Why do people still run the risk of toddlers and garden ponds?

[JackandDiane]

We all know it is not a risk worth taking? Parents, grandparents, whoever
WHY?

My brother had a tiny pond less than a foot deep and full of plants and still built a solid wooden fence with a locked gate round it

we have a two tier pond, the bottom level was filled in as it was on the grass level, the other one is much smaller and on the raised patio with a rockery around it... to fall in, they have to either shimmy along the fence, or climb over the rockery. We just netted it.

My kids didn't go out unsupervised and they have never been allowed on the raised patio area.

My aunt had a massive garden pond and after one of her Yorkshire Terriers fell in and drowned i have always been wary.

When we bought our former home the first thing I did was to cover the pond. It was a lovely pond, but I had three young children and I wasn't going to take the risk.

My dps had a pond, they filled it in as soon as their first gc was born. I wouldn't ever consider having a pond or a pool with small children around. I'm not a particularly over cautious parent but water and blind cords ard two of my biggest fears when it comes to my dc.

"think the point of the thread is very clear. Its sport for jackanddiane"
Think what you like but I would suggest to say that I'd treat a child's death as sport says more about you than me. Ridiculous.

This thread is really interesting

Ponds have algae and the like so even a small child who is a brilliant swimmer can easily slip in and not be able to grasp the sides or regain their footing in even shallow water. Its not like a swimming pool that has a handy bar to grasp and tactile tiles up the side to help gain a foothold.

Plus falling in to a pond, they'd usually have their clothes/wellies/ coats that would add weight they are unaccustomed to carrying as a swimmer in their togs. You try swimming in your sodden coat and shoes.

We lived beside a harbour. Never were we allowed to go unsupervised on it. We were all drilled in swimming by my parents who were excellent swimmer from a very young age. And we were warned to keep an extra eye on friends or younger cousins visiting and call for an adult the minute they tried to get out of the garden and onto the harbour.

Oh I forgot to mention, I slipped in a shallow water feature in a park when I was little. It was about 3 inches of water and I was happily splashing in my little wellies. The pond scum/algae on it was lethal and I fell onto my back and whacked my head. And I was like a turtle that couldn't get up, it was far too slippery. My mum came to pick me up and she lost her footing too.

If it was any deeper than my ears when I landed backwards I'd have drowned before my mother noticed I'd slipped.

Thing is, it's not possible to remove every single risk from life. Some people seem to fall prey to the kind of magical thinking that goes: if I whine and finger-point and interfere enough with other people then nothing bad will ever happen to me.
It's up to you whether or not you have a pond in your garden, but you don't get to demand other people obey your rules.

I've lived in 2 houses with ponds, 1 st house I fell in as a young child, it's my first memory. 2nd house ( rented) my friends ds fell in.

We had a pond in our garden when we moved in and I confess we had it filled in. It was a bit stagnant and not very well-maintained. I really want to make a new one now the children are older in order to attract frogs and other wildlife. I think so long as parents are very vigilant and do not leave children unattended (or get a pond cover) then a pond need not be a hazard.

We have a fountain pond and just drained it and filled it will flowers.

I'm not a particularly over cautious parent but water and blind cords ard two of my biggest fears when it comes to my dc.

I'm in agreement, Hippy.
Our house had a pond when we moved in and was filled immediately.
I don't watch my children all the time in the garden. Sometimes I have to run in to get the phone, sometimes I take my eyes off them to look at a butterfly, sometimes I am just too busy to watch them etc, plus they like to have fun on their own.
I don't feel my home should have such dangers in it that I feel the need to watch my children like hawks.
As always, each to their own, but for me, it's just not worth the risk and I just can't comprehend that when there is something that is so simple and easy to do to remove an unnecessary risk of harm, why everyone doesn't do it.

I don't think it's necessary to drain a pond or to get rid of them if you have one, they are a danger to unsupervised children but it'd your job as a parent to supervise them. Lots of things are a danger to kids but unless you teach your kids how to deal with them they will be oblivious.

We don't have stair gates and don't lock everything away from our kids - since they were born neither of them have fallen down the stairs, they don't play on the stairs but they can both get up and down them quite easily. they don't get things they shouldn't and generally leave the things they shouldn't be playing with alone - kids are 3.5 and 1.5 - but since an early age we have taught them what they can and can't have and they generally listen, neither of them run on the road, they stop at pavements even if they are running but then They don't get left to do what they want and run about daft like a lot of kids do.

I think this is just another thing society is trying to drive where people try to remove all risk from everything which is absolutely impossible. If people are fine with not covering their pond that's fine, live and let live. Nowadays people are too risk averse instead of trying to live with it they try to remove it which I think is the wrong thing to do.

The reason these kind tragedies are in the paper is because they are rare, if they were daily occurrences the papers would move on to reporting about something else which doesn't happen very often.

