Is there a way to avoid having your childs height checked at every ride?

[GlendaO]

At any rides where there's a height requirement I have always seen the little height bars either out in front of the ride but away from the line, or placed in such a way that one can bypass a line to check to see if their child is tall enough. I've never had the experience of going through an entire line and THEN having height checked. It's always been near the back of the line that height is checked, in my experience.

At MGM, Star Tours my youngest was measured in the beginning before we entered the line and then again at the end, before the actual ride. She was tall enough but I can imagine the disappointment of the child and the hassle of having stood in line only to not make it. I think there's also another height check at Soarin but she was only measured at the front there.

 

[mickeychic]

each ride is supposed to measure their height sticks every morning before they open to make sure they're correct. they must ride every time. the only time i've ever seen a child not allowed on despite their shoes is when they were turned away, walked just out of eyesight and switched the shoes of the smaller child with an older sibling with higher shoes. the cm's obviously remembered them and didn't allow them to sneak by. it's for safety. if they would make an exception and something would happen, they would still be liable. so they have to check every time.

 

[BamaFan121s]

I don't take too kindly to nosy strangers implying that I'm not a good parent.

Me either. Like I've said, I can assure you these same 'perfect parents' have done the same thing. I'd like to know how many of them have driven faster than the speed limit....even just once, by a fractional amount. I'd bet all of them. Quite a good comparison situation--breaking someone else's rules implemented for saftey reasons, just like height restrictions. If their child was in the car, they were endangering them too, plus everyone else on the road. So I guess that makes them even worse parents. There is no difference. If anyone can tell me they've NEVER sped, horsepucky!

 

[TheRustyScupper]

1) We need to discuss WHY the height requirements.
2) In some cases, it is the design of the safety restraints.
3) In others, it is the design of the seat/vehicle configuration.

4) In most cases, it is the design of the PERSON that is the issue
. . . an average height denotes an average physiology status
. . . a ride is designed for g-forces and other factors for a minimum physiology
. . . thus, the height would say the child could withstand the ride forces
. . . restraints could hold any child in, but can their body take the ride forces

NOTE: Now, would 1/4" make a difference in physiology or restraint systems. Probably not. However, you have to have a set "number" somewhere, and stick to it. Otherwise, someone can say that their child misses the height only by 2"-4".

 

[kaytieeldr]

We've been through this before. Disney does not set height requirements right at the hairy edge for safety.

Disney does not set height requirements, period. A ride’s designers and engineers do. Yes, they are likely to err on the side of caution – better than having even one rider harmed due to the ride’s design.

 

[GlendaO]

...my word for the day!!!!

 

[ryrysmom14]

I don't take too kindly to nosy strangers implying that I'm not a good parent.

I debated responding again b/c everyone has a right to do whatever they want, but coming onto a PUBLIC forum and calling people who are following the rules "nosy strangers" and "utterly naive" is not nice.

This is utterly the silliest conversation... I think someone should end it and just call Disney and ask them if it is OK to wear thicker soled shoes ON PURPOSE, pad their shoes, put their hair up, whatever to get on a ride? Report back, OK.

 

[Suzanne74]

This is utterly the silliest conversation... I think someone should end it and just call Disney and ask them if it is OK to wear thicker soled shoes ON PURPOSE, pad their shoes, put their hair up, whatever to get on a ride? Report back, OK.

What I think is the silliest thing are people like you implying these situations. The OP specifically said her little one is 40 inches with crocs on which is what 50% of the kids in WDW wear. It is a reasonable question to 99% of the world. You are silly that all you and a few others are all taking it WAY out of context. Feel free to respond to the next thread where the platform wearing, triple pony-tail 3yr old girl is trying to get on rockin roller coaster. Otherwise stop the "silly" comments that I think are obviously not wanted from the OP to begin with.

 

[Coopsmum77]

That you did Coosmum. You should have just sent some people to this site: http://www.rif.org/

OMG!!! Thank you so much.

