Cruising with a Baby - Please do not touch!

[lovesublime]

OK, I will let this train of logic speak for itself.

 

It appears from your profile that you have done a bit of cruising. Whenever you cruise, people come up to you unasked and rub your head as a friendly gesture or pat your stomach. What would your reaction be? Would you politely ask them to stop? Would you be impolite to them? Would you find that patting your head or your stomach was an invasion of your personal space?

 

DON

 

 

 

 

Love it. And also don't forget that in some religions that touching a child on the head is a no no as it interferes with their relationship with God.

[photomikey]

Do people touch your baby at home, too, or Only on your cruise? :confused:

In the last several years, it has become a no-no to touch a baby in public. At home, we (my 17 month old and I) generally hang out with my people my age (some of whom have kids my daughters age) and everyone knows the "rule". We seldom have touchers who are in their 20s-30s-40s because everyone knows the rule. If I encounter someone in the mall or sitting in a waiting room who is 60 or 70, they almost always will try and touch the baby.

Armed with this knowledge, she takes her infant into a confined space with over 1300 other people for a full week, where it is reasonable to expect that several hundred of them (rightly or wrongly) would prefer not to be in a confined space for a full week with other people's infants. When a few dozen of them actually try to be friendly she doesn't want to be rude or argumentative, but complains anyway.

A confined space? I have been in a confined space with a baby... nurseries, playrooms, playgrounds, etc. A HAL ship is probably 100,000 square feet or more. Have you ever been on a HAL ship? I presume this young lady wasn't sharing a room with an unknowing stranger who happened to be a baby hater, but to your credit she did not specifically rule that out.

Do babies get sea-sickness? Or is this something that only happens to older people? Just curious since she mentioned the rough seas.

My daughter, who was 12 months at the time, slept ... err... like a baby the whole time. She did not appear to be bothered by the motion. I have never heard of a baby getting motion sick, but that doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

[tomc]

It interferes with their relationship with God.

I hate being touched, anywhere, in any way. If someone tries it, I won't interfere with their relationship with God -- but I certainly will hasten it.

[iceleven]

I don't have any problem with you wanting to keep your child from the hands of strangers even those with good intentions. I don't have children as I never really had the desire but I think it might be something that could be a learned socially acceptable request. It might take a while for the public to catch on but it is doable.

 

What my first thought was, when I read your post, was that of the people in the cabins adjoining you. There is very little likelihood that children never cry. Did you consider how that would affect other guests?

 

I know the cruise ship would never give me my money back if I complained that there was a crying baby next door that kept me up during the night.

[dritan]

It must be a cultural thing - I've had lots of people admiring my babies but not many actually touch them. I too, wouldn't be too bothered about the germ issue but would find it odd. And if anyone had dared to touch my belly when pregnant.........

 

On the side issue of babies and small children on cruises - I think a lot of it depends on the child. For example, my little boy is 2 years and 10 months and it would just be too stressful to take him on a cruise. I would be constantly worrying about him annoying other passengers or hurting himself. He's not a naughty child but is very high spirited and energetic. So reckon it will be a few more years before we'll venture on board with our kids. However, on my recent cruise, I came across lots of toddlers who were very well behaved and were much admired by all.

 

I think there should be a nice balance that would make cruising with children easier for all. Deciding responsibly if your child/children are ready for a cruise and for other passengers to have a healthy attitude towards babies/small children and allow for the fact that they will not always sit like perfect little stepford children and aren't the enemy :-)

[siebelqueen]

This question slightly veers off topic but since the OP mentioned it, i was just wondering....

 

Do babies get sea-sickness? Or is this something that only happens to older people? Just curious since she mentioned the rough seas.

According to our family doctor, babies do not get motion sickness as they are still developing a sense of equilibrium. Our four year old felt a little out of sorts on the roughest night of our cruise. But he never really got sick. Just to give you an idea of how rough it was, the sea sickness bags in the bins by the elevators were almost completely gone by the end of the cruise, and Club HAL opened late the last day because two of the staff members were sick themselves.

 

I understand all the points everybody has made in their comments above. However, as long as cruise lines allow families to bring children, people will continue to travel with them. If you don't like it, vacation elsewhere where children are not allowed.

 

As for noise, in my experience, anybody can be a noisy neighbor in the next cabin - not just children. I was once on a cruise (before we had kids) where the couple in the next cabin had very loud sex at all hours of the day and night. Good for them, but not so great for us trying to sleep. Is that any worse than a baby who cries for a few minutes a couple of times a day? Perhaps. But we still enjoyed the cruise.

[COLLEYBERRY]

I can understand your concerns and it is your responsibility as a parent to speak for, or protect your infant , as YOU deem necessary.

