So Safe That Kids Can’t Learn How to Swim

Call me crazy, but what happened to just going to the beach?

Well, depending on where you are, there may not be beaches.

We actually stopped going to our local pool because of their insane rules. You have to take a deep water swimming test to use the diving board. Ok, I guess I get that. But the problem is that there is very little space for kids to practice their swimming where they aren’t touching the ground. The pool is sloped, like a beach (it is built into the side of a lake – weird and hard to describe), so much of the water is ankle to waist height. Their rules mean that so many kids are crowded into the shallow end that there is barely room to move on a very hot day. Their deep water test is so stringent that even after my kids passed their boy scout swim test one of them failed the pool’s deep water test. It is set up seemingly so that the fewest people possible can actually be in the deep end. Ok, I guess that keeps kids safe, somehow, but it’s just a drag.

None of the outdoor/summer pools that I know of in Northern NJ have such rules.

At our lake/pool most of the parents are sitting chatting while the kids are playing in the water. There is a deep water test for older kids to use the other side of the pool but up to about 5ft is free reign.

Funny note, they just added a sign regarding crossing the rope from deep to shallow. It reads “Do not cross the demarcation line.” I guess we take our SAT vocab prep right into the pool!

I’ve noticed some weird pool rules around where I live, too (Orlando, FL). At my community pool I have to be in the water with my son, who’s 3, unless he’s wearing a life jacket. I’m not sure at what age they can be in the water alone. That’s fine for me, since my kid can’t really swim yet, but both my sister and I were prolific swimmers by age 3, both of us having learned to swim by the time we were 2. my mom would’ve been super annoyed by this, since she cannot swim (part of the reason she got us lessons so young). It seems like the pools could trust that parents don’t actually WANT their kids to drown and wouldn’t let them in the water without close supervision until they were strong enough swimmers to handle it. This is Florida…a LOT of children learn to swim before their 2nd birthdays and these blanket rules don’t take into account any particular child’s strengths.U I was also at a different community pool recently that does not allow anyone under 14 to swim without adult supervision. 14! That seemed ridiculously old to me.

YMCA has this. “Pike Class” and “Eel Class” are for 3 to 5 year olds depending on how well they already swim and does not require a parent to get in the water. Both Pike and Eel are for ages 3 years to 5 years 11 months. (Pike also has a parents included option if the parent wants to go that route but that clearly isn’t the case here.)

https://register.ymcanyc.org/programs/AV
http://www.ymcala.org/hollywood/classes/preschool-swim-lessons

I assume she’d be willing to pay for this because she says she would be willing to pay for more lifeguards at the pool they would use now? But this means the 4 month old doesn’t get to swim. But they could split their time between the Y and the local wading pools.

I would also check with local universities and even high schools.

http://www.recreation.ucla.edu/swimlessons

Basically she wants to be able to hold the baby and watch the other two. So if lessons aren’t in the cards how about joining a swim club (Way more expensive than a public pool of course)?

there are clearly solutions out there for this mom. But I do find it hard to believe that there ever was a public pool that let you in with a 4 month old 3 year old and 5 year old with only one adult.

Oh yeah, the beach. So if this is in the portion of CA as stated in the blog post here she is 30-60 minutes from a beach depending on where she wants to go…

I’ve got no problem with “pool rules” that expect parents to be very nearby kids 2 and 3 years old. I don’t care how well they “swim” at that age, they are very small, can probably only stand in the very very shallowest of the main pool and any small thing (even getting bumped or impeded by other kids) could have them in a situation where they need assistance.

We were recently watching old video of when our kids were that age. They were great “swimmers” (if you want to call it that), had no fear of the water but I would never have left their safety up to a lifeguard in a stand (although our Y does have a guard standing on the pool deck next to the shallow end).

We used a flotation device to give them a little more freedom/flotation (a foam “turtle shell” or “bubble”) until their strength/skill improved. For whatever reason, our Y only has those available at the indoor pool to borrow, but has the full life vests at the outdoor.

Actually my post (and thinking about the old foam bubble) made me think that the original poster should ask the pools she’s considering if the older child can wear an approved belted flotation device (some are a foam square). This give the kid a little more assistance, but encourages proper swim form (as opposed to a full vest or those evil arm floaties) if you can’t be a few feet away….and can provide a little help if they need to catch their breath.

As mentioned, our YMCA has rules like this, but I’ll add that our local neighborhood pool does not. Then again, our local (expensive) neighborhood pool does not really conduct itself in a safe manner in my opinion. They let kids swim at the “side” of the diving pool which is something so foreign to me (especially when they have another whole pool who has a very long stretch of deep water into which you can jump). They also have very popular free kegs of beer twice a month (and guards have been seen drinking).

It’s a much bigger facility and far more social, but the lifeguards seem to be there to keep kids from running and off the lane ropes, lol. And I say that as someone who had a kid work there for a few years.

When I worked for a Y 30 years ago, we did not allow the floaties/water wings or rings/tubes either. Both good rules imo.

I just didn’t bother taking my close-in-age kids to the pool until they were 3 and had had their first preschool swim lessons. However, I remember pitching a fit when they told me I couldn’t let my 5-year-olds, swimmers who were very comfortable in the water and could stand up in over half of the pool, swim without me in the water *until they were 10yo.* (They later amended this to 6yo.) So what I did was roll up my jeans and walk back and forth in the shallowest edge of the pool while my kids swam. Jerks.

For this lady – perhaps this would work. Put the 3yo in swim lessons, and during the lesson time, let the 5yo play in the pool while holding the baby nearby. Chances are they aren’t going to strictly enforce the “arm’s length” rule on a 5.5yo who can swim.

It probably has to do with how many swimmers they might have in the pool at any one time. Also, maybe people were using the pool as a babysitter. Just dropping their 6 year olds off and going to work.

