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.

All my 5 were swimming unaided by 2 because we have a lovely open air pool nearby where we spend most of the summer.
For that reason I've never taken them to lessons.
However I don't think they are any more pointless than any other toddler activity. Dd2 is 2 and goes to baby ballet but won't be doing pirouettes or point work for a long time yet.
It's just fun with mum at this age.

My son was swimming unaided at the age of 2 and a half. He had been to the pool with us from being a small baby and started 'lessons' just after his 2nd birthday (he was already confident in the water and doing a sort of doggy paddle like a duracell bunny). The few weeks before he swam alone he had been having his arm band pressures gradually decreased in his lessons and on the day he swam the length of the trainer pool it was an open Sunday morning session and he asked me if he could try without his arm bands. It was really lovely and all the others
in the pool moved to the sides and applauded him !!
It still brings tears to my eyes.
So IMO you YABU different children cope develop at different ages

I lived in California when my kids were little and they used to go in the pool when they were tiny. Lots of my friends babies did the swimming under water thing when they were a few months old. (not sure quite how old)
I didn't do that bug my kids were confident in the water when they were very little. Obviously, you shouldn't trust kids near water until they are much, much older. They could be brilliant swimmers but could still bang their heads or something.

My dd only enjoyed going swimming once we stopped baby swimming lessons. Comparing her at 20 months with her friends who have continued the classes and there doesn't seem to be any difference. They spent 12-16 extra months encouraging their children to "swim" alone under water and turn to hold onto the side when they were too young to follow instruction. I can now just explain to my 20month old an she gets it immediately. I'd expect the same is even more true at 3 years.

YABU

Swimming is the activity that I do 1:1 with DS2 as I think it's the one that DS1 has benefited most from.

I can't take both on my own in the daytime so lessons are the only way we can access the pool

In the heatwave I appreciated it when visiting a large open air paddling pool. DS 1 was wading around chest deep and playing with balls and sinkers. A few times he slipped and all except once, he calmly corrected himself. Several other older children were quite shaken when they went under. If the lessons mean that he can get himself to the surface or edge safely then that's a good thing.

It was great at using his energy when I was on crutches with SPD last winter as it was one of the few active things I could do with him.

I might be unreasonable if I expected a champion swimmer by starting early or the DCs hated it, but as a fun activity and giving some confidence I think it's a perfectly reasonable activity to do with babies/ toddlers. I aslo don't spend crazy money on £13+ lessons. At the council pool it's less than £4.50 per lesson which is a sensible cost for the resources involved. Given that an open session is £2.50 I'm paying less than £2 extra for the tution and there's more activities and floats avaliable within the session.

I also can't take both of mine on my own, so lessons is the only way DS has been able to go swimming since he was 2. I take DD on my own when DS is at nursery so haven't bothered about lessons for her but if DS didn't have them he wouldn't get to go at all. DH is terrified of water so can't swim and there is no one else to watch them so weekends are out too. So in our situation, swimming lessons under 3 were great.

I kind of agree with you. Did swimming lessons at 4 months with pfb and felt they were completely missold. Didn't harness the 'mammalian diving reflex' as they promised and didn't get to the stage of holding on to edge by the time I had to go back to work. So they weren't for me but I do agree with introducing little ones to water and the swimming pool environment. Each to their own.

YABU on the grounds that my 2 year old is loving her swimming lessons.

but she has 1 to 1 because her sister is in the pool with another instructor and she loves it.

But it depends on the child.

Yawn, not again.

My two were both swimming independently at 2, they both loved the lessons, I loved the lessons, it got us out of the house when they were little and I was on mat leave yadda yadda yadda.

YABU

There are thousands of uploads of babies and toddlers swimming, children can swim from an early age, if they start correctly.

You can never be a strong enough swimmer, at some point you will be put to the test, it is worth having done as much as possible to increase your chances.

Judging by the amount of people and especially children we pull out each year, most people don't take it seriously enough.

Most people who complain that swimming lessons don't work, only do the lessons,

If you had a music lesson once a week, and failed to do any practice, you wouldn't get very good at playing the instrument very quickly, same with any discipline, you have to practice, get those children in water as often as possible.

