# Sticky  Drowning does not look like Drowning



## Shorty

A friend posted this on another site,i thought it might be of interest here,,

Drowning Doesn't Look Like Drowning 
The new captain jumped from the cockpit, fully dressed, and sprinted through the water. A former lifeguard, he kept his eyes on his victim as he headed straight for the owners who were swimming between their anchored sportfisher and the beach. "I think he thinks you're drowning," the husband said to his wife. They had been splashing each other and she had screamed but now they were just standing, neck-deep on the sand bar. "We're fine, what is he doing?" she asked, a little annoyed. "We're fine!" the husband yelled, waving him off, but his captain kept swimming hard. "Move!" he barked as he sprinted between the stunned owners. Directly behind them, not ten feet away, their nine-year-old daughter was drowning. Safely above the surface in the arms of the captain, she burst into tears, "Daddy!" How did this captain know, from fifty feet away, what the father couldn't recognize from just ten? Drowning is not the violent, splashing, call for help that most people expect. 
The captain was trained to recognize drowning by experts and years of experience. The father, on the other hand, had learned what drowning looks like by watching television. 
If you spend time on or near the water (hint: that's all of us) then you should make sure that you and your crew knows what to look for whenever people enter the water. Until she cried a tearful, "Daddy," she hadn't made a sound. As a former Coast Guard rescue swimmer, I wasn't surprised at all by this story.
Drowning is almost always a deceptively quiet event. The waving, splashing, and yelling that dramatic conditioning (television) prepares us to look for, is rarely seen in real life. The Instinctive Drowning Response - so named by Francesco A. Pia, Ph.D., is what people do to avoid actual or perceived suffocation in the water. And it does not look like most people expect. There is very little splashing, no waving, and no yelling or calls for help of any kind. 
To get an idea of just how quiet and undramatic from the surface drowning can be, consider this: It is the number two cause of accidental death in children, age 15 and under (just behind vehicle accidents) - of the approximately 750 children who will drown next year, about 375 of them will do so within 25 yards of a parent or other adult. In ten percent of those drownings, the adult will actually watch them do it, having no idea it is happening (source: CDC). 
Drowning does not look like drowning - Dr. Pia, in an article in the Coast Guard's On Scene Magazine, described the instinctive drowning response like this: 
1.Except in rare circumstances, drowning people are physiologically unable to call out for help. The respiratory system was designed for breathing. Speech is the secondary or overlaid function. Breathing must be fulfilled, before speech occurs.

2.Drowning people's mouths alternately sink below and reappear above the surface of the water. The mouths of drowning people are not above the surface of the water long enough for them to exhale, inhale, and call out for help. When the drowning people's mouths are above the surface, they exhale and inhale quickly as their mouths start to sink below the surface of the water.

3.Drowning people cannot wave for help. Nature instinctively forces them to extend their arms laterally and press down on the water's surface. Pressing down on the surface of the water, permits drowning people to leverage their bodies so they can lift their mouths out of the water to breathe.

4.Throughout the Instinctive Drowning Response, drowning people cannot voluntarily control their arm movements. Physiologically, drowning people who are struggling on the surface of the water cannot stop drowning and perform voluntary movements such as waving for help, moving toward a rescuer, or reaching out for a piece of rescue equipment.

5.From beginning to end of the Instinctive Drowning Response people's bodies remain upright in the water, with no evidence of a supporting kick. Unless rescued by a trained lifeguard, these drowning people can only struggle on the surface of the water from 20 to 60 seconds before submersion occurs. (Source: http://www.uscg.mil/hq/cg5/cg534/On%20S ... Fall06.pdf)

This doesn't mean that a person that is yelling for help and thrashing isn't in real trouble - they are experience aquatic distress. Not always present before the instinctive drowning response, aquatic distress doesn't last long - but unlike true drowning, these victims can still assist in there own rescue. They can grab lifelines, throw rings, etc. Look for these other signs of drowning when persons are in the water: 
•Head low in the water, mouth at water level 
•Head tilted back with mouth open 
•Eyes glassy and empty, unable to focus 
•Eyes closed •Hair over forehead or eyes 
•Not using legs - Vertical 
•Hyperventilating or gasping 
•Trying to swim in a particular direction but not making headway 
•Trying to roll over on the back 
•Ladder climb, rarely out of the water.

