Dinghy to shore drowning

[Tintin]

Er ... do you understand about education?

Children will start forming their own opinions from an early age. If they're old enough to helm then they're old enough to understand why they should wear a buoyancy aid or lifejacket. I have taken kids onboard and ensured they are wearing lifejackets - as well as let them remove them - but each time it has been a concious decision with some reasoning behind it - this has been listened to and understood by the child.

I believe my attitude to safety on the water is pretty good.... can you tell me why it isn't? What decisions have I made that have endangered life?

...

Errr, in answer to your penultimate question, all of the above that you have just written.

'scuse me while I puke in horror and disgust.. you are IMHO a danger to children.

 

[Seajet]

Errr, in answer to your penultimate question, all of the above that you have just written.

'scuse me while I puke in horror and disgust.. you are IMHO a danger to children.

A bit strong Comrade...

However I see what you're getting at and rather agree, some things have to be insisted upon as a matter of crew / youngsters' discipline, such things as lifejackets and harnesses are not open for negotiation on my boat, my rules are a bit strict on that score !

 

[Tintin]

A bit strong Comrade...

However I see what you're getting at and rather agree, some things have to be insisted upon as a matter of crew / youngsters' discipline, such things as lifejackets and harnesses are not open for negotiation on my boat, my rules are a bit strict on that score !

Maybe, and I almost editted it just before you posted, but then I thought about how sick I would feel to the pit of my stomach if my kids went in a tender without a LJ, and what i would think about the so called adult that had a duty of care, and what i would probably do to that person.

People like that worry me. You have to let kids do their own thing, but at the end of the day it is an adults responsibility to protect them against clear and obvious risk. It's not like falling out of a tender is no more dangerous than getting a splinter - it kills people, as this thread shows.

 

[onesea]

Maybe, and I almost editted it just before you posted, but then I thought about how sick I would feel to the pit of my stomach if my kids went in a tender without a LJ, and what i would think about the so called adult that had a duty of care, and what i would probably do to that person.

People like that worry me. You have to let kids do their own thing, but at the end of the day it is an adults responsibility to protect them against clear and obvious risk. It's not like falling out of a tender is no more dangerous than getting a splinter - it kills people, as this thread shows.

I am kind of with fireball on this one. It depends upon in which content he is talking about taking them off...

Kids that can swim wearing shorts & T shirt in quite anchorage on a boat they can climb on board climbing in and out of dinghy.. With banks in easy swimming reach...

You would obviously supervise them...

I would probably do the same, explain WHY I am letting them not wear lifejacket's let them play/ learn...

It is better they fall off then and learn in relatively controlled conditions than at sea on another day, or worse when slightly older rowing round the corner to play with there mates and taking them off then!

Yes there is a risk, but well managed it is relatively small...

If they fall in and have a fright its a good lesson learned... Its a very difficult area with lots of grey bits in the middle..

We have a duty of care for our kids and that also extends to letting them learn to make their own risk assessments and judgements...

If you never let your child jump, how do they to know what hight they can safely jump from?

Its like all of parenting there is no black and white...

 

[Dave100456]

Children, Lifejackets and Tenders!!
I have read all the posts on this subject but some posters seem unclear on the definitions of "Hazard" and also "Risk"; often using these terms incorrectly.
The "hazard" is something that has the potential to cause harm ie drowning in water. The "risk" is the likelihood of that hazard occurring.
Entering water has hazards associated with it but as an action it does not always result in death as some posters would have us believe!
I stand in line to be pilloried because I, a responsible parent, (at least I thought I was) swam, with my two children without LJs from boat to beach and back to boat to get money for an ice-cream. We then returned to beach in tender without lifejackets to buy said ice-cream. Did I feel irresponsible? No. Do I now feel irresponsible? No. Do we all wear lifejackets when an assessment of the hazards and risk deem it necessary? Yes
I would take greta exception to being judged as a "law breaker" in these circumstances.

 

[Tintin]

Kids + tender = lifejackets. simple.

Kids on boat, subject to many other factors, may or may not require LJ's all the time. Where the boat is, their maturity, experience, boat sense, what you are doing (moored or sailing), where they are on the bot, who else is with you, etc... all come into play. A careful balance of hazard & risk.

But kids + tender = lifejacket. Too many adults have died this way. Hazard in Uk waters is very high. Risk is med-high.

To suggest that kids can make up their own minds if they can helm is bordering on neglect.

 

[Dave100456]

Kids + tender = lifejackets. simple.

Kids on boat, subject to many other factors, may or may not require LJ's all the time. Where the boat is, their maturity, experience, boat sense, what you are doing (moored or sailing), where they are on the bot, who else is with you, etc... all come into play. A careful balance of hazard & risk.

But kids + tender = lifejacket. Too many adults have died this way. Hazard in Uk waters is very high. Risk is med-high.

