"The Elmwood Apartments for Rent in New Westminster" (children welcome) at http://www.aptrentals.net/new_westminster/elmwood.shtml

"The Graveley Apartments, 1436 Graveley, Vancouver, ..." (children welcome) at http://www.aptrentals.net/vancouverfiles/graveley.shtml

http://www.blockwalk.ca/britishcolumbia/greatervancouver/vancouver/re nt_vancouver.htm ~~~ Google Search: children apartments vancouver "apartments for rent"

I have to disagree with Dorothy about Vancouver not being an inviting place for families to live. I've lived in my fair share of crappy apartments - i prefer to live close to downtown (more amenities, small commute, etc), and therefore I've endured tiny, closet like apartments with high rents. The one thing that there are a lot of in Vancouver is co-ops. My wife and i spent in total about 2 days filling out applications and four months later we're in a large two bedroom near downtown - and we're paying about 400 a month less than we would be paying for a comparable apartment. not only that but around the time we got into our current co-op we received several calls from other co-ops that had vacancies. It may not solve your immediate problem, but worth it in the end...

Interesting!!! As far as demoralization, don't even get me started. I have a dog- so I empathize. You know what? I find this really interesting... what is the deal in this city? Smokers, pets and now children are out?? Wow. The place where I did finally get a home (because a friend with a dog lived upstairs and recommended me) three years ago, houses three single women (each floor) and one dog, and the owner's daughter who lives upstairs... will not rent to people with children. Lucky for me, however, she likes dogs. It's a nice suite and really reasonable for the increasing prices of the eastside, but I'm pretty much resigned to the fact that I'll be living here until I save enough for a downpayment to own a place- because I REFUSE to ever go through the "demoralization" of rent-hunting and being treated like a freak because I have a dog, ever again. This is an extremely sensitive issue with me, thus I had to get my two cents worth in. Thanks for listening. I will keep my eyes peeled for you, Dorothy. Atleast you have the co-op option; do they have those for pet owners? Parents and pet-owners unite!!

I think the whole no-pets/no-kids attitude in a lot of Vancouver places is partially a case of the one bad apple spoiling the bunch - I think that a small subset of irresponsible parents and pet owners have made landlords consider the whole group not worth the risk of renting to. I question the anecdote about the building who had lawsuits over the three year old, unless the author is exaggerating for effect...I really doubt that you'd get complaints that serious unless the noise was really out of line. And I can attest from experience that living under an apartment with kids who run around or are loud is hellish...I lasted 1 month and moved to an adult-oriented building. Personally, when we rented out our basement suite, we specifically stated "no kids, pet OK" because we're childfree ourselves and prefer not to be around kids' noise/mess (even well behaved ones). Also, the kitchen space was shared, which would have proved a major issue with small children. Pets we were happy to accomodate. I do know a lady who rented to one bad parent tenant and went through such hell that she now rents only to singles to avoid kids. I helped her clean the place, and it was a nightmare - dirty diapers, crayon all over the walls, the kids had broken the dryer and a window...just a mess. I think the co-op suggestion is a good idea - they tend to be more parent/kid/family oriented, and there are a number in Vancouver.

Ah, it comes to this! -- I've noticed virtually every conversation in Vancouver eventually winds up being about real estate, and perhaps it's true of websites too. I'm glad me and mine escaped the hellish rental cycle shortly after kid# 1 emerged last year, and got into a nice if minuscule condo. I think the "issue" about tenants with kids is awfully petty, really, and symbolic of the near-omnipotence of Van landlords. As Woodend points out, little ones can indeed be pretty raucous, but not typically past early evening -- and they're normally too ineffectual to wreak any actual, like, structural damage. So rejecting tenants on that basis (especially when you know, or should know, that the exhausted 'rents will be packing it in early and quietly themselves) seems like simple pissiness. That said, children are also eminently portable and sometimes disguiseable -- so have you considered just outright lying, Ms Woodend? Just bomb in and get the lease signed on a "don't ask/don't tell" basis --leave the kid with sis -- then produce him later. "Oh, young Mini-Wood, yes, he was a very late child. I had what you call, um, a discreet pregnancy. Protected under the human rights code, you know..."

Dorothy, my heart goes out to you. This story is the situation in every large city. I went through it when I lived in Montreal. A dear friend lived through it in Calgary where it was much worse because she was also a single mother. We already know there are a lot of small people with too much property and power in this world.

