<p>07Dad, well, let me tell you, my kids were skiing ALONE MUCH younger than your son! LOL And yes, they also skied out of bounds. My question about skiing in the woods out of bounds (which is more dangerous than trail skiing) had to do with letting a five year old ski downhill in the woods without an adult. My five year olds did not do that (even though they were brought up on downhill skis starting at age one). They did ski alone on marked trails when very young however. In fact, I recall not being able to find my little kid one day on the mountain and had to send ski patrol looking for her! I also have fond memories of my 3 year old careening down the mountain on her own and hearing those on the ski lift above the trail laughing and saying, “Look at that baby skiing with a pacifier in her mouth!” </p>
<p>So, I agree some things are what you are used to in your own environment. Some city kid is not going to ski down the mountain alone at age six like my kid. Likewise, my kid is not going to be allowed on the NYC subway alone at age 12 like some city kid. </p>
<p>Still, within certain circumstances, there are lines to be drawn about safety and high degree of risk. For example, I would not allow my kid at any age to ski where there are high avalanche warnings posted. Even my husband who skis in remote areas avoids high avalanche warnings (and has all the avalanche equipment). So, likewise, a kid who has grown up sailing, might sail solo from Northern CA to Southern CA for example. But sailing solo around the world and in the Indian Ocean during storm season has a high danger risk even for an adult. That is my point.</p>
<p>Well, my kids never used “floaties”, and they learned to swim about the time they learned to walk. I took public transportation regularly by myself when I was 7 – it was how I got to school if the weather wasn’t good enough for bike-riding, which was often the case in my near-northern-Midwest city. My kids took public transportation by themselves at that age, too, although less frequently (and in a bigger, less friendly city).</p>
<p>I have a niece to whom I am close who was a professional acrobat starting at 17, and just quit at 29. Her parents didn’t “encourage” it, though, and her younger sister had completely different interests. My sister was a ski racer as a teen, until her career was ended by a fall that she has spent the past 30 years coping with. My best friend, as noted above, sailed around the world. (Actually, he hasn’t completed the circle yet; he has about a week of sailing left, if no hurricane comes.) I was very familiar with his planning for the trip. </p>
<p>I am familiar with risk. I feel critical of hypercautious people.</p>
<p>But sailing across the Indian Ocean in the 40s in winter, alone, isn’t mere “risk” unless you have to do it. It’s a stunt. A really stupid stunt. Something like being on Jackass every day for a month.</p>
<p>By the way, my kids started with swimming lessons as babies too though I recall using floaties for a brief time as tots or if we went to the ocean as the ocean involved currents and they only went to the ocean like once/year and so I didn’t feel safe even with their swimming skills in the ocean when they were toddlers, even though they could tread water.</p>
<p>The reason I feel as I do about subways for my kids (when younger) alone is only because they grew up in a rural area that has no public transportation. Had it been a way of life, I’d have felt differently, I’m sure.</p>
<p>Regarding having faith in God, yes it’s a wonderful and mature thing. However, Jesus said, “Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.” This is what Jesus said to Satan when Satan urged Him to jump off the pinnacle of the temple. God gives people common sense and He doesn’t change the rules of nature because someone has faith. If you jump off a tall building, the laws of physics will prevail. If you put your hand into fire, you’ll get burned. If you gamble with your life by doing something inherently dangerous, you may lose it, regardless of your faith. Faith is not a guaranteed insurance policy against stupidity or foolhardiness.</p>
<p>Maybe that’s why they have plenty of other little replacements around - and one on the way. They could send one a year off to a headline grabbing death and still be going strong for almost a decade.</p>
<p>Once again, I am not going to attempt to set a line for any other parent. </p>
<p>In Micronesia for instance (and in almost any really poor coastal area of third and fourth world countries), there are no labor laws and kids (way) younger than 16 are sailing on the ocean solo. I can understand that a parent might not want their child to sail solo around the world (due to the safety concerns of the parent), but IMO the age of the child and solo status isn’t an automatic talisman of bad parenting.</p>
<p>Question: is it possible to “time” an around the world solo sail that doesn’t put the boat in some area “at the wrong season?” I actually don’t know.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Then how does belief in predestination work into this? Or, is that a wrong tenent of faith?</p>
<p>Okay, we’ve all vented about the parents’ bad judgement and how dangerous it was for a ‘mere child’ to take on such an extraordinary feat as sailing solo around the world. </p>
<p>Yes, the parents should have planned for a different time of year so as to minimize the risk entailed in crossing the southern ocean. Yes, the idea of trying to set (yet another) world record is really tiresome – why is THAT so important?! My god, isn’t it enough to actually undertake such a voyage on those vast oceans?! What an incredible experience!!</p>
<p>How many of us, ranting and raving about the soundness of such a decision, do not secretly long for something similarly wild and invigorating? I think most of us are actually green with envy that anyone, much less a sixteen-year-old, has the temerity to take on such a monumental enterprise.</p>
<p>The girl is a highly experienced, long time sailor – regardless of age. Let’s give her credit, after all she did mange to sail from California all the way to the Indian Ocean. I’m guessing she is pretty damn sure about how to handle a boat. I am totally in awe of such skill. I’d say her abilities served her very well – including during the unfortunate dismasting. How many os us would have survived that?</p>
