Southwest lap child

[BensDaddy]

It's not the Flight Attendants you need to worry about. It's the physics. Remember from your high school physics that kinetic energy increases by the square of the velocity. We're talking exponential increases in energy the faster an object is going.

Any unsecured item in the cabin... even an unrestrained child... will become a projectile. It's morbid but it is true.

 

[Angela0917]

We flew SWA with DS last year at 10 months. It was obvious he was under 2, but still needed birth certificate. And you have to get it verified in both airports. We thought you only had to do it once, and when we were getting ready for our flight home at MCO we went through security and then they told us we had to be verified again so we had to go the whole way back, get it verified, and then go back through security again. Thank God Magical Express drops us off so early or we would have for sure missed our flight!

As for the whole lap baby thing, DS was a lap baby last year. We were lucky and had no problems at all, but he was only 10 months and was perfectly content sitting on my lap the whole time. He'll also be 22 months for our trip this year also, and I could not imagine taking him as a lap baby. I am pretty sure we're going to try the CARES harness since we will be using disney transportation and will not need a carseat while we are there. Hopefully that works out ok for us!

 

[OrangeCountyCommuter]

It's not the Flight Attendants you need to worry about. It's the physics. Remember from your high school physics that kinetic energy increases by the square of the velocity. We're talking exponential increases in energy the faster an object is going.

Any unsecured item in the cabin... even an unrestrained child... will become a projectile. It's morbid but it is true.

I agree, but when people read about what they are going to be told to do, they tend to annouce that 'well I won't do that I will hold on to my child' (AKA as I am going to try to ignore the FA)

 

[Alesia]

It's not the Flight Attendants you need to worry about. It's the physics. Remember from your high school physics that kinetic energy increases by the square of the velocity. We're talking exponential increases in energy the faster an object is going.

Any unsecured item in the cabin... even an unrestrained child... will become a projectile. It's morbid but it is true.

I have a friend who is a flight attendant who refers to lap babies as "cabin missiles." Obviously she isn't the most sensitive person in the world, but she isn't exactly incorrect, either.

 

[Hannathy]

Why can't this question ever just be answered? Why does everyone have to inject opinions when they weren't asked for? All that was asked is do I need the birth certificate and the answer is yes! If the child is under 2 and flying as a lap baby the answer is yes they will ask for it, especially South West.

 

[Hannathy]

I agree, but when people read about what they are going to be told to do, they tend to annouce that 'well I won't do that I will hold on to my child' (AKA as I am going to try to ignore the FA)

How would holding onto your child be ignoring the FA? That is what they tell you to do. To hold your child facing you against your chest.

 

[lost*in*cyberspace]

Why can't this question ever just be answered? Why does everyone have to inject opinions when they weren't asked for? All that was asked is do I need the birth certificate and the answer is yes! If the child is under 2 and flying as a lap baby the answer is yes they will ask for it, especially South West.

Any time someone asks a question about a lap child on every travel board I've ever read, many people feel the need to chastise anyone who thinks a lap child is okay, even if it has nothing to do with the original question. Just ignore.

 

[aubriee]

I have a friend who is a flight attendant who refers to lap babies as "cabin missiles." Obviously she isn't the most sensitive person in the world, but she isn't exactly incorrect, either.

We have a friend who is a pilot for Southwest. He calls lap babies "projectiles".

 

[Alesia]

How would holding onto your child be ignoring the FA? That is what they tell you to do. To hold your child facing you against your chest.

During turbulence, yes, you are told to hold them against your chest, but during a crash situation, you are instructed to place the baby on the floor between your feet. Yes, the baby will almost certainly be seriously injured (if not killed) but to refuse to do so would put every single person on that plane in danger when the baby becomes a projectile. It's a horrible thing to think about, but it's true.

Why can't this question ever just be answered? Why does everyone have to inject opinions when they weren't asked for? All that was asked is do I need the birth certificate and the answer is yes! If the child is under 2 and flying as a lap baby the answer is yes they will ask for it, especially South West.

The question was answered in the second post, but this is a discussion board and people are free to give their opinions. If you're looking for a simple answer without discussion, there are better places to look, such as the airline's website.

But, to answer the question: People make the assumption that the airline wouldn't allow lap babies if it weren't completely safe. That simply isn't true. It's probably safe. The odds are very, very good that everything will be fine, but the same could be said about holding your child on your lap in a car. I can't imagine that anybody here would defend someone who wanted to do that.

Honestly, it doesn't matter to me if someone wants to take a lap baby or not. Everyone has to look at the odds and decide for themselves. But I do think that people should make informed decisions - and that requires looking at all sides of the issue, not just the things that make you feel good about your choice.

