To lie about DD2s age

[princessparty]

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 ?

Upahill, you may be able to answer this question.
If PP's daughter was a small framed 4 yr old, not your average 6 yr old as should have been, how well would the harness have fitted her? Is there not the chance that the harness used had not been passed for children of PP's daughters size & weight, therefore PP would have been intentionaly putting her DD at risk?

The reason i ask is because I do infant & child car seat fitting as part of my job, and am astounded at the amount of parents who want to thurn their little ones forward facing at 6-7m and under the weight requirements for a group 1 car seat (20lbs.)
Most will listen to sense, but we do get the odd one or two, (I'll bet PP would have been one of them if she lived near me), who say, Oh, that doesn't matter, little (insert precious name here) is so uncomfortable in his/her baby seat. Even when you explain that they are too small, the harness has not been tested to hold that small size and they are risking breaking their childs spine or neck, you know full well they'll be off to Argos to buy a seat that we wont sell them.

At the centres I have worked at a full body harness are used on small children.
Although a regular harness may appear to be ok and just a tiny bit loose kids try to convince us they fit perfect but if there is slack the child can fall out especially if they fall and turn upside down (Obvious really when you think about it).

What I find distrubing from PP is that she seems to say if there is an accident it is their fault (The centre). They should be shut down!It serves them right! She says this without regard for the consequences that may be in store for her child. That, I find, is rather worrying.

I'm not going to get into a discusion about the specifics of climbing safety because I know sod all about climbing but I do think that often (in general life) breaking rules is a good thinkg when the rules are petty and pointless. But if you're going to break rules you have to be prepared to take the consequences without whining.
There is in general far too much petty interference, box ticking, cowardice and arse-covering, as well as all the rules that are about discrimination, protecting privilege and pandering to stupidity.

I agree with upahill.

PP is clearly not prepared to take the consequences for her choice to break the rules. She thinks that if something goes wrong it's the centre's fault.

I agree with whoever said, bugger off and take your dd climbing out on real cliffs. Stop fannying about with indoor centres, practise what you preach, get out there, sort out the climbing gear yourself and do your own risk assessments (or not!)

Another scenario, whilst falling, PP's daughter takes out another child legitimately climbing. The second child is hurt as PP's little princess lands on top of her/him.

I agree-get out in the open and do it on real cliffs!
I sit under rock faces and watch my DSs, I find it difficult, but I know that they are very safe because they follow all the rules and they don't take short cuts. It is dangerous, I am not up to watching DS1 climbing frozen waterfalls in the Alps next weeks (he is an adult and very experienced). He will follow all the rules-he started rock climbing when he was 8yrs and they are second nature.
It is a sport where ignoring the rules can cause a slip and death.(My first introduction to it was on the Cornish cliffs where 2 university students had come off, fallen into the sea and the 16 yr old brother of one was clinging onto the rock face, frozen with fear. I was only going for a walk and was asked to wave down the emergency services from the road. The one on the cliff was rescued by helicopter and the lifeboat was out searching for the 2 in the sea-they picked up bodies.)
The age rule may not seem important to OP, but it is there for a reason-I wouldn't introduce a young child to the sport by ignoring the rules-not if you intend it to be more than a one off. It is one, of several sports,where you should stick to the rulebook IMO and not sift out the rules you like.

you are wasting your time PP never thinks she is wrong here is a previous thread she started

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/906015-to-just-march-into-the-classroom-and-take-my-kid s

Princessparty - you ask how any inspectors doing a surprise visit would have known your dd's age - yet you say yourself that she is not yet five, and small for her age.

The inspectors could easily have looked at the children who were climbing, noticed a noticeably small girl and asked her age - and asked for proof.

Then you would have been responsible for getting the climbing centre into a lot of trouble - possibly getting it closed down, and the employees thrown out of work - would you have been happy then? Would you still think you were right to lie??

And you still haven't answered the question - why do the rules only apply to you when you want them to?

