Would I be unreasonable to warn my family of the dangers of puddle jumpers?

Me too!

I was in crete about 10yrs ago and watched this French (sorry her nationality isnt that relevant but maybe its a French thing) woman strutting about chatting to entertainment staff whilst her little toddler boy had a float thing tucked under the back of his shorts unsupervised in the pool for hours. I could not take my eyes off him.
Flotation devices are not to be used unsupervised.

I personally think you are actually being quite rude about (presumably your DB or Dsis), saying they are not taking water after seriously. I assume they think they are. There are surely arguments for both wearing floating aids and not. One would be the false sense of security you mentioned which would be true of any floatation devise (?), and second would be your sibling obvs thinks it’s safer if one of the children did accidentally fall in.

if you feel uncomfortable then you can quietly say that you aren’t happy about the kids coming over until they have a certain level of swimming lessons/water safety knowledge. Any kind of lecture or even attempt to allude that your sibling isn’t taking safety seriously won’t end well.

I think you just bring it up in a "did you hear about that poor boy" kind of way and then open up the conversation from there. You don't have to go in with a lecture just that seeing the Puddle jumpers reminded you of what happened to the poor boy and let the conversation happen naturally about the risk of Puddle jumpers giving kids false confidence and that they need to be taught about the dangers alongside using the safety equipment, even word it in a way "like I'm sure you've already done" it gets the info across without sounding accusing or sanctimonious, its just factual conversation

Their early birthday or Christmas presents are swimming lessons from you?

This! Adults will surely be there, so whether arm bands or vesties, they have a floating aid and being supervised??

I see plenty of parents (my friends, relatives) with little kids/babies in front facing car seats. I know how much safer rear facing is. Do I mention it to them? Absolutely not. & I certainly wouldn’t have before having my own kid!

You have heard one story about a kid in America who died because he was completely unsupervised around the pool. The puddle jumper was utterly irrelevant. If the parents want to use puddle jumpers it’s none of your business.

Your pool, your rules. If you think they're not taking water safety seriously, have a serious talk with them because this is a serious subject and the consequences can be deadly. Are they not closely supervising? Are they drinking alcohol? Are they relying on you to do the lifeguarding instead of them? When my kids wore floaties, which was pretty rare, I was literally right there in the water with them. I don't really care for them because they do seem to instill a false confidence in a kid's ability to handle the pool. Both my kids were taught to swim starting at age 2 and were in the water nearly daily.

How many kids are we talking and what are the ages?

They'd better start taking water safety seriously. Kids drown all the damn time. If the parents aren't taking this seriously, you might have to ban them from the pool. They'll be mad but it's better than a freshwater drowning in your pool.

I think this falls into the category of decisions you can make for your own kids, but not on behalf of other parents. By all means say "did you hear about XXX - it's made me really nervous of those puddle jumpers" but beyond that, it's not your decision.

(Unless of course you're so worried that you don't feel comfortable being responsible for them, in which case you must say so)

You could just start a conversation re something like 'oh I say this fascinating post re the huge difference different coloured swim shorts make in bring able to see a child in the water' and send it on to them, use that as an opener maybe. I don't think they ll want to hear any of it tbh as they ll just say oh they will always be supervised. All you can do is try and be super vigilant when they are at yours.
I wouldn't mention that particular tragic case as it won't help make your argument as he drowned because his father let him outside where there was a pool uncovered nevermind having no fence either (and I think they may live in a state where that's a legal requirement?). The child didn't go in the water intentionally thinking he could swim, he tripped over a chair and fell in, the dad only went to check him when he say the dog standing totally focused on the pool. Again, you ll just get the 'oh well OUR children will always be supervised' if you use it as part of your case.

If you would like your daughter to maintain a relationship with him, you can arrange for contact to be in supervised contact centres due to his recent sentence. Depending on how they go, you could allow the grandparents to also have supervised contact until you either feel that he’s changed or your daughter is old enough to make her own choices.

I agree. Mine had little life jackets they wore when they couldn’t swim. Eldest was a bolter and had no fear, so it was additional security on top of constantly keeping an eye on her.
weirdly the only time she fell in by accident was when she was fully dressed ready to go out for dinner. She was pulled straight out, but she did sink straight down to the bottom.

i’m not sure there is a problem with the floats unless you are leaving the children unsupervised in the pool.

There’s been flotation aids around for years. It’s only an issue if they are not supervised and they then take them off in which case it’s negligence. The case that you refer to was also negligence if the father who left him unattended for a significant amount of time.

Both my kids are doing standard swimming lessons at the local council pool and they are given arm floats to start with. It's standard practice to put some arm bands on and start them in the deep end so they can't touch the bottom.

Oh I know - I didn't mean instead of supervision.

It's just that the OP seems diffident about speaking up, as if it's somehow not her place. But as the owner of the pool, it is her place.

"I won't have your kids if you don't come too and we have 1:1 supervision in the pool at all times" would also be a reasonable thing to say and she would be completely within her rights to say it.

Teaching kids to float does seem like a very important skill, to come before swimming.

How old are they? Can you just start drumming in to them that they mustn't ever go near water when no adult is around and that they won't float at all without the puddle jumpers? Or even just take them off for a while so you can physically show them the difference and how they won't float without them.

Unless you have good reason to think the children are not supervised around water then you have no reason to say something to the parents. Whether they use floating devices or not, having swimming lessons or not, children should not be given opportunity to be alone by water. Supervision is the crucial water safety measure.

But you could say that about any swimming/flotation aid.

It is all about the supervision.

I suppose you could say something to the parents like "Don’t worry, I’ll supervise the children at all times when they’re in the pool because I read about that tragic case in the US of the child who was wearing a puddle-jumper and drowned." Any more than that and I think they might well resent it.

I think you’re over thinking this. Yes they do bring a false sense of security but the parents probably just don’t want their child to be unsafe right now and probably thought they were doing you a favour. For a parent with multiple children it means you can be in the pool and not have to constant hold multiple children up.

The only times I have ever seen my children do something stupid/risky near water isn't because they thought they could float if they got in, but because they underestimated the risks of falling in - so getting too close/leaning over to get something out of the water. Which is a good example of why young children can't be left unsupervised by water whether or not they know that they must not get in.

Another one here who didn’t know these were called puddle jumpers- I thought this was going to be about Peppa Pig.
TK was playing unsupervised near the pool for nearly 10 minutes. It doesn’t really matter whether he or anyone else thought he could swim or float more than he could.

We have used one on holiday. It was a godsend. One of us was always in the pool but my ds is strong and I physically could t hold him up in the pool for an hour while he thrashed about..

Having him in one meant I could stand and support but not have to hold him up. He was able to swim a meter or so unaided but typically sank before he reached the side so he needed us there.

Obviously they are not meant to be used unsupervised at all.

You can't expect kids to take their own water safety seriously (especially if they're of an age that requires these devices) and that's why they need to be supervised constantly near water, even a shallow paddling pool. I'm struggling to understand the issue as even if they do jump in they're being supervised so you will fish them out - assuming you can swim yourself

Can't edit my post to add to it for some reason, but wanted to add:

I personally prefer swim rings, not for learning to swim but for holiday pool mucking about, because as he gained confidence he would take the ring off his waist, wrap his arms around it instead, basically play with it like a floaty toy which I think taught him a lot about his own buoyancy

But we've moved to the flat foam armbands now because he says that's what school use and he can swim better with those

Next time something comes up just take the parents “ooh just seen this in my news feed! You probs already know but I didn’t”

share the info in a non judgey way and they’re more likely o listen