Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To lie about DD2s age

254 replies

princessparty · 14/02/2010 22:08

Went to a big climbing wall today.You have to be 6 to climb and DD2 is nearly 5 but would have been really bored watching the other DC.
She is a tiny little thing who actually looks younger than her age anyway but they didn't question it.Was glad I did lie as she climbed all the beginner walls very quickly ( although she didn't bother with sticking to just one colour holds as she just wasn't physically large enough) She then moved on to bigger walls which are about 4-storeys high and she even had a good go at overhangs in the bouldering section.There is no danger really as DH was supervising and belaying for her.
So is it unreasonable to ignore age restrictions ?

OP posts:
sunnydelight · 15/02/2010 07:55

Totally unreasonable; as others have said you obviously think rules don't apply to you (and of course your darling is so advanced she can do things normal kids her age can't). Yawn!

Jackstini · 15/02/2010 08:07

Princess - don't ask if YABU if you don't want an honest answer!
Yes you were.
You taught your daughter it is ok to lie.
You set an example that rules can be ignored.
You put someone else's business and numerous people's jobs at potential risk.
You Were Wrong. Now suck it up and admit it.

Bonsoir · 15/02/2010 08:10

When my DD was under two she used to regularly go on the climbing frames that had "Over 7s only" in large letters on them. She had lots of fun!

I agree with other posters that if there are insurance issues involved for the business then you might want to be a bit careful. But generally speaking if a child feels ready for a physical challenge I would encourage him/her to take it up.

CantSupinate · 15/02/2010 08:12

Wow, what an attack fest.

How can owner of the climbing wall be held liable if the OP lied to him? Ergo, how could he lose his insurance or business? Genuine question. Even if he demanded to see birth certificates, those could easily enough (with modern scanners) be forged, so he has to rely on simply asking people. Yes the child wouldn't be insured, but how many of us think before we let a child do something slightly risky: "Is she insured for that?"

PParty, I probably would have done the same as you.

penguin73 · 15/02/2010 08:13

That's different though Bonsoir, your choice and your fault if anything goes wrong. Not the case in PPs situation. I am all for encouraging children to be adventurous and stretch themselves but not at the cost of someone else'e livelihood!

Bonsoir · 15/02/2010 08:16

Of course, in France, it is very important to teach children how to break rules! Life quickly becomes untenable here if you try to do everything by the book

BalloonSlayer · 15/02/2010 08:20

I never know whether to laugh or cry at the legoland driving school when you hear the parents saying to their DCs: "Right when they ask you, say you're six, OK? Six."

After twenty minutes of queuing the children get sent back out as they have been asked "How old are you?" and being truthful little people say "Five."

They are so upset at being sent out, and then you hear the parents saying furiously "I told you to say you were six!"

LIZS · 15/02/2010 08:22

yabu . Had you been out climbing on your own, with your own equipment, then that would be a matter of personal risk but unless you had signed a waiver at the climbing wall then you should accept their limitations. You knew the rules and knew whe would get bored if she couldn't aprticipate. Sometimes you either have to avoid such a situation or let the child learn to accept there are some occasions she cannot join in.

penguin73 · 15/02/2010 08:23

"How can owner of the climbing wall be held liable if the OP lied to him?" - for not checking. If the parent produces a false document then that is a different story - the owner has made reasonable efforts to check and culpability lies with the parent. If the owner has not taken reasonable steps to ensure the age of the child then he is at fault (unfortunately 'asking' would not be deemed reasonable measures as it cannot be proven to have happened in a court of law and we already know that PP lies for her own gain so if she chose to do so in court it would be her word against his) The owner is relying on good will so as not to inconvenience parents, PP is abusing that good will for her own gain. Not acceptable.

upahill · 15/02/2010 11:41

I'm still mad this morning with this idiot!!

I think I need to break away from MN for a while

posieparker · 15/02/2010 11:43

YABU, rules are rules.

Goblinchild · 15/02/2010 11:47

pahill, this is princessparty.
The same woman who storms into her daughter's class to remove her for gymnastics on the dot of 3.30pm. She has many weird and wonderful beliefs and attitudes. Regard them as entertainment rather than raising your stress levels.
If the case comes to court, the activity centre can use this thread as evidence.