While I sympathise with your inability to find an apartment that will take children, I must confess, when I look for an apartment, I look for one that does not contain children. "Like most three-year-olds he moved around occasionally"? How about, "like most three-year-olds he screams his head off and stomps everywhere". How about, "like most modern parents, they prefer to let their three year old express himself freely, whenever, wherever, however, with only the occasional coo of 'not so loud sweetie' and then allowintg it to continue"?. I agree that people with children are often discriminated against in housing, which particularly affects single mothers, but what do you propose as the solution? Should we force everyone to put up with the screaming three year olds? (Don't tell me they don't scream - there's one in my building now, and it's a bloody ear-splitting assault). If we take away discrimination against children through legislation, will we not then be discriminating against those who choose (yes, some of us conciously choose this) to exclude children from their lives? Should we be forced to tolerate your children? I already have to put up with ill behaved parents who refrain from supervising their children on public transit, in restaurants and theatres. Please allow me at least a little peace in my own home.

Oh fer god's sake what an dumb-downed provincial snot-nose in the air attitude -- should we be forced to tolerate your children? How about the world's children? How about the fact that these children are the next generation of the human race? How about the fact that being around a child, with a child, hanging out with a kid, is fun!! How about the fact that the noise of happy children playing is one of the most wonderful sounds in the world? How about the fact that attitudes and comments like these are signifigant of just what is wrong with the small minded pathetically sad town of Vancouver.

Well, Lani, I agree with both yours and Edward's comments. As far as children being "the world's children and the next generation of the human race", then would you have a problem with Edward (or any stranger) disciplining your child in public? (If need be, of course). I think that is the point he is trying to make, and I somewhat agree with him there. You paint a very happy picture of a community-based world where children run and play and everyone loves each other etc., but the reality is some parents are very self-centred and he is right, some children behave like monsters. If I (as a member of this big happy world family) am "allowed" to step in and teach/discipline children who are not mine, then you have a good point.

And oh, I've been tempted so many times, because SOME parents out there have no clue what they are doing and it scares me that their children are the "next generation of the human race".

Fi, it sounds like you have no children. When I was a childless and very young woman, I said almost the exact same things as you and Edward. When my child was born, I had to eat all those words. You cannot imagine.

Children are not small wayward robots that need "discipline". They are amazing, joyful, loving passionate busy people who need lots of loving caring people around them. Someone like Fi or Edward are probably someone who shouldn't be around children but it is children who need protection from them, not the other way around. i come from a rural culture where children were and are simply part of all activities. A child centred culture is a much more positive place to live. A culture than hates its own children seems pretty twisted to me.

I agree with Ragamuffing 100percent. Edward and Fi are representative of what is wrong with the City of Vancouver. In a nutshell, it's (or at least much of it) is totally unfriendly to kids. As for Dorothy, she should do what I did: stop shelling out rent to a baby-hating landlord (and many are, and mine most definitely was) and save up a few bucks to buy a condo/apartment. Nowadays, my rugrats can tear down the house, scream as loud as they want, sing, dance, fight and fart -- and nobody can do anything about it because I own the joint. That, my friends, is the Canadian dream.

I soooo expected such defensive comments.

You don't know me (or Edward) and so of course decide from a paragraph what we are all about. Lani- children DO need discipline. Period. "Someone like Fi or Edward are probably someone who shouldn't be around children but it is children who need protecting from them" you say. As far as I'm concerned children cannot be "amazing, joyful, loving and passionate" if they have no guidelines. I'm going to say something mean now (like you did about children needing protecting from Edward and I- want an ignorant, narrow minded thing to say- YOU should not have children if you think they don't need discilpine. Tell me then- what is wrong with this society we live in? Why are people so selfish and mean? I was raised PROPERLY by my parents- with an equal amount of discipline and unconditional love. I was raised to share, to not be wasteful and to respect others. Note I said "some" children and "some" parents in my comments, and what do you fire back with?? Insults and wild assumptions.

You go so far as to use the word "hate" in your last line. Good grief, woman, what are YOU teaching your children? As far as your comments, Observer, EVERYONE is representative of what is wrong with not just the city of Vancouver, but most of modern society. How easy for you self-righteous individuals to pretend you are the epitome of perfect citizens. Give me a break. And I said the exact same thing, all you can do (because I am on the "dog discrimination end" of "what is wrong with this city" remember, is buy your own place. Exactly.

One more thing, I plan to adopt an unwanted child one day- selfish, child-hating me; but really, what does that say about you all? You think children are so "amazing, joyful, loving and passionate", Lani, but did you know there are over 1,000 BC children waiting to be adopted? Is your child-loving heart big enough for that??

