I have no problem with that. On some layovers it can be hours that they have to be watched like hawks. If you feel you dont' have the time to fly with your own children, then be prepared to pay.

Fee's. The bane of our convenience's. Never going to go away either. Companies can try to say what they want, but it's not going to.

I'm sure that in many cases it literally WILL be cheaper. From the stories we've seen just on this site about how airlines sometimes simply ignore unaccompanied minors, you may as well just go with them.

Actually the fee if there was a stop-over was already $95 each way. So, if that goes up by 50%, parents are looking at almost $300 in fees for a round trip with a layover.

Can they now guarantee that the child won't be molested by some weirdo? Link to one of many recent stories: [www.wcbd.com]
Or is the increase now a safety charge?

I'm sure the airline is trying to stop the practice altogether: they don't want the responsibility.

I wonder if the airline will find a way to blame the increase on increased fuel costs.

@B: Perhaps due to today's children being fatter?

Why would anyone expect an airline to babysit their child without considerable fees? They aren't in the kid watching business.

I can understand being annoyed if your kid is 15, but if you are sending your 8 year old across the country alone you've got bigger problems then a $75 fee.

The airline can't even get your checked luggage from A to B and you expect them to watch all your bad kids? I'm surprised it doesn't cost more.

I don't have any kids, but I can't imagine sending them on a plane alone. I don't even trust strangers around my dog...

The comment about guaranteeing that children won't be molested on the flight is just plain wrong... Rather than blaming the airline/the crew, blame the nasty-ass man who does it. The fee does cover supervision of the child from A to B, but it does NOT pay for an employee to sit with the child at all times.

$75 each way is fair, I'd say...

almost cheaper for me to fly with them than to send them as unaccompanied minors!

Good! Maybe that's part of the point.

I am surprised airlines do this at all.

I am surprised parents do this at all.

@LoveNoelG: It is really going to depend on the kid. I know that I was flying alone at a very young age as my family has always traveled a lot. Maybe things have changed or something, but when I was flying as a minor the only thing that was done was that I got to board the flight first.

These fees are ridiculous. I remember flying alone when I was about 10 years old and having to go through all sorts of troubles to get them to let me fly without paying the extra fee. Don't know if that's even possible today, what with the money grubbing and penny pinching habits of the airlines. Still, any kid who's flown a few times with his parents (and can read...never a guarantee given the state of our public school system) should be able to figure out how to fly on his or her own.

@Quellman:
How does this story have anything to do with Continental's fee increase? The child was not traveling without parents, and the crew confronted the creep and notified the police. What did the airline do wrong?

Cost should not be the main consideration as to whether you send your children across the country alone.

I'm surprised that any airlines allows unaccompanied minors under the age of say, 16. There are just too many things that can go wrong.

It's even worse with the standard "if it's weather-related, you're on your own" line. What happens if a 9-year-old is stuck in Atlanta and needs to make hotel accommodations?

If you can find a direct flight, Southwest doesn't charge a UM escort fee. My son goes to see his grandparents twice a year by himself. It's worth it to me to drive the 1.5 hours to Phoenix to put him on a non-stop flight.

This sounds like the cliche commenters that I normally hate, but seriously - I don't understand how you would send any child under 14 or so on a plane without someone you personally know/trust accompanying them.

I could maybe understand it in days gone by where you can walk them to the gate and have someone meet them at the gate - but these days when navigating an airport is a stress even for adult travellers, nah.

@masonreloaded: I flew hundreds of times as an unaccompanied minor. My parents were divorced and lived a long way away from each other. It's not that big of a deal.

@DeltaPurser:

Not to mention that the mother were on the same flight as that 13 year old when the man allegedly molested her. They just weren't sat together for whatever reason.

What survival skills are really involved in moving from security, to the gate, to the plane, off the plane and to the meeting area? You wouldn't trust a 13-year-old to be able to count to the proper gate number, or sit in a seat for a few hours, or not to wander off with a stranger?

If you'd trust the kid to go into a grocery store alone and meet you back in the parking lot, I don't know why trusting him or her to take a nonstop flight is significantly different.

