A few have said this is driven by social insecurity when this not it at all. If anything, part of the issue is the opposite. I've always been very comfortable telling DH to go off with old school friends or work colleagues while I do my own thing elsewhere. Equally, I have no problem telling DH's friends that something isn't for me and not worrying too much about what other people think.
However, I am very risk-averse and view skiing as a genuinely dangerous activity that's probably best avoided. I'm the same with horse riding, motorbikes, windsurfing, water skiing, heights etc. Basically, if my neck or limbs are at risk, I'm out.
As others have said, life is inherently risky, so I'm trying to work out how much of my fear is valid concern (because skiing is a relatively dangerous activity) and how much is my own bias. Are the children genuinely missing out on something important, whether that's enjoyment with friends or learning skills that could keep them safer in the future?
What I don't want is for my own fears and dislike of adrenaline-fuelled activities to limit my children's experiences or potentially put them at greater risk later. The most persuasive argument DH has made is that learning young, with instruction and supervision, is safer than learning in their twenties when they'll probably want to try it anyway. Even I had a go at university despite being very much not that type of person.
We also have a friend who suffered a catastrophic head injury while skiing and ended up in a coma (thankfully recovered but it has done long term harm), so my fear isn't entirely theoretical. I don't know anyone from rugby, hockey, netball, football, tennis or music circles who has had injuries that severe, or as many significant injuries generally.
The difficulty is that my DCs are not like me. I'd happily spend holidays on walking tours of Europe, visiting vineyards, lying on a beach, reading books and playing tennis. My hobbies are tennis, music, reading, art and dog walking; in my youth it was netball. The children are much more like DH. I didn’t go to private schools growing up and don’t work in a profession with work ski trips so with my close friends it’s a non issue, which is perhaps why I don’t care about missing out but DCs might.
Given that, is learning now actually the better option? We don't have unlimited money, so realistically it's either a long-haul sunny holiday or a skiing holiday. I'd choose the sunshine every time, whereas DH and the children would probably prefer to alternate.
I don't want to be a buzzkill, but equally I have no problem saying no, which I have done to date. DH absolutely loves skiing, went every year growing up, still skis every year on work trips and does a long weekend with friends and would love to share that love with the children. If I genuinely felt it wasn't in their best interests from a safety perspective, I would have no issue overruling him (and have done so far which he has respected as we both need to be happy with the choice of activities for our children)
His argument is that either the children will feel they're missing out (and they have already expressed a desire to learn, although they obviously don't fully understand the risks), or they'll end up trying it later without the skills to do it safely. The reality is that most of their friends (around 70%, I'd say) ski, so I do need to factor that into my thinking. There are also annual school ski trips that they'll want to go on with their friends. There is no way I would send them on one of these at the moment, and if I were ever to consider it further down the line, I would want them to be very proficient and to have had plenty of lessons first. Do I just say no every year?
So yes, I'm aware this post will probably get me roasted as a middle-class mum in the extreme, but it's something I need to think about carefully before deciding whether I should let my children risk their necks and limbs. I'd go on whichever family holiday we chose and plaster a smile on my face, much as I do for theme parks.