Landlords who refuse to rent to families are practicing discriminatory behavior, plain and simple. As far as I'm aware, it is against the law to discriminate against other citizens. Several years ago, British Columbia had a tenancy act that had some teeth, where people who broke the law would face prosecution. However, the Liberal government watered down the act and reduced the budget of the Residential Tenancy Office, in favor of landlords and their business interests. They basically wiped out the previous NDP government’s plans to go so far as to make it an offense to overlook tenants with pets. Nowadays, if a landlord breaks the law, he or she doesn’t have to worry about being punished because there aren’t enough staff to respond to renters’ complaints. Therefore, renters with children and renters with pets have become a visible minority. Should we continue the unfair practice by establishing ghettos for families and building gated communities for adults? Others in this discussion thread have suggested that kids and their parents should live in co-ops; perhaps these are the ghettos that I have just suggested. I certainly hope not. Basically, Vancouver is an incredibly selfish society, full of individuals who view children as freaks of nature. Communities in Europe and Asia have been able to include children as part of their progressive urban neighborhoods, and they figured it out long ago. My mother grew up in an apartment building in Scandinavia in the 1930s, living with dozens of other families together in a compassionate environment. If we in Vancouver want to pretend to be a progressive and liberal society, living in a city that “welcomes the world in 2010,” we better start to learn to live together -- children and pets included -- before the visitors arrive. As far as I can tell, we have a lot of work to do.

Wow...where did all the defensiveness come from? Yes, kids can be great. They can also be mind-boggling loud, and lack an adult sense of when it`s appropriate to scream, jump up and down, play floor hockey in the kitchen, etc. I don`t blame the kids for the attitude of landlords, nor do I blame landlords who are ``child haters``. I blame a housing market where people are squeezed to the last drop of rent (which makes it difficult to afford kids and pay Vancouver rents), a culture of entitlement where everyone assumes that they can do whatever the hell they want without concern for those around them - including a lot of parents I`ve met, who believe that Johnny can do no wrong. I suggested a co-op simply because they do tend to be more family friendly and community oriented than the downtown condos that I`ve seen, not to suggest that we create `ghettoes`. Hell, I wouldn`t live in Vancouver in any case...it`s an overpriced madhouse. AFAIK, it is discrimination to refuse to rent to anyone based on familial status/sexual orientation/blah blah unless the owner resides in the building or shares living space, which was the case with us. And this comment: "Someone like Fi or Edward are probably someone who shouldn't be around children but it is children who need protecting from them" is insane. Trust me, somebody who dislikes kids enough to avoid them is at the bottom of the list of people you should worry about. Most child abuse is committed by family members, and people who express an inappropriate interest in kids are the ones you need to worry about, not the ones who run like hell.

My children have been on the receiving end of eyewatering rudeness, sarcasm, authoritarian commands, theft, and physical pushiness from adults who thought that their years and experiences gave them the right to behave in ways they would never treat an adult. I've had to play linebacker against a horrid witch who thought that my daughter had no right to her own standing space on the metro during rush hour. I've had to physically grab sweets out of the hands of well-meaning 'granny' types who ignored my persistant requests not to give them to a diabetic friend of my son's. I confronted a man who grabbed some ski-boots from a sales-bin out of my son's hand because he didn't think a child could be serious about wanting to buy them. I've told my children to ignore a woman who wanted to shush them up as they laughed and shouted in a public children's playlot which she insisted on sitting beside to read. I once heard a teacher direct such a vicious volley of sarcasm at a six-year-old for not paying attention during a school concert that, had the child had been a twenty-six year old adult instead, he would've aimed a well-deserved punch to that teacher's nose. I have dozens of examples of experiences where adults had to be put into their places because they behaved much, much worse than the children did. Oh yes, children DO have to be protected from the interventions of adults, because there is nothing like a small, inexperienced, and unknowing child to bring out the bully in a coward, or the greed of a selfish narcissist, or the rudeness of a vain egoist.

So missing the point...how peculiar, to name parents ( and grandparents) who want their children to be happy safe and protected as defensive. And, of course, the real point is that it always comes back to money and privilege and those who feel that somehow their money and privilege shouldl buy them protection from those messy, noisy, so annoying small human-like creatures called children, who amazingly enough, actually have rights, under the UN charter and other government legislation, and are supposed to be cared for and protected but in Canada, oh my my, turns out we have incredibly high levels of child poverty, but of course, that is all the fault of those lazy welfare mothers, those cheats who just couldn't seem to stay married for some reason, so easy to vote for a government who will deny them funding, or decent levels of childcare, and not ever make the connection that this plunges them AND their children into a fairly desperate situation... especially in a city full of people who think children are just so annoying and perhaps, what, should just go away, disappear somewhere, into some nice safe warm ghetto.