So if a crew member falls overboard and every looks O.K. - don't be too sure. Sometimes the most common indication that someone is drowning is that they don't look like they're drowning. They may just look like they are treading water and looking up at the deck. One way to be sure? Ask them: "Are you alright?" If they can answer at all - they probably are. If they return a blank stare - you may have less than 30 seconds to get to them. And parents: children playing in the water make noise. When they get quiet, you get to them and find out why


----------



## dru

Definitely of interest - thanks.


----------



## Davey G

Good thread. Keep an eye on your kids!


----------



## Dodge

Shorty that is an interesting and important subject and certainly the opposite of what I would have expected.

Mods is it worthwhile making this a sticky in this forum as the info might save a life someday.


----------



## Clarkos

My eldest, before she could swim, fell into the neigbours pool, twice. I was there both times, and thankfully paying attention. Both times it was virtually silent. Little to no splash, and straight to the bottom. Both times I watched to see what her reaction would be before I fished her out, and to see if she could get herself out. It was exactly as described as above, but she couldn't get to the surface. As described above, what scared me most was the lack of noise.


----------



## keza

Great thread.

I had 2 cases with my kids when they were toddlers.
One was just in the bath, my wife and I were having a heated discussion when we noticed they was no noise in the background.
Turned around to see the little one just lying on the bottom with eyes open.

The second was at the beach when my daughter ran down to the water to throw a shell, the edge was steep and she couldn't stop running, so just fell in and again sunk to the bottom and lay there with eyes open.

On both occasions I calmly picked them up and tried to get them laughing about it.
I think it is really important with small kids that you don't make a big deal about it. When they are small they have a natural instinct that will stop them breathing in the water, so don't panic.
Neither of my kids seem to be affected by it, they love the stories and find it funny.
They are both better swimmers than me now.


----------



## Buff

One of the most interesting and disturbing items I've read in a long time :shock: 
Its amazing how TV has influenced the way we think and our expectations on what we think we should see when people are in trouble.
Definitely changed my idea of a quiet day at the beach :?
Thanks for the info.


----------



## FazerPete

This is a good thread and is worthwhile information. I remember my nephew falling in a pool when he was 2 or 3 and he just went straight to the bottom and sat there looking around. Luckily there were adults everywhere so the splash as 4 people dived into the pool to get him out scared him more than sitting on the bottom.

An interesting side fact I read about drowning is that 10% of those people who die at sea don't drown at all but suffocate. Apparently some people have a panic reflex that clamps the trachea shut and they can't breathe so when they perform autopsies they find absolutely no water in their lungs. Of course it unfortunately doesn't affect the end result.


----------



## Barrabundy

Thanks for that post. Having young kids I found it disturbing an a good reminder about water safety. I'll be much more relaxed about noisey kids in the pool from now on.


----------



## Shorty

Although i have seen folks on Bondi Rescue waving for help one i saw die was when one of the Rescue guys saw someone in the water and a bit later did not see him,he paddled out not knowing if he had moved on or not he kept saying he could not have dissapeared that fast ??? he was really puzzled :?

He decided it must of been one of the swimmers nearby that he saw,,nobody reported anybody missing but at the end of the day a lady and young kid from Nepal or somewhere came to say they had not seen the husband for some hours,they found his body later.

Another thing i heard was a girl about 10 went missing during a picnic,the police and everybody scoured the bushland for hours,,a lady turned up with a tracker dog and it swam straight out to the middle of the pond ,nobody went swimming that day but she must have slipped on the muddy bank and went quietly under water a few meters from the family of picnicers,she never made a sound,,,


----------



## troutfish

gee, that was scary to read. i am so paranoid with our pool , and more so now

thanks for posting, this has really made me think


----------



## gcfisho

Wow that is a real eye opener and priceless information , thanks .


----------



## AlbyMc

My daughter, when she was about 4yrs old, and before she could swim, was at a public pool at a birthday party,patrolled by a male teen age "life guard" more interested in talking to the girls in the canteen than watching the water, was playing in water with other kids that came up to her mid waist. I was in the water nearby keeping an eye on her while talking to my wife (pregnant with our second child).In the two seconds it took me to change positions to talk to another parent, while my eyes were of the water,my daughter slipped and went under,not able to find her feet,she panic'd. Luckly, my wife saw it and told me, I rushed over and pulled her out and calmed her down. The kids playing around her did not know anything was wrong, no other parent noticed,said or did anything and the "lifeguard" was no where to be seen.Rest of the party, she was either sitting between us or playing koala,clinging to my shoulder when I did get her back near the water.
Just after this, she was in swim school and has not looked back since. The fact it happened so fast and silently really shook me. Now neither of my kids go into the water without my wife or myself being there to keep a VERY close eye on them.

