Recently, the owner of a Pittsburgh-area restaurant changed his policy and has banned children under the age of six from his establishment because they regularly disrupted other customers’ meals.
Mike Vuick, owner of McDain’s Restaurant and Golf Center in Monroeville, PA, is at the center of this big controversy.
Speaking for myself, I have no problem with his decision. He’s a private citizen with a private business and his business decisions should be customer-driven.
I had no problem when some restaurants, years ago, decided to have smoke-free environments while others continued to allow smoking. (Since then, the government has stuck its nose into the matter.)
Back then, if non-smokers stopped going to a smoking restaurant or smokers stopped going to a non-smoking one, those were the consequences the owner had to face and it was up to him to decide whether to continue a smoking or non-smoking policy.
Similarly, if people with young children refuse to dine at McDain’s because their children now have to stay home, then he’ll feel it in the day’s tally. On the other hand, if his business increases, then he made a good business decision.
I really don’t see what all the fuss is about. There are plenty of “family” style restaurants which cater to families with young children. Why is Mr. Vuick being criticized because he’s choosing to accommodate those customers who have complained that their meals have been ruined because of unruly children? His attitude is that the children may be the center of their parents’ universe, but they’re not the center of everyone else’s universe.
He’s absolutely right. I don’t have children. But I have grand nieces and nephews and, as far as I’m concerned, they can do no wrong. Their little tantrums are far more tolerable than those of strangers.
I’ve been in hundreds of restaurants over the years and many times I saw a child misbehaving while the parent sits by and does nothing. The parent doesn’t discipline the child, but, instead, continues to ignore the behavior while everyone around them has to suffer. To be honest, I’ve never seen this happen in a fine restaurant; actually I don’t think I’ve ever seen children in a fine restaurant. But, if I’m in a family restaurant, children behaving badly (and parent’s who fail to supervise them) have to be expected.
What seemed like a straightforward matter – to ban or not to ban – has created a further controversy from one of my “why does she have a job” people, Joy Behar. On a recent episode of “The View” (have I mentioned I’d rather set myself on fire than watch an entire episode of this show), when the topic was discussed, Ms. Behar said, “There seems to be a war against children going on. Except when they’re in utero! Then everyone seems to care!”
Well, I guess the controversy itself wasn’t big enough for Ms. Behar. For some reason, she had to take the opportunity to bring people like me – pro-lifers – into the discussion. She’s actually equating banning children from restaurants with killing children by the thousands every day? Is she out of her mind?
Ms. Behar, do you actually believe banning young children from restaurants is a war against them? What about what abortionists do for a living? Legally killing almost 54 million children since 1973 in this country alone isn’t a war “against children?” Are you nuts?
I get Mr. Vuick. I don’t get Ms. Behar, but if you do, God bless you.