 

As irresistible as children are to some, it is never wise to touch a stranger's baby. The question remains ,how then to stop these well meaning gestures ?

 

Perhaps these statements ..all delivered with a smile might help.

 

" I am sorry she doesn't respond well to too much stimuli."

 

" Best not touch ,she's just getting over something"

 

" Please don't touch ,her immune system is a little compromise "

 

" You might want to wash your hands now ,we think she's getting a cold"

 

My favorite

" I know I sound silly, but I am not comfortable with strangers touching my baby ,hope you understand.She sure seems to like you though "

 

Failing all else.. a pretty bib with BACK OFF I HAVE NORO VIRUS embossed on it should do the trick. :D:D

Best Wishes

Colleen

 

[sapper1]

I understand all the points everybody has made in their comments above. However, as long as cruise lines allow families to bring children, people will continue to travel with them. If you don't like it, vacation elsewhere where children are not allowed.

 

I am laughing as I write this so please don't take it as mean spirited. It is meant as a light hearted rebuttal-----As long as cruise lines allow the older generation who are used to touching babies to board the ship, they will continue to travel with them. If you don't like it, vacation elsewhere where older people are not allowed.:D

[Floridiana]

Erica - I agree with you on this one. I don't want strangers touching my dog my child, myself, etc. A polite wave and interaction - smiling, etc with the child is fine but people this is not your child or your grandchild - as you teach children just keep your hands to yourselves.

 

The OP is talking about people simply walking up and touching the baby. It seems like there was no interaction or relationship with the parents of the child - people just making a bee line to make contact with her baby.

 

 

Just because something is small and cute doesn't mean you have any right to touch it.

 

I feel the same way. I would never go up to a baby, a child, an adult, a dog for that matter, touch them and tell them that they are so cute. That is just plain rude.

[siebelqueen]

I am laughing as I write this so please don't take it as mean spirited. It is meant as a light hearted rebuttal-----As long as cruise lines allow the older generation who are used to touching babies to board the ship, they will continue to travel with them. If you don't like it, vacation elsewhere where older people are not allowed.:D

Do you know of such a place? ;-)

 

Seriously though, I have nothing against traveling with people of any age. My original post was not directed at a particular age group, and I apologize if it came across that way.

[CruisingMomma88]

My late Grandmother used to say, "a little dirt is good for you, it helps the immunity" and I must agree. I have a friend who disinfected her kid's toys weekly and she had the sickest children! Most illnesses are contracted from airborne germs anyway. Children NEED to be touched, it is actually proven to be the best way to develop their brains. Babies who are touched thrive and in general, feel loved and secure. I would be less afraid of the germs and proud of the fact that your child gets so much attention for being so lovely.

Just my two cents.

[sapper1]

Do you know of such a place? ;-)

 

Seriously though, I have nothing against traveling with people of any age. My original post was not directed at a particular age group, and I apologize if it came across that way.

No, your post did not come across that way. Someone mentioned in an earlier post that baby touching seemed to be more prevalent in the older age group and that just popped into my mind when I read your post. It just tickled my funny bone. However, I have touched my last baby.

[Hobbsey]

I'm sorry I was absent from the boards most of yesterday, I'd have loved to chime in sooner. I have not read all the posts so perhaps this is redundant.

 

I am always at a loss to understand why people choose to be parents and then want to live their lives no differently than they did before the baby was born. It's almost as if the baby were an accessory. I talking about taking babies to fine restaurants, taking them into a show or the movies, taking them on luxury vacations. What is the point? I guess it's "I want to, I can, so I will".

 

If you choose to have a child then that should be your focus. Getting that child started off in life. Keeping he or she safe, clothed, educated, etc... There is a certain level of selfishness and lack of concern for others in a decision that places a Baby in an Adult environment. One runs the risk of the dangers of disease and exposure to be sure. One also runs the risk of intruding on other's good time due to feeding schedules, wailing and fudding, teething, diaper changing, etc... When one does make the choose to go ahead and do it anyway it seems bad form to complain about the natural and potential consequencies.

 

Sorry to sound harsh. I just wonder at folks who can't seem to put self gratification on hold these days in defense of a higher calling.

[sail7seas]

In the last several years, it has become a no-no to touch a baby in public. At home, we (my 17 month old and I) generally hang out with my people my age (some of whom have kids my daughters age) and everyone knows the "rule". We seldom have touchers who are in their 20s-30s-40s because everyone knows the rule. If I encounter someone in the mall or sitting in a waiting room who is 60 or 70, they almost always will try and touch the baby.

