Kids on leashes

[aborgman]

So do you suggest leashing a kid simply because they MIGHT disobey you and leave your presence?

In certain dangerous situations, yes.

Walking on a 6' wide boardwalk with no railing through the thermal features in Yellowstone where one step off the walkway has a significant chance of leading to death? Yep.

 

[guy n. cognito]

Did you avoid roads altogether prior to the training taking effect? Training takes time.

Nope, but we were selective on where we would take our kids. We were sure to keep them close in parking lots.

Do you use a leash on your kids? If not, how did you deal with the same issue?

 

[guy n. cognito]

You are lucky. That doesn't make your point of view correct. Assuming your experience is THE experience is simply wrong.

A leash can and is used for good - and for bad reasons. It's use alone without context cannot be judged effectively nor can the parents who use them.

You - and others - are either purposefully or ignorantly insulting people who do not deserve it. Accept it or not, but that's what you are doing.

And I do not need your video link to know how to be a good parent. But thanks for sharing.

At the risk of repeating myself, luck had nothing to do with it.

I'm sorry you're insulted. I'm just not an "I'm ok, you're ok, eveyone is right" sort of person. Most aren't, although some just won't admit it.

 

[guy n. cognito]

Over time, yes.

Problem is, one mistake before that training is complete and they're dead.

Makes it hard to finish the training.

That's one of those fallacies you love to point out, isn't it?????

 

[aborgman]

Nope, but we were selective on where we would take our kids. We were sure to keep them close in parking lots.

Do you use a leash on your kids? If not, how did you deal with the same issue?

The only time we ever used one with either of our children was when we took our oldest son to Yellowstone at age 2.

It was the only way we felt safe enough to let the kid out of our arms anywhere around thermal features or large drop offs - areas where even a second of inattention would easily result in death.

On my kids, we only used one once - because I didn't trust my attention or my 2 year olds learnin' with respect to cliffs or thermal features at Yellowstone.

I've USED a leash, on my older son, for about 7 days while we were visiting Yellowstone when he was 2 years old.

He spent maybe 30 minutes a day with it on. So probably 3-4 hours total in his almost ten year lifespan.

I've used numerous OTHER forms of restraint on my children to prevent injury after they were able to walk - including slings, strollers, backpacks, handholding, shirtholding, beltloop holding, and just plain old generic holding 'em in my arms.

 

[Relic]

I've used numerous OTHER forms of restraint on my children to prevent injury after they were able to walk - including slings, strollers, backpacks, handholding, shirtholding, beltloop holding, and just plain old generic holding 'em in my arms.

Same here.
I really still think it boils down to the fact that it looks bad and some just can't look beyond that.

 

[aborgman]

That's one of those fallacies you love to point out, isn't it?????

No. If I assumed something bad WOULD happen, as opposed to COULD... then one could argue for an Appeal to Probability fallacy. I don't do that though - I just point out that sometime the POTENTIAL consequences have such a cost as to make the risk unintelligent to engage in.

 

[guy n. cognito]

In certain dangerous situations, yes.

Walking on a 6' wide boardwalk with no railing through the thermal features in Yellowstone where one step off the walkway has a significant chance of leading to death? Yep.

Well, I would argue that taking a small child to a place where one wrong step equal death is sheer ignorance, whether a leash is used or not. Those devises are designed to restrain a child, not suspend them in mid air. The thermals will be there in a few years when the child is older and capable of understanding the danger.

It's been many years since I've been, but I don't remember many spots on that walkway where a steep drop off wasn't protected by a full railing.

 

[tZer]

At the risk of repeating myself, luck had nothing to do with it.

I'm sorry you're insulted. I'm just not an "I'm ok, you're ok, eveyone is right" sort of person. Most aren't, although some just won't admit it.

Keep on repeating it - it doesn't make it true. Whether you acknowledge it or not, luck does have something to do with it and ignoring that fact is not only silly, it's dangerous.

You seem to be saying that if you do what you are supposed to as a parent then your kids will be fine. You seem to be saying that because you personally have not had any tragic or near tragic things befall you and yours that's some sort of validation of your parenting skills. While I don't doubt for one moment that you care for your children and that you are an excellent parent, I KNOW for a FACT that regardless of that, bad things can and do happen - even to kids of the best parents - in spite of their excellent parenting. Denying that is foolish - but continue to deny it if you must. I don't expect my point of view to change yours and you've made it abundantly clear that it won't.

As for me being insulted - I am not. I am saying that your logic is insulting. I do wish you the best and hope you never discover how truly flawed your belief that your parenting skills alone are enough to prevent tragedy.

