Won’t Anyone Think of the Children?

1195243564Brookline teenagers have a problem. Is it violence in their neighborhood? No. Asbestos in their high school? Not that we know of. To a perpetually hungry teenager, it’s far worse.

Some Brookline establishments won’t feed them.

Unlike Boston, Brookline has no law that requires restaurants to serve underage people food. Therefore, some restaurant-slash-bar owners refuse service to teenagers during prime drinking hours rather than risk their liquor licenses.

“I don’t have the time nor energy nor ability to watch everybody that’s in there who’s underage,” [Publik House owner David] Ciccolo said. “It’s the safest thing to do, and I think any bar owner who doesn’t do it — [I would be] a moron.”

Hey, it doesn’t bother us. We don’t want to deal with screaming teenagers as we try to enjoy a pint and a meal after work. But some Brookline parents are scandalized by the restrictions.

Meet former Brookline resident Ann Sussman.

. . . Ann Sussman and her 10- and 13-year-old children used to adore outdoor dining on Beacon Street.

“They’re sophisticated eaters,” she explained. “It was exciting to stroll down and pick a restaurant. It was really convivial. It makes Brookline feel more like Europe.”

Somebody call Merriam-Webster—we’ve found the picture that goes next to the definition of “Brookline mother.”

During an idyllic summer stroll, the family chose to eat at the Publik House. Unfortunately, it was after 8 p.m., so the budding epicures were denied service. It’s kind of odd that the server turned away kids who were clearly being supervised, but Sussman’s reaction was a little strong.

“It felt like in the old South when they would say, ‘Drinking fountain, blacks only,’ ” Sussman said. “It’s like, ‘Oh, Brookline isn’t friendly to families.’ ”

Right. The civil rights movement and your struggle to enjoy the convivial atmosphere of Beacon Street. Totally the same thing.