I still think children should not be flying unaccompanied period. It is not the airlines job to babysit children.
I do not trust people with my dog - so why would I trust strangers with my kid?

@masonreloaded: Yes, because navigating an aiport is such a hellish experience that nobody under 16 can possibly handle it? Oh please, get a friking clue. A 12 year old can do it just as easily as a 20 year old. I had flown at least a dozen times and was completely comfortable flying by the time I was 15.

@Propaniac: I want to live in your world where airports are easily navigated and unchaotic and where nothing bizarre, dangerous or scary happens.

It isn't equivalent to sending a kid to a grocery store alone (who does that?), at all.

It seems kids 12 and over can handle it, based on their experience and their parents' judgement. It's like kids who live in the city navigate it quite well, while kids who only visit are a mess. Some kids have travelled a lot and it's no big deal. I would say no fee for them, and under 12 should be a big fee or pay an actual babysitter for the flight. It's true, why should the airline babysit your kid for $25 a flight? Also, if at all possible put them on a direct flight.

@SarcasticDwarf: yeah when everything goes as planned it isn't a big deal. But how often does that happen? You would expect some kid to be able handle rebooking if a connection is missed or a flight is canceled? Or worry about making hotel reservations if they get stuck overnight? The fee is as much for insurance in case something goes wrong as anything else. If I were a parent and I was sending my kid alone on a plane I would consider the fee insurance that if something happens my kid would be taken care of.

$25 each way on AirTran. We have used them countless times over the past few years. No problems (yet).

The airline isn't babysitting anyone. We have to escort our child all the way to the gate, show ID and sign paperwork at the gate, wait until everyone else is boarded, and then have our child walked down the jetway by an airline employee. You also have to stay at the gate until the plane takes off in case there is a problem. On the recieving end, the other adult has to be standing at the gate with ID in hand. The child is brought off last by an airline employee or crew member.

I've never had an issue over the 7 years we've done this. And that includes flying different airlines out of different airports.

UM's are also not allowed to fly on the last flight of the day precisely because of "weather delays" that may lead to an overnight hotel stay. The FAA says they must complete all travel in one day. Again, it's never been an issue - we have been bumped to a later flight once. And they have stopped us from booking (unintentionally) on the last flight of the day.

Misstic is spot on.

We send our kids on flights as UMs because there really is no way to do it otherwise.

My boys started flying before they could walk, and made at least five round trips a year, and were flying by themselves by 10. There is no way that I would pay to go with them just to hand them off and return.

The youngest quit doing the UM at 13 because he found the whole AA "ticket around the neck" thing humiliating. "What am I? a dog?"

He flies with his own AMEX card, cell phone, and cash. He encountered a five hour layover in Dulles, and I got half hour updates, "I'm sooo boooorrred!!" until his plane left. If needed, he could have found the hotel shuttle bus on his own and checked-in and paid for a hotel room that I would have arranged for him.

Both boys have handled their own with TSA -- a bicycle pump in the carry-on luggage almost caused a missed flight -- and did just fine.

I rode next to a 14 year old who was an UM from Chicago to Paris and then on to New Delhi. It was his fourth trip. The stews did a nice job of paying attention to him. I'm was one of the top 10% in airmiles the year before on AA, and he got better service.

If you have trained your kids how to travel, to be respectful or considerate of others, and to be civil and given them some basic common sense then absolutely they can travel on their own.

I'm more afraid of what the teenagers are up to after school and before the parents get home than I am what goes on in the airport. Sheesh!

As far as Continental raising the rates, choose another airline. As far as I know, there very few places where you will have no alternatives.

@LoveNoelG: "Follow the signs. Pay attention to announcements. If something happens and you get confused or you need help, go to a counter and ask a uniformed employee, just like an adult would. Or you can call me." My reference to letting the kid go into a store alone (I don't know if your response meant "Who would be so irresponsible?!?!" or "When would that happen?"; if the latter, my own parents and I often separated at a shopping center to get errands done) was to make the point that most children eventually become capable of fulfilling simple tasks, perhaps even with a bit of *gasp* problem-solving required, without their parents holding their hand at every juncture, and it's silly to say that nobody reaches that point before age 14 or 16. And seriously, "bizarre, dangerous and scary stuff" can happen ANYWHERE. That's why you teach the kid how to react if it does happen, instead of hovering over your 15-year-old son or daughter every second of every day just in case he or she confronts something unexpected.