"think the point of the thread is very clear. Its sport for jackanddiane"
Think what you like but I would suggest to say that I'd treat a child's death as sport says more about you than me. Ridiculous. This thread is really interesting

Yes. It is really interesting. Not that you've contributed much if anything to it as the OP.

My first husband was put on assignment to Florida, we moved with our two toddlers. It took us almost a month to find a suitable home with no pool. We very much felt like outsiders in our development but We just did not want to risk two very young children and a pool.

according to ROSPA, a similar number of children under 6 drown in ponds as do in baths each year, although the numbers are low, its clearly far too many. Looking at the statistics, most accidents happen outside their own home and oddly 80% of the victims are boys?

We had a pond, and 2 small children, but put a grille on it to make if safe and so they could also enjoy watching the wildlife, they were fascinated by tadpoles. As others have said, it is up to us as adults to reduce risk, and we can best do this by being vigilant, removing dangerous things may not always be the best thing, as a child's natural curiosity will arise when faced with a novelty, such as a pond in someone else's garden.

www.rospa.com/leisure-safety/water/advice/pond-garden-water/

We have a two year old and a very small pond but I do think we probably should get rid. He's never out there alone but I suppose it would only take one slip up.

The only reason I'm reluctant is that it's full of wildlife - frogs, newts, lots of insect life. Obviously I'm not putting newts over DS' life but I suppose it's whether I'm prepared to be hyper vigilant all the time in my own garden rather than remove the pond.

Overreacting.

My parents have 2 ponds. They have 4 now adult children and to date 6 grandchildren. When small they fenced them off.

To date one child fell in whilst the pond was being dug and there was no water in it, and 1 dog (it saw a frog). The kids got hours of entertainment (and education) with pond life.

Presumably because they think the risk is small enough to be justified when set against the benefits?

My parents had a sturdy metal grille made over both their ponds as soon as my eldest boy was old enough to walk. It had never occurred to me before that I must admit but I was very grateful that they did and chose to go to that (very large) expense. I wouldn't have dreamed of demanding that they did so.

Over the years the pond was a brilliant resource for the kids - water snails. tadpoles. fish etc. It would have been so sad if it had been filled in.

People assess risks differently

My parents have one. It's raised, has a cover. They built it when I was about 8 I think.

The kids are never unsupervised in the garden. Ever. They are never unsupervised anyway, they have multiple complex needs including ASD. They are now 12, 11 and 8.

The kids aren't there very much at all so I've never seen the need to fill it in.

I don't have a problem with people removing their ponds in the garden.

However, I have a problem with the attitude on this thread where posters claims others are bad parents if they dare to choose to keep their ponds with toddlers. It's the type of parenting I see where parents look down on others who feed their babies' jar of food or have a fizzy drink, or juice in a baby bottle.

Like this response to my post.

I also think that in reality, people like to have those locked french doors open every once in a while.

You don't know my living circumstances. In my previous house, we only opened the back door to do the garden. It has a lawn so we have to mow it in summer. Otherwise, we never open it. In the current house. It came with a pond with koi carps. It costs a lot of money to fill it in and I don't want to kill the fish. It has no lawn and only ferns, bamboos and conifers. So barely any maintanence needed. I feed the fish after the children have gone to sleep. I make very very certain the doors are never ever opened unless they are asleep or out. (They are out a lot as they are at school or in childcare. I work full time but from home a lot. So lots of opportunity to do whatever is needed in the garden during lunch hours, if needed).

We don't use the garden, we don't sit in the garden, we don't have any play equipment in the garden. It's like in this MN universe, you are only a good parent if you let the children play in the garden. I'm lucky to live near woods and parks and playgrounds. That's where I talk them. There are many children in the country who only have a concrete backyard or none at all. It's not necessary to let them play in the garden at all.

Just to add. It's also not necessary to open the back door. Plenty of children live in houses and apartments without a back door.

BTW. I have one set of blinds in the living room too. It's arguably more dangerous than the pond in the back garden. As they are actually allowed in the house! I tied up the pull cord at the top of the blinds. It will not be drawn until DD2 is at least 8 or 9 (if ever). I only tilt it to open and close. It's a bay window that can't have curtains unless you count the cafe type. It's another parenting choice I've made. So shoot me if you like.

All DH's family are very much of the "I got away with it so it can't possibly be a danger" school.
ILs have a pond which they refuse to cover (because there's not much water in there apparently ). That is their choice. However they then also moan when I spend my time supervising DS in their house of (many) hazards. I feel they don't get to have it both ways, so am resigned to being thought of as impossibly PFB -which to be fair I am a little, though not on this point.

Well you can't expect the grandparents to remove all hazards in the house. It's their choice. Mine ILs don't even turn the lids back properly on their bleach in the toilet. Apparently, it's too hard to turn!