Youngest ideal age reasonable to travel to Venice?

[Anonymous]

So, my husband is dying to go to Venice soon after we have a baby. Not the best town at all for strollers and the like, but we figure if the kid is 3 months old, it'll be small enough to strap on and get around fairly easy. If you were going to do it, would you do it at 1 month? 3 months? 6 months? What would you consider ideal from your body perspective and the ease of getting around and being out and about perspective (assuming a non-colicky baby!)?

[Anonymous]

I would say and time after three months. That would give you time to get used to being parents, and you would have a schedule of some sort by that time. Also, the baby would be sleeping for longer stretches (hopefully) and would have its 2 month shots. One other thing to consider is that you can get those backpack things and 10-11 month olds love being in them (at least mine did). I say go for it. We take my now 4 year old DD with us all over the place, it is easy to travel with one. She was a rock star on our trip to Bolivia. I was a nervous wreck taking her to a developing nation...and I worried for nothing. In addition, there are some great prices on flights to Italy right now. My sister in law got round trip tickets to Rome for May for under 500 bucks...at that price you could get the baby a seat and strech out a bit.

[Anonymous]

I would agree that 3 months is probably the earliest I would do it (although I'm sure others have done it earlier). I remember buying tickets for a trip with a 4 month old thinking "I can't leave the house without a diaper bag the size of carryon luggage, how will I ever pack for a trip", but it turns out the baby doesn't really need much more than is in that diaper bag. It is much easier, I think, if the baby is nursing, so that's another thing to keep in mind.

[Anonymous]

We took DS to Venice when he was 2.5 and I strongly encourage you to take your baby when the baby is still lightweight!

Because you are right, OP, there are no ramps and if you go out with the stroller, you are constantly lifting it up and down all day long. Not such an issue with a 13 lb. kid as it is with a 35 lb kid.

And on that note, I also encourage you to explore various baby carriers -- at 3 mos. that would be the best, you avoid the step issue all together.

[Anonymous]

Agree with others that 3 months and up is ideal (but avoid the 9 month range--once they decide they want to crawl, travel gets very tricky).

Also, I've plugged this book in previous posts; Travel With Your Baby by Fodors. I have no affiliation with the publisher, author, or anything--just found from my own experience that book has good tips for the the plane trip and dealing with things like poopy diapers in a teeny tiny bathroom, and a hundred other things you don't think about until it's sometimes too late. Some good friends of ours ended up stuck on the runway for several hours, and ran through their supply of on-board diapers after a few poorly timed blow-outs (when baby poops in such a way that he requires a full change of clothes). They were basically pariahs on the plane, with their screaming baby and carryon baggage reeking of aforementioned blowouts.

[Anonymous]

I think for Venice, the smaller the better (3 - 6 months probably best). You want them to be sleeping a lot, small enough to put in a baby carrier and to sleep comfortably in a portable crib (most hotels have pack n play or similar available). You do NOT want to have a child who wants to be walking or who you will have to carry all over Venice in a stroller.

We went when my daughter was 18 months old - very difficult. She wanted to walk everywhere and frankly it's dangerous to have a small child toddling around with canals everywhere. Also she was too big to really carry so we had her in a stroller which we had to lift up literally every 20 meters or so to cross another *&^%$ bridge. We had a lightweight stroller and she was also petite but still a backbreaking endeavor.

[Anonymous]

Venice is a terrible place to go with kids. I would leave the baby with his or her grandparents and go on a romantic trip with my husband. Venice is not at all kid friendly, you have to walk everywhere (no cars), up and down the stairs all the time, there are no kid-friendly activities, it is crowded/full of tourists, dirty, and good luck if the baby gets sick and you don't speak Italian...Not to mention the long flight and the jet lag which will be hard on the baby...Personally, I would not do it. Don't get me wrong, I have been to Venice and it is a beautiful city worth seeing, just not with a young child.

[Anonymous]

I have traveled a lot with kids starting at age 2 months. Its not easy, but it can be done, and it can be fun, but it’s a much different trip than before and you need to be creative and flexible.
If you have to go to Venice, I would recommend going between 3 and 6 months.
Earlier than that – you have lots of doctor’s appointments and might generally be too tired. Later, you have a crawling baby that is hard to mange and heavier in a baby carrier.
In my experience, Venice is not a friendly city, and the hotel rooms are often old and small. A crying baby will bother other guests at the hotel, who are likely looking for a romantic vacation. You might have to deal with that. Its hard to find grocery stores and get simple things such as shop for diapers.
I do think that there are many other tourist destinations (even in Italy), that are a much better fit for traveling with a baby.
If you can mange to wait with this specific trip until age 3 or 4, you and your child might all have more fun.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Venice is a terrible place to go with kids. I would leave the baby with his or her grandparents and go on a romantic trip with my husband. Venice is not at all kid friendly, you have to walk everywhere (no cars), up and down the stairs all the time, there are no kid-friendly activities, it is crowded/full of tourists, dirty, and good luck if the baby gets sick and you don't speak Italian...Not to mention the long flight and the jet lag which will be hard on the baby...Personally, I would not do it. Don't get me wrong, I have been to Venice and it is a beautiful city worth seeing, just not with a young child.

I'm not sure what you mean by "no kid-friendly activities". A 3-6 month old doesn't want much more than to be held and see interesting things go by (when they are not eating or sleeping). As long as you feel capable of carrying your child around (with a backpack, say), the fact that pretty much all you do in Venice is walk around (or travel by boat) looking at things, is a plus for a small child, not a minus. Likewise, I'm not sure how hard jet lag will be on a 3 month old, since they don't really have much of a schedule anyway.

We have travelled with a small child and we just try to pack a good supply of tylenol/motrin/other medicine. On rare occasion we've had to call home to the pediatrician and/or go out and buy more medecine for fever, but it worked out fine and I'm glad we didn't sit at home worried about what might have gone wrong on a trip.