I didn't post on this letter until now because up until a couple of days ago, everyone pretty much said how I felt. But, as a read more responses to this letter, I came away with a different feeling about Tera and her motivations.

First, from a consumer standpoint, the theater has a right to charge a two-year-old child; after all they're charging for seats, and it doesn't matter if the child would be sleeping or not. And Tera certainly had the right to refuse to pay and to leave if the charge wasn't acceptable to her.

But from a mother standpoint, my thoughts are more personal. I have a feeling that the nine-year-old son wanted to see the movie, and Tera figured this is the only time she would be able to do it. Believe it or not, babysitters are not always ready, willing, and available to watch your brood while you cavort about town. I found this out last week when my husband and I had plans to go to dinner, and my sitter (my mom) "called in sick."

Also, Tera specifically chose a time when her child would be sleeping and therefore less likely to disturb the other movie-goers. To me, this shows consideration for the other movie patrons, not the other way around.

I do think her decision to take the child to a 10 p.m. Friday night showing probably wasn't the best, and I have a whole host of reasons why I feel this way. (The drunk in the theater only highlights one of them.) But who among us, parent or otherwise, hasn't been guilty of a lapse in judgment at some point in their lives? And while her decision may arguably lack common sense, it certainly isn't child abuse, as some people suggested.

So, I came away with a different feeling than I orginally had about Tera, and if my above surmisings are correct, then I think she did the best she could under the circumstances. She tried to please her son and to do it in a way that would allow her to take her daughter too.

But her daughter still had to pay for the movie.