Should all Signature restaurants ban children under 10?

[ransom]

I think this thread was started to stir up trouble and controversy. We all know Disney will NEVER ban kids from ALL signature restaurants because it is completely unnecessary.

It was just a question that seemed interesting to me, given the recent change at V&A. I wondered what my fellow DISers think. And now we know that about 20% would like to see this change, while 80% would not.

[Personally, as I said in another thread, I like WDW just the way it is: with very few things that are for kids only, and very few things that are for adults only.]

 

[Tricia1972]

I voted no, they should not ban children from all Signature dining experiences. However I wholeheartedly agree with their decision to do this for Victoria & Albert's.

10 is a ridiculously arbitrary age. Either go all the way and make them adult only, or let parents continue to use their judgment on whether or not their child can behave in a nicer restaurant.

My 6 year old is more well behaved than many 10 year olds I know!

I believe that the age of 10 at Victoria and Albert's has to do with what Disney defines as an 'adult'. 10 year olds pay for Adult tickets and are considered an adult on the Disney Dining Plan.

Disney can't pick and choose what they define as an adult. If they said 18 is an adult for Victoria & Albert's (or in the case of this poll - all signature restaurants), then they'd be forced to come up with Junior pricing for those that are 10-17.

 

[Kitka]

I voted no, they should not ban children from all Signature dining experiences. However I wholeheartedly agree with their decision to do this for Victoria & Albert's.



I believe that the age of 10 at Victoria and Albert's has to do with what Disney defines as an 'adult'. 10 year olds pay for Adult tickets and are considered an adult on the Disney Dining Plan.

Disney can't pick and choose what they define as an adult. If they said 18 is an adult for Victoria & Albert's (or in the case of this poll - all signature restaurants), then they'd be forced to come up with Junior pricing for those that are 10-17.

I can understand what you're saying but disagree that they "can't" pick and choose their definitions based on the situation. As a business, they are free to set different guidelines for different situations. They are doing already that by setting it at 10 and up - by excluding a class of Dining Plan customers from a Dining Plan restaurant (those that purchased the plan for their 3-9 year old). KWIM?

 

[Jennasis]

Absolutely not! I'd be appalled if all the signature dining went child free, and I have been a very vocal supporter of having SOME type of adult only dining options. NO way should ALL the sig restaurants be adults only. I am ok with building an all new establishment that is adult only (and not costing an arm and a leg like V&A), or by having one or two sig restaurants do adult only during certain hours on one or two nights during the week (and maybe rotating the restaurants).

 

[pfalcioni]

I voted yes, but I don't think they should be banned, only like others have mentioned, no children under 10 after 7 or 8pm.

I think this is a valid option. I know many kids are extremely well behaved, and most would never cause a problem - however, it seems like parents who are willing to make poor decisions about where and when to dine (late at night, and at 'adult' restaurants), are also not able to control their tired, bored and disriptive children.

DW is a huge draw for honeymooners and older couples without kids - and although we're all looking to be kids again when we go through the turnstyles - we sometimes want to go back to being adults when the sun sets!

 

[PaulaSB12]

All signature resteraunts no ONE yes. While most of the parents on this board will make their children behave there are enough people who think that their little darling spoiling some one else's meal is just so cute!

 

[Tricia1972]

I can understand what you're saying but disagree that they "can't" pick and choose their definitions based on the situation. As a business, they are free to set different guidelines for different situations.

I'll agree, Disney is a business and technically can do whatever they want. I feel that it'd be a VERY large can of worms for Disney dealing with the public and explaining to them why their 10 year old is sometimes considered an adult and is sometimes not considered an adult. "Well yes Mr/Ms Customer. Timmy has to pay for an adult park ticket and the adult dining plan, but he can't eat at Victoria and Albert's because he isn't an adult yet." In this case, Disney would basically use the definition of adult to best suit them to make the maximum dollar off of an 'adult' who was 10-17 years old.

I think that the decision for V&A to be 10 and over was very wise for them. They avoided any bad PR and any hassles in this regard.

...They are doing already that by setting it at 10 and up - by excluding a class of Dining Plan customers from a Dining Plan restaurant (those that purchased the plan for their 3-9 year old). KWIM?