I haven’t been to a pool in years (mainly went there with my friend back in primary school (and yes we were under 14)), but are the chlorine damp and dito water really so much fun for a 4-month-old anyway?
And maybe she has a friend with older kids?

(Not to say that I agree with the rules, just working around them…)

I had this problem years ago. I literally couldn’t take my kids to the pool because of the parent:child ratio 🙁 WE also ran into this at our local zoo. They have a special room / play area for kids under 8…with a 2:1 child/parent ratio, my husband and I couldn’t even take our own children in there!

How strictly do they actually enforce the rules? I took my niece and nephew to my Y with similar rules. The guards never fussed when the kids were playing in the water. In part because we have a family rule – non-swimmers wear a proper US Coast Guard approved life jacket. They also had a beach entrance so no wading pool and kids on the slashpad did not have to have an adult right there.

Also niece was able to pass the deep water test at 4. Once she had the wristband, I didn’t have to be next to her even though she was under 7.

The thing about a USCG approved life jacket – kids can practice their strokes. We would take them off for the jump to me and swim to the side type thing. Both of our little fish were expert swimmers by 5. Able to both swim the length of the pool easily, and deal with many open water situations.

There was one scary incident. A girl got mad at a boy. She walked up to him in the beach area. He was sitting. She grabbed him and forced him backwards. She slammed his head against the pool floor and held him there. I could see his eyes bugging out. I was pretty sure he was inhaling water. I yelled for a guard and knocked her off him.

No one else saw it. When he came up sputtering and coughing up water he called her a bitch and swung at her. That everyone noticed. I had to physically shove the boy behind me and use the words Police attempted murder – before any of the adults would listen. After I told what I saw, a couple of mothers spoke up about “accidents” where this girl had hurt their kids at the pool. The boy’s Mom took him to his doctor to be checked out. The girl and her family got banned from the pool. I ran into the boy’s mom later. She said he was ok, but they had been told to watch him carefully for signs of a concussion and dry land drowning.

Oh by the way – Adult swim has been found unconstitutional in some appeal court jurisdictions. It was being used to discourage families with kids from using the pools. I don’t know how they were doing that. Where I’ve seen it used. It has been crowded situations. Adult was used to pretty much clear the pool so the lifeguards could switch out, or have a break.

The YMCA does have child only no parent required swimming classes for 3 through 5 years of age.

Hi SKL,

The YMCA can do you one better. Kid 1 and Kid 2 can take the same lessons with the same group. While mom plays with the baby out of the pool! Both the Pike and Eel groups would take her 3 and 5 year old.

http://www.ymcanyc.org/association/programs/swim-at-the-y

I should note that our pool does not have an adult-child ratio rule, nor have I heard of it around here. What they do say is that you are supposed to be within arm’s reach of your kid(s) through age 5. Which is not entirely impossible for tots / young preschoolers. I used to take both of my three-year-olds into water over their head to practice swimming. They were not always within arm’s lenth of me, but they were always close enough that I could get to them quickly if they were in any distress. In the shallow part of the pool (where they could stand up), I gave them much more space and eventually stopped going in the pool – until the lifeguards suddenly got militant when they were close to 6yo. :/

Wow, I would have had to drop our pool membership or put it in hold status if it had a 1:1 ratio like the one described. I have twins, and my husband doesn’t like going to the pool. Now, it is very difficult, and once my smaller twin was within a few feet of an adult swimmer who didn’t realize that one twin had gone out a bit too deep and was struggling. I swooped down and had the man pull him over to me. I can’t socialize with other adults or do anything but tend to the kids when we’re there. But the kids rarely let me do that anyway.

Shallow pools is precisely WHY as a kid, I never passed the beginner swim class test, which got inflicted on me 2 or 3 times before my mom gave up.

In deep water, I was fine (I was never a great swimmer, but I could reliably get from point A to point B with no danger of drowning). But the moment my toe touched the shallow bottom on the kiddie pool where the test was given, I would stop swimming and stand up. I was 8 or 9 and it was pure reflex, I couldn’t help it. And stopping anywhere during the “swim across the pool test” was an automatic fail.

If I’d been tested in the deep pool, where I swam all the time outside of class (and had been swimming in for at least a year before I ever saw a swim class), I’d have passed the test just fine.

Back then, failing the swim test was NOT a reason to keep a kid out of the deep pool, but I imagine nowadays it would be.

I agree, I think it is a reflex to stand up in a shallow pool, especially if you’re under any kind of stress.

I know my kids can swim because they have been in pools that have no shallow part, and have swum in the ocean from a boat to the shore. In the shallow water, they play a lot but swim very little. That said, I think it’s good exercise for young kids to play in the shallow part of the pool. Better than sitting on their butts.

@Kimberly Hebert….you are saying that someone took a pool facility to court because of Adult Swim? I’m baffled by this. It’s used in every pool we’ve ever been to, some more frequently than others. It’s a small segment of each hour (or even less frequently depending) and I think it’s the smartest, nicest thing a pool can do for kids AND parents. It gives kids a chance to take a break, gives lifeguards a little respite (most pools still man the stations but can take a mental breather from the hoards in the pool), and thankfully allows adults to get in the pool w/o having kids getting in their way for a few minutes!

I cannot imagine private facilities aren’t allowed to make their own rules.

How on earth is that a constitutional issue? And how on earth is it dissuading families at all? Kids can still swim the VAST majority of the time. I must be missing something.

@E Denying someone right to do x is not “giving them the chance to take a break”. I know it is a nitpick, but I hate when “I do not want you to be here” is framed as “nicest thing you can for for him” or some kind of service. It has strong doublethink element into it. The nicest thing you can do for somebody is to allow him to be there when he wants and take break as he wants.