So missing the point...how peculiar, to name parents ( and grandparents) who want their children to be happy safe and protected as defensive. And, of course, the real point is that it always comes back to money and privilege and those who feel that somehow their money and privilege shouldl buy them protection from those messy, noisy, so annoying small human-like creatures called children, who amazingly enough, actually have rights, under the UN charter and other government legislation, and are supposed to be cared for and protected but in Canada, oh my my, turns out we have incredibly high levels of child poverty, but of course, that is all the fault of those lazy welfare mothers, those cheats who just couldn't seem to stay married for some reason, so easy to vote for a government who will deny them funding, or decent levels of childcare, and not ever make the connection that this plunges them AND their children into a fairly desperate situation... especially in a city full of people who think children are just so annoying and perhaps, what, should just go away, disappear somewhere, into some nice safe warm ghetto.

Can you imagine the backlash that would result from a rental ad prohibiting people over 55?

Diane, even though I am now in that age group (over 55), I agree wholeheartedly with your comment. I am often embarrassed by the sense of entitlement some people take on once they hit a certain age. It almost makes me want to dye or color my hair a tad just so I won't be mistaken for one of with these spoiled antiques who don't appreciate they, as a group, are far better looked after than any other segment in society, ever.

Lani, my comment about defensiveness was directed to everybody's reactions on this thread, not at parents. I was simply surprised at how quickly the discussion blew up into name calling. And the anecdotes about moronic behavior towards kids simply illustrates my point: there is a real decline in civility/respect in this society from all quarters, and it is extremely divisive. I'm sure everybody has anecdotes about rude behavior from men, women, kids, teens, pet owners, Hare Krishnas..you get my drift. I've certainly seen stuff that made my jaw drop - from the woman who changed her kid on a restaurant table and left the dirty diaper there to the guy who let a door slam in front of a man in a walker. It's not limited to any one social group, unfortunately - it's systemic, and the result is that people try to avoid it by isolating themselves from each other and pointing fingers rather than being more tolerant and trying to resolve issues. The rental hassles described by the author seem to me to be a symptom of this and of several other nasty factors in play in the Vancouver housing market, including insane rents, a lax Rental Tenancy Act, overcrowding and the high competition for space in the downtown area. I stand by my suggestion for the author to either buy her own place (which she states she can't do) or to check into co-ops so they at least have a roof over their heads. I know other people who have been in this same kind of situation, too - one was on welfare, one was a recovering addict, and another was caring for a disabled spouse. Your comment on kids having rights under the UN also applies to these people, and they experienced the same problems finding housing as the author did. It's not limited to parents. I don't know what the fix for the overall situation is. There may not be one. Does anyone have any constructive suggestions?

Nice comments Rhea... and I certainly understand your points, Lani. I wholeheartedly agree. I do not dislike children in the least and I'm sorry if my original comments offended you. I have good friends who are/were single mothers and I agree with all of your comments that there should be much more community support for these women (and men) and basically everyone in society. I have a good friend who is bi-polar and on disablitiy 2. This summer she lost her father to cancer, her brother to (she thinks) suicide due to an overdose and then, sadly, her beloved 12 yr old dog who had to be put down. Her neighbours and friends continue to amaze me with the support she receives (her family lives in Ontario) and I think my point is that this kind of self-less community support is what needs to be fostered. Some of her neighbours whom she doesn't know well have said very cutting and cruel remarks to her re: her dog (when he was going downhill fast he would lash out in confusion/going deaf etc; even turned on my dog and attacked him for no reason) and those people have NO idea how much hurt they caused her.

I think society in general has become SO self-centred (along with all the points made by Rhea) that resolving issues is something we don't have a handle on anymore- we are all so desperate to put a roof over our own heads, to be "safe and protected" that we don't stop and say "Well, protected from what?" We are all people with the same basic needs, we all love our children or dogs or cats or whatever; if we had the kind of community understanding and support that my friend has, we would feel safe and protected more often. I don't know... I've gone off on a tangent here; any other suggestions?

Far from being a Vancouver-based problem, I've found this attitude to be prevalent in a number of the cities I've lived in with kids (Montreal, Calgary and now Victoria). Like the writers above with dogs who found places through owners who had dogs or liked dogs, my experience is your best bet is trying to find places where the people renting have kids or have experience with kids. Try going through the network of people you build up around your kids (childcare/school/other activities).

i can only recommend: co-op housing. like michael above, i spend an evening filling out applications, and within four months had received a half dozen calls about vacancies. now's a good time, because lots of folks who have saved money over the years (by living in an inexpensive co-op) are buying homes and moving out.

i am in my neighourbood of choice and pay rent that is geared to my income. there are over a dozen kids here, aged 18 months to 18 years. built-in playmates and babysitters!

it is a bit miami vice, with the stucco ceiling and bad carpet--but you know what? it beats the hell out of over-paying for the unsafe little heritage home with the crappy landlord we just moved out of. if wanting something styling is a big deal, you may be stuck at your sibling's place for a long time.

