|
meanandugly
Jan 31, 2012, 5:25 PM
Post #2 of 80
(13095 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 20, 2004
Posts: 312
|
I have no problem with her actions. Its interesting by the pic that she finds important enough to wear a helmet while climbing, but none for her child...that's the problem.
|
|
|
|
|
Lazlo
Jan 31, 2012, 5:32 PM
Post #3 of 80
(13084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2007
Posts: 5079
|
meanandugly wrote: I have no problem with her actions. Its interesting by the pic that she finds important enough to wear a helmet while climbing, but none for her child...that's the problem.
Agreed. What made her decide to wear a helmet and yet decide her toddler didn't need one?
|
|
|
|
|
lena_chita
Moderator
Jan 31, 2012, 5:48 PM
Post #4 of 80
(13060 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 27, 2006
Posts: 6087
|
meanandugly wrote: I have no problem with her actions. Its interesting by the pic that she finds important enough to wear a helmet while climbing, but none for her child...that's the problem.
At first I thought this was about the two parents doing multi-pitch with two kids in a backpack... the thread that was in ladies room last year. But those people decided to remove the story and pictures instead of trying to justify it.
Problems: yeah, I do see a lot of problems with it.
Below is the rehash of the main points that have been brought up before.
-The mother is wearing a helmet, but the kid is not, major WTF, IMO.
-the kiddie pack that she is wearing seems nothing more than padded cloth a minimalist baby carrier. Definitely not designed for climbing. Looks to me like there are plenty of ways for the kid to slip out of it, and with climbing, if she is doing high steps, etc, there is plenty of wiggling and weight shifting.
-falling (even on a toprope) with the weight behind her back could result in her swinging, spinning, and hitting the rock with her back -- where the kid happens to be tied up.
-the kid has no way of anticipating the fall or bracing for it. Whiplash, anyone? There is a reason why little kids have to have their neck supported and why they have to be in car seats...
Bottom line-- come ON, was there a specific reason why she needed to toprope with a kid attached to her? I am not advocating restraining kids in general, but if there was nobody to watch the kid, and the kid absolutely couldn't be kept contained in some sort of play tent, I would be more O.K. with then hanging the girl in a kiddie harness from a tree branch and letting her swing back and forth, than I am with this stupid idea.
|
|
|
|
|
Lazlo
Jan 31, 2012, 5:53 PM
Post #5 of 80
(13053 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2007
Posts: 5079
|
lena_chita wrote: meanandugly wrote: I have no problem with her actions. Its interesting by the pic that she finds important enough to wear a helmet while climbing, but none for her child...that's the problem. At first I thought this was about the two parents doing multi-pitch with two kids in a backpack... the thread that was in ladies room last year. But those people decided to remove the story and pictures instead of trying to justify it. Problems: yeah, I do see a lot of problems with it. Below is the rehash of the main points that have been brought up before. -The mother is wearing a helmet, but the kid is not, major WTF, IMO. -the kiddie pack that she is wearing seems nothing more than padded cloth a minimalist baby carrier. Definitely not designed for climbing. Looks to me like there are plenty of ways for the kid to slip out of it, and with climbing, if she is doing high steps, etc, there is plenty of wiggling and weight shifting. -falling (even on a toprope) with the weight behind her back could result in her swinging, spinning, and hitting the rock with her back -- where the kid happens to be tied up. -the kid has no way of anticipating the fall or bracing for it. Whiplash, anyone? There is a reason why little kids have to have their neck supported and why they have to be in car seats... Bottom line-- come ON, was there a specific reason why she needed to toprope with a kid attached to her? I am not advocating restraining kids in general, but if there was nobody to watch the kid, and the kid absolutely couldn't be kept contained in some sort of play tent, I would be more O.K. with then hanging the girl in a kiddie harness from a tree branch and letting her swing back and forth, than I am with this stupid idea.
Pretty valid points, actually. I think you changed my mind.
|
|
|
|
|
njrox
Jan 31, 2012, 6:09 PM
Post #6 of 80
(13038 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 12, 2011
Posts: 251
|
This got me thinking.
Today, I was looking at getting one of those bicycle trailer carriages. Does putting my toddler in one of those create a similiar scenario? Where I'm putting my child in harms' way by bringing them along when I do an activity.
The bike trailers I'm looking at are rated for saftey by American Society for Testing and Materials. The trailer has been tested for and is designed to protect, to a reasonable degree, in the event of bike accident like a carseat would in a car accident.
Show me a baby harness/bjorn that is designed and tested to carry and protect an infant while top-roping. Because I've never seen one.