<p>I do think that sailing is her passion – anyone who has been bitten by the bug will understand that!. And, I do hope she will try again (as she said) – only next time with the saner goal of simply completing a circumnavigation – no matter the length of the voyage. </p>
<p>It is, after all, the journey, not the destination that is most rewarding.</p>
<p>“How many of us, ranting and raving about the soundness of such a decision, do not secretly long for something similarly wild and invigorating? I think most of us are actually green with envy that anyone, much less a sixteen-year-old, has the temerity to take on such a monumental enterprise.”</p>
<p>Speak for yourself. I don’t long for that kind of adventure, and am not envious at all that the 16-year-old dares to do that. I think she’s foolhardy and am glad that no one in my family longs to do something like that.</p>
<p>My idea of a fun adventure is singing and dancing on stage, something I took up in my mid 50s.</p>
<p>leanid, One can have adventure without aiming to set some record. What’s wrong with sailing around the world with two people in the boat? With a chase boat in case of emergency when in those areas of the world where land is 2000 miles away? What’s wrong with stopping in ports? What’s wrong with going at a time of year when storms are less of an issue (unless trying to beat the “youngest” record in time)? </p>
<p>07Dad, I don’t think you got my point but that’s OK. I already agreed with you that circumstances of what your kid is used to is a factor (city kid vs. country kid, age when starting a hobby, etc). But there is a point that NO matter the experiential level of the person (kid or adult) certain ventures are HIGH RISK for death. In my view, those are unwise. Everybody can do what they want of course. But a parent has a role in trying to minimize death for their child. Thus solo sailing for a teen like Abby is fine given how well trained and experienced she is. Solo sailing around the world in the way she did it was nuts in terms of the high risk to her life, in my view (even if she were the premiere expert at sailing).</p>
<p>At age 16 Abby was sailing 'round the world.</p>
<p>At age 16, my DD was studying Russian, honors math, honors chemistry, history, english and art. She also rowed for her high school and helped paint a mural in her school building. She occasionally helped out supervising disabled kids at an afterschool camp. She knitted little hats for our dachshund, watched “Friends” and “Grey’s Anatomy”, went to movies and to Starbucks with her buddies. She also bicycled and went swimming when she could. None of these activities put her life at risk.</p>
<p>Do y’all remember Beck Weathers? From Wikepedia:
</p>
<p>I’ve heard him speak and his story is remarkable. At the end he talks about why he was always looking for the next big risk. He admits that he was basically running away from home. Here is what he has to say about extreme risk:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Here’s a link to an interview with Dr. Weathers:</p>
<p>It certainly sounds like a hollow, meaningless life, yorkyfan! I’m sorry that your D is one of those kids who sits on the couch and plays videogames.</p>
<p>I’d be more inclined to buy the arguments about the glorious adventure if it weren’t for the shameless marketing!</p>
<p>“One can have adventure without aiming to set some record.”</p>
<p>"What’s wrong with stopping in ports? What’s wrong with going at a time of year when storms are less of an issue (unless trying to beat the “youngest” record in time)? "</p>
<p>Please reread my last post. You’ll see that I am in agreement with you on those points.</p>
<p>But the other stuff is laughable. A person with a passion for something (“thing” , not “one”) only needs that thing. Sailing solo is perfectly reasonable. And, a “chase boat”?! Please… maybe with the parents in it to check on every little thing…rofl! </p>
<p>Without the passion you cannot understand the allure…</p>
<p>Actually, our kids’ lives are at risk all the time. Just driving a car or riding a bike involve some risk. And so on with other examples. </p>
<p>I think it is more to do with the degree of risk and the odds of it. When the degree is high and the odds are high of extreme danger, I find it unwise to take that level of risk no matter one’s age but particularly when dealing with making that decision for your children who are minors. </p>
<p>My kids do things that others likely find quite risky. But I am not opposed to risk. But there is a line to draw where the risk becomes very high and then it is playing with fire. </p>
<p>One example…my daughter has traveled solo in many foreign countries many times for the past six years. However, we drew the line at one country/city she’d like to visit where she knows someone who lives there. This country is currently on the State Dept. List of advisories for Americans to NOT visit. She is over 18 but has respected our wishes given the dangers we feel in this situation (she is the fearless type however), and has lots of other countries she lives in and travels to (even as I type this).</p>
<p>leanid…I think having a “mother ship” (which did not have to have her own parents on it!) made sense because one of the biggest dangers in that solo voyage is that help was 2000 miles away. Had she fallen into the sea in that storm (a distinct possibility that even her parents feared may have happened before she was located), help was two days away. My point about a mother ship is to minimize the risk of death while still having the adventure. Same with stopping in ports or having a partner along. Those are sane ideas to minimize the risk while still setting off on a wild adventure. I mean they chose for her to have a satellite phone! Why bother if she just wanted adventure?? She didn’t have to have the phone or internet, right? Those were added as a “safety” measure of sorts.</p>
<p>Soovievt- I think the idea of a “mother ship” would be laughable to people who sail. As a mother I would want my child to have a “mother ship” but as someone who is married to a sailor I know that is unrealistic.
