to be really bloody angry about this

[ingeniousidiot]

My DS10 and 3 friends won a prize of a day trip to a local theme park travelling by coach. Three of the parents were happy (with mild concerns) to let the kids enjoy it as their first grown up day trip. One decided that she wanted her dh to trail the kids all day. AIBU to be pissed off that he is essentially changing the dynamics of the group and the presence of the DH standing in the queues behind them completely changes their day?

Adding a bit of background information - the prize gave the option of an open day ticket to allow the winners to go whenever with whoever, or to go on the organised, supervised coach trip. The DH didn't want to go, the other parents didn't want him to go. The DH has said that he will not be responsible for the other children.
AIBU in thinking that she should've chosen the open day ticket and made it a family trip another time, rather than our children being stalked for the day?

Central help point isn't the same as children being supervised. Nor is someone in a high vis jacket. Police or not.

Worra it says in the OP that it is one mum who isn't happy.

Slightly off-thread but Later's post has made me wonder: which of Dante's circles would this (accompanying group of 10 year olds around a theme park,) belong in? And what would it be punishment for?

(Sorry, OP; am bored by your over -emotional ingratitude about what is, ultimately, a gift.)

I have no problem with anyone disagreeing with me. I just found it ironic that you appear to think anyone who disagrees with you, hasn't read the OP fully.

The Mum can want what she wants, but it's the Dad who's going on the trip.

OP, like many others here I don't get you 'anger' over this.

Unless you're possibly threatened by another parent's concern about safety, being different to yours?

His decision to go along, does not mean he is judging you and your decision to not to.

But also, I'd really like to know the answer to this OP...

Incidentally, if your child got off a ride with his nose pouring with blood for example, would you be angry if the parent comforted him and took him to the first aid post?

Of course yabu

I think the 3 would be better on the organised trip and let the other dc go with his family.

I think the dh is being unreasonable saying he will not look after the other dcs.

This is quite selfish.

Either he goes and supervises the kids or don't go.

Sounds like the dh doesn't want to go with his dc and would prefer someone else to have to parent them, whilst the op wants her dc to go independently.

Was this really your son's first trip without his parents? By the age of 10 my children had been on several trips without me or DH, including a residential trip to the Isle of Wight.

I can actually see where the OP is coming from.

The other mother is changing the terms of the trip - it's obviously fine for her to not want her child being unaccompanied, but then she should have accepted the 'open' tickets, not agreed to her child going on the organised trip and then deciding that her partner will accompany the trip. She doesn't get to make that decision for OP and the other parents who are comfortable with the 'original' arrangements.

I certainly wouldn't have been impressed at that age to be supervised by a friend's parent if my parents had agreed I could go 'alone'. My parents also would have seen this as other parents undermining their decision. And I probably would have found other kids to hang around with that day.

I wouldn't let my 10 year old go to a theme park unsupervised. Even though they were already walking to school alone by then, meeting their friends in the park down the road, and nipping to the local shop.

A huge theme park some way from home is a completely different scenario. I would be quite happy to mooch behind at a reasonable distance or sit on a bench with a book and let them have a bit of freedom though.

Theme parks are scary at any age.

YANBU
If they didn't want to let their 10yo go on their own unsupervised, they should have done it on another day, as a family together.
They had no right to interfere in the decisions of other parents that thought it was OK for their 10yo to do so and impose one parent 'to overlook them' whilst saying none of the other children are their responsibility.

I suspect that the reason for all that was that their DC wanted to go with their friends, which meant oin his own. They didn't want their DC to do that so the compromise was the child going with them all whilst they kept an eye on the child 'from further away'.

Personally, I would ave a major issue saying that he would not be looking after the other dcs. So, if one of them was lost/getting hurt or whatever, he wouldn't move? I don't believe for a minute that he could live with himself with leaving a child he knows struggling just because he isn't 'supposed' to be there, all the while would be happy to step in at the slightest issue for his dc.

I just found it ironic that you appear to think anyone who disagrees with you, hasn't read the OP fully. yeah, especially all those who used the word 'unsupervised' or similar... about 7 prior to my comment and a number after it, some on this page too!

So, yes. Worra. Why aren't some posters reading the OP properly, even now? And why can't I ask that question?