Adults swim is done for the sake of people that are too precious to be in the same room as children. Lets not frame it as service to parents or kids.

Andy – As a parent, I love adult swim!! It makes going home so much easier since my kid already has to get out of the pool. If I try to leave any other time, I get a long, drawn out begrudging exiting of the pool. It also ensures that my kid will get out of the pool and eat/drink at least occasionally if we are there all day. It is worth the cost of the ice cream that I get hit up for at the first adult swim every time we go to the pool.

At my pool, the point of adult swim is definitely to give the life guards a break. They only have one, instead of the usual 3 or 4, guard on duty during adult swim.

And since it is a grand total of 10 minutes out of every hour, I fail to see how it translates to “done for the sake of people that are too precious to be in the same room as children.” I don’t know anyone who pays to go to the pool for 10 minutes.

My answer is the same as always–how do these pools expect the kids to automatically be able to swim, once they reach the magical age of X, when the ridiculous restrictions are lifted?

Also, Nadine, is it possible to book a birthday party at your pool, and specifically say that you’d rather the kids have free swim than games? Is that expressly forbidden, or is it just that nobody’s ever requested it? If it’s the latter, all I can say is, if you never ask, the answer will always be no. It might still be no if you do ask, but then you’re no worse off than you were before.

If this is in Glendale I would try to meet up with anouther mommy friend at a apartment or condo complex that has a pool, if no aquaintences have a backyard pool. In so-cal there is a pool just about everywere. It can be hard with that many young ones and a baby to hold on to. Other than that raging waters has season passes, the kiddy waterpark area would keep the walking ones enertained for hours.

When I left my under-6s in the water and didn’t go in myself, I wasn’t sitting on a beach chair texting. I was walking around the pool, getting some exercise, making sure my kids weren’t acting foolish, and a couple times, even identifying a dangerous situation that the lifeguards missed. Like the time a swim coach was giving a lesson to 2-3 preschoolers, and while helping one learn a skill, failed to notice that another one had lost hold of her floatie board 4′ water. A couple times I dragged my own kid to the side when she was doing something stupid. All with my clothes on. I felt I was more useful watching from the edge of the pool than standing stupidly in the pool, and certainly more than if I had been swimming myself.

I don’t understand why it makes sense for lifeguards to be high and dry, but it makes more sense for parents to be stuck in the water without the ability to move quickly. Of course if we’re talking about wee babies who don’t have the sense or ability to keep their heads out of the shallow water, that should be obvious enough to the parent without a formal rule. But a 4-5yo?

For those who are recommending the ocean off of CA…no. The ocean is a place to hop the waves when little, or a place to surf when older.

My kids went to the ocean several times a week when those ages, but I can safely tell you, no, they got no practice swimming except one time when the waves were REALLY low for some reason. One time in 6 years. The ocean is a great place to cool off.

What I did when my youngest was 3 and I had a 5 and 7 year old, was to find a neighbor with a pool and we made an agreement that one afternoon per week I could bring my kids to their pool so I could teach them to swim. I felt it was really stupid that though I had taught swimming lessons for many years, that I couldn’t actually teach my kids to swim in the local pool because they had rules about no toys in the pool. The owner of the pool had me sign a form saying that he would not be responsible if anything happened to my kids, which was fine by me.

Make use of 8 ft diving board,children’s find it so comfortable

Oh & btw you’re also not allowed to take a picture of your kid at the pool because apparently you might be a perv trying to snap pics of other kids in swimsuits.

Yikes! We have had our own pool for years I was unaware of the rules at public pools, , those ratio rules are out of touch with reality.

http://www.thespoof.com/news/us/121662/in-a-stunning-decision-the-supreme-court-declares-adult-swim-unconstitutional

From a site called The Spoof……

@E Are you trying to convince me that the rule has no other purpose then micromanage other peoples breaks? I can understand pool guards need for break/cleaning etc, but I can not understand ease with which some people make/accept rules with no other purpose then to control what does not need to be controlled.

@Donna Adult swim 10 minutes per hour seem genuinely weird. I have never seen a pool with such rule. I have seen pools that are for “swimmers only” and lanes only for fast swimmers. I have seen a “no noise” pool once, but then again, the ‘no noise” rule applied to everyone equally.

It is not enough time to get exercise and the “do not clog swimming lane” rule would help there much more. It is not enough to just hang around and chat, older people up to that prefer to stay in pool for much longer. And as a parent I would find it annoying if I would have to organize our playing/stay around mandated breaks.

Plus, the 18 years cut off does not make much sense, it is not like 17 years old would play with a ball or splashed much water. As far as I can tell, if they are annoying they are more annoying when out of pool then in the pool.

Oh, and I always smile a bit at the Y name “pike” for the littlest ones, simply because that’s the opposite of the camp I went to. There, “pike” was the highest level!

This could have been me 8 year ago.
My daughter was weeks old when I parked her stroller in the shade under the lifeguard stand and introduced myself to the teenage lifeguard. She was also my 5 yo’s swim lesson teacher. Turns out, she is the daughter of an old swim team member of mine and loves kids. The rule at the time was any child with a flotation vest or swimmies had to have an adult with them in the water. So we didn’t use flotation devices. They learned to swim so much faster without them.

Most of the lifeguards (I was one when I was a teen too) at our swim club are older swimmers on our swim team (and swim instructors) or older children of families that belong to the pool. Talk to them and tell them your situation. It is physically impossible to have octopus arms and enjoy swimming and offers no benefit to your kids. So don’t. You can supervise your kids from a bench and not in the pool.

Delayed dry drowning is only a subject for the weak of mind.

