To use a pram for DS (3.5)?

[ziggiestardust]

We just moved to London, and DS is struggling on days out such as the Royal Parks and Castles, where the tube stations are often a good half mile or more away from where you want to be in the park, and a lot of the 'wandering around' element really takes it out of him. He was a late walker anyway, and we often end up carrying him towards the end of the day, which is fine but it's exhausting!

Yesterday we went to Hampton Court Palace, and by the time we'd walked to the station in town, walked to Hampton Court, been around the maze etc, he was exhausted poor thing! And there was so much more I wanted to show him. I'm wondering if this wouldn't be solved with a small foldaway buggy that we can use at either end of the journey for a more enjoyable day for him. We honestly do cover quite a bit of ground, and his little legs just aren't quite up to it. We're not thrashing it either; anyone who has visited London will realise how much ground you actually cover doing seemingly very little.

He does walk 20 mins through the park to nursery and back, is outside all day (it's a forest school) and he swims twice a week and plays football once a week; so he's pretty fit and healthy.

AIBU to get a pram or should I just make him walk and tough it out a bit?

Tbh I think stick with it, making him walk and you will all be better for it in the long run. Just factor in lots of little breaks and snacks/drinks

I don't think constantly stopping for snacks and drinks is the answer either or you can't venture too far from a toilet.

They are far more likely to walk more if there's no pressure and they can rest as needed then leap out again. Plus more enjoyable as they haven't used up all their energy to get there and have none left to enjoy it or join in

Rhonda, I've never said that. I take one. I only have one. I think it's you who perhaps needs to read posts properly, including the opening sentence of mine where I said 'I don't have an older kid'.

And I maintain that your proposal, for people living in most parts of London, would be hideously and unnecessarily dull for several years. The alternative - taking a pushchair so that a child can get an hour's break, enabling a full day's outing that everyone enjoys - doesn't seem to be the undesirable situation you're painting it.

I used a buggy with ds until he was 4, he needed containing! We walked everywhere and didn't need a car at the time, the buggy was useful for bags and getting across busy roads safely. I lived in London at the time, might not have used one for so long had I not.

I don't understand your dilemma OP, BUY AND USE THE BUGGY! If it makes both of you happier, why worry what others or MN thinks?

You're doing your bit for the environment by walking/using public transport so you can offset any criticisms that way. I also like doing more adult things with the kids, our holiday this year was sightseeing in a european city with 2 little ones or in other words, many parents worst nightmare. We took the buggy, which for a large part made the trip really quite manageable and enjoyable. Our 5yr old made good use of it after a busy day seeing all the sights, 2yr old took naps in it.

Don't get rid of it once their in reception either, when the school calls that they're ill or whatever, its a godsend, ditto for when you want to pop to the shops but they're not quite feeling up to it.

YANBU. My Dts use one for days out and it's for containment, naps and the truck load of stuff we need to take. I get tired too and would love it if my mum scooped me up, popped me in a wheeled seat, have me refreshments and let me have a nice nap! What's not to like???

Yes, you're right, we both misread each other's posts

I don't consider an activity boring just because it doesn't involve walking around London all day, carrying a pushchair just in case. Some of the best fun we've had when our DCs were small were when other people came over to play.

But I can understand that if you have to have a "trip" in order to enjoy yourself, waiting maybe six months or a year until your 3 year old can keep up with the adults might seem beyond the pale to some.

Oh, ouch, Rhonda, the little barbs! How beautifully crafted.

We don't 'have to' have a trip to enjoy ourselves. We simply enjoy it, in the same way as we enjoy having people to our home, and enjoy shorter visits to nearby places. Each enrich our lives in different ways.

If I restricted myself to one of those categories? Yes, I'd probably miss the others. And given that I, like many on this thread, see a pushchair as an easy way to enable this rather than as the encumbrance you and a few others seem to, I can see no reason to stick close to base until DS's legs are longer and stronger.

Hampton Court isn't going anywhere, but what DS gets out of it at this age is. His joy in mature and dinosaurs and nature and machines is hugely enriched by what London has to offer. And I'm overjoyed we live somewhere that makes that possible, and that we all enjoy, and that's very simple to do even with a small child if you can get over the idea that a pushchair might be a joy useful thing.

suburbanrhonda is there an age at which you should start tailoring trips to what a child can manage under their own steam? Do you avoid taking a 2 month old baby out of the house because they can't walk themselves? When do the 'rules' change - 12 months? 18 months? 2years? 3? Are they not allowed to go to the park until they can walk all the way there and back by themselves? Is it OK to drive them to a petting farm, but not ok to take them in a buggy, or should no child meet cows until they can walk to the farm themselves?