GothDetective · 15/02/2010 11:54

I've read some stuff in the BMC magazine that 6 should be a minimum age for children to start climbing as before that they are not developed enough physically and run the risk of causing permanent physical damage to their shoulders. Probably not relevent if this was a one off but I imagine thats one reason the wall has this rule as they won't want younger children being regular climbers. Not sure how true it is either.

penguin73 · 15/02/2010 11:54

I hadn't realised that this was the same person, would be interesting to 'know' her in real!

upahill · 15/02/2010 12:02

I think what has got me mad it that as I have stated in previous posts that this behaviour is becoming normal. People don't see why their child should miss out on anything. They will get what they want any means even if they have to lie.

It puts instructors and operators in a bad place. We have to be able to trust people and not go round demanding prove of age of young ones with every client we have. Whether princesknowall likes it or not a climbing wall is still deemed to be an 'adventerous activity' which has risks associated to it even if she can't imagine what they are.

Parents are getting more demanding. Two Monday's ago I took a group out on an evening walk. The OP will clearly feel that this is not a dangerous activity.
However coming down a path one of the girls slipped. I didn't see this. It was dark night and I was talking to one of the unfitter members of the group. She didn't tell me either and was chatty in the minibus with her mates. However about twenty mins after I dropped everyone off her step dad was ringing me up saying his daughter had fallen, what did I do about it, what am I going to do about it etc. It could have got ugly.

Good for us that all my night/ evening walking risk assessments are in place. I had given her the right kit (walking boots, torches etc), I had a first aid kit, I am qualified to do that walk and so on. If any of them things weren't in place I would have been in such a vulnerable position.
I have not seen her birth certificate but it looks like I'm going to start demanding proof of age because of the liks of princessdowhatilike.

StayingDavidTennantsGirl · 15/02/2010 12:06

I should have realised from the title that this was a princessparty thread.

The rules simply DO NOT APPLY to princessparty and the little princesses. Teachers have to stick to the rules about what time school finishes. She does not have to stick to the rules about not intruding into the classroom and disrupting the class. Nor does she have to obey the rules in a climbing centre.

The rules are for the little people, the drones, not for the princesses of this world.

It must be wonderful to be so SPECIAL!!

upahill · 15/02/2010 12:08

Gothdectective you are correct quoting the BMC. It is also to do with their hand/eye co -ordination. Also by the age of 6 they usualy have sufficient height and body weight to be able to climb sucessfully.

The child in this post is 4 years old. It would have been upsetting if the child freaked and panicked at 4 storeys high as princess bragged that is hight as reached.

piscesmoon · 15/02/2010 12:12

I expect that it is one of those things that isn't noticed because it all goes smoothly. I don't know what the position would be if she fell and was badly injured. The insurance would cover her and you would have lied. I am not one to say 'it won't happen to me' because it can happen to me.

GothDetective · 15/02/2010 12:13

Agree with UpaHill about clinbing walls being dangerous. I fractured my spine on one 15 years ago and am still in a significant amount of pain because of it.

upahill · 15/02/2010 12:13

Last sentance on my post didn't make sense. I was trying to say ' the height she reached'

PixieOnaLeaf · 15/02/2010 12:17

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

upahill · 15/02/2010 12:21

Pixie... I think you are right and we should ignore. I think Princess puts these posts on to annoy us. However she is a reflection on what is happening in RL and that is what is infurating.

stealthsquiggle · 15/02/2010 12:22

Yes it is entirely unreasonable to ignore age restrictions. Age restriction in this case is for insurance reasons, not for their amusement.

There are instances when it is reasonable. DS did lots of things at 4 which were meant to be for 5 & over because he was in Reception when he 'should' have been in nursery, and the age restrictions were about wanting DC to be old enough to listen and follow instructions. However, I never did it without telling the organisers his real age, and making sure I wasn't messing with their insurance.

For climbing, he just had to wait until he was 5 (the limit at our local climbing wall), as did others we know, with older siblings who climbed, who were desperate to join in. Such is life.

StayingDavidTennantsGirl · 15/02/2010 12:24

Upahill - can I ask you a question please?

Would I be right to think that the Health and Safety people could close you down if they found an underage child climbing on your walls, even if there hadn't been an accident?

StrictlyKatty · 15/02/2010 12:26

I thought this would be one of those threads about knocking a few weeks off your child's age when it's under 2's free etc and your child is 2 and a week.

I would have said how old my child really was and asked if the age was a guide and whether DC could manage it. Sometimes the age is really a guide and if you have a tall child a few months too young it would be fine. However OP has said she has a particularily small child I doubt they would have said it was ok, knowing the truth.

I think if you lie you have to be willing to take total responsibility should something happen.