FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
More in the Cafferty File today on the pleasures of modern air travel:
[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/11/16/art.child.on.plane.jpg caption=""]
After you're groped, X-rayed and looked at like a common criminal, you finally make it onto your flight only to find you're seated in front of, next to or behind someone traveling with one or more small children.
For the duration of your flight, you can look forward to screaming, crying, kicking, food-throwing and yelling parents.
The New York Times says for some, sitting near such an uncontrollable child is "the second biggest fear of flying." They report on a growing push for airlines to create child-free flights or to designate "family-only" sections on planes.
A recent travel survey shows 59 percent of passengers support creating these special sections, while close to 20 percent say they'd like to see flights with no children.
Some travelers say they'd gladly pay extra to fly with no children on board. Even some parents support the idea of separating kids from the rest of the passengers.
They say a family-only section would give parents and children more freedom to make a little noise. They also point out it's stressful for parents when their kids are screaming and won't calm down.
But it's unlikely any of this will happen. A major airline trade group says the industry is working hard to return to profitability; and they don't want to start turning people away from certain flights.
As for family-only sections, they say it would be too complicated. Plus it could set a dangerous precedent once you start separating passengers by age. What if there are calls for elderly-free flights or obese-only sections?
Here’s my question to you: Would you pay extra for a flight with no children?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Ray in Knoxville, Tennessee writes:
I sure would, Jack. I would also pay extra for restaurants, theaters and stores with no children.
Oh, God. I would pay to not have a kid kicking the seat behind me. After a 4-hour flight and the usual unexpected delays, I would gladly pay an extra $50 for a flight without kids. Whenever possible, I take the train and get a full private room… it takes longer, but it sure beats the cattle drive of flying.
Once you start creating "special" flights with family-only sections or kid-free flights, then the trains, busses and subways will be next. Sorry, kids and crying babies are part of life... YOU were one once.
After enduring an overnight flight to Lima, Peru with a squalling brat sitting behind me and kicking my seat all night (the parents apparently didn't want to discipline their little angel) I would gladly have paid an extra C-note to anybody who would have stuck a cork in the little monster. I paid good money for that trip, to fly in peace and not be made miserable by somebody else's kid.
Susan in Roseville, California writes:
Parents should be the ones to pay extra: on a flight, in a restaurant, in a museum. Too many special occasions have been ruined by bratty, whiny kids and indifferent mothers and fathers. I would rather sit next to a smoker than a screaming brat.
Ann in South Carolina writes:
Why don't we all buy our own jet so we won't be bothered by other people on our flight?
Children? Who cares about children? I'd pay extra for a flight that didn't begin with my body experiencing more groping at the gate than in my bedroom.
Gat in Texas writes:
Jack, I would give up my first born if that made it possible to fly without children. And he is 41 years old.