The best way is to avoid connecting flights and get a gate pass so that you can watch the minor get on the plane. The guardians on the other side can also get a gate pass to meet the kid at the door. In between there isn't much that can happen except spill a drink on themselves.

I wouldn't send my dog unaccompanied, much less my kid.

Would you want your kid staying in a hotel with a person you never met before becuase the plane diverted to an airport other than it's destination or they miss a connecting flight?

Is it worth the trauma your kid would endure to save a few bucks not flying with them.

Thank you! Maybe this will cut down on some of the un-supervised hellraisers that seem to like tormenting other passengers.

Free babysitting service now has a charge.

Oh well, move along, nothing newsworthy here.

@Pop Socket: UM's are not allowed to take connecting flights at all. And you must get a gate pass and stay until the plane takes off as I mentioned upthread.

Airlines aren't in the business of baby sitting... just getting the baby from point A to point B. If they want to charge $75 or $175 so what. If you don't want to pay the fee, don't send the kid alone or don't fly at all.

@MissTic: They aren't? I flew on connecting flights unaccompanied fairly often when I was a kid (though my parents did try to get a direct flight if they could). Granted this was a fairly long time ago now. A couple of times I got stuck for awhile due to delays, but they would just put me in an airline lounge with some food and drinks and let me watch TV (while being supervised) until they could rebook me. Fortunately I never got stuck overnight as a kid.

"almost cheaper for me to fly with them than to send them as unaccompanied minors!"

That's kinda the point. Why should the rest of us subsidize your babysitter?

Why don't they simply offer to place them in lego-appointed pet cages and stow them in with the luggage? No fears of Dirty Old Men™, and they may make friends with Fluffy and Scraps!

Actually, when there is no connection the airlines must make $s on this fee. One parent takes the kid to the gate, and waits until boarding. The other parent meets kid at the destination gate. About all the airline has to do is show kid their seat, and make sure they don't get off the plane until they are ready to take them out to meet their parent.

Having a connecting flight would be different (which is why it's more $s. Personally, I think their price for that is low. However, I'd never consider having an airline responsible for a transfer of minors. Too many things could go wrong.

@jeblis: I don't think the majority of parents like putting their minor on a plane alone, but accompanying a minor on a plane trip isn't just the $150 extra for the parent's seat, it's also a day or two off work (even if it is the weekend, some people do work on the weekend), stress in the airport, and potentially flying twice in one day, which isn't that feasible if you are flying across the country.

My 7yr has been flying unaccompanied since she was 5 back n forth between LA and Portland. It beats having to pay an extra $1200 to pick her up and drop her off.

I guess this mean that "broken homes" need to start being responsible for their actions and choices.

@llynglas: If you think thats all it takes to take car of a kid on a plane -PLEASE never have any children.

Or, next time you fly, sit next to a family with kids and watch goes on.

@Jaysyn: Yeah, go figure...

@MissTic: Actually, different airlines have different rules re. connecting flights for UMNR's... Some do, some don't let them make connections.

What gets my blood boiling, though, is when the parents on the arriving end doesn't show up for an hour. Makes the kid feel unwanted - I've seen sad faces, tears...

@UpsetPanda: which isn't that feasible if you are flying across the country

Yeah, I'm sure it's a pain. That's why they offer you the option of paying them to do it for you. Why should I subsidize that fee? They're not my groin fruit.

I can't imagine why anybody would send there kids on a cross country trip alone. You wouldn't put your kid in a taxi and tell them to drop them at grandmas house would you?
I agree the airline is probably trying to phase out this service as the responsibility for watching a child in this day and age is tremendous.
And if something does happen to the child I can imagine the law suit that would follow.