Victoria & Albert's is only on the Platinum dining plan, you can't use your TS credits there on the regular DDP or even the DxDDP. Though what you say is technically true, for the few who purchase the platinum plan. Disney has excluded an entire Platinum Dining Plan customer class (3-9) at V&A's versus the sticky situation of excluding an entire class of Platinum Dining Plan customers from V&A's and part of another class of Platinum Dining Plan customers (10-18 in the 10+ adult class).

I am not saying that your 6 year old is not equipped to eat at Victoria & Albert's. My 5 year old is very mature and might be able to handle the experience too (not that I'd bring him - spending $300 on dinner is definitely time for Mommy and Daddy only - but I digress). But because our children may be exceptions to the rule, doesn't mean Disney needs to change their rule at Victoria & Albert's to suit our kids. I also would like to reiterate my view that I do not think that kids under 10 should be banned from all signature dining. I still agree that it is prudent to have this rule in force at Victoria & Albert's.

 

[stellablue]

Aside from good/bad behavior of children, isn't it nice to have the option of just one or two restaurants with an "adult-only" atmosphere?

Certainly NOT all the signatures, but I love that V&A is and just one more would be great (one that's less expensive and upscale, but with food I would actually eat!)....or at least a time restriction.

It's just a different atmosphere altogether without children-more grown up appeal, don't have to worry about your conversation (not that I"m vulgur, I'm certainly not, but you know what I mean). I think a place like V&A should portray that.

and though I was joking around in my post about wanting to attend the kids only events like P&P & Princess Tea (well, sort of... ), I'll bet those kids LOVE having an event with "no adults allowed"-just makes for a different and special atmosphere. I think thats along the exact same lines as making V&A adult only.

 

[spooky1]

100% absolutely NO !!! Disney if for kids, LIGHTEN the heck up !!! Just heard about the Grand Floridian, what idiots! Course I do agree - some places just are not for kids, let the snobby ahems have their meaningless peace and quite.

 

[wendy46001]

Didnt vote as I’m a some not all person
Some kids just can behave/some adults can either

The screaming toddler at our 9:30pm blue zoo meal should have been in bed...and we were compt. part of our meal because his parent don’t know how to parent...

 

[Jennasis]

Keep in mind that I answered an emphatic "NO" to the OP....

but if I hear one more _______ person say that Disney is for kids/families, I think I'm going to scream.

It is not FOR anyone...it's FOR EVERYONE. And there are things to do and places to see to appeal to everyone.

 

[Booyakasha]

Didnt vote as I’m a some not all person
Some kids just can behave/some adults can either

The screaming toddler at our 9:30pm blue zoo meal should have been in bed...and we were compt. part of our meal because his parent don’t know how to parent...

Hopefully Bluezoo management added it to the parents bill. Maybe that would teach parents to have well behaved kids in a nice restaurant, if they were "fined" for disturbing other peoples dinner.

B.

 

[wendy46001]

Hopefully Bluezoo management added it to the parents bill. Maybe that would teach parents to have well behaved kids in a nice restaurant, if they were "fined" for disturbing other peoples dinner.

B.

I doubt it, honestly I’ve never seen people think they own the world like these two...The waiter was trying so hard with that kids...offering him everything under the sun just to calm him down...but the parents kept saying oh he's just like that ....and then had the nerve to order after diner drinks ....The manager went table to table after they left....

I just don’t understand why they wont kick the disruption out instead of apologizing to all the other tables

 

[stellablue]

100% absolutely NO !!! Disney if for kids, LIGHTEN the heck up !!! Just heard about the Grand Floridian, what idiots! Course I do agree - some places just are not for kids, let the snobby ahems have their meaningless peace and quite.

What?? Your post may need some lightening up

I'm sorry, but what is so snobby about wanting to hang out with grown ups for a few hours? and what is so meaningless about peace and quiet? Don't think I've ever heard anyone say that....

It's ONE restaurant out of hundreds to choose from.

You know, I posted a very interesting poll on the Theme Parks thread-asking how many of us Dis'ers are "adult-only families" on WDW vacations. You might be surprised by the results so far because there are actually a significant number of us "adult-only family" guests.

 

[apostolic4life]

I would be interested in how many people, who think we parents should pack our kids in and go to bed before 7pm, actually have kids who would be affected by this type of policy.

My children are often out later than a lot of kids their age due to church functions and our rural location (gotta drive 25 miles to the nearest town/city), but that is fine because they get up later than other kids too because they are home-schooled. While at WDW we tend to eat later in the evening at nice restaurants and never have a melt down, but I have seen the melt downs and tantrums from children who are operating outside their normal routine. When this happens it is the job of the parents to do what is in the best interest of the child......sometimes that even means leaving the restaurant you so dearly wanted to eat in.

