To think that swimming lessons before the age of three are totally pointless

[ReallyTired]

I know that newborns can supposely hold their breathe and swim under water, but no small child is safe with water. As far as water confidence goes a family splash session is as effective as an expensive lesson.

Dd started swimming lessons at three years and three months. After three terms of lessons she can now swim 5 metres on both her front and back. I believe it is developmental readiness that determines whether a child learns to swim early or not. There are children in dd's old swimming class who had lessons as babies and children in her new swimming class (all of whom can swim 5 metres) who have only had a couple of terms of lessons.

I feel the risks of baby swimming lessons (ie. glue ear, mum dying of boredom) outweigh the benefits. Its better to wait until the child is actually told enough to follow instructions and you can sit in the cafe while your little darling kicks around with a float.

YANBU. I completely agree.

My dc started lessons in July. Ds1 is 5 and ds2 was just 3.

We have always gone swimming regularly, so they are both confident in the water anyway and really enjoy it.

Within 3 months, ds1 has gone from a non-swimmer (Water confidence class, pre-level 1) to level 4. He can now swim two widths completely unaided on front or back, can swim in the deep end to touch the bottom etc. It's been fantastic watching his progress. At 5, he was ready to learn, physically and mentally.

Ds2 has gone from the water confidence class to...the water confidence class. He is NOT learning to swim. He spends the lessons splashing around, getting in and out safely (he could do it anyway), playing games. All the things that we do when we go family swimming anyway, only now i'm paying £9 p/hr for the privilege.

The worst thing is, Ds2 LOVES his lessons...so there's no way I can stop them as now he'd know what he was missing iyswim? I couldn't now take ds1 every week and not ds2, even though it's apparent it'll probably be months or a year or two until ds2 starts learning from the lessons.

I'm in the same boat (so to speak) as vvviola - I live in the tropics. We have a pool in our garden, every single complex here has a pool and we're at the beach in the ocean most weekends.

As far as we're concerned here, swimming is a necessary life skill. DS is 2 and has weekly lessons plus is in the pool with us most evenings. He loves it, it's all a game to him but at this age all I care about is him getting to the side of the pool if he falls in.

Perhaps not necessary to have lessons in the UK until slightly older but my parents started swimming lessons with us around 3 years and we loved it. And more to the point, it was the single most exhausting extra-curricular activity any of us did and when it comes to nap time, that's important!

Sure, you don't find it important for kids to have lessons before the age of 3, but it doesn't mean anyone else is unreasonable for taking their kids swimming before that age.

YABSlightlyU. Baby swimming lesson are about parental confidence and building the childs confidence in the water.
However, my son as had 'proper' swimming lessons from about 18 months. I hadn't noticed how well he could swim tbh, but when we were on holiday (he was 22 months) an american family stopped me to ask how old he was because he was swimming as well as their 7 year old.

With a swim fin he can swim the length of the pool and he only 'needs' that so he has the confidence to get his head up and breath.

My two went from six months and love it. My daughter could swim a width by two and a length by three. My DS is just one and already swimming at bit by himself.

Could they have done that without official swimming lessons? Probably. Would we have ever taken them so often without structured classes? Almost certainly not.

I am a poor and timid swimmer despite liking the water, so wanted my DC to be confident in the water and they do seem to be. Obviously I wouldn't leave them by themselves in a pool yet though.

I do feel sorry for the little ones who cry week after week and seem to hate it. If either of mine were like that I don't think I would have persisted.

In my experience I disagree.
DC1 did baby swimming and could swim 10 metres before 2.5 years old. And from there just went on and on with it. At 8 now, she has 1000m badge and swims better than me or her dad.
DC2 is doing a similar baby group now. She loves it as an activity. If the worst were to happen I think she would panic a bit less than a baby who's not used to going under the water, she would be more likely to know which way is up, kick to the surface and hold on to something.

Maybe it's taken more lessons to learn to swim than an older child (2 years ish til DC1 could swim) - but the earlier the better as far as I'm concerned as we live right next to water.

Oh and I think it's great that DD can't remember a time she couldn't swim. I must be easier than having to 'learn' it at a bit older.

Most 'baby' lessons (soccer tots, music, dance etc. etc.) are pretty pointless in that most children given the freedom to play and move will pick the skills up just as quickly when they are 5/6/7 whether or not they have had 'lessons' as a baby.

However, the classes give the parent somewhere to go, provide some structure to the day and give the child confidence. In the case of swimming they are never not a swimmer - I have never come across a child who did baby swimming as opposed to splash and play sessions who couldn't swim a few metres by the time they were 2 or 3.

DS has some co-ordination issues and was in no way able to take part in a swimming lesson that didn't allow some parent participation when he was 6. (He found it sensorially overwhelming). However, he did small Aquatots classes with either me or DH from a young age and has always known that he can swim.

YABU. DS was swimming at 18 months. He is confident in the water and was never afraid of being in the water, going under, splashing etc.

He is almost three now and follows clear instruction from his teacher and can swim and dive very well.

While I hope to goodness it is never put to the test, should be accidentally end up in a body of water he won't panic and will be able to save himself.

Each to their own but swimming is active, sociable and useful. It's also considerably less trying (for me!) than an hour of most other baby and toddler groups! Not that we don't do those too...

My DS has gone to the local swimming pool for "lessons" since he was about 6 months old - he was 3 a couple of weeks ago. It has cost us the same as it would have done if one of us had taken him swimming

They were parent and baby classes up to the age of 2 when he moved up to the next class...just the toddlers in with the teacher.

