during our meals we actually talk with our kids. We've also taught them proper table manners and acceptable public behaviour. I do everything I can do to ensure we aren't intruding on others as well as to ensure WE will be able to enjoy our meal. I do also understand that kids will be kids and things will happen beyond our control but I take responsibility and yes in that rare event we have gotten our food boxed and left the restaurant. My daughter having a disability is NOT an excuse.

I'm very tollarant of families who are clearly trying their best to work with their child. Every parent has likely been in a similar situation. I have no tollerance for kids roaming restaurants or being ignored when they're clearly looking for attention or need something. These parents have no respect for other patrons or for their own kids.

I agree with your post. My 19 month old nephew was a micro premie who only eats through a feeding tube so he isn't distracted by being feed. He will also get very loud since when he gets over stimulated very easily. She and I alternate bringing him outside when he gets fussy.

If a child (special needs or not) has a meltdown in a restaurant, then it cannot please too pleasant for them. So being a good parent means you remove them so that they can get their emotions under control. If it means you cannot eat in restaurants then that is something you will have to deal with.

My daughters are now teens but I have always told them my job is to prepare them for the world because the world isn't going to change for them.

 

[indimom3]

Let me preface this by saying, thank you for knowing your children and knowing that it is too much of a gamble for them to be well behaved at a signature restaurant.

However, your comment above is exactly the kind of attitude I don't understand.

Why should a restaurant be responsible for providing entertainment to a child to ensure that child behaves well? Children's behavior is the responsibility of the parents.

You are paying money for the meal not for distraction for your children. Signature restaurants have higher price points because they feature more rare menu items (buffalo, ostrich) or because they keep up with seasonal, local or organic ingredients.

As far as a signature experience for the child....the view at CG is part of it's signature status, that can be enjoyed by child and parent alike. And, the signatures have more complex and creative children's menus, featuring items like Rice Crispy Sushi with Chocolate "soy" sauce and Green Marshmallow "wasabi" that make the experience "signature" for children.

It is a parent's choice to bring their child to a Signature restaurant and in that token they should be the ones who are prepared to distract or otherwise occupy their children.

The restaurant isn't "responsible" for entertaining my children, but if you are operating a nice restaurant in a kid-heavy environment, it's a very nice bonus. It also makes me, as a paying patron, want to go back to that restaurant. So IMO, it's just good business. That plate probably cost Disney a dollar or less. And those parents might have spent $30 on after dinner coffee drinks. That plate also enhanced my enjoyment of the meal, by stopping a meltdown before I had to witness it.

It's really no different a strategy than some of the TS restaurants handing out crayons. That plate was the Signature version of 'crayons.' A good restaurant that brings it's customers back over and over again caters to its customers - whatever age they happen to be. And Disney has a lot of children as customers.

And I also disagree that I am paying for just the meal and not the distraction. I'm not paying Disney prices because those meals are worth that much money - I'm paying Disney prices because I'm at Disney. I expect 'special.' I expect more than just a decently cooked piece of meat. I can get a world class steak 10 minutes from my house. When I go to Disney, I am paying for ambience, entertainment, and a nice big dish of distraction with my meal. And because that's usually what I get, I'm willing to pay a lot more for the same meal at Disney.

I'm not in any way expecting Disney to parent my children. I got that taken of. But if unruly children in Signatures is such a common problem, like it seems on this thread, then I think it makes good business sense for them to see if there are simple steps they can take to help.

Oh, and once at Goldoni in DC, the waiter DID give my husband a very nice tie after he spilled wine on the one he was wearing. We were on our way to the opera and were very appreciative. That's a level of service I have never forgotten. Did I expect it? No. Did he get the best tip we've ever given a server? You betcha.

 

[luvthemouse71]

A lot of this can be prevented by knowing your child, and by realizing that the ability of a child to sit through a long elaborate meal just isn't there at age 6 or under( most kids). The adults in the equation have to be mature enough to realize that their good time may fall victim to their responsibilities as parents.

 

[TinkerBelle_325]

The restaurant isn't "responsible" for entertaining my children, but if you are operating a nice restaurant in a kid-heavy environment, it's a very nice bonus. It also makes me, as a paying patron, want to go back to that restaurant. So IMO, it's just good business. That plate probably cost Disney a dollar or less. And those parents might have spent $30 on after dinner coffee drinks. That plate also enhanced my enjoyment of the meal, by stopping a meltdown before I had to witness it.

It's really no different a strategy than some of the TS restaurants handing out crayons. That plate was the Signature version of 'crayons.' A good restaurant that brings it's customers back over and over again caters to its customers - whatever age they happen to be. And Disney has a lot of children as customers.

And I also disagree that I am paying for just the meal and not the distraction. I'm not paying Disney prices because those meals are worth that much money - I'm paying Disney prices because I'm at Disney. I expect 'special.' I expect more than just a decently cooked piece of meat. I can get a world class steak 10 minutes from my house. When I go to Disney, I am paying for ambience, entertainment, and a nice big dish of distraction with my meal. And because that's usually what I get, I'm willing to pay a lot more for the same meal at Disney.

I'm not in any way expecting Disney to parent my children. I got that taken of. But if unruly children in Signatures is such a common problem, like it seems on this thread, then I think it makes good business sense for them to see if there are simple steps they can take to help.

Oh, and once at Goldoni in DC, the waiter DID give my husband a very nice tie after he spilled wine on the one he was wearing. We were on our way to the opera and were very appreciative. That's a level of service I have never forgotten. Did I expect it? No. Did he get the best tip we've ever given a server? You betcha.

