to think that DCs should be supervised on bouncy castle slide

[motherofallhangovers]

Went to a fete today. DS (3.5) went on a bouncy castle slide thing.

We paid, and he came down it once, all smiles, then ran round the back again. He didn't appear again for ages, so I went round the back to see if he needed help.

I wasn't prepared for the absolute carnage that I saw! There were about 20 children trying to get up the two ladders. The ladders were both quite difficult to manage and many of the children were struggling. It was pandemonium! DCs of all ages were pushing each other out of the way, falling down, trampling other DCs. One toddler (maybe 2.5 or 3) in particular kept getting knocked back and pushed off the slide, and fallen on by older DCs. I was worried his neck was going to get hurt. Another mum turned up and between us we restored some sanity, picked the little ones up, told them not to push each other, helped them up the ladders.

I found the young guy we'd paid (£1.80) and said there should be someone round the back to supervise. He said that there was a guy, but he was away right now. I said it was dangerous, he went and got him (the boss I think). I told him that it had been getting dangerous. He said "there's no blood, it's all fine"

10 minutes later, the "boss" was off round the front again, chatting on his mobile. A little boy was struggling at the top, his dad was standing on the bottom of the bouncy castle to give him a hand up. When the boss came back, he had a go at the guy for standing on the bouncy castle. He said "I was helping my son". The "boss" was really arsey and said he'd have to pay him if he broke it. The dad said, incredulously, "what about my son's safety?!"

I said there really needed to be an adult to supervise, that it wasn't safe. He was getting visibly annoyed with me, but I can't believe he though it was fine to let so many kids be unsupervised! It was round the back, where no adults could see them. There seemed to be no time limits (or age restrictions) they just kept piling kids on, and it was getting really crowded. If parents are meant to supervise that should be made clear.

Sorry that was an essay, but had to get it off my chest!
WABU to expect the guy to actually supervise his bouncy castle slide?

Yes, he was shaken but ok. He landed on his side and his arm, which went a little red, but not even a scratch! I had asked the ticket attendant on arriving-it was an outdoor park with just various inflatables-and was told that at 4 all of the slides were fine to use.
Tbh, they would have Been fine for my 4yo if there hadn't been hordes of bigger kids on there (bad judgement on my part too).

OP complain to the people who ran the fete - the bouncy castle contract was between them and it's owners. If it wasn't being run safely, it would have been them dealing with the accident reporting people in the event on anyone being injured.

You're talking about toddlers, of course parents are meant to supervise, thats what you do with toddlers. You don't let some random guy who owns a bouncy castle supervise your small child, do you?

Sounds like children far too small for it were being thrown on by their daft parents.

At that age of DC I should think it would be the parents who would supervise. You'd supervise your DC if they went on a slide in the park, wouldn't you, so why wouldn't you supervise them on an inflatable?

I see the obligatory have-a-goers have arrived.

"You'd supervise your DC if they went on a slide in the park, wouldn't you, so why wouldn't you supervise them on an inflatable?"

The slide in the park is free, and it's clearly understood that it's unsupervised, so you supervise your DCs of course.

The difference with a bouncy castle at a fete is that you pay someone to go on it. The guy at the front was obviously supervising those coming down the slide. I had assumed that supervising the DCs was part of the service. And in fact I'm not unreasonable to think this - as an Environmental Health Officer shared up thread, the industry best practice guide states that

"The operator and attendants should watch the activity on the inflatable constantly. They should use a whistle or other signal and take action at the first sign of any misbehaviour. Somersaults and rough play should not be allowed.

It is the operator?s responsibility to ensure that the equipment is not overloaded with users. Larger, more boisterous users should be separated from smaller ones. The number of users at any one time should be limited to allow each user enough room to play safely."

And there was actually a man who was meant to be supervising at the back. The problem was he didn't think it important and wandered off.

It wouldn't be practical for 20+ parents to all be round the back supervising, it would add to the chaos. The operator should ensure that it's one person's job to do this.

Its called opinion that differs to yours dear, not "have a go"

You pay someone a couple of quid to use the big dangerous inflatables, not to take a break from watching your child who is too young for it anyway

You come across as a thoroughly unpleasant person.

I wasn't taking a break from watching my child. I was watching the slide the whole time, but you can't watch the front and back at the same time! I assumed (incorrectly it turns out) that the thing was properly supervised and I was waiting for him to come over the top of the slide.

The point is that the operator was failing in his duty of care, and putting the DCs in danger.

This is not about whether I should have been supervising my child or not.

This is about whether the operator of the slide should have been supervising (whether that's in addition to or instead of parents is really not the point).

Really? How amazing is your ability to know anything about me from a few lines? Impressive.

Mind your own kid and stop whining.

D'you know what? It seems that quite a lot of people today don't want to take responsisbility for their own DC. It's always others' faults when something goes wrong. Why would you leave your pretty young DC to go on an inflatable, which everyone knows are quite dangerous bits of kit, on their own without supervising them. The blame culture is the reason that so many people are reluctant to look after DC. Just look after your own DC and don't blame others.

It seems to be just like the way people treat Brownies, Rainbows, Cubs, etc. We've paid our money so you have to take complete responsibility for our DC and we'll create merry hell if the slightest mishap occurs. This is the reason so many schools don't want to take the DC on any trips.

I've re-read your OP and don't understand why you let your DC on the slide a second time if there had already been trouble the first time?

this is not about whether parents should supervise their own DCs, but about whether the operator has a duty of care and if so whether he was negligent.

What sounds better to you? One person who knows the slide well, supervising the kids climbing up the back of the slide (while the parents wait at the front).

Or 20+ parents and 20+ children all trying to squeeze into a space not nearly big enough for all of them, so as they can supervise the kids climbing up the ladder? Then running round to the front, to see the kids coming down, then back again. It'd be chaos!!

"I've re-read your OP and don't understand why you let your DC on the slide a second time if there had already been trouble the first time?"

I went to watch from the front again as I'd gone to find the guy who was meant to be supervising; he went round the back so I thought problem solved. When he wandered off again, I went back round.

It is though. If it was important to you that someone else supervise them, you should have checked that first. You didn't. Suck it up and move on.

At our school fete the bouncy castle and slide hire company insisted that we (the organisers) were responsible for anyone using the equipment. They were there to operate equipment only.

We out up noticed reminding parents / careers that they must supervise their DC (an approach suggested by the hire company).

Could you try attacking the post, rather than the poster? Otherwise you might get deleted, you're being unreasonably personal for some reason. People don't agree with you, in aibu, this is a shock to you?

wanttomakeadifference as far as I can tell, the guy at the back was actually meant to be supervising, but he wasn't doing his job.

PenisVanLesbian your posts were offensive by implication. You have called me "daft" "whining", implied I was paying someone £2 "take a break from watching your child" and told me to "Suck it up and move on."

Such language really isn't necessary. I find this personal and offensive. And i don't think I should let it stand unchallenged.

I'm well aware my posts might get deleted.

Okay, legally the organisers of the fete would have been in a very difficult position if anyone had been injured. There was a recent ish court case where a 10 year old was injured at a private party, and the organisers of the party were held responsible.

AHEM
Olympic Peace and Love....