He can't swim, but I never expected that he would be able to yet. He can't do lots of the things that other posters have said. He can hold onto the side and make his way to the steps. He can jump in and doesn't mind going underwater and is learning that kicking helps to move him through the water.

We could have done it ourselves, but neither of us are big swimmers and we might have taken him the odd time but it wouldn't have been every week.

YABU - our DD thinks swimming pools are the best thing ever and has done since first encountering one aged 6 weeks. 10 months now. She grins and pants with excitement as soon as she gets through the door! There is no way DH would take her if it wasn't a booked and paid for lesson at a specific time - he just wouldn't get round to it and never swims on his own account.

We have both noticed a lot of wailing DC apparently being made to go, however, which does seem pointless.

I think the swimming classes are missing a trick by not marketing directly to parents rather than just mums. I found it quite hard to wrangle DD in and out of the water - DH finds it easy. All our renewals start 'Dear mums...'

My 2 year old fell in the pool recently and swam to the side and pulled herself out, so I can well believe lessons can be beneficial. That being said she doesn't have lessons but we swim regularly.

For me it's just about time in the water and time spent enjoying something together.

Should have added he started Little Dippers at three months

I think lessons for under threes can be useful, but then I'm in a country where swimming is very common, we live by the beach and a lot of people have pools. People are very safety conscious around the water and kids.

My DD did a water safety course around her second birthday and learned to 'rescue' herself like the child in VisualiseaHorse's video. At 2.6 she can now swim/doggie paddle to the edge of the pool, too.

So I would argue that swimming lessons are probably a waste of time in under threes UNLESS you are going to be around pools/water a lot.

If you're so sure you're right why are you asking?

Both of my DCs have gone to swimming lessons, we enjoy it and would probably only have been to the pool about twice if we hadn't done this as we're that disorganised.

I'm really sorry the enjoyment we get from this annoys you so much, is there anything else you'd like me to run past you?

Little Dippers is what my ds did as well. We then moved out of the London and so my dd did different lessons. My ds's teacher's find my ds very advanced for his age - he was two levels up where they expected him to be when we moved when he was 3. My dd, although very confident for her age, is not at quite the same level as he was and I partly put that down to the fact that the parent and baby sessions she did were not to the same standard as Little Dippers and similar programmes.

I think it depends on the dc. Mine took four years to swim a width, starting at age 3.5 but I have seen toddlers swimming lengths. I don't think it's necessary to start that young but if people enjoy it, why not. I found it very hard to fill my days with a baby/toddler - swimming is an activity you can do to fill a morning without having to make small talk with strangers too much.

If someone was asking me for advice on when to pay for lessons to get the best "bang for your buck" I'd say wait till 5 or even 6. But get water confident before.

I took mine from 2 and he finally learned to swim above the water at 7! The lessons were a nice part of our routine and money wasn't an issue.

If you are enjoying your baby swimming lessons then that is fine. Our local council pool has baby swimming lessons and all they do is sing nursery rhymes and woosh the babies up and down in the water. If people enjoy such an activity then fine.

I think as far as wailing children goes, there is little point in making a small child unhappy with swimming lessons. However some of the year 5 (aged 9 years old) children at my son's school also cried when they had school swimming lessons.

A lot of people are talking up the water safety aspect of baby swimming lessons. I would agree that swimming classes are strong on water safety aspects such as turning to grab the side and floating but, in the UK, if they fall into water, it is likely to be a pond or river and will be very cold and murky, possibly with currents and I don't think toddlers who have had lessons will be particularly helped in that situation.

It will be more likely to be of use if they fall into a pool, which is fairly unlikely for most UK children. Obviously, it is going to be very useful for toddlers who live in countries like Australia with a big pool culture.

After watching VisualiseAHorse 's video (which was as terrifying as it was fascinating) I'm going to say

YABU.

Well yes I think year 5 is too late for many kids.

I imagine the baby swimming posters have described above would get more kids swimming. We were in Australia and our two-and-a-half year old was the oldest in the non-swimming group! The other kids were around water a lot and the teachers were very professional. I found it challenging as a non-swimmer to be ordered to put my head under the water, it wouldn't happen in the style of UK lessons you describe OP.

If you are enjoying your baby swimming lessons then that is fine. Our local council pool has baby swimming lessons and all they do is sing nursery rhymes and woosh the babies up and down in the water. If people enjoy such an activity then fine.

Now that is another advantage to swimming lessons. I tend to feel a bit of a twat sitting in a swimming pool talking nonsense and singing nursery rhymes. I feel slightly less of a twat if half a dozen other mums and a swim teacher are doing the same thing at the same time.

"Well yes I think year 5 is too late for many kids. "

I disagree. People can learn to swim at any age.

Our school does its swimming lessons in year 5 and the year group of 60 is split into 4 groups. The children who can swim are in a group of 20 and the non swimmers were in a group of 10 supported by a TA.

Nearly all of the non swimmers passed their national curriculum swimming test at the end of the year. The children who did not pass had extra lessons in year 6.

The school took a bit of a tough love approach and did not stand for any nonsense when a child refused to get into the water. I think this is fair enough at nine, but it would be wrong to do this with a small child.

To answer the op question I think lessons before 3 are pointless but spending time playing in the water and building confidence isn't !

Of course people can learn new things at any age but whole class swim lessons at age 9 when many of the class can already swim were pretty ineffective and humiliating in my experience.