I wouldn't say that unruly children at Signature restaurants is endemic, as this thread is suggesting. I've only encountered it once or twice, in dozens of meals at Signature restaurants.

However, at every restaurant you pay for the meal, ambience etc. The reason that Disney charges a premium is because it is a tourist destination. You will find increased prices at restaurants at all "resorts." I once paid $30 for coconut shrimp at a Hyatt Grand Regency, in a LOUNGE! They weren't the best shrimp and it wasn't the most amazing atmosphere, but its a product of supply and demand. Resorts of any kind inflate prices at their restaurants.

I still don't think that "distraction" is really an element of what you are paying for at a Signature restaurant. At a character meal? Absolutely! But at a high-end restaurant that just happens to be in a resort that has lots of kids (WDW is not a kid-resort) then there is no expectation for them to cater to kids.

The waiter that brought the plate went above and beyond, as did the waiter that brought the tie. You can't expect "special" because then it isn't "special" anymore, it is standard. And I guarentee, if Disney started providing paint a plates to all the kids at a Signature:

A. There would be paint everywhere
B. It would cause an increase in price (because they are Disney and they CAN)

 

[nbs2]

Comments in red

I think you misunderstand what I am trying to say. This may be due to my failure to indicate that they must anticipate all possible problems, and be ready with all reasonable precautions.

The burden of care rests upon the parents. That we agree on.

However, the element that the Signature restaurants at WDW cannot escape is that they are at WDW. While all varieties of groups may attend the park, a look at the marketing materials suggests that their primary target is families with younger children. Therefore, coupled with their child admittance policy, it is reasonable to expect that Signature restaurants attempt to bring a higher class of dining to parents of younger children. While they make it clear that they have an expected level of dress, they do not indicate in their materials that children are not welcome. That, I believe, we can agree on.

While most parents do their best to guide their children effectively, there are some who are underprepared (either intentionally or unintentionally) for a boredom or a meltdown. Those underprepared parents are the issue that is being addressed here. Again, I believe we are in agreement.

When these parents fail to control their kids, we now have to look at the restaurant response. Earlier in the thread, I argued that while the restaurant should be aware and address the issue, there is a duty that other patrons ensure the restaurant is aware of the problem. After all, if management is unaware, there cannot address the situation. But, that is not the issue being discussed in our counterpoints. Rather, it is what response should the restaurant make or be prepared to make.

Once a child begins to act out or otherwise disturb other patrons, and the restaurant is aware, it is incumbent on the management to ensure that action is taken. In the case of these underprepared parents, that can mean ushering them to a more remote location, suggesting that one parent take the child outside, or simply pointing out the problem. In the alternative, it can mean compensating other patrons for enduring the child - but that is not only more costly financially, it comes a a cost to overall customer satisfaction. Therefore, we can agree that a better solution would be to look for a resolution that preempts any acting out or other misbehavior.

A restaurant in this situation - subject to high attraction by parents with younger children but offering a higher class of service - needs to take certain reasonable precautions. First, let us look at the world all possible precautions. They could have an epi-pen on hand for allergies, clothes for adults who have product spilled on them, clothes for children who spill product on themselves, minor distractions, etc. There are clearly too many precautions possible to list them all. I did want to address your points, even though I suspect they were rhetorical, because they do guide us in discussion of the reasonable. If a restaurant claimed to offer a perfectly allergy free experience, it would be reasonable to expect them to have epi-pens on hand. After all, while a customer should be prepared, it is reasonable that the restaurant be prepared to resolve a failure to meet its billing. Disney Signature restaurants do not make such a claim, and so I would not expect them to have them on hand. I don't expect a restaurant to have a change of clothes, but I would expect any respectable restaurant, including Disney Signatures, to pay the cleaning bill if food is spilled by the waitstaff. I would consider it unreasonable, however, to expect a restaurant to take care of a mistake by a customer that affects only himself (such as the child spilling product on himself). I think we can agree those are all reasonable responses by a restaurant.

Getting down to the distraction is where we reach a point of contention. We have established that the Signature restaurants are as subject to Disney marketing as any other restaurant on property. We have also established that they offer a higher class of service than a CS or most other TS locations. If a Signature restaurant can ensure a more pleasant dining experience by anticipating a sizable quantity of underage guests and preparing according by having some sort of minor distraction available, wouldn't that be reasonable? While an adult may suffer a short wait for food by enjoying the location and knowledge (or anticipation) that the product will be exceptional, it is unreasonable to expect a child to do so. This brings us back to the problem of underpreparedness. If a parent is not prepared and is not addressing the needs of a child, it is the rest of the diners that suffer. These restaurants can reasonably anticipate this problem and can mitigate it through minimal effort and distraction to other diners. To expect them not to do so would be akin to expecting the other diners to endure.

Had we been discussing a restaurant of the perceived caliber of the Signature restaurants in a non-WDW locale, I would agree with your comment that parents are the only precaution available. It would be unreasonable for them to expect any sizable quantity of younger diners and thus unreasonable to expect them to take precautions. I would expect them to turn away reservations or walk-ins from non-VIPs that have children. But, the location cannot be ignored. So long as they feed off the teat of WDW and DDP, such ignorance is unacceptable. Parents should be ready, but that is not excuse for a Signature restaurant to remain defenseless.

And that, my Leaf-loving Canadian Pixie, is why a Signature restaurant must be ready for kids. Not for the underprepared parent, but for all other patrons.