I had a similar experience when my son was about 9 months I innocently inquired about a two bedroom apartment in the west end and was told "sorry we don't allow children". Fortunately I still had an adequate supply of post partum hormones and stood screaming on the street "Kids are not DOGS they're humans, they have rights!!!!!" My advice try for a concrete building where little feet don't disturb the neighbours. My building Columbia Place in the west end on Jervis welcomed children thank god. We lived in a one bedroom there until my son was 5 and we were able to buy a house. This is just sick.

Try http://mole-hill.ca/ I live in this downtown neighbourhood of rennovated heritage houses, and there are many families with kids and even *gasp* things for families and kids to do. There is a higher turnover rate in family suites than a lot of coops have, and the market rent prices are excellent due to their being based on urban Canadian averages... Best of all for you, families are expected to live on the (really darn nice) upper floor suites, so no one can complain about normal child sounds (though I did have a set of "permissive parents" above my suite for a while, and the sound of the mum in the hallway, politely begging her three year old to unlock their front door as she and gran and gramps would really like in, for repeated ten minute sessions, got to be a bit much. Ha.)

Hey hey, in many ways dogs are a notch above humans....

My experience has been less than welcoming, in this 'lotus land' of ours. I moved to Vancouver 5 years ago to attend university. It did not matter that I came armed to the teeth with references attesting to the fact that I was remarkably clean and responsible, nor that my child was well behaved and "disciplined" (from the comments on here you would think the only definition of discipline is the old addage that 'children should be seen and not heard'- not so folks!). Still, everywhere I called or visited I got the same response, no kids. So much so that I, in a fit of tears, phoned the BC Human Rights Advocate (does that even exist anymore?) to clarify when families with children can legally be refused housing. After hearing my stories an agent there was so horrified that she asked me to call back with landlord names and telephone numbers! This does not tell the story of 6 years on a BC Housing waiting list either... I finally went to the burbs folks, and I found very few other 'out' visible queer parents/single parents, no supports that weren't $$ dependant, no community, and then I spent three years trying to get back! I am finally in a Vancouver co-op now but I did not do it years ago because I never had the money for a share purchase, and the situation is such that many co-op's (including the one I am in now) will not advertise that they have payment/financing options because they want the money honey! Yes folks, someone else paid my share purchase but not all single parents and families are so lucky. It's a catch 22 really, I recently had a co-op treasurer tell me that in order to get financing (that is not advertised) for share purchase one must "convey their desparation" (read: beg) but, I also know that co-op's want people who are not too, too high of a risk and who can contribute financially as well as in other ways. As such, people don't reveal/acknowledge that they struggle, eat from the foodbank, and need help, mostly out of fear of missed opportunity- at least I didn't anyway. And this idea of buying a place! Ha! When my gazillion in student loans is paid, my teeth are fixed, my son gets through university, I finally have some sort of RRSP, etc, etc, well maybe when I am 80! Anyway, my point is that there IS widespread discrimination, parents and children are stereotyped and are all painted with the same brush, that affordable housing is VERY hard to find, that even within 'socially minded' housing co-op's there is still a bottom line that must be met and subtle oppressions at work, and that we don't care about anybody else's quality of life or housing so long as ours is good. People do end up in informal ghettos, and raising children in places we wouldn't raise livestock, but we don't want secondary suites, or to spend $ on social housing (Hmmm... I would live on a fast ferry..or how about that big, fat, juicy EI surplus folks? our tax dollars should be spent where we want... or how about those Olympics, what are they costing us? what will happen to our already limited, pricey housing then?)... I guess I just, in my overzealous manner:), want to make the point that we are all responsible for our community (in the broadest sense of the word)-and that Vancouver as a city, a people, and a vision, needs to take its blinders off and get its people out of the shelters and alleys, and mould infested apartments, and leaky condos, and overpriced mega divided houses, and make a committment to what it purports itself to be... no wait! We aren't rated the greatest place in the world to live anymore... I wonder why? Maybe because no one can afford to live here, especially with children!

Parents must be so hyper-vigilant now. I think of how my mother let my brothers, sisters and I play all around the neighbourhood and in the woods, run off to the corner store, use the local swimming hole unsupervised, stay after school and use the playgrounds. We never felt unsafe or instrusive. Such freedom is inconceivable now. Sometimes when we made mistakes, strangers would suggest we correct our behaviour, but it was done respectfully and in the spirit of learning, so that no offense could be taken, whereas the tendency now to level a barrage of sarcasm prompts a 'f/u' response. So in addition to trying to teach our children the balance between consideration for others and sticking up for themselves when others try to railroad them, there is the sense of constantly filtering what the world has to throw at them -- because there is so much damaging, ugly and soul-crushing debris. And we are leaving them such a damaged, ugly and crushed world compared to what we were raised in. This is a huge violation of trust.

