Restaurant Bans Kids: A Considerate Move or Discrimination?

One Pittsburgh restaurant has stirred the pot by banning children under 6 years old from their dining room, citing frequent noise and disruption as the problem. Not surprisingly, there has been a lively national reaction to the bold decision, and now diners stand divided on the ethics and motivations behind it.

Dining in a public environment is not always an easy feat, and running a restaurant can be particularly challenging. Think about it: how do you please a room full of hungry strangers with different expectations that have no vested interest in each other? Well, the owner of McDain's Restaurant and Golf Center has decided the easiest way to please the most people is simply to eliminate a part of the dining demographic. In response to many complaints from customers, owner Mike Vuik has bravely gone where no restaurateur has gone before by introducing an age requirement to exclude some current clientele.

But while it's hard to disagree that rambunctious young children are the source of the disruption, is it right to exclude them? The decision has many parents with young kids fuming, since they can no longer enjoy their right to dine unless they unload their children with a babysitter -- something that isn't always easy or convenient. Clearly, the other side feels as though they're unfairly suffering when they go out to enjoy a nice meal, and that's perfectly understandable, too.

At this point, Mr. Vuik's supporters are the majority, but the uproar will likely have other restaurants thinking twice before following suit. After all, so many establishments are not in a position to pick and choose their clientele, and any repeat business is good business. But aside from that, kids are people too and should be treated as such. Does this ban unfairly limit their rights? Could it lead to other types of discrimination?