Very good read for every one regardless if you have kids or not. Maybe somebody elses pride and joy you save 

Alby


----------



## AlbyMc

Hi Lapse. I did not mean that the life guard was at fault and if that was implyed, then i'm sorry.I realize that the lifeguards do an incredibile job and they deserve every bit of praise that they get.He was young and it was a big responibilty for him to take, 2 pools on his own is a big ask for any person.Some people get are put into situations that they are are not fully prepared for and I've seen this as a NSWRFS volunteer for over 25 years. I do believe that every child is the responsiblilty of the parent and my situation was no different.My point was that parents' have a sense of safety when they know that a life guard is on duty and that some people take that to the extreme. I was only trying to make the point of how quickly this can happen. I was watching my girl completely, knowing her swimming ability, and in the 2 seconds it took me to change position, she went under.I was in the water with her,only about 15 metres away when this happened.Up to 1 minute before, I'd been at her side. I had just left her side to talk to the other parent and as such had taken my eyes from her. Again, sorry if I offended you as that was not my intention,only to reinstate how fast this situation can happen.


----------



## andybear

Thanks for the informative post.

I am one of those who would be expecting the TV/Film version of drowning. When you look at the subject hard, it makes perfect sense. I am now much more aware

Thanks again, Cheers Andybear ;-)


----------



## blueyak

Great post shorty.


----------



## wopfish

Thanks for that post - something that I'll always remeber. One question my young boy will be two in december - what age do you think is a good time to get them some basic swimming lessons ?


----------



## Junglefisher

wopfish said:


> Thanks for that post - something that I'll always remeber. One question my young boy will be two in december - what age do you think is a good time to get them some basic swimming lessons ?


Well at just over 2 years old, my youngest son survived falling into a pool PURELY because he had had swimming lessons and could dog paddle back to the edge. I reckon you can guess what my opinion is  It's never too early! Of course, swimming lessons don't have to be formal, you can teach your kids to swim yourself.


----------



## wopfish

Thanks for that JF, yes I was thinking soon, starting in the spring here in Sydney. I dont want to go through this next summer without him being aquainted with the water. Glad to hear your boy did good


----------



## keza

Earlier the better I think.
One of ours did the lessons from 3 months (i think), with all the underwater stuff.
Just try to make it a lot of fun.
When they are old enough, nippers is great but ours really needed pushing.
Well worth it in the end, I never need worry about my kids in the water now.

I told my kids that if they did nippers, then they could swim in the surf on their own but if they didn't, they could only go in when I went in.
Not cool to swim with a dad in budgie smugglers, so they took the nippers option. ( thank god I can go back to board shorts now  )


----------



## sbd

keza said:


> thank god I can go back to board shorts now


Amen.


----------



## keza

sbd said:


> keza said:
> 
> 
> 
> thank god I can go back to board shorts now
> 
> 
> 
> Amen.
Click to expand...

Do you want your swimmers back now ?
Washed or unwashed ?


----------



## Barrabundy

When I first read this I emailed it off to close family members who all have young kids and pools.

Last night I had a conversation with one of them who said that, a few days after reading it, she was at a swim school in Brisbane txt'ing while her 3yo daughter was having lessons. She casually glanced up to watch and noticed a child bobbing in the water with eyes wide open but not making any sound or motion. That particular part of the story had stuck in her mind and recognised the symptoms straight away so was up in a flash to get to the pool.

At the same instant the parent, who'd been sitting there wondering if her girl needed help, sprung into action as well along with a third parent who had noticed their own child in the same predicament.

One of the instructors had given a child a push-off back towards the step and had turned around to start with the next child and didn't notice that the child they pushed-off didn't make it to the step and got into trouble pretty much straight away. Apparently no one paniced and my sister wondered whether they'd realised how serious the situation was. Even though none of the parents thought much of it at the time, the instructor was taken off the roster.

The first child had just slipped off the step and couldn't get back on, noone noticed with all the activity.

I thought this thread deserved a bump now that were heading into the warmer months.


----------



## dru

Barra - great to see this thread having immediate impact. And the "bump" is certainly worthwhile.


----------



## Rose

xxxxxxxxxxxxx


----------



## Shorty

Thats scary Rose,,funny about the guy just walking off like that,thank god he came when he did,,


----------



## Rose

I wish he hadn't...I'd love to know who it was gave me all these years...