A car accident could be catastrophic. A bike accident could be catastrophic. A climbing fall could be catastrophic. But if you insist on putting your child in harms' way, at least offer them legitimate protection.
|
|
|
|
|
TarHeelEMT
Jan 31, 2012, 6:39 PM
Post #7 of 80
(12995 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 20, 2009
Posts: 724
|
lena_chita wrote: meanandugly wrote: I have no problem with her actions. Its interesting by the pic that she finds important enough to wear a helmet while climbing, but none for her child...that's the problem. At first I thought this was about the two parents doing multi-pitch with two kids in a backpack... the thread that was in ladies room last year. But those people decided to remove the story and pictures instead of trying to justify it. Problems: yeah, I do see a lot of problems with it. Below is the rehash of the main points that have been brought up before. -The mother is wearing a helmet, but the kid is not, major WTF, IMO. -the kiddie pack that she is wearing seems nothing more than padded cloth a minimalist baby carrier. Definitely not designed for climbing. Looks to me like there are plenty of ways for the kid to slip out of it, and with climbing, if she is doing high steps, etc, there is plenty of wiggling and weight shifting. -falling (even on a toprope) with the weight behind her back could result in her swinging, spinning, and hitting the rock with her back -- where the kid happens to be tied up. -the kid has no way of anticipating the fall or bracing for it. Whiplash, anyone? There is a reason why little kids have to have their neck supported and why they have to be in car seats... Bottom line-- come ON, was there a specific reason why she needed to toprope with a kid attached to her? I am not advocating restraining kids in general, but if there was nobody to watch the kid, and the kid absolutely couldn't be kept contained in some sort of play tent, I would be more O.K. with then hanging the girl in a kiddie harness from a tree branch and letting her swing back and forth, than I am with this stupid idea.
Changed my mind.
|
|
|
|
|
hyhuu
Jan 31, 2012, 6:47 PM
Post #8 of 80
(12982 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 25, 2001
Posts: 492
|
njrox wrote: This got me thinking. Today, I was looking at getting one of those bicycle trailer carriages. Does putting my toddler in one of those create a similiar scenario? Where I'm putting my child in harms' way by bringing them along when I do an activity. The bike trailers I'm looking at are rated for saftey by American Society for Testing and Materials. The trailer has been tested for and is designed to protect, to a reasonable degree, in the event of bike accident like a carseat would in a car accident. Show me a baby harness/bjorn that is designed and tested to carry and protect an infant while top-roping. Because I've never seen one. A car accident could be catastrophic. A bike accident could be catastrophic. A climbing fall could be catastrophic. But if you insist on putting your child in harms' way, at least offer them legitimate protection.
I would not take the bike trailer on the road. I only use it on the bike trail or multi-use path.
|
|
|
|
|
bearbreeder
Jan 31, 2012, 6:48 PM
Post #9 of 80
(12982 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 2, 2009
Posts: 1960
|
what everyone else said ...
i found it most interesting that the mom and the belayer wore a helmet top roping ... so they thought there would be some hazard ... but the baby none ...
also note that, while rare, one can invert on top rope with a pack ... for that very reason on rappel, it is recommended that one clips through an improvised chest harness should yr pack be enough to unbalance you ...
there are also the possibility of being spun around in mid air ... it is quite possible that one would hit the wall at an angle that would contact the baby
note that the baby does not seem particularly secure either ...
|
|
|
|
|
meanandugly
Jan 31, 2012, 6:49 PM
Post #10 of 80
(12975 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 20, 2004
Posts: 312
|
Very valid points Lina. But if one takes the right precautions there is no reason to not do this with your child.
I say that as I stir a pot of boiling sulfur...lol
|
|
|
|
|
njrox
Jan 31, 2012, 6:54 PM
Post #11 of 80
(12965 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 12, 2011
Posts: 251
|
hyhuu wrote: I would not take the bike trailer on the road. I only use it on the bike trail or multi-use path.
Where I live I won't even take my bike out on the road unless it's very early on a Sunday morning!
|
|
|
|
|
lena_chita
Moderator
Jan 31, 2012, 7:07 PM
Post #12 of 80
(12944 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 27, 2006
Posts: 6087
|
meanandugly wrote: Very valid points Lina. But if one takes the right precautions there is no reason to not do this with your child. I say that as I stir a pot of boiling sulfur...lol
Yes, I am sure, if you put the child in a well-designed sturdy pack, put a helmet on her, and take caution not to climb a route that has a potential of swinging on toprope, you are probably pretty safe.
But WHY?