There are many good suggestions in this comments section. I particularly like the one about approaching the network of parents and child-care professionals you now consult. The familiarity is already there, and the predisposition to wish the children well.

Having rented in Vancouver with children for 11 years now I think I have some experience in this matter. We've been home hunting 4 different times and yes it's a crisis each time. Some things I've learned.. Vancouver does have "Family housing" for low and moderate income families. It's not-for- profit housing and each complex keeps half for subsidized families and half for "market value" (way cheaper than real market value) to avoid the "slum" factor. The GVHC units in Vancouver are usually smaller than their suburban counterparts but can be livable and no one is going to complain about your kids. Co-op Living is even better but not all are family friendly (do your research first). Mouldy units can be an issue in almost anything built after 1980 but it's not always a given. The biggest problem about getting into GVHC units is proving you have enough income to avoid being put on the subsidy waiting list. According to government rules a family cannot pay more that 1/3 of their income on rent on these units. So even though the average Vancouver family spends %50 of their income on housing if you can't prove you make 3 times the rent you're still out on the streets. Incredibly frustating for many famlies but true. Most Co-ops are under the same regs. Check out http://www.gvrd.bc.ca/housing/ GVRD also owns a lot of single family homes located on GVRD property (mostly parks, but other property too) but they are a well kept secret and are not advertised on any website I can find. Calling the individual housing offices or better yet walking in and talking to them is the only way I've found effective to acess them. Same with the complex units- it's not enough to just fill the aplication form and wait- you have to talk to the managers of the housing offices each month and pester them to find out if something is opening up. Although someone said the Residential Tenancy Act http://www.pssg.gov.bc.ca/rto/ has lost its teeth I have to say my dealings with it this last year since the changes have been in place have been favorable. Yes, the most disenfranchised of us all find it incredibly difficult to pursue the whole process of arbitration but if you can spend the time then you might get satisfaction. The new RTA spells out the landlord's responsibilities very clearly and its up to the landlord to follow the rules. Unfortunately in such a high demand market with tenants who do not know their rights most landlords play very loose with the rules. Only when tenants hold them to these rules and they start to pay in arbiration hearings will the landlords get the message. Of course I'm speaking from the prospective of a two parents, one decent income family (decent income in the rest of the country- never enough in Vancouver). If you think you've got it bad just imagine what a single mom on assistance or a low income family goes through. It really is a nightmare.

The truly sad thing in this capiltalist thing centred society is the secret many of us know that in the long run, family is what gets you back up, carries you through, and supports you through all the crap. True, families are both immensely wonderful if they work and immensely damaging if they don't, but being part of a solid close knit loving family is so infinitely better in the long run than sitting alone in a child proof world huddled over a lot of stuff. Now there's a sure recipe for long term loneliness.

Right Bear, I was wrong about equating smoking and pets. That is ridiculous, smoking is a filthy habit. However, it is YOUR opinion that pets are a luxury. Even so, luxury or not, what is your point? It's a luxury to have a laptop too, should people with laptops be discriminated against? Anyway, one could say the same for children, especially given the cost of raising one these days. Many people choose to have pets rather than have children, or have them first; whatever the reasons, they DO have rights- do you want to set up the hierarchy of rights as you see fit? Get to it then, man.

I was a non-pet owner for 28 years of my life. I have been a pet owner for six. I will not even begin to try and describe the fabulous quality of life I lead thanks to my dog. It would surely be lost to your ears anyway and pet owners already know what I am talking about. Animals do have rights in this country (thank goodness or we would have them chained to walls, suffering and dehydrating in the heat like in many countries). Of course children have more rights than pets- I didn't mean to turn this into a forum for animals' rights, which is partly what I have done; I was merely showing how I have experienced discrimination as well due to my lifestyle choice. When we start belittling others' choices that's when it all goes wrong. How do you expect people to respect your choices if you don't respect theirs ?

Animals, bless their charming little souls, are not children. This isn't a matter of belittlement, just a fact.

True, and a fact that lends nothing to solving the problem of both people with children and people with pets being discriminated against in this lovely city of hours.

The fact that there are people not willing to rent to families is the sort of disciminatory practice that calls out for a class action lawsuit. Frankly every apartment building that has refused a family should be sued as part this sort of action and very renter family should be compensated by the owners. It is this sort of blatant and fundamentally evil disrimination that makes every fibre of my body want to leap up and pound the crap out of the landlords (and I am Quaker). Discriminiation against childern, is there a type that is worse? This is intolerable. Anyone that does not want kids around should agree that they should recieve no government benefits after they retire. If they do not want the kids, they should not be allowed to benefit from the kids in the future. Children are our future - starting off treating a three year old as a pariah sets such an awful example. If kids are too loud, buy a house in the country and get out of the city and leave decent people alone to build a better and brighter world than the dank hellhole a childless place becomes.

