Chicago cafe owner takes a stand against boisterous children!

[Flubber]

Originally posted by smacksim


Like I said, I understand the strong reaction. Perfectly reasonable too if the expectations of the place are understood (thinking of an airport for example where everyone has a right to be there). But thinking of the Chicago case, some of those parents seem to have hardened their sense of what is expected everywhere and have made a blanket statement: "We shall be allowed to bring our children anywhere so long as we feel we are controlling them to our standards."

This is what gets my ire up a bit. The audacity of a person to come into my business and tell me what my expectations for them are! I don't accuse anyone in this thread of acting this way, but the possibility seems there with potentially hardened and certainly hard-won self-expectations for family.

I suspect that my expectations of the acceptable level of behavior would be higher that what the business owner would set.

You already know that I don't expect to bring my child anywhere I choose. You probably also suspect (correctly) that I would end a bad behavior long before an establishment owner would feel the need to intervene. I believe if you consistenly set high but reasonable behavioral expectations, the child will begin to conform.

We actually do this by setting up shorter periods where higher level behavior is expected. A two hour dinner is too much to expect . . . our last time out was a buffett and he behaved perfectly-- THose parents who read a paper at a coffeeshop are setting themselves up for a meltdown-- Any child will act out if you keep them bored and inactive for too long

[Flubber]

Originally posted by lord of the mark

Too many kids dont spend any time at playgrounds, playing outside, etc. Theyve GOT to blow off steam at some point. If we want kids to be better behaved in public, we should attempt to discourage parents from giveng their kids electronics as a substitute for the physical things that kids need to do.

For our guy, time outside is the BEST

Fresh air + intense activity = a better longer sleep

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Flubber


For our guy, time outside is the BEST

Fresh air + intense activity = a better longer sleep

and that doesnt stop with toddlers, by any means.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


and that doesnt stop with toddlers, by any means.

True I was a camp counselor for 8-13 yr olds. They had all sorts of plans for nighttime mischief but they were lost in the exhaustion of having us wake them early and run , swim, canoe all day long

[smacksim]

Originally posted by Flubber
We actually do this by setting up shorter periods where higher level behavior is expected. A two hour dinner is too much to expect . . . our last time out was a buffett and he behaved perfectly-- THose parents who read a paper at a coffeeshop are setting themselves up for a meltdown-- Any child will act out if you keep them bored and inactive for too long

Ack! A 2-hour dinner is exactly what my parents did to me every day for perhaps the same reasons! I never thought of that. The only negative side effect of this is that I'm a slow eater and tend to like slipping below the dinner table when I'm finished...

Nobody can criticize your parenting philosophy that you'll always have higher standards than the proprietor and won't encounter a conflict there. An end run play.

[Arrian]

True I was a camp counselor for 8-13 yr olds. They had all sorts of plans for nighttime mischief but they were lost in the exhaustion of having us wake them early and run , swim, canoe all day long

Heh. Dunno why, but that made me think of Full Metal Jacket.

"I'm gonna PT your ass!"

-Arrian

[Sava]

plus, let's not forget the real reason kids are here...

TO REPLACE US!!!

[Cyclotron]

I'm not sure you can be replaced.

[lord of the mark]

from somebody who actually lives in Chicago


"Chicagoist is a website about Chicago. More
Editor: Rachelle Bowden Publisher: Gothamist November 09, 2005
Taste This, *****es
Oh baby. Are there some uptight people roaming the streets in Andersonville or what?

Chicagoist heard the rumblings back in February of what the New York Times today calls "a nasty spat roiling the stroller set in Chicago's changing Andersonville neighborhood." At issue is the sign that Dan McCauley, owner of A Taste Of Heaven cafe, put up in his shop months ago in an effort to din the noise in his cafe. "Children of all ages have to behave and use their indoor voices when coming to A Taste of Heaven," the sign reads.

What's the big deal? Well, for some parents up in Andersonville, it's being considered an affront to their parenting skills as they say the sign implies that they can't handle their kids. According to the Times article: "I love people who don't have children who tell you how to parent," said Alison Miller, 35, a psychologist, corporate coach and mother of two. "I'd love for him to be responsible for three children for the next year and see if he can control the volume of their voices every minute of the day."

Chicagoist sort of understands the indignation.