The little girl is two yo. At this age, kids usually love to scramble over small rocks, and should be encouraged to do so, with adult spotting. The kids usually love being put in a harness, maybe climbing a few feet off the ground, and then swinging on the rope. The kids usually love being outside in general, enjoying nature, getting dirty, playing with leaves, rocks, sticks, sand, etc. etc. and enjoying a lot of attention from adults around them.
Most 2yolds I know usually tolerate being in the pack, because it signifies GOING to someplace enjoyable, or because on long walks the regular rocking motion of the adult walking with the pack on is soothing.
But what exactly is so enjoyable about being strapped in a pack while the mother is climbing? What valuable "experience" the child is gaining by being in the pack when the mother is climbing?
I am totally for exposing the children to the things you love. I am totally for bringing them along on hikes, or when you go climbing, or when you go grocery shopping, for that matter.
Bringing the kid along- -great! Letting her try climbing or swinging on the rope, if she wants to-- wonderful. There is your shared experience, exposure to the outdoors, blah-blah. But if you tell me that there is actually some sort of benefit to the little girl being in the pack while the mother climbs-- I'd call it bullshit.
So in my view -- no positive, and plenty of negative (definitely the way it was done by this woman)
|
|
|
|
|
markc
Jan 31, 2012, 7:27 PM
Post #13 of 80
(12919 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 21, 2003
Posts: 2481
|
Lena and others hit on my major concerns. That carrier doesn't look particularly safe - even if it was more snug. The kid's right arm is clearly above the strap, and I know my kid could easily free both arms in a similar carrier. Going with a wrap might actually be more secure in this instance, but that just addresses the falling risk. Added weight up top only adds to the chances of inversion. Even though the risk might be small, the consequences could be huge. At least from that picture, it doesn't look like she has any type of chest harness. Even with a chest harness, she could still barn door and wreck that kid. The claim that you can just lower off if a problem develops is ridiculous.
As a parent, I have nothing against bringing kids along (with certain caveats). I pick appropriate crags, I bring enough people so that someone is always with the kid(s) on the ground, and I make sure they're properly supervised and away from the base. My older son has a helmet and harness, and both his mother and I are comfortable with him climbing. As Lena said, there's plenty to do from climbing, scrambling, or just playing on a blanket with a few toys we've brought. Neither of us would be okay with this risk.
|
|
|
|
|
nate2006
Jan 31, 2012, 8:30 PM
Post #14 of 80
(12857 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 25, 2009
Posts: 70
|
Helmet or not on the child its a big fat hell no you don't climb with your child on your back. The only situation I can see it being Ok is in a survival situation and that is it.
|
|
|
|
|
dynosore
Jan 31, 2012, 9:24 PM
Post #15 of 80
(12821 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 29, 2004
Posts: 1768
|
Ffion. Enough said 
|
|
|
|
|
ky2a
Feb 1, 2012, 2:35 AM
Post #16 of 80
(12696 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 30, 2012
Posts: 18
|
lena_chita wrote: meanandugly wrote: I have no problem with her actions. Its interesting by the pic that she finds important enough to wear a helmet while climbing, but none for her child...that's the problem. At first I thought this was about the two parents doing multi-pitch with two kids in a backpack... the thread that was in ladies room last year. But those people decided to remove the story and pictures instead of trying to justify it. Problems: yeah, I do see a lot of problems with it. Below is the rehash of the main points that have been brought up before. -The mother is wearing a helmet, but the kid is not, major WTF, IMO. -the kiddie pack that she is wearing seems nothing more than padded cloth a minimalist baby carrier. Definitely not designed for climbing. Looks to me like there are plenty of ways for the kid to slip out of it, and with climbing, if she is doing high steps, etc, there is plenty of wiggling and weight shifting. -falling (even on a toprope) with the weight behind her back could result in her swinging, spinning, and hitting the rock with her back -- where the kid happens to be tied up. -the kid has no way of anticipating the fall or bracing for it. Whiplash, anyone? There is a reason why little kids have to have their neck supported and why they have to be in car seats... Bottom line-- come ON, was there a specific reason why she needed to toprope with a kid attached to her? I am not advocating restraining kids in general, but if there was nobody to watch the kid, and the kid absolutely couldn't be kept contained in some sort of play tent, I would be more O.K. with then hanging the girl in a kiddie harness from a tree branch and letting her swing back and forth, than I am with this stupid idea.
Agreed.. all valid points..
|
|
|
|
|
Juzzme
Feb 1, 2012, 4:29 AM
Post #17 of 80
(12644 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 21, 2011
Posts: 5
|
what if she climbs 5.12 and the pics were on a 5.4 rout?
just sayn
what no nomination's for the proactive Darwin award removing ones self and your kid at the same time.
|
|
|
|
|
marc801
Feb 1, 2012, 4:57 AM
Post #18 of 80
(12636 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2806
|
njrox wrote: Today, I was looking at getting one of those bicycle trailer carriages. Does putting my toddler in one of those create a similiar scenario? Where I'm putting my child in harms' way by bringing them along when I do an activity.
