I agree with the 4th tradition. The group has a right to set policies to keep the atmosphere conducive to recovery. But I think a black and white line in the sand policy of no kids can be damaging, I'll provide to real examples:
I was six months without a meeting ( military obligations), my wife and I had just had our first child, she was 2 months old, there were only two meetings per week in the entire county we lived in, we decided we would attend one together ( it had been at least 3 months for the wife). We agreed that if our daughter woke up and became restless we would take turns taking her out of the room. We never got the chance...
We got to the meeting and were told in no uncertain terms that this meeting was closed ( alcoholics only) and they had a no child policy. We told a few group members our situation and asked, telling them what we would do if our two month old became a distraction we would leave the room. We were told in a rather cold manner that we could stay, but our child could not...
Common sense???
A few years after that experience, I was at a meeting and a single mom showed up, black eye, scrapes and scrathces on her neck. She had three kids and looked like a newcomer. She was asked to leave, she was told about a meeting where there was child care ( it was several days away). She told the group she did not know where to go, the indifference and un-caring was more than I could take.
I took her to get coffee ( none of the women I invited would go with us). I had just moved to this area so I did not know alot of people, but I took her to child services...
Then the rumors at the meeting started ( 13th stepper)
I do not mean to divert. The point is that while the group does have a right to have a no children policy if it deems it necessary we still have a higher calling, to carry the message to the still suffering. A group coscience decision like this should always allow for some bending