----------



## keza

Rose said:


> I wish he hadn't...I'd love to know who it was gave me all these years...


I'm pretty sure it was Will Smith, I saw the film :lol:

edit:
no laughing matter i know but it does sound like Hancock or one of those heros


----------



## johnny

nearly drowned when i was at whale beach 25 years ago
decided not to die quick but to fight
every leg/arm muscle ached for days later
coughed up water for 2 hours

was climbing the ladder..was classic one arm up for help..was yelling when i got above the water...saw the people just look up and gawk from sunbathing...........those sh.. for brains ..

mate saw me,dived under me,i got on his shoulders to muster all my strength to body surf out...


----------



## Straddie

Yep, also have been close to drowning, once as a kid at a pool, jumped into the ??shallow end?? at a new pool only to discover it was the deep end. Ended up near the bottom just looking up at the sunlight and bubbles before my brother saved me. It seemed to take a while for the rescue and I was fully aware that I was trouble but knew that I was unable to rescue myself. The other event was when I was sliding across an old wire rope at Whale Rock, Stradbroke and heard the "snap" of the rope and fell into the water with a full knapsack and rods and bucket. Hmmm ........ somehow my memory is wiped about this, until I found myself again looking up from down deep in the water, I believe that I went into shock or was stunned as I hit the rocks and bounced into the water. But once again the brain was operating on a different level to what my body was doing. My thought patterns were focussed (not always on the required rescue) but on trying to process all things at once. My thoughts were intertwined between "watching the bubbles" to "trying to understand why my legs and arms were doing the ladder climb???". So yes, my body did go into involuntary motions and my brain was trying to comprehend all the different stimuli. Somehow my legs and arms came in contact with the underwater cliff and this final gave me a solution to escape. All I had to do was climb the underwater cliff and all my energy was then placed into this solution to save my own life. I was surprised how vicious I was in thrusting my hands into the rocks and grasping at the rocks with my bare flesh of my fingertips. It did not take long before I was at the surface and just kept climbing until I was high and dry?? or wet?? My fingers were ripped up and bleeding, but I did not even feel any of this and all I did was look at my hands but did not register any thoughts. All I was doing was trying to calm myself down because I think I could have lifted a car at that point of time and since there was no car around I had to sit and let my body calm down because it was so ready for a fight. 
This all happened at sunrise, and was watched by a middle aged couple who just happen to be at the Point having a ??wonderful?? romantic morning watching a sunrise for the wedding anniversary which was rudely interrupt by a near drowning of a rock fisherman (another statistic). I still feel sorry for spoiling their morning and I have learnt a lesson to not rely on someone else's gear when it comes to safety.
So I do reinforce this initial discussion thread, and have always stood as lifeguard for my kids at all times in any water, and this was reinforced when our son almost drowned in a laundry tub of water on a hot summer day. He was a 2 yr old and was just sitting in the tub splashing water around. We went into the kitchen and he slipped onto his back with his legs in the air. He was unable to reposition himself or get his head above the half filled tube and was literally drowning in the laundry tube. This also happens with half filled water buckets as small kids fall head first into the buckets and are unable to push themselves back out. So I am very very careful around water with kids and for myself I am always looking at the risk and working out escape plans if I end up in the water.

Be safe, be vigilant
cheers Phil


----------



## jayman

very interesting read thanx for posting just goes to show what tv does to us i thought the whole splashing thing was wat it looked like.

cheers jay


----------



## Barrabundy

Just off on a slight but timely tangent. With all the flood waters around the place at the moment the temptation to play in them is irresistible for some, particularly kids. Floodwater is dirty, once someone goes under noone can see them to rescue them. Kids jumping off bridges are particularly at risk. They can't see what's under the water and once their heads go under no on knows where they've gone, something people don't think of!


----------



## tingles

Hi All

I've been a paramedic for 20 years and a helicopter rescue crewman for 15. There is some good info in the previous posts which fellow yakkers should heed. If I were to summarise my thoughts on this subject it would be:
- learn CPR
- teach your kids to swim
- NEVER take your eyes off them when around water
- ALWAYS wear a PFD when boating or yakking. Kids should wear one ALL THE TIME even when not mandatory. 
- wear hi vis colours - if I can't find you, I can't save you!!

Safe yakkin'

Dave


----------



## kayakone

Of course the first reflex is to jump in and save the life, but.......!