 

<snip>

 

 

Thanks. I don't travel in the 20/30 something year old group, being a deal older, and had no clue there was now a 'rule'. :eek:

 

I now know about the Rule and will keep it in mind. I almost feel like I was left out of the 'in crowd' or something to read this was so well known and I didn't know it. :o

 

I seriously doubt I have ever touched a baby uninvited by the parent/guardian but know for sure I never will.

 

 

 

 

 

 

As stated earlier, there have been so many posts on this board about many HAL cruisers not liking children (how sad), and now we're being told to stop liking them so much. :shrug:

 

What are we to do? I guess the message is we are now expected to ignore the kids.

 

Can't win for trying and it gets to 'why bother trying'.

Ever feel like it's a nuisance that we exist beyond the point some feel appropriate?

Makes one wonder how all the previous generations managed to be raised and become old enough to become parents themselves..... generation after generation after generation. The species has survived and it won't be touching baby that will be the end of the species, I don't think.

 

OP.... I'm sorry you experienced stress due to the large numbers of (probably mostly) older folks who admired your daughter. I sincerely hope we have all learned on this thread to put our hands in our pockets. Babies are not to be touched. ( I know you have asserted you did not describe the demographic of about whom you are speaking but I'll venture most were older than 60.)

 

Where's, Randy, our 'shrink' ? .... I'd like to know his comments about socialization and friendliness babies may learn from such experiences.

 

[kakalina]

We have several friends who work and live onboard cruise ships. A few of them travel with their families including babies. I have been told by them that unwarranted and unwanted touching of their children is a large concern.

 

I have heard them tell pax please do not touch the baby. Just that with no further explaination. None need be given. Just like anything else in life you don't touch what isn't yours without an express invitation.

[peaches from georgia]

I'm sorry I was absent from the boards most of yesterday, I'd have loved to chime in sooner. I have not read all the posts so perhaps this is redundant.

 

I am always at a loss to understand why people choose to be parents and then want to live their lives no differently than they did before the baby was born. It's almost as if the baby were an accessory. I talking about taking babies to fine restaurants, taking them into a show or the movies, taking them on luxury vacations. What is the point? I guess it's "I want to, I can, so I will".

 

If you choose to have a child then that should be your focus. Getting that child started off in life. Keeping he or she safe, clothed, educated, etc... There is a certain level of selfishness and lack of concern for others in a decision that places a Baby in an Adult environment. One runs the risk of the dangers of disease and exposure to be sure. One also runs the risk of intruding on other's good time due to feeding schedules, wailing and fudding, teething, diaper changing, etc... When one does make the choose to go ahead and do it anyway it seems bad form to complain about the natural and potential consequencies.

 

Sorry to sound harsh. I just wonder at folks who can't seem to put self gratification on hold these days in defense of a higher calling.

Surely I am dating myself age-wise, but I feel the same way as you. When we had our children, and when most of our grandchildren were infants and toddlers which was not so long ago, parents knew when they had their babies their life would change for a certain number of years. If they would be taking luxury vacations in a more adult environment, the babies would be staying home with the grandparents. If an evening out at a fine "adult" restaurant and a show or movie afterwards was the plan, then there would be a babysitter at home with the kiddies. Having babies included the acceptance of a change of lifestyle for some years until the kids were of the age of reasoning and good behavior was guaranteed. Young parents understood that their decision to have children did not include the acceptance by the rest of the world that we all would have to accomodate normal kiddie behavior/misbehavior.

 

Now the blame for non-accomodation to others' babies/children is being put on everyone but the parents themselves. My theory is that this pattern started when couples started having children somewhat later in life after they had established themselves and were used to enjoying the finer things in life. The "me" generation assumed the rest of the world would change and accomodate their every wish even if it disturbed the very environment they themselves had learned to enjoy and wanted to continue. There isn't a place we go now where babies are not brought, even if the atmosphere is no longer enjoyable for all.

 

I spent this weekend at several church administrative meetings where our work was disturbed by infants brought to the meetings by people who are more than financially capable of hiring a babysitter. These gals are friends of mine and I love their children, but not at the place they chose to bring them. The demand at our church now is that if a baby or young children will disturb the event then the church must hire and pay for a babysitter for every meeting or social event, which we hardly can afford. (I'm not meaning regular church services where a nursery is always provided.) One girl even suggested that maybe the senior women could be asked to miss the meeting or social event and do the babysitting for them!! The rationale for that was that old women love to play with babies, so they wouldn't mind doing it! My answer was "Been there, done that, you'd better get a Plan B!". We all lived through the years where we couldn't have and do everything we wanted and had to make some sacrificies if we wanted to have a family, but I guess that is no longer what is expected.