@SKL
Original message: “I don’t understand why it makes sense for lifeguards to be high and dry, but it makes more sense for parents to be stuck in the water without the ability to move quickly. ”

…So what you want is 7 lifeguards, one per each family, following their kids around so the parents can stay dry? That simply isn’t practical. I think you’re mistaken on the purpose of lifeguard. Lifeguards *are not* babysitters. Lifeguards are rule enforcement (for every family at once), first aid providers, and rescuers. In that order, too. The lifeguard first has to enforce rules so that the kids won’t get hurt or need to be rescued.

Parents don’t need to be able to move quickly, because you should be with your child in the water already in case they start to *drown*. You will always, assuming you’re paying proper attention, reach your child faster from next to them in the water than outside, because being in the water eliminated the step of jumping into the water. That’s not to mention that a lifeguard has to be scanning the entire pool, so to expect them to notice your child individually struggling before you (who should be near them) do is unrealistic.

A lifeguard’s job starts where your oversight fails. For example, failing to keep your children following facility rules makes the lifeguard step in. Failure to keep your kid from drowning makes the lifeguard step in. Care for your child is always primarily your responsibility, and to demand that a teenager (who isn’t individually contracted for you as a babysitter) take on that role is unreasonable.

To ask that parents are responsible and watch their kids *who can’t swim independently* isn’t actually that much to ask. To ask that a lifeguard babysit your and 20 other children is too much to ask (not to mention we also “babysit” the parents; we still need to make sure you aren’t on the bottom suffering a heart attack).

I also don’t understand why you don’t want to spend time with your kids, anyways. You’re taking a *family* outing the pool, and you’re part of the family. Why don’t parents want to be in the water playing with their kids (and teaching them how to swim)?

Wow that is really insane! Thank goodness our pool is nothing like that. We pay the membership fee to pay for the lifeguards to be on duty. There is no such rule about ratios or the kids being near you. I am one of the only moms that swim with my kids. Most moms sit on the chairs and play on their phones or talk or read or sun bathe the whole time. I actually like swimming so I get in.

The rule at our pool is no swimming for kids during adult swim which is 10 minutes an hour and no lifeguards on duty (it is when they take their breaks) and that no kids are to be dropped off alone until they are 10 or 12 or 13 can’t remember the exact age. Teenagers are there by themselves all the time. Moms show up with multiple kids all the time. Moms don’t go in with the kids all the time.

They also say the baby pool is swim at your own risk because the lifeguards won’t watch the baby pool as it is out of their line of sight. So parents are in charge of making sure their kids don’t drown in there.

I think that is very reasonable. I would not even bother with pools with those rules. With twins how exactly can I ever achieve a 1:1 ratio? My husband works during the day and I don’t have family nearby to go places with me. Its nuts.

I always assumed “adult swim” was the park district’s way of getting kids out of the pool to spend money on the concessions.

Now I guess the size of the pool and the amount of people swimming matters. For our small membership only pool we usually only have a limited number of people there. Most of the time it is like less than fifteen people total in the whole pool area. So one lifeguard can easily keep up with that many people.

On weekends or during like 4th of July they bring in two lifeguards since they are more busy to watch everyone.

So really I have full confidence the lifeguards can monitor all the swimmers safely. Parents still need to be aware of their kids but they don’t have to be in there with them or watching them every single second. The other parents and the lifeguards are backing you up too.

But I guess if you go to a super super super crowded huge pool with 50 people and only 2 or 1 lifeguard or even no lifeguard, yeah then I could see maybe needing to be right there next to your kid in the pool. At least where we go, I don’t see that being necessary.

Even when we swim in a hotel pool with no lifeguards sometimes I will sit at a table and watch them instead of being in there with them and my kids are not even good swimmers. But they have floats on and I am watching them so if they needed rescuing I could do so in like two seconds. Hotel pools are only a few feet deep anymore anyway so not hard to get them out if they get in trouble. Every hotel pool I have been to lately is 4 feet all the way across or something like that. They are never super deep.

I would worry about getting my kid out of the 12 foot deep end of the community pool but that is why we have lifeguards on duty the whole time.

I was a lifeguard in the late 80s to 90s, about 10 years. Most of the time I was guarding a backyard in ground up to 8 foot deep pool full of about 30 school age kids and two to 3 other teachers to help me.

The teachers got in some, some just wanted to get tan. All helped me with watching. We only had one incident, where a non-swimmer jumped over the rope into the deep end and lost her hold on the rope. I was there quickly. Because I was trained to know what it looked like, I saw it before the other adults who were also watching.

Even when I was at a community pool, we didn’t have one on one or one to three or anything like that. I think we DID have the rule that if the child was in a non-approved floatation device, that the parent should be in the water near the kid. If the kid was in an approved life jacket, they were fine to go the whole pool. If they were in water wings or a tube, the parent had to be nearby. But we also weren’t Nazis about it. We realized that people had more than one preschooler. But we also know those tubes tip over, wings can deflate or slip off. Which is why we wanted parents nearby. Approved lifejackets will flip a kid to face up in the water if they have an issue – very different than tubes or water wings.

Most of these comments make more appreciative of my local pool that has the attitude that “parents actually want to bring home alive all the children they came with and can be trusted to make their own decisions as to what is best for their children” so there are no rules as to parent/children interaction in the pool. Nor is there an excess of life guards. 3-4 for an olympic size pool that can have upwards of 100 kids on a busy weekend afternoon.

And, yet, this pool has existed for 78 years without being a danger to the community. In my 32 years in town, NO person has ever drowned in the pool nor has there ever been a near drowning incident. Over the 7 years my family has been going regularly, I’ve never seen the life guards have to even leave their seats except to stretch.