Take a second or two first. There could be danger for you. This is the 'D' of DRABC. DANGER, Respond, Airway, Breathing, Circulation.

A friend and his 8 months pregnant wife invited his wife's brother over for a BBQ beside the backyard pool. She was cooling off in the pool when her brother, at the BBQ with his brother-in-law noticed something strange....she seemed to be in trouble. He jumped in to save her (and her unborn child). But the pool was alive with 240 volts (the light had leaked through both seals - this cannot happen now as all pool lights must be 12 volt). A double tragedy became, in one well meaning second, a triple tragedy, leaving unspeakable pain.

Always check for danger first. This applies to road accidents, finding someone lying on the kitchen floor, anywhere someone is in trouble or in an unusual state. This is easier said than done. It must become mantra....check, check. You have to hold yourself back for a moment to check for danger.

On another note


liam8227 said:


> A bronze medallion course will teach you rescue techniques and from memory the course I took also had a CPR/EAR component. First aid/bronze medallion course are a couple of hundred bucks but well worthwhile if you get into a situation where someone needs rescuing and first aid.


Agreed Liam, but the techniques we learned then did not work when I tried to save someone. Brisbane readers will know this place, and old farts like me will remember the time...January 1974. We were driving down Margaret Street from George Street, but couldn't go far because the intersection with Albert Street was 6' under water. 
As we climbed out of the SES car, we realized someone was drowning on the intersection. I sprinted through the muddy water and tried to take him in a chin carry, but rapidly became a victim as he clawed me under repeatedly. After the third dunking I went under and swam underwater towards him searching in the murky water till I had his ankles. I spun him and came up his body to take him in a choke hold. I had this strange thought "I'm going to save you, you bastard, despite trying to drown both of us." A few kicks to the traffic light standard, and I held on waiting for the SES rescue boat. No way was I going to release the choke hold.

I hope this stuff is taught nowadays.


Lapse said:


> Of the rescues I have done at work (very busy pool in Brisbane), I would say about half of the children were directly supervised by an adult in the water. Interested in what Lapse says about this.
> 
> Great post. Very helpful.
> Cheers
> Trevor


----------



## DECIM8

Interested thread, I was swimming fluently before I was 6 months old. Before I could walk I could swim!!! Apart from that, it built muscle for walking but .. If you dont have a child who is taught not to cross a road, avoid cars or swim before 2 something is wrong. If they dont know their own house address, phone number and what number to ring in emergency before the age of 4 - something is wrong.

Old thead, came up in a search but serious situation which needs to be noticed.

BUMP.


----------



## emufingers

Kraley is in line with the information of experts in the area. No mattr how bright and advanced a child is, they do not have the ability to assess risk very well. Having skills like swimming and using the phone is great. The principles of prevention say that relying on a safety behaviour is the least effective way of avoiding tragedy. The best is to make sure that there is no access to pools without direct supervision. This why pool fences are required. It took a long while but you will find that even Lawrie Lawrence who is a strongsupported of infant swimming emphasises the importance of making sure kids can't get access to pools unless they are with an adult.

The fact is that kids are unpredictable. If they are distracted then the fact that they have the ability to do something often does not translate into them actually doing it. Be proud of what they can do, but if you want to keep them, don't rely on it to keep them safe.


----------



## GT79

Without saying I think anyone is right OR wrong, I don't think an extra layer of protection is a bad thing.
At work, home, driving the car, even Yakking we take steps to avoid possible disastrous outcomes.

I don't have a pool and my kids don't spend a great deal of time at pools/beaches etc and NEVER unsupervised, but they could both swim by the age of two.
At least enough to get to the edge or step of a pool.

My daughter at age four also knows how to ring "000", her address etc.
My reasoning ... As I am a shift worker my wife spends a fair chunk of time at home with just the kids.
A slip in the shower, stroke, whatever, we all know what can happen, we all also know what difference timely attention can make.

Thanks for starting this thread and to all for their own experiences and input.

GT79


----------



## keza

Our kids starting swimming from 6 months.
The lessons were never about learning to swim as such but more about comfort in the water. Most kids have this as babies but lose it as they get older.
The main lesson I can remember was for the kids (old than 6 months obviously) to return to the side of the pool. 
You would repeatedly put then out from the side and they returned to the side to hang on, it doesn't take much for them to learn doggy paddle.
This is of course all done with fun and games so the kids enjoy it.
I would still keep an eye on my kids but was happier that they at least had some comfort in the water and wouldn't panic.
All kids are different but for my kids I knew they would always be around water, so swimming has been important.