[iancal]

I cannot imagine why anyone would touch someone's baby or child without asking permission from the parent. When our daughter was small, we had a springer spaniel who followed her everywhere. No one other than us or the grandparents ever got to stick their hand in the baby carriage without intervention from the dog. Worked like a charm.

 

On our one and only Carnival cruise (it was a very nice cruise) we saw a staff member preventing a passenger from taking pictures of a group of children on some sort of an organized event while in the lounge area. I thought that this intervention was very good and I was impressed with how Carnival handled the situation. It was done very quickly, and very quietly after it was ascertained that the person behind the camera was neither a parent, relative, or friend.

[3rdGenCunarder]

I'm sorry I was absent from the boards most of yesterday, I'd have loved to chime in sooner. I have not read all the posts so perhaps this is redundant.

 

I am always at a loss to understand why people choose to be parents and then want to live their lives no differently than they did before the baby was born. It's almost as if the baby were an accessory. I talking about taking babies to fine restaurants, taking them into a show or the movies, taking them on luxury vacations. What is the point? I guess it's "I want to, I can, so I will".

 

If you choose to have a child then that should be your focus. Getting that child started off in life. Keeping he or she safe, clothed, educated, etc... There is a certain level of selfishness and lack of concern for others in a decision that places a Baby in an Adult environment. One runs the risk of the dangers of disease and exposure to be sure. One also runs the risk of intruding on other's good time due to feeding schedules, wailing and fudding, teething, diaper changing, etc... When one does make the choose to go ahead and do it anyway it seems bad form to complain about the natural and potential consequencies.

 

Sorry to sound harsh. I just wonder at folks who can't seem to put self gratification on hold these days in defense of a higher calling.

 

No this isn't redundant. I've thought about this, too. I have seen examples of what you're talking about. I've also seen people travel with small children, manage them beautifully, and everyone has a good time. I don't know how they do it, there's so much stuff to lug around with a baby that pure laziness would keep me home. But people who can travel this well are balancing their entertainment with the higher calling of parenting. It can be done, if the parents organize themselves well and keep the child's needs in mind.

 

It also depends on the child. We have no kids of our own, but have been blessed with friends who have children who knew how to behave in public, even when they were quite small. I've seen the rolled eyes as we walked into a restaurant, even though the kids could sit through a meal quietly and enjoy being with the grown-ups. Again, parental entertainment blended with good parenting. A child can learn a lesson of how to behave by being taken into adult situations. That said, our friends also knew when it was time to take the kids home. And, we're not talking about infants now.

 

I've also seen parents who have no clue about taking care of a child while traveling. We were on a walking tour in Bruges in December, and a couple on our tour had a toddler with them. She had to be carried most of the time becasue of the cobblestones. They had her in a dress and mary-jane shoes. They had brought absolutely NOTHING with them--no bottle, no sippy cup, no toy, not even a diaper bag. This was a 1/2-hour bus ride, 1 hour walking tour, a little free time, and another 1/2 hour bus ride. And they had nothing with them to care for the poor little kid, who cried almost the entire time. If I had known a Belgian phone number for child services, I'd have been tempted to turn them in. They were completely irresposible. THESE are the sort of parents who need to read your post, Hobbsey.

[sportsmum]

 

I sincerely hope we have all learned on this thread to put our hands in our pockets.

 

Now, now- that will start something else. Remember, get your hands out of your pockets.....God sees everything!

[cruisemom42]

I am always at a loss to understand why people choose to be parents and then want to live their lives no differently than they did before the baby was born. It's almost as if the baby were an accessory. I talking about taking babies to fine restaurants, taking them into a show or the movies, taking them on luxury vacations. What is the point? I guess it's "I want to, I can, so I will".

 

If you choose to have a child then that should be your focus. Getting that child started off in life. Keeping he or she safe, clothed, educated, etc... There is a certain level of selfishness and lack of concern for others in a decision that places a Baby in an Adult environment. One runs the risk of the dangers of disease and exposure to be sure. One also runs the risk of intruding on other's good time due to feeding schedules, wailing and fudding, teething, diaper changing, etc... When one does make the choose to go ahead and do it anyway it seems bad form to complain about the natural and potential consequencies.

 

Sorry to sound harsh. I just wonder at folks who can't seem to put self gratification on hold these days in defense of a higher calling.