 

[Hannathy]

During turbulence, yes, you are told to hold them against your chest, but during a crash situation, you are instructed to place the baby on the floor between your feet. Yes, the baby will almost certainly be seriously injured (if not killed) but to refuse to do so would put every single person on that plane in danger when the baby becomes a projectile. It's a horrible thing to think about, but it's true.

OH PLEASE!!!!!!!! and yes I am yelling. Not this again!!! This is not done anymore! and has not been done for 20 years!. You are told to hold them against your chest. Look on the emergency card. My DD is almost 20 yrs old and this is how it has been done since I started flying with her I had to do this for a landing.

Again for the thousandth time this is NOT DONE. Babies DO NOT go on the floor!

 

[Lewisc]

Why can't this question ever just be answered? Why does everyone have to inject opinions when they weren't asked for? All that was asked is do I need the birth certificate and the answer is yes! If the child is under 2 and flying as a lap baby the answer is yes they will ask for it, especially South West.

This is an internet discussion board. Posters are entitled to make comments not directly related to your original question. You may have no interest in reading about safety and comfort issues regarding lap babies but other people reading this thread might.

You could have gotten your answer directly from Southwests website. Once you decided to post on DIS you get comments, even if you don't want them.

Southwest got tired of parents "forgetting" the age of their kids. Got tired of employees arguing with parents who claimed their 2.5 year old was big for his age. Tired of having to justify why a copy of a birth certificate wasn't asked for an infant who was clearly under 1 but the GA insisted on seeing a birth certificate for an infant closer to 2.. Much easier to just ask to see a birth certificate for all lap babies.

PP is correct. Parents are no longer told to put their lap babies on the floor during turbulence. The reason for the change has nothing to do with safe procedures but rather being realistic as to what parents will do.

 

[mom2brooke76]

Interesting article:

http://jetwithkids.com/book_freeChapter.html

 

[jsilvers]

From what I've read about that crash in Iowa (correct) a while ago where the pilots landed with no hydraulics, a woman had a lap baby and the best they could do was try to put it under the seat in front of them as belting it in would not have worked. The baby died.

Amazingly this is only partially true. At least one infant survived. She did have injuries from sliding all over the plane as she was ripped free of her parent's arms.

From the National Transportation Safety Board's report on the accident (United 232, Sioux City, Iowa, July 19, 1989):

There were four in-lap occupants onboard flight 232. Three of them were under 24 months, and one was 26 months old. During the preparations for the emergency landing, parents were instructed to place their "infants" on the floor and to hold them there when the parent assumed the protective brace position. The four in-lap occupants were held on the floor by adults who occupied seats 11F, 12B, 14J and 22E.

The woman in 14J stated that her son "flew up in the air" upon impact but that she was able to grab him and hold onto him. Details of what happened to the 26-month-old child at 12B during the impact sequence are not known, but he sustained minor injuries. The mother of the 11-month-old girl at 11F said that she had problems placing and keeping her daughter on the floor because she was screaming and trying to stand up. The mother of the 23-month-old at 22E was worried about her son's position. She kept asking the flight attendants for more specific instructions about the brace position and her "special situation with a child on the floor." The mothers of the infants in seats 11F and 22E were unable to hold onto their infants and were unable to find them after the airplane impacted the ground. The infant originally located at 11F was rescued from the fuselage by a passenger who heard her cries and reentered the fuselage. The infant held on the floor in front of seat 22E died of asphyxia secondary to smoke inhalation.​

While the report doesn't emphasize it, note that the 26-month-old child was not eligible to be lap-carried. Which leads back to the original question - yes, most airlines will want to see a birth certificate, in order to ensure complaince with FAA regulations.

 

[DJSMOM]

I don't think it is just a SW rule that you have to show a birth certificate for a lap child. My daughter flew with me at least 7 times before she turned 2. With heightened security, you need to show the birth certificate to obtain boarding documents to get through the security checkpoint at the airport. this was necessary on other airlines besides SW.

 

[goofy4tink]

This in a 'discussion' forum...so, we allow discussions. Period. If someone isn't crazy about the subject matter, or feels it serves no pupose, or whatever, they are free to move on and not post.

 

[malibuconlee]

I don't think it is just a SW rule that you have to show a birth certificate for a lap child. My daughter flew with me at least 7 times before she turned 2. With heightened security, you need to show the birth certificate to obtain boarding documents to get through the security checkpoint at the airport. this was necessary on other airlines besides SW.

I have a friend who flew other airlines and wasn't required to show a birth certificate. She seemed surprised I always was asked by SW when getting her Boarding Verification Document. It's best to just take a copy with you no matter what airline you fly.