Shout Box

Who's Online
0 registered (), 18 Guests and 4 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Page 3 of 6 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 >
Topic Options
#33177 - 09/19/07 07:07 PM Re: Youngest climber on High E? [Re: Coppertone]
rg@ofmc Online   content
Pooh-Bah

Registered: 12/25/99
Posts: 2472
Loc: Poughkeepsie, NY
I'm probably gonna get fried for this, but I have many reservations about taking young children up traditional climbs. People pretend trad climbing is totally safe "when done properly," but I don't believe this to be true. There is always some risk, and climbers accept this and presumably even welcome it as a source of spice.

I think it is fine for adults to choose to take voluntary risks, but I'm uncomfortable when people expose young children to these risks, children who are in no way capable of making an informed decision about risk themselves. This means that I agree with Coppertone, but don't feel much better about parents taking their own kids up multipitch trad climbs.

As a matter of full disclosure, I have to admit to having taken my daughter up a bunch of climbs when she was a pre-teen. Everything went fine and she had a good time, but I think, from a moral standpoint, that it was a mistake.

Top
#33179 - 09/19/07 07:53 PM Re: Youngest climber on High E? [Re: rg@ofmc]
ShakesALot Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 04/19/04
Posts: 258
Loc: NJ

Does this mean that you wouldn't take them for a non-essential car ride either? To a foreign country, "the subway", etc...?

Top
#33180 - 09/19/07 08:41 PM Re: Youngest climber on High E? [Re: rg@ofmc]
mworking Offline
old hand

Registered: 05/26/04
Posts: 764
Perhaps RG. But if so, then it is the type of moral mistake that parents make all the time.

Is climbing (if handed extremely well as I am betting this case was) really any different than allowing kids to ride bicycles, skateboards, play sports, ride in automobiles (when not absolutely necessary) or go on rides at an amusement park? I say no.

Again I’m betting that a parent was present and the adults present were very comfortable on high E, just as they were getting to the Preserve, and handled this very, very well.

Again, I feel that if this was a moral mistake, then it the same as other as many of us make all the time.

(Beaten to this but my 0.02 anyway)

Top
#33181 - 09/19/07 09:05 PM Re: Youngest climber on High E? [Re: mworking]
Coppertone Offline
old hand

Registered: 08/17/00
Posts: 1055
Loc: Newtown, CT
A multi pitch climb is far more involved then a kid riding his bike in the neighborhood or going for an unnecessary car ride. On a multipitch climb there is climbing, belaying, change overs, gear removal, exposure, rockfall, fear, weather and many other aspects that would separate this from other activities. My point was simply that this not a responsiblity that should be on anyone other than the parent and there is allot more going on then a simple TR or gym climb. There is just so many things that could go wrong and 6 year old is in no position to either make decisions or take any decisive action should there be a problem. I stand by my opinion and agree with Rich on this one.

Top
#33182 - 09/19/07 11:46 PM Re: Youngest climber on High E? [Re: Coppertone]
rg@ofmc Online   content
Pooh-Bah

Registered: 12/25/99
Posts: 2472
Loc: Poughkeepsie, NY
Does this mean that you wouldn't take them for a non-essential car ride either? To a foreign country, "the subway", etc...?

Oh phooey, the slippery slope fallacy.

Some risks are more optional than others, some risks are much smaller than others, and some activities are of more predictable benefit than others. I've given a good part of nearly 50 years to climbing, but I don't think it qualifies on any of those grounds. Coppertone explains it pretty well, there is little I could add to his observations.

Perhaps RG. But if so, then it is the type of moral mistake that parents make all the time.

All the time? Hmmm, perhaps that is worth a few moments of parental reflection. And is it any better to make this mistake, if that's what it is, if you are in the company of many others?

Let's just say a party at the top drops a rock on the kid and kills him or her. How do we explain that to ourselves? Is that really no different, in terms of the choices made, than getting killed in a car ride to an amusement park?

Top
#33183 - 09/20/07 12:07 AM Re: Youngest climber on High E? [Re: mworking]
chazman Offline
old hand

Registered: 02/07/02
Posts: 944
 Originally Posted By: mworking
Is climbing (if handed extremely well as I am betting this case was) really any different than allowing kids to ride bicycles, skateboards, play sports, ride in automobiles (when not absolutely necessary) or go on rides at an amusement park? I say no.

So when your child rides a bike, skates or plays a sport they may find themselves 80 feet away, alone, out of range of verbal communications and dangling from a rope?

Top
#33185 - 09/20/07 12:28 AM Re: Youngest climber on High E? [Re: chazman]
rg@ofmc Online   content
Pooh-Bah

Registered: 12/25/99
Posts: 2472
Loc: Poughkeepsie, NY
I'm afraid I've suggested that this is some sort of moral failing, which is not my point, and it is dragging the discussion in a direction I'm not sure I really want to argue.

My point is that many people think climbing is safer than it is.

Top
#33187 - 09/20/07 03:46 AM Re: Youngest climber on High E? [Re: rg@ofmc]
mworking Offline
old hand

Registered: 05/26/04
Posts: 764
 Quote:
There is just so many things that could go wrong and 6 year old is in no position to either make decisions or take any decisive action should there be a problem.


With this I fully agree.

 Quote:
My point is that many people think climbing is safer than it is.


and this too.

My point is that I bet this board has misjudged this "event".

 Quote:
80 feet away, alone, out of range of verbal communications and dangling from a rope?


I doubt any of the above occured. Not that I am about to do it, but it would not if I took a six year old up a multipitch climb. What led anyone here to beleive that there was not a parent right there with the kid the whole time and whole way - unless the kid was that good and already that experienced - one of the exceptions.

Guess there isn't much point in discussing this further unless we hear from the OP his freinds or other witnesses.


Edited by mworking (09/20/07 03:48 AM)

Top
#33189 - 09/20/07 06:06 AM Re: Youngest climber on High E? [Re: mworking]
MarcC Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 07/10/00
Posts: 3532
Children don't have any business being anywhere around rock climbing. So the real question is, what constitutes a child? I'm not a parent (we forgot to have kids) and I don't like children, so it's quite simple in my case - anyone younger than about 18 or so is suspect and has a lot to prove. "Climbing" with a 6 yr old - get real: you're soloing - is just idiotic on so many levels.
_________________________
- Marc

Top
#33191 - 09/20/07 12:01 PM Re: Youngest climber on High E? [Re: MarcC]
empicard Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 08/29/01
Posts: 2957
Loc: LI, NY
youre a tool.
_________________________
tOOthless

Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.

Top
Page 3 of 6 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 >


Moderator:  webmaster 
Sponsored