My two cents on ... the guy who banned children from his restaurant

Restaurant Bans Young Children - I'm going to include the text of the story below because it's short.

Mike Vuick has made the decision to ban children younger than 6 years old from his Monroeville, Pa., restaurant.

Beginning Saturday, the "upscale casual" McDain's will no longer accept young children, a policy that's getting Vuick a lot of attention.

Vuick's decision is driven by a host of customer complaints, although his biggest issue isn't with the children, but their parents. "Their child -- maybe as it should be -- is the center of their universe," Vuick told Pittsburgh TV station WTAE. "But they don't realize it's not the center of the universe."

The small restaurant, in which a third of the seats are at the bar, is described by Vuick as "a very genteel, quiet place; very adult."

The ban on children is completely legal. While senior citizens are in a legally protected class and cannot be banned from establishments, existing laws do not protect children from being denied service.

Vuick notified customers of the impending policy change via e-mail, and most of the reactions were positive, with customers responding, "Thank you," and "Nice job."

Vuick said he doesn't expect the decision to affect his 9-year-old restaurant.

---
If you know me at all, you know I have an opinion on this.

Believe it or not, I support the guy.

I’ll say it again, I think he’s in the right.

Here’s why … number one, it’s HIS business. He owns it. He makes the rules. There are plenty of other places around that don’t allow children – for example, adult-only apartment complexes. Cigar bars. (There’s a mental picture – a bunch of men in suits, cigar in one hand and scotch in the other with a three-year-old running around them. Ha!) Gyms. (Yeah, they have childcare because they don’t want your kid running around while you’re working out. It’s a clever ploy to get the same point across – they ain’t allowed.) You get my point.

Number two – children are irritating. I admit it. Mine is generally pretty well-behaved in public. We’ve had some meltdowns. Usually, about the time we’ve had enough and are ready to take her out, she calms down. Every time she is unruly, I always apologize to the people around us and more often than not, they tell me it’s no big deal, they’ve been there, and that she’s really not that bad.

Here’s the thing – this rule isn’t punishing children. Quite the contrary. It’s punishing the parents who choose not to control their children. This guy is protecting against the parents who don’t care that their kids act like giant asses. The parents who don’t bother to bring anything to occupy their kids, the ones who don’t care if their kid is flinging food into the hair of the lady in the booth behind you. Those are the parents – and the kids – who ruin it for everyone else. My suggestion is that if you see a parent like that, smack them. And then their kid, cause God knows they aren’t going to. (I’m kidding. Well, not really.)

Have we abandoned plans to go out because of our child? Yes, yes we have. If she’s got an attitude problem, I will not subject other people to it. It’s not fair to them. It’s not fair to me. It’s not fair to her.

On the flip side, when we go out, where do we go? Applebee’s. O’Charley’s. (But not O’Charley’s cause that place sucks.) Ruby Tuesday (though, not as much since they jacked their prices and tried to go upscale). Carino’s. Qdoba. Places that are already loud. Places that, for the most part, probably have another kid who is acting like a bigger idiot than my own, so mine looks like an angel in comparison. Places that you know the patrons didn’t go to in an effort to have a quiet dinner out, they just didn’t want to cook.

If I want to go to an upscale place, am I taking the kiddo? Not on your life. That’s what date night is for.

Now, I understand not being able to get a sitter. But you cannot enjoy a night out if you’re constantly telling your child to sit down and begging them to eat their broccoli. So no one can tell me that they opt to go out with their kid for a relaxing evening. I’m not buying it. You go out because you don’t want to cook and/or clean the dishes. It’s still work to go out when you have a toddler.

Furthermore, if you look at what the guy says about his place, a third of the seats are at the bar. That just proves who his intended demographic is, and it’s not children under six. As a general rule for me, if there’s not a separate kid’s menu with some crayons coming my way, it’s not suitable to take the kiddo.

But, from what I gather reading the comments on the story, I’m the exception to the rule. I believe in disciplining my child. (Very, very rarely has she ever been hit – and even then, it was just a smack on the hand. So don’t go thinking I beat my child.) I believe in teaching her manners and prompting her to say “please” and “thank you” if she doesn’t do it on her own. I believe in righting her wrongs. I believe in teaching her how to acts in public. I once told someone, “I may be an ungrateful person, but I refuse to let my child act like one.” (This is when the person laughed and said I was so far from ungrateful – I informed her she didn’t know me very well!)

Let’s just throw this out there – this guy also did this to get attention. I bet he will get MORE business as a result of this, as opposed to less. Simply because there are the people without kids who are thrilled, but also the ones who are interested to see the place that banned children and want to see what it’s really like. He’s got all kinds of free press out of this. I’d be interested to see how much his business goes up in the first couple weeks after the news stories. I guarantee you a majority of that increase won’t be because of his new policy, but because of the media hype.