I didn't think it was that hard to understand the suggestion of putting the boy in normal shoes. You know, those Sketchers that are made with the eight inch platform heel that all the boys are running out to get now a days. I guess that was to much to ask.

You would have thought I suggested platform shoes. Personally, I think a well broken in pair of Sketchers is one of the best options for touring the parks, because they have a great amount of support, much more than flip flops or crocs.

To drgreen1096, I think you assume a lot thinking that the concern over a child's height is simply because of the parents desire to ride something. Ever think the boy might want to ride the rides? How about the parents who can only afford a trip once in a blue moon, and their kid is at a perfect age to really want to ride some of these rides, and is coming up 1/4 inch short barefoot. As a super honest, exceptional parent, I would insist on taking his shoes off to measure him, just so he could see it was Disney not letting him on the ride.

When we were younger, one of my friends was rather short for his age. I know we, as kids, would have schemed to get him on, even though our parents had no interest in the ride.

 

[ryrysmom14]

What I think is the silliest thing are people like you implying these situations. The OP specifically said her little one is 40 inches with crocs on which is what 50% of the kids in WDW wear. It is a reasonable question to 99% of the world. You are silly that all you and a few others are all taking it WAY out of context. Feel free to respond to the next thread where the platform wearing, triple pony-tail 3yr old girl is trying to get on rockin roller coaster. Otherwise stop the "silly" comments that I think are obviously not wanted from the OP to begin with.

I'm not speaking of the OP's situation, I know that the kid makes it with his crocs on, sneakers on, whatever. I am responding to comments made throughout the thread, which I believe none were yours. People are starting to call names as you just did... I was just trying to come up with a way to end this conversation, not exacerbate it as you just did.

 

[Coopsmum77]

Get a load of those new-age super soles, designed specifically for park hopper passes only!

 

[grimley1968]

I was curious, do heelies add a lot of height?

I was hoping my 42" tall 4-year-old DD could wear some heelies and get up to that 44" mark.

 

[dqpowell]

Disney does not set height requirements, period. A ride’s designers and engineers do.

Nope. I mean, sort of... certainly the ride designer tells Disney what minimum height they would recommend. But Disney sets the posted minimum required heights for each ride to correspond with one of their goals. For some rides, that goal is simply to pick the nearest "round" number that matches one of their pre-determined minimum heights. The ride engineers tell Disney that the 'safe' minimum height is X, with their own padding built in. Then Disney imagineers/managers round X up to the nearest round number, which might be 40", 44", 48", etc. If the ride's engineers specified the minimum required heights, no two would be the same. Disney's correspond to 40", 44" or 48" with a few exceptions.

Yes, they are likely to err on the side of caution – better than having even one rider harmed due to the ride’s design.

That should be stated more strongly. They (the ride engineers and Disney) don't just like to err on the side of caution -- they absolutely do pad the numbers. Neither the companies designing the individual rides nor Disney want to ever have a situation in which an inattentive CM or some other situation allows a slightly-too-short rider to be injured or killed.

However, sometimes they (Disney) set minimum required heights for reasons that have nothing to do with safety. They raised the minimum required height for Stitch two or three times in an effort to only allow older children through, since it frightened younger children so much. In that case, they were using height as a sloppy/imperfect guideline for age, since there is no tenable method to determine a child's age on sight.

David

 

[dqpowell]

NOTE: Now, would 1/4" make a difference in physiology or restraint systems. Probably not.

With the way they're specified and padded, absolutely not.

However, you have to have a set "number" somewhere, and stick to it. Otherwise, someone can say that their child misses the height only by 2"-4".

I agree with this statement 100%. I'm not arguing that CMs should allow kids a little too short to "slip by." That way madness lies; it's a classic slippery slope situation.

My point is that it's false to say or imply that a child tall enough to "slip by" wearing padded shoes will be in any danger. He/she won't be.

I debated responding again b/c everyone has a right to do whatever they want, but coming onto a PUBLIC forum and calling people who are following the rules "nosy strangers" and "utterly naive" is not nice.