When they were older we had the constant fight with them not wanting to go to nippers, fair enough Bronte is not the most user friendly beach in Australia but the rule was that if they didn't go to nippers, then they weren't allowed in the water without me and if they did, they were.

I was going to say that no amount of precaution is too much but I don't really agree with that. I have friends who have a fear of the water and they have transferred that to their kids by being over cautious. I don't those kids will every enjoy the sea.


----------



## kayakone

kraley said:


> There isn't any excuse for letting a two year old out of your sight in a house that possesses a hazard like this. Sorry we disagree.
> 
> Two year olds need to be kept under your watch, and at arms length at all times. They don't 'just wander off'.


Ken, they do 'just wander off'. At an amazing speed. No parent can watch a child for every moment of every day. I will admit to 2 such incidents when my kids were young. One, at age 18 months, wandered (we think ran - so short was the time) onto a main road, along it and down a side street....two very distraught parents. The other one was out the front door, which he couldn't open (till then), and rode his tricycle down the front stairs. I know of several other incidents in families. Tragically, there have been many deaths, from cars reversing, to drownings etc.

Not every parent who experiences such trauma could be said to be to 'blame' for lack of supervision. It can happen in a very short time span.



kraley said:


> Lapse said:
> 
> 
> 
> You have once again completely missed the point kraley - It is not about using their ability to swim as the only method of preventing a death.
> 
> 
> 
> I am pretty sure that you are missing my point: early swimming lessons don't do the child any harm, but are pretty useless as a preventative measure for drowning. In fact, the attitude that it can be relied on at all is a huge additional risk that might let parents let up on things that actually matter.
Click to expand...

"....risk that might let parents let up on things that actually matter. " I see your point about possibly fostering a casual attitude from some parents. Your caution re attitude is valid. _Yes it might._, *but it might help when other defences have failed*.

In regard to swimming/survival lessons for young children, 
"....but are pretty useless as a preventative measure for drowning" I disagree. I think, as Lapse (he has saved a lot of lives) and others have said, that something is better than nothing, as is every element of safety/survival training.

Trevor


----------



## emufingers

It's amazing how emotions and blame are always stirred up with regard to safety. The whole idea that someone is to blame gets in the way. If you ever watch Air crash investigation, it is nearly always a failure of several part of the system that leads to tragedy. My riak management and safety training suggests a hierarchy of controls.
1. Separate the person at risk from the hazard&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.A fence. A great distance
2.	Reduce exposure by changing the frequency of exposure &#8230;&#8230;. Limit the number of times you go near unprotected water
3.	Limit amount of the hazard &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.shallow water and not much area
4.	Put in place automatic protection if the person and the hazard meet&#8230;&#8230;put a lifejacket on when near unprotected water
5.	Teach a safety response behaviour&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230; parent supervision&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.. swimming skills
6.	Teach a treatment response &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..dial 000 do CPR
All of these modify the risk of drowning. The ones nearer the top have more effect those near the bottom have less effect.
Your active child will get out of sight near water at some time. A child resistant fence and then a life jacket are your best bets, the child being able to swim is down the list.
The more levels of protection that are available the lower the risk of a tragedy.

However there is a problem. If a child never learns how risks are identified and managed then they will be a walking disaster area because they expect others to protect them. This is the cotton woll system.
My solution is this. Choose your risks. Risk assessment and management can be taught to children using hazards that have unpleasant but non damaging effects. If a surface is not hot enough to burn a child then let the child manage the risk, Use lumpy soft fall in playgrounds so when the child falls they feel energy and pain but don't get a fracture.
This way the child can be taught the hierarchy of risk management. By the time they are ready to learn to drive, they will have a solid system of risk assessment. The younger the child the more unreliable and inconsistent is their risk management . Children under ten on average cannot reliably handle the complex task of riding a bike in traffic. Not because they don't know how, but because they don't apply enough of their brain to the task for enough of the time.
So tragedies are a failure of the risk management system. Blaming an individual is counterproductive. It makes people have attitudes like you can't make me wear a seat belt. 
OK some people are poor risk managers. All you can do is model good risk management yourself. Those that don't learn will have an increased risk of tragedy.