My pool interaction with my child has varied over the years. When she was little, she happily hung out in a life jacket and I was in and out of the pool as I wanted to get wet. Then at 4, she learned to swim, didn’t want to wear a life jacket anymore and yet couldn’t touch the bottom. I spent far more time in the pool that summer, particularly early on, as her swimming skills advanced. By 5, she was back to doing it all on her own, this time without a life jacket, and I was in and out as I wanted to get wet. Now I’m lucky if I even know where she is half the time, but she can also out swim me (and I’m not a bad swimmer).

Another thought–since there was a (very) similar story on here last summer, about basically the same scenario at a different pool, at a YMCA somewhere (I think their rule was that kids under the age of 11 who didn’t pass the swimming test had to be in the shallow end, in a life jacket, within arm’s reach of an adult), is there a chance that this pool is doing this as a money-making scheme? Since the kids can’t practice swimming in any meaningful way during free swim, in order to BECOME swimmers, is it possible that the pool management wants to entice parents into enrolling their kids in swimming lessons, or, for the kids who are already enrolled in the beginning levels, to delay their advancement in said lessons, thereby forcing their parents to spend MORE money? That’s what a lot of people thought last summer, so I’m surprised that it didn’t come up here.

By the way, our YMCA has that horrible “If you’re not within arm’s reach, you’ve gone too far” poster, with a photo of a boy around age five, panicking while standing in chest-deep water. I’ve asked the YMCA many times to replace it with a more positive poster (about teaching kids to swim/putting them in swimming lessons as the best means of water safety), and I’ve even volunteered to MAKE a more positive poster, but the answer has always been no……even when one mother interpreted “within arm’s reach” to mean “tread water right in front of the diving board while six-year-old son is jumping off.” This resulted in the boy almost landing on his mother, several times. I don’t know what supposed “danger” he was being “protected” from, because he was wearing a life jacket, as per his mother’s edict. When I pointed out this dangerous situation later, I was told that it was a “parenting decision.” I’m sure it would have been different if the boy actually had landed on his mother’s head.

I agree with Beth. The “Dear Mom On The iPhone” open letter, berating a mom who dares to play on her iPhone while supervising her kids at the park, is one of the most saccharine pieces of sanctimommy drivel I’ve ever seen. My mom used to sit on a bench and read a book while my brother and I played at the park (pre-iPhones), and we grew up just fine. In fact, I think it’s better to let kids enjoy the park/pool/whatever on their own terms, rather than the parent’s terms, because kids are honestly more creative, and they often act out stories, or play complicated “tag” type games, on the equipment, rather than just playing on the equipment “normally.” I know that I used to do that stuff as a kid, but somewhere along the line, I forgot how. I don’t have kids, but I’ve worked with kids a fair bit in my time, and supervised them at playgrounds, and while I might swing on the swings, or do a cartwheel or two, I don’t understand the games they’re playing, and trying to participate would be awkward, so sometimes, supervising passively rather than trying to actively join in, actually gives the kids a better “free play” experience.

Silver Fang: our closest actual beach is about 10 hours away so pools it is for us. Or the kinda gross fake lakeside beaches around here. I prefer pools.

I went to a swim birthday party today and they did not allow any floaties or rings and you could only wear their life vests. So we did that. I did see a kid go down a few feet from me. He was on a lazy river tube and flipped over. He did not know how to swim and had no life jacket on. He was floundering and I kinda paused a second before helping him because I was not sure he was not going to recover and the lifeguard was right there. She ended up having to jump in and get him but then handed him to me and he clutched me for dear life while I walked him around the lazy river till I got to the place to get out.

Then I told him to go get a life jacket and he acted like he was going to put it on but his mom runs over and says he won’t wear it and that is why she wants him to stay out of the lazy river. My brain kinda broke with that logic. So you know your son can’t swim and you were not only not watching him but also did not make him wear a life vest? She had no idea he had even gone under and been saved by the lifeguard. I guess she was wondering why some crazy lady was carrying him around then?

So yes, apparently some parents are freaking stupid and don’t pay any attention to their kids and make sure they are safe in pools. Which I already knew that. There are always going to be some parents that suck at their job. Let’s be honest.

But luckily the lifeguard and I were there to save the day. I knew mine could not swim well and made mine wear a life vest and kept an eye on them.

“Or is it just the phone that ticks people off, and reading or other activities would be looked on much more favorably? I’m genuinely curious.”

At the risk of going off topic, I’ll go on record as saying it seems to be the phone that ticks people off – in this situation and others. I doubt the sanctimommies would have their knickers in such a twist over a mom reading a book (despite the fact that she could very well be reading a book on her phone or iPad). Same with a kid playing on a phone in a restaurant vs. reading a book in that scenario. People view it differently when electronics are involved.

@Lifeguard Emily–

Swimming is great, but sometimes, for whatever reason, you don’t want to do it EVERY DAY, and sometimes, parents don’t want to swim when their kids do. Maybe it’s a bit chilly out, and the pool in question is an outdoor pool. Maybe you just came from the hairdresser, and you want to keep your hair nice for a little while. Maybe you have a headache, or a cold, or an earache, or a sunburn that makes wearing a bathing suit painful, or….any number of things that’d preclude swimming, but not necessarily preclude hanging out on the pool deck. Or, maybe you’ve just been swimming with the kids all week, and you’re sick of swimming now, and you’re at the best part of your book, or you just unlocked a new chapter in Candy Crush Saga. Or, maybe the kids WANT to swim without a parent hovering over them and watching their every move, and since they’re strong swimmers, they don’t need that level of supervision for safety reasons. Anyway, I’m not a parent, but I am a fairly regular swimmer, and even I have times when I can’t swim (like last winter, when I had a horrible cold), or don’t want to swim, or would rather do something else. So, with all that in mind, I don’t think that choosing not to swim with (water-competent) children, is a rejection of said children. Usually, kids who are old enough to be strong swimmers, are also old enough to want and need some independence while playing, and so, a parent on the pool deck of a lifeguarded pool, would be enough supervision for them. Also, I think people are forgetting that the norm used to be for the kids to walk or bike to the pool by themselves, swim, and then walk or bike back home. My mom told me that she started doing this when she was only five or six years old, in the 1950’s, and it was only the toddlers and preschoolers whose parents accompanied them to the pool. So, my point is, when did it become appropriate to treat school-aged kids the way people used to treat toddlers?

