At the grocery with my 2-year old

[Moray]

I've never experienced this. If that is the case I will concede that what the OP's son is doing could be irritating. I still am not convinced that a person being short makes them more responsible to watch where they are going than other people. There are always children in the grocery store. It makes no sense to not be just as aware of them as the adults.

A free range toddler does not tend to move in patterns.

A few years ago, I was at an amusement park.  There was a toddler running at me, so I moved right so I'd was out of her path.  The child moved into my path.  So I moved again and again the child moved in the same direction I moved in.  Since I could not predict the child's movements, I just stopped and stepped aside, out of her current path.

Said toddler still ran smack into my legs and wound up on her tush, crying.  She ran into me, I was not moving and did not walk into her.  But *I* was at fault according to the parent and was told to "WATCH OUT".  I WAS watching out, and did what I could to avoid a collision. 

Add a shopping cart and a distracted shopper and the OP's child *could* wind up injured.  Carts (especially full ones) do not stop on a dime.

This situation is completely different. The OP is redirecting her child. Her child won't wind up injured because she is looking out for him.

A shopper could come along in a split second before shygirl calls to her son, and knock him down, or in the case of someone with mobility issues, be knocked down by  him. Redirecting is one thing. Physical control over a toddler is another.

But none of those things have happened with the OP and her son.  They are hypothetical situations.  They certainly could happen, but they could happen with any child and even with adults.  At some point the kids have to come out of the cart and come off the leash.  Everyone just needs to be careful and watch where they are going.  OP is managing this with her DS just fine.  There haven't been any accidents.  When he has the occasional toddler-drift, she gets him back on course.

There is a potential that that could happen, and it is the job of the parent to keep her kid out of the way of others. Just because an accident hasn't happened yet doesn't mean one will not happen.

As for it happening to an adult, that's impossible if the adult is not the size of a typical two-year-old toddler.

A parent, short of having constant physical contact on their child, can never fully guarantee they won't veer/run/get in someone's way.  Not just toddlers, but 4 year olds or 8 year olds can potentially act out and cause calamity.  I don't think that etiquette demands a parent must have physical control over children to ensure potential accidents do not occur.

And plenty of adults have careless moments.  I've seen adults pushing loaded shopping carts out into the main aisles at a brisk pace without checking to see for cross-traffic.  Adults can go too fast and not watch where they are going. It's human!  So accidents can result from these behaviors be they from adults or children.  When everyone is careful, we minimize that risk.  And as I mentioned, in my opinion, that doesn't mean a parent must always exercise constant physical control over their child.

I think you have to apply some sort of "reasonable person test" to this. So, is it reasonable to expect most adults, or most 4 or 8 year olds not to go wandering off to the extent that they have to be reminded several times in the span of a few minutes? The answer is clearly yes. Is it reasonable to expect that level of control from a 2-3 year old who has consistently demonstrated he isn't capable? No, it really isn't. Other measures, like maintaining physical contact or putting him in the cart are needed.

[snowdragon]

No, Dandy Andy's Daddy's Love. The point is that if the parent were controlling the toddler, there would be nothing to watch out for.

The parent is controlling the toddler.

I think if she's reverting to "yelling" (or even loudly speaking) "watch out" most times (OP, maybe you could clarify, but I got the impression it was pretty regular) they have these short "5 minute" trips into the grocery store then she isn't controlling him. In a 5 minute trip if he can't pay attention enough that she reminds him repeatedly and still has to say "watch out" then he isn't ready to walk independently.

I am all for toddlers being under physical control of their guardians - but actually what  you describe is a pretty typical toddler. That's why I think they need to be under physical control in public, it's not that the toddler is bad or the parent is negligent , but that they are like living Tiggers "(bounce,bounce, bounce and oh yeah, BOUNCE) and can cause issues for them selves or others. 4 year olds, 8 years or even 30 years old just don't have that  energy or daredevilness that makes two year olds so fun - and dangerous.

[Tabby Uprising]

I've never experienced this. If that is the case I will concede that what the OP's son is doing could be irritating. I still am not convinced that a person being short makes them more responsible to watch where they are going than other people. There are always children in the grocery store. It makes no sense to not be just as aware of them as the adults.

A free range toddler does not tend to move in patterns.

A few years ago, I was at an amusement park.  There was a toddler running at me, so I moved right so I'd was out of her path.  The child moved into my path.  So I moved again and again the child moved in the same direction I moved in.  Since I could not predict the child's movements, I just stopped and stepped aside, out of her current path.

Said toddler still ran smack into my legs and wound up on her tush, crying.  She ran into me, I was not moving and did not walk into her.  But *I* was at fault according to the parent and was told to "WATCH OUT".  I WAS watching out, and did what I could to avoid a collision. 

Add a shopping cart and a distracted shopper and the OP's child *could* wind up injured.  Carts (especially full ones) do not stop on a dime.

This situation is completely different. The OP is redirecting her child. Her child won't wind up injured because she is looking out for him.

A shopper could come along in a split second before shygirl calls to her son, and knock him down, or in the case of someone with mobility issues, be knocked down by  him. Redirecting is one thing. Physical control over a toddler is another.

But none of those things have happened with the OP and her son.  They are hypothetical situations.  They certainly could happen, but they could happen with any child and even with adults.  At some point the kids have to come out of the cart and come off the leash.  Everyone just needs to be careful and watch where they are going.  OP is managing this with her DS just fine.  There haven't been any accidents.  When he has the occasional toddler-drift, she gets him back on course.

There is a potential that that could happen, and it is the job of the parent to keep her kid out of the way of others. Just because an accident hasn't happened yet doesn't mean one will not happen.

As for it happening to an adult, that's impossible if the adult is not the size of a typical two-year-old toddler.

A parent, short of having constant physical contact on their child, can never fully guarantee they won't veer/run/get in someone's way.  Not just toddlers, but 4 year olds or 8 year olds can potentially act out and cause calamity.  I don't think that etiquette demands a parent must have physical control over children to ensure potential accidents do not occur.

And plenty of adults have careless moments.  I've seen adults pushing loaded shopping carts out into the main aisles at a brisk pace without checking to see for cross-traffic.  Adults can go too fast and not watch where they are going. It's human!  So accidents can result from these behaviors be they from adults or children.  When everyone is careful, we minimize that risk.  And as I mentioned, in my opinion, that doesn't mean a parent must always exercise constant physical control over their child.

We are not talking about four-year-old or eight-year-old children, or about adults. We are talking about a two-year-old child. I believe that etiquette demands that we keep kids of that age from being a danger to themselves and to others in such places as a grocery store.

Okay, specifically to the OP we are talking about a 2 year old.  A 2 year old who is walking and only 1-2 feet away from his mother.  He has not run amok. He has not caused an accident.  He has not bumped into a person or a cart. 

He has drifted, yes, but his mother has told him to "watch out" and thus remedied the situation. 

4 year olds, 8 year olds, accidents, and running amok are all outside of the OP.  I do agree with that!

[LeveeWoman]

Okay, specifically to the OP we are talking about a 2 year old.  A 2 year old who is walking and only 1-2 feet away from his mother.  He has not run amok. He has not caused an accident.  He has not bumped into a person or a cart. 

He has drifted, yes, but his mother has told him to "watch out" and thus remedied the situation. 

CUT

To me, the key is the unspoken word "yet". Just because he has not done so as of now does not mean that he will not do so in the future. Calling out to the toddler is not nearly as safe as having physical control over him.