As for the pouring of blood... erm, the trip is supervised! That one lone parent, all on his tod, poor thing, wouldn't be required to do much... the group 1st aider would! Just like any other organised trip that includes kids without their parents!

I can't see why the OP is making such a big deal of it.

There's nothing wrong with the other parent feeling more comfortable is a known adult is present. And we have no idea of the nature of the other parents concerns; there may be a specific reason why her child is nervous.

This is an acceptable alternative that in no way needs to cramp the children's style (unless they're behaving really badly and don't want anyone to know!). I don't see why the other parent should have pulled her child out of the trip with his mates and take him on a family day instead. That would have been quite a harsh thing to do IMO and this is a halfway measure that doesn't need to affect anyone else.

But yes OP, you're being rather selfish and controlling in thinking that another adult of another child shouldn't make a personal decision for their benefit that doesn't need to affect you or your child. They are under no obligation to stay away for your benefit or make a different parenting decision.

And the fact that you have asked if you were unreasonable and then argued with anyone who said that you were also makes you come across as controlling/think everyone should come to the same conclusions as you.

you're being rather selfish and controlling in thinking that another adult of another child shouldn't make a personal decision for their benefit that doesn't need to affect you or your child. alternatively she is just venting here rtaher than doing any of that! She would have been VU to shout at other mum, but coming here and moaning is what the forum is for, I thought!

Oh, and how can it be controlling to 'think' somethng without acting on those thoughts?

Not even Huxley, Wells etc had the Thought Police being that scary!

I'd hazard a guess that the Dad won't be intrusively holding their hands in queues and embarrassing them, but keeping an eye on them from a distance. Which sounds quite reasonable.

I have a 10 year old. He's a smart kid, he's bright and he's pretty savvy. I'd still be happier if a parent kept a long-distance eye on him and mates at a place like that than letting them go solo.

Disclaimer I absolutely did read the post fully. And have RTFT and still maintain that you're being slightly massively overdramatic.

I would be angry if it was already agreed that the children would be going alone, especially as the children would have been looking forward to having some freedom. Even more pissed off that the so called responsible adult is not willing to supervise any of the other children.

BUT from a personal level i would have been that parent wanting to have my 10yr old supervised.
How do you know that the child hasnt asked his dad to go along, but doesn't want to be the one to tell his friends that?
My DS, although grown up would have needed supervision at 10yr old in a big theme park.

If this was my son id be there. Not in the queues with them but id take my kindle and grab a hot drink and go on the odd ride alone but theyd know which zone I was in incase they had a falling out / needed an adult for anything / there was an accident.

Fair enough he doesnt want to supervise everyone elses kids, I wouldnt mind being the point of contact for all four of them, but queueong with them is a bit much.

I find Mumsnet a constant eye-opener.

I can't imagine giving a situation like this more than half a second's thought. I certainly can't imagine giving it enough energy to be angry, let alone 'bloody angry'.

I find it fascinating. Of course, now I'm wondering if such emotional storms raged behind the friendly masks of other parents on numerous similarly, utterly innocuous, occasions in the past. There I'd be, innocently projecting a facsimile of my own emotional landscape onto the canvas presented to me, while, in fact, I was way off - a veritable tsunami of emotional otherness might be raging behind their eyes!

Who'd have guessed?

So many ways to innocently provoke rage in another!

You've got to love AIBU sometimes. It really offers a window into the souls of others.

I'd be there if it was me. No way would my DD be unaccompanied at 10 in a busy, chaotic theme park.

OP, at least it's only the one parent who is going. It could be worse..the whole family could have carted themselves along, aswell as the other sets of parents/siblings etc...now that really would have changed the "dynamic." So it sounds like they will all still have a great time, and if the dad is a good sport then hopefully he'll just let them get on with it whilst being close by. 10 years old is still very young and I remember when I used to work in a theme park (back in the bronze age), this was just the sort of age group that needed a close eye kept on them. Not for any bad reasons, but just because they were more likely to get lost and shoved out of the way.

YABU to be really bloody angry.
Ok, not the way you would have done things. But really... There are more significant things to be angry about. Is this the biggest thing you have to worry about? You are very fortunate.

OP, I'm suprised your DC cares. . Mine would just be thinking about the rides and hanging out with their pals rather than thinking about who is supervising them. Does you son think the Dad is going to be actually trailing around after them the whole day?