Those of us who are willing to help our children get by a measuring stick that they are very close to passing anyway were being called bad parents. I responded in kind with the "nosy strangers" comment. I don't want or appreciate a stranger telling me that I'm risking my child's safety when I know for a fact that I'm not.

The "naive" comment was not the same, and you misquoted me anyway. What I said was: "It is hopelessly naive to believe that if (for example) 44" is "safe," that 43" is unsafe." That's true, though I can understand how those who feel that way might be offended that I consider them naive.

I think someone should end it and just call Disney and ask them if it is OK to wear thicker soled shoes ON PURPOSE, pad their shoes, put their hair up, whatever to get on a ride? Report back, OK.

As I explained before, I'm not saying Disney would approve, or that they should allow those just short of the requirements to slip by. They have to set the line somewhere and then enforce it as consistently as the situation allows. But my attempt to get a child by the measuring stick is no business of yours. I'm not endangering my child's safety, and I'm not hurting any of those "better parents" out there that think Disney sets minimum heights right at the safety limit.

David

 

[BamaFan121s]

I'm shocked! No one wanted to touch the height restriction/faster than the speed limit comparison? I can't imagine why. I guess it's much easier to pin the bad parenting skills on others than it is to admitting you're guilty of the same ones, huh? (Cause let's face it, we ALL speed from time to time...or have at least once at some point in our life.)

 

[ryrysmom14]

David- thank you for clarifying. I did realize that I misquote you saying utterly instead of hopelessly...my bad. I 100% agree with you that noone has a right to tell you what to do with your child which is why I said, in my last post, that everyone has a right to do whatever they want. I, for one, has said that I wouldn't do it with my OWN kids and has never implied here that anyone is a bad parent b/c I am no expert.

 

[BamaFan121s]

I, for one, has said that I wouldn't do it with my OWN kids and has never implied here that anyone is a bad parent b/c I am no expert.

I don't think he neccessarily meant you said it. But it's been implied and stated outright, more than once in this thread. Maybe he was making more of a 'general' response...

 

[dqpowell]

I, for one, has said that I wouldn't do it with my OWN kids and has never implied here that anyone is a bad parent b/c I am no expert.

Yes, sorry -- I didn't mean to imply that you called me a bad parent. My "no business of yours..." comment was meant in the general sense... I was ranting a little there. I apologize if it came across the wrong way.

David

 

[GoochiGirl]

It is really not that serious. I was just at WDW last week 8/12-8/18. I traveled with my DD who just turned 3 and my DS who is 4 and my 8 year old DS. I went there epecting that my daughter was not going to ride any of the big rides due to the fact of her size and age. She wore flip flops in the park because she loves her pink flip flops. I also brought along her tennis shoes in case she got tires of the flip flops not for a heigt increase. The height check was not all that serius. They only had her stand up to a stick to see if her head touched the stick and the only did this before we got in que for the ride. Nobody ever stopped us to check her height again after that. She was checked in her flip flops not her tennis shoes and was able to ride TT, TOT, Dinosour, Soarin and Kali. Those rides are actually mild rides that she enjoyed. My DS 4 wore normal tennis shoes or Nike Sunray sandel and was able to ride SM, MS, and EE. I did not even try to get my daughter's height checked for those rides because I knew that she was not 44 inches tall. They did not do any height check for BTMR or SPlash. My duaghter rode those rides over and over the two days we were at MK and no one ever stopped to check her height.

 

[Buzz Litebeer]

I don't dout you and always find your posts very informative. However I have seen a CM ask kids to remove shoes as I posted prior.

Thanks for the kind words. Likewise, I don't doubt you've seen some CMs do that. Those CMs can also get into some very hot water if those guests complain to management.

I'm just saying what Disney's Official Policy on height measuring is, as it was explained to me not only by my supervisor, but by the next two supervisors up the chain of command (yes, I asked for clarification).