Every child is different, so parents should make decisions based on their child's needs, and be prepared to alter their plans to show courtesy for other diners.

 

[OKW Lover]

I just wondered what you meant by requiring a party to have young children w/them before they can eat? I was a little confused.

The comment was a bit tongue-in-cheek. Actually, a lot.

The real point is that there are grown-up places to dine and there are entire-family places to dine. We all make practical decisions on what type of place to eat at even in our own home town.

 

[spooky1]

What?? Your post may need some lightening up

I'm sorry, but what is so snobby about wanting to hang out with grown ups for a few hours? and what is so meaningless about peace and quiet? Don't think I've ever heard anyone say that....

It's ONE restaurant out of hundreds to choose from.

You know, I posted a very interesting poll on the Theme Parks thread-asking how many of us Dis'ers are "adult-only families" on WDW vacations. You might be surprised by the results so far because there are actually a significant number of us "adult-only family" guests.

What they should have done is set hours of operation - 4-6 family dining - 7-close 10+ ... Oh and I also seen the poll you are referring to - the results are quite surprising, but dont change the bottom line and that is that this restaurant in a Disney Resort is now discriminating.

The screaming toddler at our 9:30pm blue zoo meal should have been in bed...and we were compt. part of our meal because his parent don’t know how to parent...

OMG - you were compt because a child was being rowdy? Who are you to judge any other person?

 

[LarryJ]

I can only think of three that might be no children restaurants for dinner and those would be V&A, Bistro, and Ca Grill. Ca grill is iffy, but the other two is a definite.

Larry

 

[TDC Nala]

No. And I don't have any children.

I don't think it's necessary. Fine for Victoria and Alberts, which is not a suitable place for little kids (albeit the random child here and there who actually likes the food and doesn't mind sitting still for three hours in fancy clothes). The other WDW signatures are not as upscale and provide for the presence of children (except maybe Bistro de Paris, which is not on the basic/deluxe dining plan and has no children's menu - but it still doesn't aspire to V&A heights).

Nor would I consider it necessary to ban adults without children (what age children, by the way? 10, 12, 16, 24, 37? At what point would the majority of humans be too old to enjoy a character meal?)

And I never say Disney is for kids, or Disney is for families. Disney is for anybody who enjoys Disney. Just because the majority are families with children doesn't make it FOR them. It's there for me and my friends just as much as it is there for you and your children.

I would, however, advocate excluding children under 10 from the paid events at the food and wine festival, including the Party for the Senses. I'd also advocate some new paid events geared toward kids (without the wine angle obviously).

 

[Colleen27]

I would be interested in how many people, who think we parents should pack our kids in and go to bed before 7pm, actually have kids who would be affected by this type of policy.

My children are often out later than a lot of kids their age due to church functions and our rural location (gotta drive 25 miles to the nearest town/city), but that is fine because they get up later than other kids too because they are home-schooled. While at WDW we tend to eat later in the evening at nice restaurants and never have a melt down, but I have seen the melt downs and tantrums from children who are operating outside their normal routine. When this happens it is the job of the parents to do what is in the best interest of the child......sometimes that even means leaving the restaurant you so dearly wanted to eat in.

Every child is different, so parents should make decisions based on their child's needs, and be prepared to alter their plans to show courtesy for other diners.

We're night owls too, and I'd hate having to force early dinners into our schedule (especially in January, when the parks close so early!) to work around age restrictions at the restaurants. We have 5 signature dinners planned for our trip next week, and I wouldn't be interested in doing any of them if Disney adopted the "no kids after 7" idea that some people have suggested because it would cut into the already short park hours far too much. I'd imagine it would also be a major issue for people coming from the western U.S. - eating at the kids' normal 6pm dinner time would mean 9pm Disney time.

My kids have never had a meltdown in a restaurant, at Disney or elsewhere. But we're not trying to keep our kids going from rope drop to late dinner - we sleep late at home so we sleep late on vacation, and we eat late at home so we eat late on vacation. I think most of the problems re: kids & restaurants boil down to parents throwing all semblance of a normal schedule away in the name of vacation fun, and not realizing that kids can't just reset their sleeping and eating patterns on command.