Babies and prams in Pubs!

[hellosailor]

Quite. If you sling a few shi*e catapults out there and suggest that even having a glass of wine with your dinner if you're a parent means you are an irresponsible parent and have some sort of addiction (and yes - that is what she says, If in doubt, re-read her posts) then expect people to respond if it's on a public forum.

If you don't want people to respond, try saying it into your bedroom mirror while holding your hairbrush instead.

[KidKruger]

I think Marie81 was asking obvious questions and her tone was not rude.

She was asking whether both parents drink when caring for a child or whether only one parent does.

Her conclusion was that if both parents are drinking then there is an increased risk to the welfare of the child. Chiefly in the situation where an emergency arises (was what I took from her comment).

This is obvious fact, not an attack. Just because she pointed it out doesn't make it an attack.

Obviously it may seem rude if the reader has a stake in the subject at hand, or feels a need to justify / protect their stance, and let's face it, perceiving that one could be construed as having impaired judgement in respect of what's best for one's child will make some parents defensive. As opposed to inclined to consider their motives.

No-one is saying parents are p!ss-heads, but it's obvious that alcohol impairs judgement even after very little to drink. Which is why the drink-driving laws were invented, remember !

It's interesting to me how not one parent has said "yeah you now what I never looked at it like that, what if an accident did occur and we needed to get to hospital or drive - we'd be compromised".

Which means you know it all already.

Why can't one parent concede that exposing a child to public house where alcohol is consumed may not be the best option for welfare of the CHILD ?

Drinking culture in this country accommodates this behaviour, but that doesn't mean it's best for the child.

Concerns such as noise made by kids or incovenience of a pram in a thoroughfare are comparatively irrelevant.

[StraferJack]

won't someone think of the CHILDREN???

"It's interesting to me how not one parent has said "yeah you now what I never looked at it like that, what if an accident did occur and we needed to get to hospital or drive - we'd be compromised". "

so by that logic, parents who don't have a car, regardless of alcohol consumption, are putting their children at risk?

[KidKruger]

well let's extend that train of thought shall we SJ, to those carefree parents who expose their children to the risks of living in a house when they know very well that the roof potentially could collapse and injure their child ?

I see your logic there.

[hellosailor]

KidKruger Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I think Marie81 was asking obvious questions and

> her tone was not rude.

>

Marie81 wrote:

>

It is totally irresponsible for both parents to be drinking alcohol whilst caring for their children, I am shocked that any parents on here would take their children to a pub and both consume alcohol the same for drinking at home, one parent should always be sober in case anything happened to one of the children and they needed to be rushed to hospital! If you?re must insist on drinking regardless for the care of your children well then I?m afraid you may have a problem such as addiction!

I think we must be looking at different posts KidKruger? The Marie81 I'm talking about wasn't asking any 'questions', she was telling us the score in no uncertain terms. And to suggest that having a glass of wine with dinner makes you 'totally irresponsible' and an 'addict' is pretty rude, actually.

Like StrafrerJack says, by that logic does the the fact that some of us don't drive mean we are irresponsible? If my child was to have an accident I would have to rely on the (gasp!) London Ambulance Service to transport us to hospital?

>

[StraferJack]

precisely KK

so where do you draw the line? In your argument "we'd be compromised" is a nonsense because in the event of a problem the parents in question would do what parents who don't drive would do - call a cab or an ambulance.

What's the problem?

[pk]

KidKruger Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>

> Why can't one parent concede that exposing a child

> to public house where alcohol is consumed may not

> be the best option for welfare of the CHILD ?

>

>

so what is the best option for of child welfare?

[Earl Aelfheah]

If you read through this forum, it is clear that there are a significant number of people with a real resentment, general dislike and intollerance of children. I go to the pubs in the evenings and don't see them full of children. During the day, it's perfectly reasonable for famillies getting something to eat, or maybe having a drink to take their children along. Most of the pubs round here are not traditional old man boozers, they are gastro pubs / cafes. They are set up for famillies and low and behold, they attract famillies. If the pubs were full of toddlers at night that would be a problem, but they are not. If you want an old school boozer, try the CPT or the Castle.

The Victorian 'seen and not heard' attitude is pathetic.

[Breton]

You may be wrong on this one Rahrahrah. I think there's a genuine concern for the welfare of the kids with the smell of booze in their heads from such an early age and the association of mum together with pub. And as for the Victorian attitude it was more than pathetic it was abusive and cruel to children in so many ways. Young kids were part of the gin palace culture and suffered horribly as a consequence. Time will tell on this one.

[Loz]

*Bob* Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Grandpa in My Pocket is much improved after a

> couple of glasses.

>

> Indeed, I'm not sure if there are any viable

> alternative ways of seeing it.

I imagine 'Go The F*** To Sleep' would take on a whole new level after a few shots of vodka.

[StraferJack]

you couldn't make this up

There isn't a word of that sentence that doesn't make my skin crawl. Of all the problems kids will encounter in life, being in an environment where people socialise and include the childen won't be one of them

If you would rather your child wasn't in that environment that's a perfectly fine position to take and you are free to do what you want. But to get all sniffy about other people and to generate a fear about "welfare of the kids" = Mary Whitehouse levels of judgement

[Breton]

StraferJack it's CHILDREN not CHILDEN.

