Would you leave a 9-year-old while you go on a ride?

[goofyintoronto]

Yes, I would. My newly - 9 year old would be ok with it. I would first show him where I want him to stay. And then I would have him come through the line with me and use any chicken exit there is...and then he will be waiting where I asked him to when I get off the ride in 2 - 5 minutes.

Exactly this! I'd be totally fine doing this....get the kid to take the chicken exit and have them wait at the giftshop. They can wait near the CM/check out if they wish. I dont see anything wrong with it.

 

[goofyintoronto]

Ok..I didn't read this before my post. Love it!
We all have different parenting styles, and none are right or wrong. But I don't believe in coddling a child who is being stubborn or showing fear for something that we know won't endanger them. There's going to be things that scare you in life..there's going to be times where you're out of your comfort zone, and no matter what age that is a valuable lesson to learn. If you don't want to do something? Fine. But don't expect everyone else to miss out with you.
Maybe that sounds harsh..but again, to me it's about a life lesson.

I totally agree with this! Sometimes they just need a little nudge in the right direction. When my son was younger he was very cautious when trying new things. I'd encourage him to try, and sure enough, he was very happy I did in the end.
OP, I like your plan about trying it with 7DMT first. Its a very short ride, like 2 minutes long.

 

[DisneyFan2013]

You know, this thread has given me a lot of material to chew over.

Every time anything bad ever happened, my mum always asked me, "What did you learn?"

I was molested over a period of time when I was eleven. I had to go to court to testify against the landlord of my building - who had a key and would let himself into our home when my mother was out. My mum, who tried her darndest to keep me safe, ultimately couldn't. What did I learn from that? That, unlike with the bullies at my school, speaking up made the hurting stop. It's something I think I've carried forward through my whole life - that sometimes speaking up doesn't get you punched or labeled a tattletale, sometimes speaking up makes everything better.

When I had kids of my own, I tried hard to make sure they knew they could always speak up. That I'd always listen. And I tried to teach them that I trusted both their good judgement and their resilience and ability to make smart decisions.

But I found my convictions really tested, when my son was diagnosed as hypoglycemic at age nine. He'd fainted, while out with his big sister, and I'd had to run six blocks to meet the ambulance. That was scary. What was even scarier was knowing that he had a paper route and regularly went out alone to deliver his papers. But, rather than make any rash decisions out of fear, I took the time to think through the consequences. What would it do to my boy's confidence, if I decided he couldn't do his paper route alone any more? How would he feel about this condition, that he'd have to live with the rest of his life? Would this become something that held him back, kept him from doing the things he was capable of doing?

In the end, I gave him a snack and lent him the family cellphone, and he went out to deliver his papers as usual, never once suspecting how scared I was to let him go.

And what did I learn from that? That parenting is an act of faith. It's terrifying sometimes, but I don't think I'd have done my children any favours if I'd followed them around with the idea always in my head that "anything can happen" and I shouldn't ever "provide that opportunity". I don't want them growing up like that. I don't want them becoming adults who believe they are always in danger, no matter where they are or what they're doing. I don't want them to think that every other human being is a likely predator, out to hurt them.

My mum spent four years teaching in Lahore. She came home alive. My grandfather died while riding a lawnmower in his own backyard. Life is weird. So... just live. Take reasonable chances. See what opportunities come your way. You might just learn something new!

Great post! My mom is still like this and I'm in my 30s! I know she means well, but her constant worrying and negative thinking is annoying.

Having said that, since my mom has instilled me with fear my whole life, I don't think I'd leave my kids alone while on a ride. Of course I don't even have kids...probably because I'm afraid to have them!

 

[famy27]

Never. Not only is it a 15 minute ride but what if, God forbid, the ride malfunctioned and it turned into an hour or two or three. Let the older one ride alone. You can put them on and be waiting when they exit.

I guess I just can't wrap my head around what people think will happen, even if it turned into two hours (which would be VERY unlikely). I think the worst thing would probably be that the waiting child would get bored.

 

[robinb]

I guess I just can't wrap my head around what people think will happen, even if it turned into two hours (which would be VERY unlikely). I think the worst thing would probably be that the waiting child would get bored.

I don't get it either. A PAYG cell phone can be purchased very cheaply and used in the situation where a parent gets delayed. FWIW, I have been to WDW dozens of times and I have never been delayed 2-3 hours on a ride. Ever.