We came out of the sea, hung about for a bit, then went back in, when we remerged we lived on the coast line, mainly living on shellfish, which is why our hands and feet go wrinkly when we are in water for a while, clever development for creating a good grip, we are designed for water, we live on a planet that is mainly water.

It is a very bad idea not to learn to swim as quickly as possible, and very stupid to not get accomplished at swimming as fast as possible.

I happened upon a baby swimming website recently, and the parents were boasting about how young their babies were when they had their first lesson. Several said 5 days old

I completely disagree with you OP.
I am definitely not bored, it is my favourite activity with ds. You are more likely bored now you are sitting at the side of the pool, I am in the pool looking at the enjoyment on my ds's face.
He started at 8 weeks, and no I don't expect him to swim by 1, but I had a fear of water for years after nearly drowning so I want him to grow up with no fear, and confident in water. Starting swimming lessons at this age does not guarantee it, but it is fun activity for us both. He is learning to splash, kick his legs, and be in the pool in a safe environment with a qualified teacher. He can now kick his legs so he can get up to me from under the water after only 1 term. The life saving skills he will learn are invaluable. The fact we also have so much fun, as a fun activity,and amazing bonding experience is even better. I would not be confident floating with ds on top of me had it not been for these.

whatson is your directed at the boasting or the age?

DC went in the pool at 3 days and DC4 at 11 days. I don't see it as anything to boast about but was pretty cool

My friend has been doing baby swimming lessons with their child since he was about 6 months. They love it together as a family activity. Their son loves water and all is lovely and jolly, except for the fact that said child can not distinguish between jumping into water and thin air! I have witnessed him literally diving off a sofa directly onto the floor. Is this a result of swimming lessons that teaches children to jump into the pool (!!) or not being very bright (and I doubt he'll get cleverer by repeatedly doing this)?

I live in a building with a swimming pool so we go all the time and my children have learned (not structured lessons, but some help from us) at 2-1/2 years or so. Same as expat kids who spend a lot of free time in swimming pools and often swim quite early.

The kids I know who have lessons seem to enjoy the water less than mine who are simply presented with pool and get on with it and have fun (with some help if they want it)

With my eldest, who is a very strong swimmer, I used to take her as a baby (in Asia) and dunk her from about 8 weeks. Don't know if that made much difference, but she's always been used to a wet head.

I've not ever experienced lessons in a public pool but they sound stressful and expensive. You can easily - very easily - teach them yourself and the best lesson is seeing you have fun in the water and getting your hair wet.

Show don't tell and all that.

Should say they were always in the pool from birth but learned to swim independently at 2-1/2.

So because your child started at three that's the right age?

If the child and parent are happy then it's none if your business what she child learns to swim. Yabu

Depends what you hope to get out of lessons so young. I couldn't stomach paying lots for little progress myself, so I view lessons for my under 5s as a waste of money. But if others enjoy it or get other benefits regardless of progress, then why not.

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.

But it might give them an extra minute, which could make the difference between them being saved or not. It is true though that you're more likely to succumb to hypothermia before you actually drown in UK waters, but anything which gives you a bit more chance has to be a good thing. If it means a child can get to the surface so someone can reach them to grab them, that gives them more chance - especially if the water is so muddy they wouldn't be seen otherwise.

Obviously prevention is better than cure, and learning about water safety with open water is quite different from learning about water safety in a pool environment - but drowning is the 3rd highest cause of deaths in children, so I'm of the opinion that every little helps.

YABU. I live near the sea and it is essential that DD has confidence and a natural affinity for water. I'm very confident in water but am not confident with a very tiny baby in water. The swimming lessons we started at 9 weeks are really enjoyable and mean that I will be confident taking her to the pool on my own soon. In the summer we'll swim and bob about on body boards in the sea. When she is a bit older i hope she will join the surf lifesaving club and develop her confidence in moving water...

I think the problem can be that the children also get used to the parent being in the water with them and it is these children who often struggle when the time comes for them to be doing classes

independently

It's just fun isn't it?
Rhyme time won't make them poet laureate either but you don't see threads about how pointless that is.
I like swimming. Ds is starting in a couple if weeks for ten sessions. If he hates it we'll call it after that.

Rhyme time doesn't cost £100s.

naice even if it were allowed I haven't come across a parent who doesn't accompany their under 5 in the water.