First off, we should admit that we're big fans of A Taste of Heaven. They did Chicagoist's wedding cake and we've been going there since the old location on Foster Avenue.Just the same, on a recent Sunday morning brunch with Chicagoist's best friend's Most-Well-Behaved-Child-On-Planet-Earth-
Who-Didn't-So-Much-As-Whimper-The-Entire-Meal garnered the most contemptible, snotty, totally undeserved looks of scorn from patrons and servers alike. What the ****, people? Was she disturbing your groove that much? Why so sensitive over the mere presence of a kid? They've gotta eat, too, and really? How in the hell are they ever going to act like well-mannered adults if parents aren't given the opportunity to take them out to restaurants and teach them how to early on?

But on the flip side ...

Is it just Chicagoist or is there an influx of parents who are afraid to throw down the hammer on their childnre? Days were when Chicagoist's father had no compunction about giving her a good thwack on the ass if she was acting up in a public place and yes, we know that the PC Police will call Family Services on you so fast it'll make your head spin, but damn! Why are some of you all trying to reason with two-year-olds instead of telling them "no?" We're not sure we can blame McCauley if he's constantly barraged with a bunch of kids causing a raucous, no matter how normal the behavior. It's a disturbance to his business, any way how you slice it. And you know what they say: one rotten apple can spoil the whole bunch.

While Chicagoist sides with McCauley -- if for no other reason than it's not as if there aren't other cake-and-cookie options that are family friendly in Andersonville -- we have serious sympathy for the parental units out there. It's tough, we know. The extemes of the spectrum, however, garner the most attention and Chicagoist believes that this is what you're dealing with here: on both sides, you have a bunch of uptight, overly stimulated, overly pampered yokels with an inflated sense of entitlement.

Chicagoist thinks you all need to switch to decaf."

[Flubber]

Originally posted by smacksim
Nobody can criticize your parenting philosophy that you'll always have higher standards than the proprietor and won't encounter a conflict there. An end run play.

Shouldn't that be the philosophy for everyone?? . . . to behave far better than the MINIMUM required ?

[Flubber]

I think Chicagoist hits the nail on the head . .


Interesting that even a well-behaved child garnered a negative reaction . . .

[smacksim]

I agree with the conclusion too: switch to decaf, and damn! slap yourself with a wet noodle if you jump on some anti-child bandwagon in the interests of taking sides in this oh-so-not-so-important debate amongst the 'stroller set'.

Flubber, while I personally agree with you in practice that having standards so high one hardly has to wonder if they exceed the minimum for any particular place. I do that too. But, just to be completely nit-picky, one could wonder if this is like paying expenses you don't always need to: That in some circumstances lower 'standards' would be profitable and acceptable.

But the only reason I did point that out the way I did is that not everyone would agree with that, no. What do we do with all those people?

[Sava]

Originally posted by Cyclotron
I'm not sure you can be replaced.

well, imagine how my (future) kids will turn out


assuming I live long enough to have some

[Ben Kenobi]

Too many kids dont spend any time at playgrounds, playing outside, etc. Theyve GOT to blow off steam at some point. If we want kids to be better behaved in public, we should attempt to discourage parents from giveng their kids electronics as a substitute for the physical things that kids need to do.

Reading through the thread I see plenty of things I want to comment upon, this more then the rest. How many kids do you see playing out in the yard? Even if the kids wanted to, chances are their parents have told them that it's either not safe, and that they should be inside. Same with halloween. I remember going out with my folks when I was small, nowadays, they want the kids to have daylight when they go door to door. Daylight! They feel it would be unsafe otherwise.

The same with kids in school, especially the rambunctious boys. The boys are made to feel bad for their desire to be out and about, labelled disruptive and the rest, when really it's just normal behaviour. It seems very telling in our society today that the behaviours categorised as attention deficit become a disorder needing treatment.

The second major point is the scarcity of children in today's society, particularly in the cities. I shocked myself when I was in Vancouver by how awkward I felt having a baby sit in my lap, simply because I was so isolated from that sort of thing. The same could be said by many of the patrons of the restaurant, like a child is a foreign intruder into their lives. I know there are always exceptions, but it surprises me how many folks see kids in this manner, regardless of their behaviour in public.

Finally, I think because kids are so scarce, parents are far too protective. They need to let their kids make some mistakes once in awhile, let them get hurt and learn to deal with things on their own.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Flubber


I control my little guy at retail stores but will let him have innocent fun.

The type of "parental behavior" (I use the word loosely here) I was refering to are the type of "parents" that will allow their children to knock things off of the end cap at my register, allow their children to scream and throw tantrums when they either take things away for them to ring up or because the child picked up something the do not wish to pay for. I won't even mention the occasional child that I can hear from the other end of the store. If a child is well behaved I don't mind them, I may even play with him a bit while ringing the parents up.