 

[guy n. cognito]

No. If I assumed something bad WOULD happen, as opposed to COULD... then one could argue for an Appeal to Probability fallacy. I don't do that though - I just point out that sometime the POTENTIAL consequences have such a cost as to make the risk unintelligent to engage in.

Hmm. I didn't see a COULD statement in your previous post. I'm sure I just missed it.....

 

[aborgman]

Well, I would argue that taking a small child to a place where one wrong step equal death is sheer ignorance, whether a leash is used or not. Those devises are designed to restrain a child, not suspend them in mid air.

One wrong step doesn't equal death, one step off the walkway does.

... That is about three wrong steps, during which the leash restrains them before they step off the walkway thus not necessitating an ability to suspend in mid air.

It's been many years since I've been, but I don't remember many spots on that walkway where a steep drop off wasn't protected by a full railing.

Ummm... on WHICH walkway? There are thousands of miles of walkway at Yellowstone. Some of it is highly fenced. Some of it ain't fenced at all - and many of the thermal areas (due to the need to move the walkways often) have no rails at all.

...and even where there are rails, they're generally sized to stop adults from falling. Many of them a child would slip right through.

 

[aborgman]

Hmm. I didn't see a COULD statement in your previous post. I'm sure I just missed it.....

I wouldn't consider my kid running off for a minute and being found healthy and happy a "mistake".

I would consider my kid running out into traffic and getting smashed one.

 

[guy n. cognito]

Keep on repeating it - it doesn't make it true. Whether you acknowledge it or not, luck does have something to do with it and ignoring that fact is not only silly, it's dangerous.

You seem to be saying that if you do what you are supposed to as a parent then your kids will be fine. You seem to be saying that because you personally have not had any tragic or near tragic things befall you and yours that's some sort of validation of your parenting skills. While I don't doubt for one moment that you care for your children and that you are an excellent parent, I KNOW for a FACT that regardless of that, bad things can and do happen - even to kids of the best parents - in spite of their excellent parenting. Denying that is foolish - but continue to deny it if you must. I don't expect my point of view to change yours and you've made it abundantly clear that it won't.

As for me being insulted - I am not. I am saying that your logic is insulting. I do wish you the best and hope you never discover how truly flawed your belief that your parenting skills alone are enough to prevent tragedy.

You're reading way too much into my comments.

Can bad luck befall a leash parent like yourself, of does the leash eliminate that chance? Said another way- your leash does nothing to eliminate the "luck" risk.

 

[aborgman]

Can bad luck befall a leash parent like yourself, of does the leash eliminate that chance? Said another way- your leash does nothing to eliminate the "luck" risk.

Correct.

It REDUCES it, not eliminates it.

Just like other forms of restraint like strollers, backpacks, handholding, etc.

None of them eliminate risk - NOTHING can. They can REDUCE risk though.

 

[guy n. cognito]

Correct.

It REDUCES it, not eliminates it.

Just like other forms of restraint like strollers, backpacks, handholding, etc.

None of them eliminate risk - NOTHING can. They can REDUCE risk though.

Yep. Just like common sense and proper training. Oh, and full face helmets. Think of all the "bad luck" you could ward off by wearing one of those 24/7!!!!!

 

[Relic]

Yep. Just like common sense and proper training. Oh, and full face helmets. Think of all the "bad luck" you could ward off by wearing one of those 24/7!!!!!

Full face helmet? Overkill, but I do require my kids to wear a helmet when they go bike riding. When the oldest hits 18 then he can decide to do so or not for himself

 

[guy n. cognito]

Full face helmet? Overkill, but I do require my kids to wear a helmet when they go bike riding. When the oldest hits 18 then he can decide to do so or not for himself

You forgot to qualify that you THINK it's overkill, but other might not and that opinion is completely valid, right?

 

[aborgman]

Yep. Just like common sense and proper training. Oh, and full face helmets. Think of all the "bad luck" you could ward off by wearing one of those 24/7!!!!!

I wouldn't advocate them 24/7 - but every time my kid gets on a motorcycle, atv, or football field I'll make sure he wears one.

...because sometimes dangerous situations demand different levels of protection. Sure, I could just never let him do those things - but I'd rather protect him while allowing him the experience.

Horses for courses and all that.

 

[aborgman]

You forgot to qualify that you THINK it's overkill, but other might not and that opinion is completely valid, right?

Of course.

 

[Relic]

You forgot to qualify that you THINK it's overkill, but other might not and that opinion is completely valid, right?

I'd THINK it looks silly but I would not automatically assume that that person is a crappy parent for doing so. Would you?