“I do not understand why moms don’t want to swim with their kids. I mean, kids are great and cute. As a woman, swimming in a pool isn’t a terrible enough ordeal that I mind it. And if you hate swimming…why a pool and not the park/sprinkler?”

As far as parent is concerned, swimming in a pool with small kids and sitting in a park/sprinkler is kind of similar thing – except that pool is more tiring. You hang around the water, you are not really swimming nor doing laps nor relaxing in an adult way.

The pool thing is done for kids sake, it makes big difference for them. They get to swim and exercise and it is awesome for them.

Contrary of what some seem to think, kids often love doing their own things. Parent is an authority (or should be) and plying with authority is not the same as playing with equals only. When a friend says “knock it off” the kid may or may not stop. When a parent says “knock it off” the kid has to stop or else trouble. It is different.

Also, many parents spend a lot of time with their kids. The cute great moment you see is less exceptional for them, they vent through exactly same cute moment five times this week and eleven times last week. I’m not even sure it would be healthy for children if parents would be overwhelmed by cuteness on daily basis.

Emily (lifeguard) – If you were truthfully doing 7 rescues a month (or even 2), there is clearly something wrong with the population you are serving/the lifeguards serving the population that cannot be extrapolated out to the general population. My pool has no regulations and averages a grand total of ZERO rescues a month.

As for why parents don’t swim with their kids:

– Kids are far more likely to grab onto mom rather than learning to swim, learning how to get themselves out of trouble and learning how to manage their own limits if mom is right there all the time.
– Kids actually like to play with other kids, not their mothers 24/7.
– The adults aren’t actually swimming. They are standing around in a pack of young children (because, again, children like to play with each other) getting sunburned while getting water constantly splashed in the face. It is mind-numbing boring and not particularly pleasant.
– The first time your child jumps off the side of the pool is great and cute. Long before the 6,000th time (which is likely the same day as the 1st time), it has completely lost the great and cute appeal and is now just rather annoying (because each time they do it if you are really within arms reach, you get splashed in the face).
– People seem to have a decreasing affinity for playing in the water as they age. I can remember not wanting to get out of the water as a child. Now, while I still enjoy swimming and cooling off, I am not as enamored with it. I’m not going to spend hours doing hand stands and flips any more. I’m happy to jump in, cool off and get right back out again.

As for why the pool and not the park:

Ever been to Georgia in the summer? Parks are useless during most of the day. By 11am, it is too hot to exist outside and the playground equipment is too hot to use. Even kids just stand around looking miserable mid-day. The only outside place that is comfortable is near a body of water.

Dolly – I am also frequently in the pool because it is too hot to be out of the pool, but I am not within an arms length of my child … or even in close proximity. She is playing with her friends and I am either swimming or hanging out in the deeper water (away from all the splashing preschoolers) talking to mine. I may race or play with my kid for a little while here and there, but she would rather play with her friends than me most of the time.

But if none of my friends are at the pool, I do enjoy moving a lounge chair into the shade to read a book or take a nap.

My city only has an indoor pool, so I don’t have the issue of being too hot/sunny outside of the pool. (Though it does get warm in there, at least there is no glaring sun.) I walk around the pool instead of in it, because I happen to prefer walking, among other reasons. Isn’t it nice that as free adults we get to choose?

I long for the days when I can leave the pool area all together and go up to the grown-up exercise area or take a yoga class while my kids swim. Maybe this fall, when they start swim team?

FTR if I had a non-swimmer I would spend some time in the water encouraging her to practice swimming skills.

Another thing – I have 2 kids so I can tell them to watch out for each other. Part of their swimming classes has included basics of how to help another person in distress. And again, I do look over at them frequently enough to make sure they aren’t doing something stupid. Though now that they are 7 they are getting more responsible. I can see why they made 8 the cutoff age for being alone at the pools when I was a kid. Not that we didn’t have horseplay, but kids do have a little more sense at that age.

SKL – I can’t speak for all swim teams, but my daughter’s certainly doesn’t expect parents to hang around. In fact, parents are barred from going inside the fence surrounding the pool during practice (it is a chain-link fence so you can watch from outside if you want). And the swim team begins at age 5 and requires nothing more than being able to doggie paddle across the narrow end of the pool to join so has some (a lot really) very new swimmers – none of whom get one-on-one supervision.

“As far as the mom on the phone thing. Moderation is key as always. I don’t mind a mom chatting poolside or reading a book or taking a nap or playing on her phone. IF she knows her kids can handle themselves. If she is clueless that her kid just went under the water and had to be pulled out by a lifeguard for example in my story above, maybe she should pay a bit more attention.”

Exactly. Although I do swim and splash around in the water, we spend a lot of time at the pool, sometimes when the water is too chilly for me. (We live in a state where it can be 65 degrees on a summer afternoon.) I sometimes read a book or chat on my flipphone when my six-year-old is in the sand or the very shallow end. I glance over frequently to check on her. I also sometimes swim laps or go down the slides myself, while she watches from the edge. My older kids are good swimmers and do not require supervision, although I have them warn me when they’re going down the plunge slide that can cause even adults problems.

I only have a problem with moms who are appear to be so addicted to their phones (or napping/reading/etc.) that they are leaving supervision of their young kids totally to the teenage lifeguards when it’s not appropriate for their children’s age or swimming level. Just to cite one example from this summer, I watched a young boy be pulled out by lifeguards. They tracked down his mom, who walked over to sign some forms and went right back to her seat and phone, while he went right back into the deep end. Smartphones seem to create more issues like this because of their addictive nature.