To suggest that kids can make up their own minds if they can helm is bordering on neglect.

Difficult for me to see the addtional hazard that deems LJs to be worn when we've just swam to beach and back? Please tell me.

 

[Dave100456]

I am kind of with fireball on this one.We have a duty of care for our kids and that also extends to letting them learn to make their own risk assessments and judgements...

If you never let your child jump, how do they to know what hight they can safely jump from?

Its like all of parenting there is no black and white...

+1

 

[Seajet]

Kids + tender = lifejackets. simple.

Kids on boat, subject to many other factors, may or may not require LJ's all the time. Where the boat is, their maturity, experience, boat sense, what you are doing (moored or sailing), where they are on the bot, who else is with you, etc... all come into play. A careful balance of hazard & risk.

But kids + tender = lifejacket. Too many adults have died this way. Hazard in Uk waters is very high. Risk is med-high.

To suggest that kids can make up their own minds if they can helm is bordering on neglect.

I'd agree with the gist of what you're saying, but who would leave unsupervised children at the helm ?

That sounds like neglect to the boat, not the brats !!!

 

[fireball]

Kids + tender = lifejackets. simple.

Kids on boat, subject to many other factors, may or may not require LJ's all the time. Where the boat is, their maturity, experience, boat sense, what you are doing (moored or sailing), where they are on the bot, who else is with you, etc... all come into play. A careful balance of hazard & risk.

But kids + tender = lifejacket. Too many adults have died this way. Hazard in Uk waters is very high. Risk is med-high.

To suggest that kids can make up their own minds if they can helm is bordering on neglect.

You've already cast some doubt - kids on boat subject to many other factors may not require Ljs all the time... Er is a tender not a boat? At wat point is the boat now a tender? I know boats larger than tender size that are far more likely to tip the occupants in.

You mention. Maturity. Boat sense and a careful balance of hazard and risk - all the things I've been saying all this thread - you say them and it's fine - I say them and I'm a hazard to children?! Funny - I've taught a fair few and never even hurt a single one...

 

[fireball]

I'd agree with the gist of what you're saying, but who would leave unsupervised children at the helm ?

That sounds like neglect to the boat, not the brats !!!

Oh really. So what age did you get let loose in a boat. Ask an Olympian next time you see one and see how closely supervised their sailing was.

 

[Dave100456]

I stand in line to be pilloried because I, a responsible parent, (at least I thought I was) swam, with my two children without LJs from boat to beach and back to boat to get money for an ice-cream. We then returned to beach in our tender without lifejackets to buy said ice-cream. Did I feel irresponsible? No. Do I now feel irresponsible? No. Do we all wear lifejackets when an assessment of the hazards and risk deem it necessary? Yes
I would take great exception to being judged as a "law breaker" in these circumstances.

... now nearly 30 mins since posting. Was I right or wrong? What hazards necessitated the wearing of LJs. Perhaps the LJ compulsion brigade are busy adding me to the LJs offenders register!

 

[Croak]

I've been waiting all day.

 

[fireball]

You can guess my view - I don't know the exact circumstances but I guess it was a safe environment to swim to start with and the tender was just a method to keep the cash dry ?

 

[fireball]

I've been waiting all day.

But they are as entrenched as they think we are. I'm waiting to find out what happens after they've landed and loose the life jackets. How do they get back?

 

[alant]

Don't get in the bath then.

Is that supposed to be an intelligent statement?

Grow up!

 

[fireball]

Whatever "scant" judgement is being used, any water will drown you, so stop being so bloody obtuse FFS!

The so called 'sensible' postings on this topic, with people considering that they will not drown if (a) not in scottish waters, (b) in an estuary (b) in Chichester Harbour or environs, makes me doubt Darwin!

Is that supposed to be an intelligent statement?

Grow up!

Oh mr maturity.

Tell u what - just do us a favour and put me on ignore - you obviously lack the intelligence to make a coherent argument.

 

[Twister_Ken]

This has all become very tedious.

 

[chewi]

I am sure that in 20 years time people will look back at this thread ('cos it will still be around somewhere) and think how quaint it was that people ....

...argued with one another like I used to do with my late father after a few beers, with no prospect of anyone changing their opinion.

Go to bed guys and wake up in less belligerent moods.

 

[Dave100456]

Is that supposed to be an intelligent statement?

Grow up!

I guess the OP will be along to answer that himself but if I can add my 'two penneth'....

I welcome debate but object to the general tone of some posters who make statements like "water kills". I have a similar issue with the slogan "Speed kills" in so much as these simplistic statements do not tease out the real issues and actually only serve to stiffle enquiry.

We all have different perceptions of hazard and risk and, whilst I would not impose my views on others, likewise I wish to be independent in my decision making. Some posters in this debate do not recognise others right and abilities to make informed choices.