 

[maxiesmom]

I guess I just can't wrap my head around what people think will happen, even if it turned into two hours (which would be VERY unlikely). I think the worst thing would probably be that the waiting child would get bored.

I think it is very likely a CM would notice and they would make sure they were ok too. Disney World is the last place I would worry about somebody doing something, we are all on camera all of the time! And I would think that if the OP is considering leaving her 9 year old to wait her 9 year old is smart enough not to go off with a stranger.

 

[aaarcher86]

I don't get it either. A PAYG cell phone can be purchased very cheaply and used in the situation where a parent gets delayed. FWIW, I have been to WDW dozens of times and I have never been delayed 2-3 hours on a ride. Ever.

Heck, an ipod can text.

 

[MakiraMarlena]

if you're delayed a very long time, and you have phones, text your kid to find a cast member and say their parent is stuck on a downed ride.

 

[jerseygal]

No way,! No attraction is worth it!

 

[robinb]

No way,! No attraction is worth it!

Worth what? What are you of?

 

[jerseygal]

Worth what? What are you of?

Worth a child being lured by a pedophile in a moment! Go on the sex offender registry of every town in this country and there's plenty of them!

 

[maxiesmom]

Worth a child being lured by a pedophile in a moment! Go on the sex offender registry of every town in this country and there's plenty of them!

Again, if the OP is considering leaving her child behind while she and her other child go on a ride, I doubt she will be lured off. I would bet that if the OP thought she would be, she wouldn't even consider leaving her alone.

 

[robinb]

Worth a child being lured by a pedophile in a moment! Go on the sex offender registry of every town in this country and there's plenty of them!

Lured off? In public? With thousands of guests and CMs around? Nope, I don't think so.

 

[famy27]

Over and over in this thread, there are some wacky perceptions of risk. Getting in your car in driving to WDW is many, many times riskier than having your child sit on a bench, but nobody says that it's not worth it to drive. Reminds me of the Ebola threads last year. People were considering cancelling (and my have actually cancelled) WDW trips, even though there was no actual Ebola threat at WDW.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...shed-by-furniture-than-killed-by-a-terrorist/

 

[Magpie]

Worth a child being lured by a pedophile in a moment! Go on the sex offender registry of every town in this country and there's plenty of them!

Things that get you on the sex offender registry...

"Maya R., now age 28 and a resident of Michigan, was arrested at the age of 10 for sexual experimentation. ‘Me and my step brothers, who were ages 8 and 5, “flashed” each other and play-acted sex while fully-clothed.’ A year later, Maya pled guilty to the charges of criminal sexual conduct in the first and second degree, offenses that required her to register as a sex offender for 25 years. . . .

In 2004, in Western Pennsylvania, a 15-year-old girl was charged with manufacturing and disseminating child pornography for having taken nude photos of herself and posted them on the internet. She was charged as an adult, and as of 2012 was facing registration for life. . . .

In 2006, a 13-year old girl from Ogden, Utah was arrested for rape for having consensual sex with her 12-year-old boyfriend. . . . Her 12-year-old boyfriend was found guilty of violating the same law for engaging in sexual activity with her, as she was also a child under the age of 14 at the time."

From: https://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/us0513_ForUpload_1.pdf

And that's not including people who end up on the sex offender registry for crimes such as public urination.

Of the very few ACTUAL child predators on the list, the vast, vast majority are there for crimes against their own children or children they know very well (such as a step child, a foster child, or a child they were coaching or teaching).

The registry is beyond useless. Almost none of the people listed are any kind of threat to your child.

It's ridiculous to worry about a nine year old "child being lured by a pedophile in a moment!" in a Disney World gift shop. You might as well worry about being hit and killed by a meteorite. Or any other highly unlikely scenario.

 

[JimmyV]

Over and over in this thread, there are some wacky perceptions of risk. Getting in your car in driving to WDW is many, many times riskier than having your child sit on a bench, but nobody says that it's not worth it to drive. Reminds me of the Ebola threads last year. People were considering cancelling (and my have actually cancelled) WDW trips, even though there was no actual Ebola threat at WDW.