You are not seriously suggesting the OP sits at home or keeps all trips within 1 mile of the house for a year or 2, surely?! If if's acceptable to drive the DC out for little outings, what's wrong with using a buggy instead of a car?

You're right, erin, I'm not suggesting that at all, seriously or otherwise.

The OP said her DS was "struggling" with the walking, was "exhausted" at the end of the trips and that "his little legs aren't quite up to it".

So I suggested an alternative to taking a buggy - to leave those trips until he's better able to manage the amount of walking they require.

I'm happy to be in the minority on this one

Yes, but you've not really explained why, Rhonda. That's what I'm struggling with. Why is the buggy bad, or to be avoided?

Ok, for the last time, I have not said the buggy is bad, or to be avoided.

The OP's solution to her child being "exhausted" by too much walking on outings is to keep the amount of walking the same and put him in a buggy when it gets too much for him.

My suggestion - that's a suggestion, jassy - is instead to reduce the amount to walking to something he can comfortably achieve and save the long walks for when he is physically able to manage them.

Hope that's clear now.

But in doing so you're suggesting your solution is preferable to a bugu, without explaining why you think it's preferable to a buggy. That's a huge flaw in your argument that you're 'simply offering an alternative'.

If OP had said 'my child is exhausted on big days out, what can I do?' your comment (and subsequent refinement of your position) would make sense. But that's not what OP asked - so by suggesting an alternative, you're implying that the buggy isn't a desirable option. You subsequently confirmed that when you suggested that you could understand why families with an older child as well would use the buggy.

You've never once explained why you think popping him in a buggy isn't desirable in your view, hence requiring the suggestion of an alternative.

So no. It's not clear, because you haven't bothered to exain your odd position. Arguments with such gaping holes do tent people to point at said holes.

I simply cannot understand Rhonda's POV. If a child would enjoy being driven to a waterpark and having a fun time before being driven home, how is that any different to taking a buggy on a trip to somewhere where driving would be inconvenient. Should the child not go to the museum or waterpark because they couldn't cope with walking there and back as well as enjoying the activity?

Why would anyone bother getting judgy about someone using a pushchair, sigh. I'm judgy about people getting judgy about such things.

jassy, I appreciate that you've put a lot of thought into your last post, but you are completely wide of the mark.

If the OP's default position is that she is committed to taking her DS on trips she's admitted are beyond his physical capabilities, rather than considering even the possibility of reducing the amount of walking involved until he can cope with it, the of course she has to take a buggy, otherwise she will be carrying him home once he's no longer able to walk any further.

What I've suggested is an alternative - to plan a trip around the amount of walking she already knows her DS can do, so he doesn't end up "exhausted", as she describes it. It's an alternative, I haven't said it's preferable.

It's not judging someone for using a buggy (fgs!) i'm looking at the problem from another angle and proposing a different solution. It's what we do in school, where it's called differentiation. It's responding to the child's current capabilities. But I have no problem with people saying the amount of walking is not the issue.

I just don't happen to share that view and I can actually live with people disagreeing with me . I'm off to work now.

There is only merit in offering an alternative if the preferred option is somehow deficient or less desirable than the alternative. You've not answered the question of 'what's wrong with trips out that might require a buggy' apart from to be mildly insulting,

Your position has changed during the course of the thread? That's fine, mine often does - but I own up to it.

This is what makes me chuckle about this thread - the idea that going by car is better than taking a buggy to give a kid a break.

Get a buggy and save your sanity. I have a three year old and there is no way I would carry him about, I can't even carry my nearly two year old for long.

Lots of us don't find them stressful and in places like London, they can be brilliant. Horses for courses. My DS is a brilliant walker but sometimes just needs a rest - he still naps in the day, for one thing!

No ones suggesting they be confined to the buggy full time on this thread. You know when my kid is truly knackered because he asks to go in it - he'd rather run everywhere!

Yep, whereas in London trying to drive anywhere is pretty stressful!

Most people I know with 2 have 'stacking' doubles rather than side by sides - fine for buses etc. Or a buggy board, but that's not a sensible solution for those like OP with one:

I would try and build his stamina as its rare for children of that age to be in buggies.

We don't drive - and our long days out could involve a lot of walking.

The older two would have short trips in the buggy we had with us- eldest was still wanting that at 4 but she was youngets in reception and she did get exhausted- they still all developed stamina and walk for miles now more so than most DC their age.

Youngest was a good walker so it was often hard to know if we needed to tak a buggy at 3.5. However we did end up hiring a buggy on holiday at that age as we'd hoped we wouldn't need one -but she did get more tired than usual and carrying her was hard work as she was very big - hiring one made everyone happy.

Did do a day out when she was 3 and she refused buggy all day - but it was still useful and we put everyone else's backpacks in it.

I get a very cheap light weight or second hand one - and try it and see if it helps to have it around.