 

Surely I am dating myself age-wise, but I feel the same way as you. When we had our children, and when most of our grandchildren were infants and toddlers which was not so long ago, parents knew when they had their babies their life would change for a certain number of years. If they would be taking luxury vacations in a more adult environment, the babies would be staying home with the grandparents. If an evening out at a fine "adult" restaurant and a show or movie afterwards was the plan, then there would be a babysitter at home with the kiddies. Having babies included the acceptance of a change of lifestyle for some years until the kids were of the age of reasoning and good behavior was guaranteed. Young parents understood that their decision to have children did not include the acceptance by the rest of the world that we all would have to accomodate normal kiddie behavior/misbehavior.

 

Now the blame for non-accomodation to others' babies/children is being put on everyone but the parents themselves. My theory is that this pattern started when couples started having children somewhat later in life after they had established themselves and were used to enjoying the finer things in life. The "me" generation assumed the rest of the world would change and accomodate their every wish even if it disturbed the very environment they themselves had learned to enjoy and wanted to continue. There isn't a place we go now where babies are not brought, even if the atmosphere is no longer enjoyable for all.

 

 

I wasn't going to respond to this thread, but these two posts really raised my eyebrows. Are we back to living in the 1950s then? Or worse yet, the Victorian era? Because that's when the whole "leave baby in the nursery with Nanny" thing really started. Up until the mid-1800's babies survived (as best they could in those days) pretty much in the midst of all the comings and goings of family life, wherever that life took place.

 

And you might recall that a lot of the things recommended for babies in those days turned out not to be so good for them after all, including restrictive swaddling, bottle feeding, early toilet training, and corporal punishment.

 

And while I'm on the topic, childrearing experts pretty much agree that exposing children to different and interesting stimuli from an early age helps to develop connections in the brain that are only possible at this age. Plus, traveling from an early age helps slightly older children understand how to be adaptable and more willing to try new things.

 

I believe that it is the children who are not introduced to "the finer things in life" from an early age that never develop an appreciation for them. How many times have I read on these boards (and others) about people who don't like museums, or music, or art, or even fine food? I'd venture to guess these things were not a part of their lives during their formative years. My son has been exposed to these things, as well as travel, from an early age.

 

The way I look at it, my "higher calling" as a parent was to do these things. Parenting isn't static; it's not a case of "Well, it was good enough for me/my children." We learn new things and we apply them.

 

As for the sort of weird linkage to the "me" generation, I think it's been established that this actually came about as a reaction to the bleak, restrictive outlook of going through life like their parents from the 1940s and 1950s. This led to the free-spiritedness of the late 1960s and 1970s......which has changed the way we all think about how we act, dress, work, live, and raise our children.

[Jo-Bob]

Not sure what it says about me, but this just all makes me very sad. So much fear, IMO, of the most insignificant things.

[Jo-Bob]

And yes, I believe it's always a good thing to expose children to as much stimulus as possible.....fine dining, cruises, whatever. Even better if it enhances 'family' life......but with that come some comprimises. Take your kids out to experience life, and sometimes 'life' includes some touching and oogling by some very well meaning and enchanted members of the public.

 

Don't want people paying attention to your kids? (the community at large) then you really ought to be aware of what you will tolerate, and what you won't, and then adjust your plans accordingly. And I realize there is a difference between paying attention and fondling.....but isn't that why babies (human and animal) all have such big, beautiful, soulful, magnetic eyes? Who can resist a puppy or kitten? I know I can't:)

 

My hands will firmly be placed in my pockets as well, and I too have touched my last baby. Not that I ever did, was more interested in making goofy faces at them.....but someone, somewhere will likely think I'm some creep with less than positive intentions. (oh, and being childless, not by choice) also has me, I'm sure, in the category of creepy middle aged woman who wants to steal a baby:rolleyes: On hyper alert now.

[Tampa Girl]

As for the sort of weird linkage to the "me" generation, I think it's been established that this actually came about as a reaction to the bleak, restrictive outlook of going through life like their parents from the 1940s and 1950s. This led to the free-spiritedness of the late 1960s and 1970s......which has changed the way we all think about how we act, dress, work, live, and raise our children.

 

I'm not sure about that hypothesis, but if so, more is the pity. Our people's "free-spiritedness" is, imho, not an improvement on society. The responsibility for raising one's children should necessarily take into consideration the effect the children (and adults) have on others around them. That is all part of a civilized society. And, now I will get down off my soap box.

[sansterre]

Do you know of such a place? ;-)

 

Seriously though, I have nothing against traveling with people of any age. My original post was not directed at a particular age group, and I apologize if it came across that way.

 

You would be less likely to having the doting grandmothers who are missing their grandchildren on a Disneycruise. Any older people there would probably be with their children and grandchildren. We did that when our children were young, but I preferred car travel to the worries of the ocean, getting on and off boats and ships etc.

[cindy1957]

OOPs posted twice. Can't figure out how to remove one of them!