----------



## garyp

So glad I read this post. Thank you. I read it aloud to my wife as well.



wopfish said:


> Thanks for that post - something that I'll always remeber. One question my young boy will be two in december - what age do you think is a good time to get them some basic swimming lessons ?


Wopfish, if you are on the North Side, there is a fantastic swimming school at Frenchs Forrest. Indoor pool & heated. If anyone wants the details PM me and I will dig up the phone number for you


----------



## grinner

emufingers said:


> It's amazing how emotions and blame are always stirred up with regard to safety. The whole idea that someone is to blame gets in the way. If you ever watch Air crash investigation, it is nearly always a failure of several part of the system that leads to tragedy. My riak management and safety training suggests a hierarchy of controls.
> 1. Separate the person at risk from the hazard&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.A fence. A great distance
> 2.	Reduce exposure by changing the frequency of exposure &#8230;&#8230;. Limit the number of times you go near unprotected water
> 3.	Limit amount of the hazard &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.shallow water and not much area
> 4.	Put in place automatic protection if the person and the hazard meet&#8230;&#8230;put a lifejacket on when near unprotected water
> 5.	Teach a safety response behaviour&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230; parent supervision&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.. swimming skills
> 6.	Teach a treatment response &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..dial 000 do CPR
> All of these modify the risk of drowning. The ones nearer the top have more effect those near the bottom have less effect.
> Your active child will get out of sight near water at some time. A child resistant fence and then a life jacket are your best bets, the child being able to swim is down the list.
> The more levels of protection that are available the lower the risk of a tragedy.
> 
> However there is a problem. If a child never learns how risks are identified and managed then they will be a walking disaster area because they expect others to protect them. This is the cotton woll system.
> My solution is this. Choose your risks. Risk assessment and management can be taught to children using hazards that have unpleasant but non damaging effects. If a surface is not hot enough to burn a child then let the child manage the risk, Use lumpy soft fall in playgrounds so when the child falls they feel energy and pain but don't get a fracture.
> This way the child can be taught the hierarchy of risk management. By the time they are ready to learn to drive, they will have a solid system of risk assessment. The younger the child the more unreliable and inconsistent is their risk management . Children under ten on average cannot reliably handle the complex task of riding a bike in traffic. Not because they don't know how, but because they don't apply enough of their brain to the task for enough of the time.
> So tragedies are a failure of the risk management system. Blaming an individual is counterproductive. It makes people have attitudes like you can't make me wear a seat belt.
> OK some people are poor risk managers. All you can do is model good risk management yourself. Those that don't learn will have an increased risk of tragedy.


jerry, excellent post.

i have a slightly different approach to safety issues and to "set guidelines" etc, though i can see why they are popular.

in my experience humans will always make mistakes and they will especially make mistakes when they first try something.
babies bang their heads on tables, 
new home renovationists cut their fingers off with power tools (interesting that very few of these occur during the week when the tradies are at work, saturday and sundays are the boom times)
new recruits get shot first
p platers have accidents
young doctors in cas make the most mistakes (again funny how the least experienced are asked to do the most complex work)
and new yakkers will undoubtedly have the most accidents

how can akff help.

when a person makes a mistake they are usually fairly upset by it and hopefully will learn from it.
when a nurse gives the wrong vaccine, (happens at least once a year at my surgery0 does it help to have the authorities make her fill in forms, have a disciplinary hearing, appear at the nurses board, have her employer yell and scream at her.

OF COURSE NOT, she's already in tears , she already feels bad.

what would be so much better is a debriefing in a non judgemental meeting where others can learn from the mistake.

good casualty departments used to hold these (back in the 80's0 before the culture of cover up and arse covering and punishment evolved.

for akff.

sadly i have seen newby yakkers report things like "my kayak almost sank" or "went out with a hole drilled in it and it took on water"

these are cautionary tales and should be met with responses such as 
"bravo, good sir, thank you for sharing, thanks for your bravery in admitting a mistake"

sadly, on too many occassions it has been met with chastisement and berating of the member which

1 makes him feel bad
2 makes others less willing to share
3 therefore denies others the opportunity to learn.

so, if you make a mistake, please share it. if certain members rain down the hate and roll their eyes at your mistake, sleep soundly in the knowledge that it is they who are contributing to an unsafe work and play environment, not you.


----------



## simonsrat

Emu and grinz ... both excellent posts.

