A restaurant in New Jersey has come under fire after banning children under 10.

Nettie's restaurant said children under 10 are no longer welcome because having children on their premises causes multiple issues. They explained that they don't have enough room for high chairs. They are also tired of cleaning up "crazy messes" caused by children. "We love kids. We really, truly, do. But lately, it’s been extremely challenging to accommodate children at Nettie’s. "Between noise levels, lack of space for high chairs, cleaning up crazy messes, and the liability of kids running around the restaurant, we have decided that it’s time to take control of the situation." The staff said they do love children, but they're causing far too many disruptions in their restaurant. "This wasn’t a decision that was made lightly, but some recent events have pushed us to implement this new policy. "As of March 8, the day we return from our winter break, we will no longer allow children under 10 to dine in the restaurant. The team at Nettie's apologised for upsetting some customers, but they had to make this decision for their own sake. "We know that this is going to make some of you very upset, especially those of you with very well-behaved kids, but we believe this is the right decision for our business moving forward."

"I'm a mom - kid-free dinners are AMAZING and every. one. knows. it."

Many customers supported their decision, but some parents were less than impressed. "Your house, your rules. I'm a mom - kid-free dinners are AMAZING and every. one. knows. it. moms especially!! so unsure why all the outrage over it?" "They’re still allowing kids, just not under 10. It’s their restaurant, their choice. I love it. I hate eating out with a screaming kid next to me." One said they were making a major mistake. "I can’t see how you can possibly justify discriminating against an entire group of people based on age (or any external factor) alone." Another parent said, "We’ve been and our kids are so well behaved 6 and 9. It’s too bad you couldn’t have handled patrons on an individual basis when issues arose." What do you think?