In one sense the trailer carriage seems safer then the standard baby-carriage, where you get to push the baby out into traffic ahead of you to run interference.
|
|
|
|
|
marc801
Feb 1, 2012, 5:02 AM
Post #19 of 80
(12630 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2806
|
Regarding the mom wearing a helmet and not the baby that some have mentioned. From the article:
The Daily Mail wrote: She also said that a helmet was not necessary on the route and she wore hers only ‘out of habit’, a decision she now ‘regretted’ because of how it looks. But other climbers said the limestone rock face at Three Cliffs Bay, on the Gower peninsula near Swansea, was notorious for breaking off and falling. |
|
|
|
|
marc801
Feb 1, 2012, 5:08 AM
Post #20 of 80
(12627 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2806
|
lena_chita wrote: Yes, I am sure, if you put the child in a well-designed sturdy pack, put a helmet on her, and take caution not to climb a route that has a potential of swinging on toprope, you are probably pretty safe. But WHY? The little girl is two yo. At this age, kids usually love to scramble over small rocks, and should be encouraged to do so, with adult spotting. The kids usually love being put in a harness, maybe climbing a few feet off the ground, and then swinging on the rope. The kids usually love being outside in general, enjoying nature, getting dirty, playing with leaves, rocks, sticks, sand, etc. etc. and enjoying a lot of attention from adults around them.
In reply to: "Hey! Look at me! I'm so rad 'cause I do this extreme rock climbing sport. I'm so damn cool I even take my kid strapped to my back, so she can learn about the outdoors and how to be really extreme like her mom." |
|
|
|
|
patto
Feb 1, 2012, 6:26 AM
Post #21 of 80
(12598 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 15, 2005
Posts: 1453
|
Is there really anything to suggest that the child is at much more risk that driving in an older model car or sitting in a seat back of a bicycle??
Rockclimbing is NOT dangerous if done sensibly. Cars are NOT dangerous if done sensibly.
Remember it is simply one small error on a high speed highway and you are dead. So what makes this so much different?
|
|
|
|
|
irukandji
Feb 1, 2012, 9:10 AM
Post #23 of 80
(12571 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 17, 2010
Posts: 42
|
Now that is so wrong in so many ways...
|
|
|
|
|
jktinst
Feb 1, 2012, 7:17 PM
Post #24 of 80
(12427 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 29, 2010
Posts: 89
|
Our kids have been involved in our various outdoor activities from the earliest possible age, provided they could be carried safely during the activity or they could do it themselves safely. We understand that safety is always going to be a compromise based on taking all reasonable precautions and accepting the fact that 0 risk does not exist any more on mountains, ski trails or lakes than it does on sidewalks, in the car or even at home.
Anyway, I feel that the only ways a kid can be brought safely to a top-roping area are :
1. (S)he’s old and reliable enough to walk on their own over rough terrain and obey instructions to stay within a well-circumscribed area at ground level (ie with no drop-offs, streams, or in this case, the sea anywhere in sight) and well back from the rock face. Even then, for younger kids accompanied only by 2 adults, one climbing and one belaying, the belayer should do visual checks on the kid and have a ground anchor pre-rigged in case (s)he needs to lock-off the climber to respond to (or prevent) an emergency with the kid.
2. (S)he’s being looked after by a 3rd adult or older babysitting youngster in a spot well back from the face. If the belayer could belay from that spot, I suppose that he could carry the child in a pack
3. (S)he’s climbing with all the standard gear and precautions (including suitable helmet) and the route and anchor have been inspected and are free of loose rocks and pebbles.
There is just no way that a child can be safely carried by the climber (or the belayer if he can’t stay way back of the face), regardless of the carrier design, the ability of the climber or the difficulty of the route. Additional precautions may also need to be taken depending on the area and the circumstances; eg wildlife could be an issue with a small kid being left for a length of time at a distance from the only two adults in the vicinity.
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
Feb 1, 2012, 9:02 PM
Post #25 of 80
(12353 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
Lazlo wrote: meanandugly wrote: I have no problem with her actions. Its interesting by the pic that she finds important enough to wear a helmet while climbing, but none for her child...that's the problem. Agreed. What made her decide to wear a helmet and yet decide her toddler didn't need one?
From the article: "She also said that a helmet was not necessary on the route and she wore hers only ‘out of habit’, a decision she now ‘regretted’ because of how it looks."
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