Risk reduction is far more complicated than that. Yes, people who cancelled (or thought about cancelling) trips to WDW because of ebola were acting irrationally. But people who cancelled trips to West Africa were not. Just because I am far more likely to die in a car crash than get hit by lightning is not a good reason to run out onto a golf course during a thunderstorm waving a 4 iron around like a lunatic. There are many things that are more risky than letting a young child sit all by themselves on a bench in an amusement park filled with 40,000 people that he does not know. But rattling off a list of the things that are more dangerous is not justification for leaving a child alone on the bench. At that very moment when the child is on the bench and the parent is on a ride, at that precise moment, the child has a greater risk of harm at the hand of strangers than any other risk that can be conjured up. And when the parent and the child are on the Disney Bus back to the resort, at that precise moment, the risk of injury from a bus accident is the single greatest risk that the child faces. Risks change with each passing minute. Just because one can list 999 other things that are statistically more dangerous is not a valid basis to continue the 1,000th most risky behavior if the 1,000th most risky behavior can be easily avoided. (None of this answers the OP's question, or is in anyway suggestive of leaving a child unattended, or refusing to ride buses. It is simply an explanation that quoting statistics and placing risky behaviors in some ordinal listing is rather pointless. At any given moment, one confronts the risks that are in front of them, and all other risks, greater or not, are irrelevant.)

 

[unwritten01]

My 4 1/2 (as he says) could not ride Rock N Roller coaster last week (not 48" even on his tip toes). We were sitting outside the exit while others rode, and a woman asked if we would keep an eye on her daughter while they rode... first time for me... I told them to go through and take chicken exit. Had to then explain it but they were happy and went on. I may have also mentioned that when my family came out we were gone.

 

[Magpie]

Risk reduction is far more complicated than that. Yes, people who cancelled (or thought about cancelling) trips to WDW because of ebola were acting irrationally. But people who cancelled trips to West Africa were not. Just because I am far more likely to die in a car crash than get hit by lightning is not a good reason to run out onto a golf course during a thunderstorm waving a 4 iron around like a lunatic. There are many things that are more risky than letting a young child sit all by themselves on a bench in an amusement park filled with 40,000 people that he does not know. But rattling off a list of the things that are more dangerous is not justification for leaving a child alone on the bench. At that very moment when the child is on the bench and the parent is on a ride, at that precise moment, the child has a greater risk of harm at the hand of strangers than any other risk that can be conjured up. And when the parent and the child are on the Disney Bus back to the resort, at that precise moment, the risk of injury from a bus accident is the single greatest risk that the child faces. Risks change with each passing minute. Just because one can list 999 other things that are statistically more dangerous is not a valid basis to continue the 1,000th most risky behavior if the 1,000th most risky behavior can be easily avoided. (None of this answers the OP's question, or is in anyway suggestive of leaving a child unattended, or refusing to ride buses. It is simply an explanation that quoting statistics and placing risky behaviors in some ordinal listing is rather pointless. At any given moment, one confronts the risks that are in front of them, and all other risks, greater or not, are irrelevant.)

I have to disagree. I suspect your child is probably at greater risk, while sitting on that park bench, of choking on their own tongue. Of falling off the bench and knocking themselves unconscious. Of being attacked by a bird. Of getting struck by lightning out of a clear blue sky.

Because, the fact is, most of those "strangers" are people who will help and assist your child, should they need help. These strangers are castmembers, mothers and fathers, grandparents... all sorts of people who will move heaven and earth to protect a child. There are few places your child could be safer, than on a bench at Disney World.

Irrationally trying to reduce every possible risk, no matter how remote, is no way to live a healthy life.

 

[Hikergirl]

Worth a child being lured by a pedophile in a moment! Go on the sex offender registry of every town in this country and there's plenty of them!

Your child is more at risk sitting in a hotel room with Uncle Bob then they are of being lured by a stranger in WDW. But I'm guessing you are the type who wouldn't let your kids be alone around any male family members. Maybe even female too.

 

[JimmyV]

I have to disagree. I suspect your child is probably at greater risk, while sitting on that park bench, of choking on their own tongue. Of falling off the bench and knocking themselves unconscious. Of being attacked by a bird. Of getting struck by lightning out of a clear blue sky.

Now you are just being contrarian for sport. Go ahead and start a poll, if you wish, and ask the audience if a child sitting alone on a bench is more at risk from foul play by a stranger or by choking on their own tongue and see what sort of results you get. But you already know the answer to that.