I do agree that the adventure could have included an adult and also stopping at ports along the way. For me not seeing the different places along the way would be short sighted. I will go cruising but for me it is definitely not about the sailing portion but about the ability to see and go places that most people will never see. I have been to coves and beaches on islands that are not reachable by land.
I also wonder if people would still be upset with the parents if the Dad had been along and the same events had happened. It would still be a case of a parent putting a child in harms way.
It also comes down to what you are comfortable with. I can not watch my kids ski or snowboard. It makes me sick to my stomach. I was not raised skiing. To me it is unsafe and I can’t watch. Part of that is unrealistic fears, which is why I let them do it. They have had plenty of lessons.
From watching some of the videos of Abby before her trip I have come to the conclusion that she is a confident sailor. I have spent many a afternoon in amusement watching adults who think they know what they are doing trying to drop an anchor, or dropping an anchor is a position that will probably get them into trouble. I would not consider sailing a high risk sport. Like any activity knowledge is the key. I would be more comfortable with my child sailing versus ski racing. One of the things my kids don’t always love about sailing is how long it takes to get somewhere. They would look and envy those in the powerboats with the engine and the AC and the full sized bed.
I am not defending the family. I would be nervous but would let my H take one of my kids on an extended sailing trip. I would not let any of them solo. I would not be happy with my H if he took a solo trip to the local islands. Heck I get angry with him if he surfs alone.</p>
<p>10 minutes on Google and I now know of recent shootings/killings at Starbucks in Atlanta, Midtown NY and in DC and the number and variety of shootings accross the US at movie theaters. CDC rates bicycle related injuries way up there with 700 fatalities a year. As pointed out before, drowning is a major death risk in children. Rowers drown and have heart attacks, per US Rower’s. The stats on lethal assaults and non-lethal sexual assaults on students on high school grounds, both pre and post Columbine, were shocking.</p>
<p>While we are all glad nothing bad happened to yorkyfan’s daughter, to believe that it would have been out of the question is unrealistic.</p>
<p>Well, if she had a satellite phone my opinion of her sense of REAL adventure is considerably diminished… ;)</p>
<p>The whole point of it is that the danger is real – REAL – and it is accepted not because there is a death wish but because there is a drive to overcome that which CAN be overcome. Solo circumnavigations have been done a number of times. That in itself is enough (for some) to encourage another attempt.</p>
<p>I must say, though, that when something is tried for the very first time – whatever it is – by mankind, that is the ultimate, pure adventure. It is the not knowing how things will turn out that turns some people ON – and others (quite a few others, by this forum) OFF.</p>
<p>07Dad:
I agree that yorkyfan’s D was at risk. The point is, the odds of risk or death walking into Starbucks or riding her bike are not as great as the risks that Abby Sunderland faced solo on this voyage. Everything involves risk. It’s when you venture into an endeavor where the risk of danger and death is high, it becomes unwise to some of us. </p>
<p>Mom60: It is interesting that you say that if Abby’s dad was along for the sail, people would have said he put his D in danger. But he surely put her in more danger letting her go solo. The risks rose with that decision he had to make. And where we agree is that you’d let your teen go if an adult was on that voyage, but not alone. That’s my point. I’m not saying sailing adventures of this nature are off limits but one would minimize the risk of death as much as possible, even though it can’t be eliminated. </p>
<p>I know the idea of a mother ship sounds silly to you but you also don’t have experience with a solo voyage crossing those continents. I am not saying a mother ship is necessary if the kid sails from Boston to Miami. Help can be on the way if danger arises. Help is not readily on the way if in the middle of the Indian Ocean. Add in storm season. Add in solo…which could mean even illness which would make her unable to sail and nobody to take over.</p>
</p>