[Marie81]

I am not judgemental at all, people who have actually met me have said that that is my best quality. Yes I am strongminded and have my own opinions but not do not judge people at all.

hellosailor in none of my posts was I being rude or argueing with you, I was simply asking questions and for the last time I was talking about people who get drunk whilst looking after their kids and I know that some people can be quite tipsy after just one glass of wine so I wish you'd stop going on about that! Also I don't know why people are making such a fuss about me having this opinion especially when I said about being able to drive...I suppose I was speaking of my own experience as I once waited for an hour for an ambulance in an emergency and I always say we probably would have been better getting in the car and driving there instead! For those of you who are parents and don't drive then this doesn't apply does it and doesn't really matter, thankfully ambulance responses are generally far better. Also I know one drink doesn't make a person an addict you have taken this out of context as you have everything I have said. You are really over analysing everything I am saying and by telling you to calm down was because I felt you were ranting on about this when there really wasn't any need to. So hellosailor can we just end this now as it's getting ridiculous, I really am amazed that you have carried this on today and do feel now that you're personally attacking me because you just keep going on and on and on and on!

Also speaking of my own personal experiences, as a child I hated the smell of alcohol on my Dad's breath when he would get home from the pub and also my partner vividly remembers both his parents drinking heavily when he was growing up and hated that(they drank heavily)and that is probably part of the reason why he doesn't drink today.

Thankyou Kidkruger for your comments, how you explained my remarks was exactly how I meant them to be.

[Otta]

Breton Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> StraferJack it's CHILDREN not CHILDEN.

Are you one of said CHILDREN?

Correcting someone's typo doesn't render the rest of their post null and void you know.

[Otta]

for the last time I

was talking about people who get drunk

whilst looking after their kids and I know

that some people can be quite tipsy after

just one glass of wine

Fair enough Marie, I guess then we need to trust grown ups to know how much booze it takes to get them tipsy. If it's one glass, then perhaps they should lay off it.

If it's a bottle, then a glass or two won't be a problem (assuming they're not driving home).

[tallulah71]

@ Marie81

Think you may have missed the point. Not the funniest of posts, but surely a joke?

Dougal Mulldoon Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I don?t have any children but I am going to have

> five and take all of them into the pubs you have

> mentioned just to annoy. And my misses & I will be

> drinking alcohol.

>

> Hoots

[edcam]

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> If you read through this forum, it is clear that

> there are a significant number of people with a

> real resentment, general dislike and intollerance

> of children.

This is a classic EDF misconception. I doubt many (if any) posters really have that opinion of children. Many here just think there are a fair number of crap parents around. There's quite a difference!

[ClareC]

edcam Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> rahrahrah Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > If you read through this forum, it is clear

> that

> > there are a significant number of people with a

> > real resentment, general dislike and

> intollerance

> > of children.

>

> This is a classic EDF misconception. I doubt many

> (if any) posters really have that opinion of

> children. Many here just think there are a fair

> number of crap parents around. There's quite a

> difference!

Unfortunately doesn't come across that way.

[edcam]

ClareC

>

> Unfortunately doesn't come across that way.

hmm... Not sure that's true actually.

[Otta]

If people have taken something a particular way, then it is true, whether intended or not.

[edcam]

Otta Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> If people have taken something a particular way,

> then it is true, whether intended or not.

That's not true either Otta. There's a marked difference between a general dislike of children and a concern that some people just aren't very good at parenting. Not what many want to hear but true.

It should also be said (yet again) that most parents are pretty good at this stuff, it's just the ones that aren't are very apparent.

[KidKruger]

So if one person says something and two other people take it in different ways, one of them being grossly offended by what they see as an insult and the other person seeing it as a passing comment, then it is true, whether intended or not ?

How many truths can there be ?

I'm not looking to argue here but a person's tendency to receive things a certain way does mean that 'the truth' may be misinterpreted at times. If everything some people thought was actually the truth, the world would be an extremely scary place for them I'm sure.

[ClareC]

edcam Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Otta Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > If people have taken something a particular

> way,

> > then it is true, whether intended or not.

>

>

> That's not true either Otta. There's a marked

> difference between a general dislike of children

> and a concern that some people just aren't very

> good at parenting. Not want many want to hear but

> true.

>

> It should also be said (yet again) that most

> parents are pretty good at this stuff, it's just

> the ones that aren't are very apparent.

Unfortunately the posts don't tend to come across as being directed at the minority of bad parents. there appears, to be huge generalisations and tarring all with the same brush. I am not just referring to this thread either.

Back to the topic of this thread, I totally agree that kids being dragged to the pub frequently whilst their parents get pissed up is not right in any shape or form. A family having lunch / early dinner at a pub and the parents having a drink with their meal however is totally different.

[zeban]

Totally totally totally agree edcam. In fact you've hit the nail on the head with what this thread is really about. And why many Mum's seem to get very aggressive and nasty when people point this out. But not all are being tainted by the same brush so I think it's ridiculous how nasty they can get. Of course we all get defensive about things close to our hearts but everyone is entitled to their own opinion and if it's different to yours so what!

I'm not against drinking when parenting though think it is probably best kept separate- ie. drinking when the kids aren't around. If drinking socially it's pretty embarassing to see your parents drunk! But on a more serious note if parents are drinking to relieve stresses and difficulties in life (which can often lead to a dependence on alcohol without even realising it) then it's not great to pass on this message to your children- that alcohol is the way to deal with stress and difficulties in life.

[ClareC]

If a person is offended the result is the same whether offence was intended or not. Once that offence is realised, on the basis it was not intended, then it can be rectified. Failure to do so would imply the interpretation is correct.

The problem with the written word is it can easily be interpreted in a way that was not necesarily intended.