I have to say that I would not want to be friends with anyone who had such a huge sense of entitlement for themselves and their precious children and so little thought for anyone else.

I wasn't aware of the other thread but it seems the name says it all! Obviously above rules and much too elevated to wait for other people!

Incidentally, we found ourselves in a similar position a few years ago. We were in Yorkshire and wanted to visit the National Coal Mining museum in Wakefield, and particularly wanted to do the underground tour - but ds3 was too young, by less than a year.

It did not even occur to us to lie about his age. We put off going to the museum until the following year, when he was old enough to do the tour.

And for the record, no, I have never sneaked into a nightclub when underage - and if any of my dses did, they would get a huge bollocking from me and their father - because we are trying to teach them right from wrong, and that includes the fact that you have to obey the rules, even when you don't agree with them. If you think a rule is wrong, there are ways to go about getting it changed, but lying and deceit are not the way.

Well we either opt into society's rules or excuse ourselves when it doesn't suit us but I get annoyed with people who want it both ways.

What would PP say if the gym which is so important decided to allow staff without CRBs and ISA checks to work with her daughter 'because they really wanted to, no-one would know, they looked the part, and Mabel in the corner there knows about CRBs'.
I bet she'd have plenty to say.
And the school mums who squeeze 5 kids into their Corsa on a daily basis, but when there's a school trip get on the coach to make sure its' got seat belts! (Seen this one.)
So, DS(15) wants to see The Wolfman but DD(8) isn't old enough. Shall I stick a pair of heels on her and a bit of lippy and try to sneak her through? No, we'll all go to see Alvin & Chipmunks and DS can do his age-restricted thing tomorrow.
What is so wrong about having to say 'No, this one's not for you' to a child as long as you can follow it with 'but later we will do X and the others can sit it out'.

YANBU as long as you understand that if your dc falls and injury occurs you will be the one prosecuted

Exactly, springlamb! Ds1 (16) is desperate to start driving - if we think that he is capable, big enough and sensible enough, should we decide that our judgement overrules the law, and start teaching him now? No, of course we shouldn't!

If you have children of different ages, you are bound to come up against situations where one child is too old or too young for a particular activity, but that is life, and they have to learn to deal with that, and so do you.

Teaching them they can circumvent the rules when it suits them is NOT a good thing - my children know that we expect them to obey age restrictions, so I don't expect to find them trying to buy alchohol underage or sneaking into nightclubs, but Princessparty is going to end up with children who think the rules don't apply to them - they can speed if they decide it is safe (and risk others' lives as well as their own) or park on double yellows because their need to get to a shop is greater than other people's need for traffic to flow freely. They'll be the ones parking on the zigzags outside their dcs' school, and putting other people's dcs at risk - because it is their right to do whatever they want, and flaunt whatever rules they think shouldn't apply to them, because that's what their mum taught them!

Exaggerated - maybe. But it is all part of the same attitude.

"You have to be 6 to climb and DD2 is nearly 5 but would have been really bored watching the other DC."

Because she'd have to stay with you?
'Nuff said.

I've just come back from swimming with an 8 year old, a nearly 8 year old and a baby. Only the 8 year old was allowed in the pool unaccompanied by an adult.

When the baby started crying, I decided to leave the two older dcs unaccompanied for the rest of the session (observing them from the seating area. They could see me).

I don't think I was being unreasonable to do this and IMO sometimes you can make your own judgement call about what constitutes an acceptable risk for your dcs.

JoeyBettany - whilst I agree with totally that you should make your own judgements I think you also have to conisder why the rule is there. If you decide to let an under 8 go swimming in a lake or stream that's up to you but the rule in the swimming pool is there for the same reason as the rule on the climbing wall.
The operator of the pool has to have certain rules to be allowed to open and to get insurance for all the users and ensure the safety of the majority as far as possible. I was turned away from a pool a couple of weeks ago as my DCs didn't meet their requirements and yes I was mightily cross about it but I had to accept it.
I think we should all make own decisions but also consider those around us.

