A mother said in a TikTok video that Starbucks employees refused to serve her after her autistic son started crying and later threatened to call 911. Imaan Up posted the clip under the handle @imaan.up. The video has gained 160,900 views, 11,400 likes, and more than 1,500 comments.
On-screen text in the video reads, “STARBUCKS THREATENED TO CALL 911 BECAUSE MY AUTISTIC SON WAS CRYING.” In the caption, Imaan wrote that staff made an error with her order and that the family waited while it was corrected. She said her son became distressed and she tried to buy a treat to calm him, but an employee refused to complete the sale.
She stated that other customers tried to help, yet a supervisor stopped serving everyone and said service would not resume until they left. Imaan wrote that they were not aggressive or threatening. She added that autism is not a crime and that families like hers need understanding, not humiliation and threats.
Video shows staff citing crying child during recorded argument over service
The video shows two Starbucks employees behind the counter. Imaan can be heard saying, “When I ask both of you serve me and I, I want to pay for them, but this guy, he’s told me he’s refused serving me. Can I have a reason?” A female employee replied, “Your kid’s in here crying.”
Imaan said her son wanted a lollipop. The employee responded, “Common decency, leave your kid out there, get the lollipop, bring it to your kid.” Imaan asked if there was a policy that she could not stay if her son was crying. The employee then asked, “You’re recording me?” Imaan answered, “Yes.”
She demanded they show the policy that would let them refuse service if a child cries. A male employee said, “You have a third-party policy.” Imaan again asked them to show the policy right then.
Imaan wrote a longer account in a comment on the video. She said she placed an online order that morning because she knows it can be difficult for her son to wait in a busy public place. She stated she waited for the ready notification, as she does every day at that same location.
When she picked up her drink, she noticed something was missing and asked for it politely, she wrote. While she waited, her son saw the cake pop they had ordered and began to cry. She said he was not causing a major scene and that it was already her turn with the order packed and ready.
She claimed the cashier then refused to give them the completed order because the child was crying. That was when her son became hysterical, she wrote. She asked why a grown man showed less patience than a young child. She said the cashier told them her son was “annoying the customers.”
Several customers offered to buy him a cake pop, according to her comment. She stated that employees then announced they were having a problem and could not serve anyone until the woman and her child left. They also threatened to call 911 if the family refused to leave, she said.
Imaan wrote that she calmly explained her son is autistic and told staff to call the police because she believed the treatment was unfair and unprofessional. When an officer arrived, they stepped outside and waited, she said. The officer later came back, apologized on behalf of the staff, and brought their order out to them, according to her comment.
She stated she is not sharing the story for sympathy and is not using her son’s autism as an excuse. She said she is sharing it to raise awareness and that children and families, especially those with special needs, deserve compassion, not humiliation.
Starbucks’ Code of Conduct does not specifically address crying babies or prohibit customers from bringing infants into its stores. While the policy generally prohibits disruptive behavior and conduct that interferes with others’ ability to use the space, it does not explicitly state that parents can be asked to leave because their baby is crying.
Some viewers said stores can refuse service for disruptive behavior. One commenter who said they had worked at Starbucks wrote, “When I work at Starbucks they do mention that we allowed to deny service for disruptive behavior.” Another commenter focused on other customers in the store and wrote, “Wow ppl just want to chill in starbucks not hear screaming.”
Other viewers said the family should take legal action. One wrote, “Ma’am file a lawsuit now! Those two need to be fired!” Another commented, “This is protected under ADA. Applicable in all states. You can absolutely sue.” The incident is part of a broader pattern of customer service disputes at Starbucks, such as when a customer who stuttered while ordering claimed a barista mocked his speech.
Some commenters criticized the suggestion to leave the child outside. One wrote, “Leave the child outside? That’s crazy of her to say. Smh.” Another said, “I hate how many adults hate children. They are kids. This one has autism like what’s wrong with yall ?”
A few viewers suggested the clip did not show the full situation. One commenter wrote, “There’s more to the story.” The debate over public behavior and autism extends beyond this incident, as seen when a shopper with a service dog faced a confrontation in a store.
Published: Sep 2, 2026 01:15 pm