I have to say, I find it appalling to hear that so many landlords discriminate against children. For 2 years, I was in the position of being allowed/ contracted to 'pick tenants' for our small apartment building, which I live in, and it never occured to me to refuse anyone with kids.. I'm pretty disgusted to see that I was the exception to the rule. yes, I can see how noise issues arise, but its all about people and tolerance, and respect for the neighbours whos building you share (regardless of if its you or them making the noise) its certainly not about kids/ dogs / teenagers, whatever... when I 'picked' tenants, I barely bothered to 'screen' tenants in the traditional sense (ie: show me proof of income, letter of reference, etc..)... I simply explained that everyone knew everyone in the building, and was totally up front about the reality of apartment living ... ie: this old wood frame building is not the least bit soundproof... you can hear your neighbours and they can hear you... walking around, doing dishes, watching tv.. everything.. and I mean everything... (wink-wink, nudge-nudge) and THAT is what you will have to live with if you live here. if you are cool with that, and it wont cause you stress, then I'm certain you will be happy here. guess what.. people who'd rather live in a private little box (rather than a big partitioned one) never signed the rental agreement. I guess they realised they'd be unhappy... however, the rest of us are very happy with our 'lack of privacy' - in fact, we barely notice it.. i think if you have the right attitude neighbour noise becomes 'background noise' , and then you can deal with it the same way you deal with the endless traffic noise if, say, you choose to live on robson street. the benefit or tolerance is that it gets returned to you. plus if you hear that your neighbour is home, you know can go over to borrow a cup of sugar (or whatever you need..) yes, we have kids in the building. I've never heard any complaints about them.

sorry - I meant to say "the benefit of tolerance" shoulda proofread this..

Fi - In contemporary society, pets are a luxury, to which you correctly describe as a 'lifestyle choice'. Unless they are prescribed for a specific purpose (i.e. guide dogs for the blind and other assistance to the disabled), there is no legal obligation for animals to be acommodate it. I would prefer that pets would be accomodate - I was lucky enough to find an apartment building to accomodate my cat, but I also realize that pet ownership isn't one of the 13 grounds for protection under BC's Human Rights Code. As for a hierarchy of rights, that would already be established by who is and who isn't mentioned in the code, the Landlord and Tenant Act, the Criminal Code of Canada, and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Bear- then what you are saying is that disallowing accomodation to people with children is a human rights issue (which does not apply to someone with a pet)- then there it is. So what Dorothy needs to do is go to the human rights complaint office (?) and have them deal with it. I'm assuming children (as people) are mentioned in the Landlord and Tentants Act and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Maybe I will look that up now. By George, I think we've got it!!

I have just one thing to say - "housing co-op". They are safe, family friendly and neighbourly. All the things you need when you have a small child. We lived in a housing co-op with our two boys for nine years until we bought our own place and never regretted it for a moment. You need to call the Co-op Housing Federation of BC and ask for a list of co-ops that have openings. You will be much happier.

I have never had a problem with neighbor's pets but I have with their children. I don't enjoy being awakened at 7 or 8 am on the weekend by the sounds of kids playing upstairs or a colicky infant crying all day. I enjoy children and I work with them all week but I don't want to be disturbed by them when I'm at home. I agree with the co-op housing suggestion.My friends with children all live in co-ops and they're wonderful, supportive environments for all types of families.

Ruby, if you don't like the beautiful sounds of children -- whether it be laughter or crying -- then move far, far away from me. Your kind aren't appreciated. You must be a child-hater and a baby-hater.

Dear Observer Wow! What judgemental, awful things you say. I hope you don't teach your children (if you have any) to be so quick to judge others. If you had read my post thoroughly you would have seen that I do like spending time with children and I work with them. That means I'm with children 7 hours a day, 5 days a week. Actually I work with the sort of kids that nobody else wants to: those with mental illness, severe behavior disorders, severly mentally challenged and sometimes the child has a combination of all those things. I love and appreciate those kids, they have given me amazing experiences and I've learned a great deal from them. That being said, not everyone wants kids of their own or wants to be with them 24/7. There is nothing wrong or hateful about those of us that make the choice to live a child-free life at home. Please stop making hateful statements about us.

Whoa! I just revisted this thread and its deja-vu!! I'm with you Ruby; I find it intersting that we call it 'child-free' and people with children call it 'child-less', too. I find many of the people who don't have children would make the best parents of all; and from your comments Ruby- you are a wonderful "mother", so cheers to you!!

