Should fine dining establishments go out of their way to accomodate toddlers?

[ComradesTrue]

No they should not, says the mother of a 3 yr old and a 1 yr old. There are plenty of places that I can go with my kids. In addition, there are plenty of sitters if my husband and I want an upscale meal.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by Blondie93

No they should not, says the mother of a 3 yr old and a 1 yr old. There are plenty of places that I can go with my kids. In addition, there are plenty of sitters if my husband and I want an upscale meal.

This.

[AOII Angel]

Considering that the point of going to Joel Robuchon's restaurants or Daniel Boulud's Cafe Boulud is almost as much the ambience as it is the food, I'd say that having children there is a huge NO! At least she didn't take her child to Daniel! I've eaten at 20 or so of NYC's top 50 restaurants, and I've never had adults making idiots out of themselves disturbing my dinner, so saying that this justifies letting children dine with their parents is absurd. Diners at these establishments are paying good money for a nice experience and don't need it ruined by someone else's poorly controlled children. They can experience the restaurant with their children when the kids are old enough to remember it!

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by AOII Angel

Diners at these establishments are paying good money for a nice experience and don't need it ruined by someone else's poorly controlled children. They can experience the restaurant with their children when the kids are old enough to remember it!

Besides, the average kid would rather be anywhere other than that nice restaurant.

[AOII Angel]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

Besides, the average kid would rather be anywhere other than that nice restaurant.

I agree with that, too.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

Besides, the average kid would rather be anywhere other than that nice restaurant.

And as a commenter pointed out - the "children's menus" at those restaurants aren't healthy or adventurous food that's opening up the kid's palate. They're spaghetti and chicken nuggets at ridiculously jacked up prices. A more responsible parent would take their toddler to the cafe at the food co-op and feed them fresh things that are good for them.

[AOII Angel]

Originally Posted by 33girl

And as a commenter pointed out - the "children's menus" at those restaurants aren't healthy or adventurous food that's opening up the kid's palate. They're spaghetti and chicken nuggets at ridiculously jacked up prices. A more responsible parent would take their toddler to the cafe at the food co-op and feed them fresh things that are good for them.

I wouldn't say that the food at any of the high end restaurants I've been to is exactly "healthy."

[agzg]

Originally Posted by AOII Angel

I wouldn't say that the food at any of the high end restaurants I've been to is exactly "healthy."

There's been an uptick in restaurants that serve organic, sustainable food that has lower sodium/more healthful options than your usual butter-soaked fare. They're absolutely fantastic, in my estimation.

If we could afford a $100+ meal out more than once or twice a month, I'd definitely go more often. But, you're more likely to find them in larger urban areas, I've noticed.

I still wouldn't take a kid there below the age of 10 or 11.

In fact, I probably wouldn't take teenagers there, either, but that's because I generally hold teenagers (aged 11 to 19.99) in contempt.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by AOII Angel

I wouldn't say that the food at any of the high end restaurants I've been to is exactly "healthy."

Agreed. But the commenters are saying stuff like "I want to take my child to a GOOD restaurant, not JUNK FOOD like you want to force them to eat at McDonald's!!" It's kind of a ridiculous argument when they get there and just order a more upscale version of McNuggets. Expensive certainly does not = healthy.

[33girl]

If by "accomodate" you mean "have a soundproof room to stick them in" then yeah, I'll get on board with that. But if I go to a NICE restaurant, the last thing I want is a baby/toddler crying, stinking, drooling or all of the above next to me.

Really all you need to say about this.

[dreamseeker]

Originally Posted by 33girl

If by "accomodate" you mean "have a soundproof room to stick them in" then yeah, I'll get on board with that. But if I go to a NICE restaurant, the last thing I want is a baby/toddler crying, stinking, drooling or all of the above next to me.

Really all you need to say about this.

this! lmfaoooooooooo @ that clip. i'm gonna watch it again.

[ThetaPrincess24]

Originally Posted by Blondie93

No they should not, says the mother of a 3 yr old and a 1 yr old. There are plenty of places that I can go with my kids. In addition, there are plenty of sitters if my husband and I want an upscale meal.

While my step children are now 12, 13, and 18 and I dont have any of my own (though I greatly desire them), I agree. There is an upscale place here (though certainly not on par with NYC upscale places) that my husband and I enjoy for a quiet, intimate, tasty meal without screaming children. Actually we dont take the step kids to this place either in an attempt to eliminate: the complaining that they dont understand the menu, dont like what is offered on the menu, blowing straw papers at each other, or fear of the youngest son doing something highly inappropriate such as farting.