Have they stopped making trees? Bloody climbing walls, indeed. Paying for something your kid can do for nothing.

Here's an idea - tell your kids to get out of your house, go off and find a tree and climb it. Tell 'em to be back by tea time or there'll be hell to pay. That way, you can do something grown up with your time, and they can enjoy an active, independent life outdoors.

Climbing bloody walls ...

Trees and Climbing walls are not exactly the same thing. Climbing walls are for rock climbing.

MY DS is 14 and has been climbing on a climbing wall at our local base for a few years now and has since gone climbing and abseiling in the peak district. Which is why it's not suitable for a 4 year old.

Climbing walls are very important for those who are learning to rock climb-mainly because many people are not lucky enough to live near natural crags and because the weather in UK is often not suitable. It isn't playing and therefore not suitable for a 4 yr old who should be climbing in a play area. Older children can climb trees but it isn't teaching them anything about rock climbing, e.g how to tie themselves on, belay etc.

Bloody hell OP -
Have not had time to read all of the replies, but SAFETY rules are not there to be ignored at a whim. What next, "my 12 year old knows how to drive so I let him do the school run"?

you are SO lucky nothing happened to your child as YOU would have invalidated their ample insurance provisions, and you may have lost someone their job (someone who thinks a parent would not lie about their childs age in those circs so did not challenge you)

I am not even allowed to accept under 4s for Rainbows, in a relatively safe hall environment, because Guiding's insurance would be void IF anything happened

my bro works for an out door activities centre (tree jumpers)- they recently had a guy try to sue for severe damage by a paintball to his eye - of course the pillock did not have a leg to stand on as he had removed his safety visor thingy, having been told they must remain in use throughout the game

I don't get how people can be so blase about their kids safety, i really don't

am coming back to let the OP know what happens when someone with a jumped up sense of self importance (like the OP) ignores the rules for their own selfish reasons.

the SIL of a very good friend of mine tooke her children to a ball pool.

this woman thinks that as her son (he is a tiny 5) is such a fab climber he could go into the bit that is for older children, and also has a climbing wall.

it is not suitable (according to the rules) for any child under 6, much like this place the OP went to, but as he is a good climber (according to the mum), and his sister was in there, (who is nearly 7), the mum seems to think that she and her children are therefore immune to the rules.

the boy got 10feet up and fell.

to the bottom!!!

he wasn't restrained properly, so hit the ground with force, broke his jaw and arm and leg, lost several teeth, and ended up in intensive care.

the restrains failed because he was too small and too light.

the mum is not able to sue as she had ignored the rules, and in fact, if I have been informed correctly, she might be sued herself by the ballpool place as they were looked into and almost closed down because of it.

The reason I am saying this now is that I was not told the full details until this week, it actually happened before xmas but altho I had heard that the boys was seriously hurt, I did not know why until I saw my friend, and I asked how he was, and what happened.

I am stunned that at the very same week this this trumped up, selfish, idiotic OP comes on trying to wow us all with her amazing daughter and her own AMAZING ability to ignore rules (no doubt expecting us to pat her on the back and profess her DD to be a G&T at climbing), I find out what happens when the worst can happen.

I actually hope like hell that the mum that is the SIL of my friend DOES get sued.....she put her son at serious risk of death to suit her own selfishness.

I am dreadfully sad for the little boy (thankfully he is recovering well, altho he will always have teethe and jaw issues now due to the damage), for having a mother like he has who thinks of his boredom level and her boredom level before the safety and health of anyone.

having said all of the below tho, I suspect that the OP will still feel as tho she is immune to type of laws us mere mortals adhere to, as she is not like us.

actually she isn;t.....I suspect she is an alien in a princess disguise

YABU,

it's always best to follow the guidelines where children and safety are involved.