Iani, you say that I am someone who shouldn't be around children. You're partly right. I shouldn't be around ill-behaved ones, or their ill-equipped parents. But when I suggested that very point, I was crticised. May I also say that I take offense at your inference that I, and others who are disturbed by ill behaviour, hate children. I do not hate children. In fact, I love them, and have often been touched by their sensitivity, innocence, and sense of wonder. What I dislike is that how they are raised affects their behaviour either positively or negatively, and, it seems, the majority of parents these days are not capable of effective child rearing, I would rather not live in the midst of them. Diane suggested that there would be a backlash if a rental ad appeared that excluded people over 55 from applying, but failed to note that there are many apartment buildings that exclude people UNDER 55. Why do you suppose that those approaching or in retirement would want to live in a building - not a nursing home, but just a building geared toward an older demographic and those retired - that excludes those under 55? Because they don't want children around interrupting their serenity. Are you going to lodge a human rights complaint against the elderly? I'm under 45, why shouldn't I be allowed the same comfort as a 56 year old? I have friends and relatives with children, and I enjoy the company of some of them - on occasion and for short periods. Some I do not visit, because their parents are clearly not cut out for parenting, and they are raising, as Fi said, children that behave like monsters. I don't blame the parents entirely. It's not easy being a parent in the 21st century, where two incomes often struggle to get by, let alone single mothers (whom I feel deserve far more breaks from our society). But utimately, parents must take responsibility for their own. I should not be expected to supervise your kid when he's throwing rocks at cars, pulling flowers, playing soccer in the hallway, screaming in the lobby, putting leaves in everyones mailboxes, or any of the other activities the little darlings get up to while you're out, watching TV, or just avoiding the noise themselves. Supervison is THEIR job, and far too many of them do it appallingly. Let me ask - if you lived in a quiet, well maintained apartment building, and a 35 year old moved in, blasted her stereo at all hours, left empty beer bottles in the hall, and let her boyfriend park in your parking stall, would you be irritated? Would you complain? Well, there is a good chance that that 35 year old wasn't properly supervised as a child, and therefore never learned to be a responsible citizen. Maybe a little loving discipline would have changed the course of things? Yes, children need, and deserve, unequivocal love. But love and discipline are not mutually exclusive. In fact, I would suggest that an important part of love is discipline. That doesn't mean whipping or screaming at the child, but directing thoughtfully, consistently, and with constructive forms of punishment when necessary. Call me small minded and pathetic if you like, but if your children are the next generation of the human race, I can only hope that your partner or your extended family will be able to compensate for your peculiar attitudes toward childrearing. But if they don't, I'll have to hope that I don't end up your neighbour. Incidentally, are you going to conclude that Vancouver is a "small minded pathetically sad town" whenever someone raises a point of view that you disagree with? I can't imagine how this backwater populated with inbred hicks ever got to be named, repeatedly, the best city in the world to live. So, where are you from?

Sorry Edward, it is just sooooooo not about you and your preferences and the fact that lucky ol' you can afford to live somewhere where you can have "serenity". Well, whoop te do. Who cares? The issue is about parents, with children, trying to find decent affordable housing in this so called "best city." And that, obviously, is a BIG problem, regardless of what kind of town Vancouver is SUPPOSED to be.

And, by the way, jusgement is easy, But compassion, tolerance, understanding and even some active helping go a long way to making this town aplace where we can all manage to live together without many lawsuits. So, Edward, what I suggest is that you find some nice single parent Mommy and offer to take her three or four kids off her hands for the day so she can rest and maybe even wash her hair or something equally exciting and then see what a wonderful job you can do with the little darling. I promise it will soooo interesting for you.

And, by the way, jusgement is easy, But compassion, tolerance, understanding and even some active helping could go a long way to making this town a place where we can all manage to live together without many many lawsuits. So, Edward, what I suggest is that you find some nice single parent Mommy and offer to take her three or four kids off her hands for the day so she can rest and maybe even wash her hair or something equally exciting and then see what a wonderful job you can do with the little darling. I promise it will soooo interesting for you.

Lani, I've just re-read your posts and I think you're a single mother, right? With more than one child? You do deserve more support. We don't mean to insult or judge you. I can't understand, you're right, because I've made the decision to not have a child until I'm older and more financially secure, if ever. I don't think Vancouver is the best city to live in at all. If it weren't for the mountains and sea I would be sooo out of here. I do hope you have some good friends and family close by, though; really, I do. Best of luck finding affordable housing.

Dear Fi, thank you for your kind wishes and warm heart...but really, it is sooo not about me either.

poo

poo