“Emily (lifeguard) — If you were truthfully doing 7 rescues a month (or even 2), there is clearly something wrong with the population you are serving/the lifeguards serving the population that cannot be extrapolated out to the general population. My pool has no regulations and averages a grand total of ZERO rescues a month.”

This may be why I’m more likely to be concerned about total lack of supervision by parents who misjudge their kids’ abilities — We go to the pool often for an hour or two. I witness a rescue on about half our visits. Once, I saw four rescues in one afternoon and only one was questionably necessary. We have a plunge slide that causes teenage boys to need rescuing. My daughter says you have to hold your breath at just the right moment — I’m too much of a wimp to try it. We also have a diving board with no height restriction and a zero-depth entry shallow end that turns too deep for my six-year-old BEFORE the rope marking off the deep end. Part of the problem may also be that we have less than three months of comfortable outdoor swimming weather. Although we’re regulars, some families swim just one day all summer and kids are not aware of their abilities.

I am not always arms length from my kids at the pool for sure. That is stupid. Now if the kids cannot swim and there is no lifeguard present, that is a good policy. At hotel pools I pay way more attention because there is no lifeguard. I still don’t stay arms length though but I am usually right on the side of the pool watching like a hawk or in the pool watching like a hawk.

With that scenario with the three kids the way to handle that is life jackets or puddle jumpers or something for the older kids and then a little baby float for the infant and then get in there with all of them. See it at my pool every day. All the moms come in with large numbers of kids of various ages and abilities.

Age is nothing but a number with swimming. Mine are 7 and I see 5 year olds out swim them. It should be more ability based.

What is a plunge slide? Just a regular pool slide or something different? Just curious?

If I had to bring their father with them every time we went anywhere we would never get to do anything. My husband works and when he does not work he stays home. He does not like crowds. He is pretty anti social. He hates being outside. He whines a lot if he comes with us. I just leave his butt at home and we go it alone. I am super mom in that regard. So any place that insists me and my kids cannot handle it alone would not be somewhere that gets our business. I am almost always alone with my kids. I also don’t have family nearby that will do that stuff with me every day.

Seven rescues per month seems a lot to me too. There are lakes full of swimming people with no lifeguards at all and we do not see seven deaths per month.

On the other hand, it never occurred to me to rely on lifeguard with safety of my children in pool. I always took it as primary my job and lifeguard being there as an additional backup if I fail. I treat lifeguarded pools the same way as lakes without guards. If I would watch the kid in lake without guard, then it is probably good idea to watch them in pool with one.

I mean, they are trained, mean well and all that, but they are human. The pool is big/crowded, drownings silent, lifeguarding boring most of the time (maybe not in 7 actions per month pool, but rates seems to be different here). People drowned in lifeguarded pools too.

I find it very interesting that so many here are constantly saying that parents know best about their children and are insulted when someone dares to question their abilities, but now are all about questioning this woman about how she could possibly manage 3 young children at the pool. My guess is that if she is actively looking for a pool, she actually has a plan.

While nothing inflatable is allowed in the pool, my pool provides life jackets, noodles, kick boards and even has a couple baby floating things. Babies are in the pool all the time and, even the little kids understand to be careful around them. I’ve seen a few get splashed and not be happy about it, but I’ve yet to see one dumped out even on the busiest of days. There are plenty of parents who somehow manage to juggle older kids and infants at the pool.

Is this going to be the most optimal experience for learning to swim for any of the children? No. Is it possible to have 3 young children in a pool and have them all cool off and have fun? Absolutely in a pool not mired down by a bunch of stupid rules made by people who think they know better than the parents what the parents can handle.

Do any pools still do the deep water band test?
Ours does every day.
It’s a badge of honor for a kid to pass and wear the band. It lets the lifeguards know the kids who are strong swimmers and limits the slides and deep end to those wearing a band.
I encouraged my kids to take the band test at the start of every season (starting at age 4) as I want to know that they have the ability to tread water for 3 minutes-an important skill to have in case of emergency- and if they didn’t pass the test, we worked on their stamina so that they did on the second try. They also had to swim 2 laps, one on their back, one on their front.

I was a lifeguard for 6 years and only had 2 rescues during my *career* at a large public pool. One was a kid wearing floaties when he jumped in and lost one and sank with one arm sticking out. He didn’t even try to swim…just waited there, helplessly. The other was a choking child- the gumball from the bottom of a snow cone. One of the biggest safety issues as a lifeguard is blind spots. Floats (including baby floats) obstruct the view and create shadows that make it hard to see. I cannot for the life of me see why they would be allowed in crowded pools as they are a genuine safety hazard. Teaching kids to swim is one of the most important safety skills we can give them.

lollipoplover, our pool does not do swim tests as far as I know. Then again, kids usually hang out in the more shallow parts of the pool because it’s more fun (it has squirty/splashing features that kids like). The pool is designed so nobody is ever very far from the side. So the danger to a kid who is tall enough to stand up on the shallow side is pretty minimal.

SKL – Personally, I can’t imagine anything more unpleasant than taking 3 young children to a pool. In fact, I can’t imagine much more unpleasant than taking 3 young children anywhere. There is definitely a reason that I didn’t have 3 children. But I am not everybody and my personal preferences are completely irrelevant to this discussion.

It does sound very judgmental when you start questioning people and inserting your own personal preferences into a discussion for absolutely no reason. The mother wasn’t asking for opinions as to whether this was a good idea. She clearly wants to do it and was lamenting pool rules.

E, the iphone post that we’re talking about was addressed to a mom at the park, allowing her kids to play while she looked at her phone. Clearly it would be different if the setting was driving down the freeway or even at a pool (depending on the kids’ ages).

Just found this response to the Mom on the Iphone post; I had not seen it before.

http://reallifeparentingblog.com/dear-mom-on-the-iphone-youre-doing-fine/

And now I’ve probably officially hijacked this thread…..

That plunge slide sounds crazy. Never seen or heard of one of those before. I would try it but probably would not like it. I am off to see if I can find a youtube video of one.

“https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7m1uny5QWg

is this a plunge slide like you were talking about?”

Basically yes. Our slide is a little bit longer with a little shorter drop after the slide. My older daughter loved it from the moment she was finally tall enough.

Re the OP, I don’t think it would be too difficult, absent the crazy rules, to keep the baby in a sling or napping in the stroller at the edge of the pool while mom sits where she can see both bigger kids or wades in to cool off. I’m too used to moms with two, three, even five kids under age seven taking them everywhere.

Cool I have never seen a plunge slide before or anything like that. It looks fun but definitely for fearless people and good swimmers only. I would probably hold my breath the whole time.

@Amanda Matthews–Nobody’s against teaching kids to swim. I’m all for it, and so is the mom in the letter, as she clearly mentions that her five-year-old has been taking swimming lessons. However, swimming lessons don’t work all by themselves; you need independent practice outside of those lessons as well, just like you’d do with, say, piano lessons–except for the minor detail that being bad at the piano doesn’t cause drowning; whereas failing to develop competence in the water can. The 1:1 and within-arms-length rules at ALL the pools in the letter writer’s area make that independent practice impossible for anyone under the age of seven. That takes us back to the title of this thread–the rules are literally “so safe that kids can’t learn to swim,” which impedes true water safety in the long run.

Hello, All! I’m the friend with the 3 kids that was written about here. I wanted to clarify the problem: at the public pools within a 30min radius of my house, I am not permitted to even pay and enter with my 3 children on my own due to their ages. I was on the East Coast recently and went to two different public pools in two different towns where we entered with no problem. I am happy to play in the water with and near all 3 of my kids (baby loooves the water), but there is a 1:1 to ratio in my city, so I can’t. We can go to the wading pools, but they have a maximum depth of 18″, so obviously neither kids can learn to swim in that or enjoy a pool. Both my older kids are in swim lessons, and the instructors recommend that I have them practice between lessons, but i can’t take them to a pool to practice! I do like the idea of approaching the aquatics instructor at the local Y to see of they have a solution. When i posted on Facebook to see if any of my local friends had an answer, I did find one place 55 mins from my house that, with parking, would cost $26.50 (plus gas!) each time I wanted to go. I found it odd that I can’t take my own kids and supervise them in the pool for recreation. I want them to use the skills they learn in lessons and enjoy the play of unstructured swimming.

Another thing that I just thought of now–at all the pools in Michelle (OP’s) area, children have to be within arm’s reach of an adult in the pool until they’re seven years old, regardless of swimming ability. I’ve been reading up about the rules of various pools, and a lot of them have that rule in common, and even go as far as to say that “underage” kids who pass the deep water band test still have to be within arm’s reach of an adult in the deep end. Anyway, with the arm’s-reach-of-an-adult thing in effect until the magical age of seven, I’m sure some kids won’t WANT to let go and swim on their own when they turn seven, because they’ve been indoctrinated all their lives with the idea that swimming is a scary, dangerous thing, that can only be done with Mom, Dad, or another adult RIGHT THERE. That kind of thinking is going to hold them back in swimming lessons, hold them back from enjoying free swim, and kill their confidence, making it harder for them to progress to the higher swimming levels, that teach vital water safety skills, such as swimming longer distances, treading water, swimming with clothes on, and doing rescues. I think the conflicting definitions of “water safety” come down to two basic, but opposing concepts–short-term “water safety” (involving life jackets, excessive adult supervision, and making sure nobody ever goes out of their depth), is based on fear, whereas true water safety (i.e., teaching kids and adults the skills needed to be safe and help others in and around the water, and giving opportunities to practice), is based on empowerment. So, while it may be necessary to have age restrictions, or to do band tests in order to keep kids who can’t swim yet out of the deep end, even the littlest kids, or the lowest band level, should be given some scope to actually learn swimming skills, such as floating unassisted on the back or stomach (impossible in a life jacket), propelling themselves through the water while floating (almost impossible with the “arm’s reach” rule), but more than that, pools should be encouraging parents to bring their kids to swim, so they learn, rather than making rules that make it harder. When that happens, families will just give up on the whole thing, so it becomes harder for the kids to grow up to be water-competent, and it’s also lost revenue for the pool. Nobody wins, except the insurance companies, but not really, because if the pool goes out of business for lack of attendance, there’s nothing left for them to insure.

@Dan–That’s funny, because, as Dolly/SOA wisely said, with water safety and swimming ability, age is just a number. None of the pools I frequented in my youth had a blanket rule of “mandatory adult supervision for anyone under sixteen,” and even if they did, it’d be kind of ironic, because you don’t magically become a competent swimmer on your eighteenth birthday. I was a better swimmer than my dad by the time I was twelve or so, and I got my Bronze Medallion at thirteen, my Bronze Cross at fourteen, and I once had to save my brother from drowning in the middle of the lake at the cottage when he was having chest pains while swimming (I was also fourteen when that happened–sometime in between Bronze Medallion and Bronze Cross). Anyway, after that incident, the family rule shifted from “Kids can’t swim without adult supervision” to “Male family members can’t swim without female supervision,” because my mom and I are strong swimmers, but my dad and my brother aren’t. So, under your pool’s rules, if my family decided to go swimming there when I was a kid/young teenager, I would have likely been cast in a “supervisory” role for my dad and my brother, despite the age restrictions.