I really like grinz bit about sharing when you stuff up.

thanks guys,

S


----------



## BIGKEV

keza said:


> Our kids starting swimming from 6 months.
> The lessons were never about learning to swim as such but more about comfort in the water. Most kids have this as babies but lose it as they get older.
> The main lesson I can remember was for the kids (old than 6 months obviously) to return to the side of the pool.
> You would repeatedly put then out from the side and they returned to the side to hang on, it doesn't take much for them to learn doggy paddle.
> This is of course all done with fun and games so the kids enjoy it.
> I would still keep an eye on my kids but was happier that they at least had some comfort in the water and wouldn't panic.
> All kids are different but for my kids I knew they would always be around water, so swimming has been important.


My veiw and approach towards learning water safety is as per the above. My boys are all older now at 10, 12 & 14 but they could all swim proficiently by the time they were 5 and were doing swiming club etc with squad training each afternoon by around this age.

One night at swimming club my youngest, who was not quite two at the time, was chasing beetles on the walkway around the pool in front of where we were sitting as he did each Firday night at swimming club. He was no more than 6 feet away and it was between races so the pool was empty at the time. He spotted a beetle right at the edge and took a step towards the pool to pick it up and overbalanced and fell forward into the pool and went straight down. I saw the event unfold in a split second, my wife missed it but plenty of others saw it happen and the audible gasp from the crowd alerted my wife to the fact something had happened. When she looked around and couldn't see Ethan she knew straight away what was going on. At this point he had a good 18 months of baby swimming lessons behind him and I was imediately interested to see if he would turn and head for the side as he had been taught, my wife on the other hand immediately jumped up to recover him but I stopped her, much to her and many other peoples disgust. Ethan turned under water as he had been taught kicked and paddled back to where he had came from, grasped the side and pulled himself out exactly as he would have if I had been in his lessons singing nursery rhymes with him and making it into a game. The swimming instructor on the night gave me a knowing look and nod of the head in approval of my actions, many of the mums of the club wouldn't talk to me and my wife and I had a bit of a barney that night but eventually she agreed that it was great to see this outcome in a very real situation.

That night I polarised the parents of that swimming club, those who subscribed to creating confident independant children armed with life experiences to takle life in the big bad world agreed with my actions, those who insist on wrapping thier precious little darlings in cotton wool were absolutely appalled that a parent could ever consider such an act.

Basic facts is the child was in the water for no more than 3 seconds, it feels alot longer when you have a hundred people or more waiting for you to pluck your child from the pool. If for any reason he had not turned and was not looking like turning I would have taken the two steps required to grab him and pulled him out myself without any risk of him drowning. I have seen a few kids take a fall in a pool over many years of both my own and my kids participation at swimming clubs and some kids just sink like stones and freeze as soon as they hit the water, these kids genuinely needed rescuing and they got it within seconds. My kid did not need to be rescued despite what the experts scribble in their books I believe that early lessons for babies and toddlers can only be a good thing.

Kev


----------



## emufingers

kraley said:


> emufingers said:
> 
> 
> 
> However there is a problem. If a child never learns how risks are identified and managed then they will be a walking disaster area because they expect others to protect them. This is the cotton wool system.
> 
> 
> 
> Just to be clear - my attitude towards this topic is for very young children - where cognitive abilities are clearly not developed enough to respond safely to the real risk.
> 
> However - this notion that we are raising children unaware of real risk is interesting to me - I was wondering if you have come across any real research that suggests this is the case? I'm not sure that the phrase is used outside of aus and the UK so haven't really found any credible literature about it.
Click to expand...

It is difficult to find a single article that covers this issue. I have come to my conclusion as a researcher in injury prevention, by observing changes in children participating in Safe Communities programs and reading widely about development from early childhood to the teen years.

One article that is interesting is Early childhood education as risky business: going beyond what's "safe" to discovering what's possible. 
http://ecrp.uiuc.edu/v7n2/new.html

It reveals some of the arguments that go on among early childhood educators.

Unfortunately it is hard to design an ethical study and methodologically sound study to give definitive measurement. Even if the design was really good, getting money to do such a study is well nigh impossible. The difficulty in design start with the fact that children's behaviour is so different from hour to hour and day to day. The ethical problem is that in order to discover whether a child will recognise and manage risk, the child has to be put at risk.

To give one example from my experience, I have witnessed a program for upper primary children operating in a low socioeconomic environment where it was known that injuries were more prevalent than the average similar child population. The children were taught about what constitutes a risk and ways of changing the risk of injury.
They then had to list things that they thought could result in injury in their local neighborhood. Their lists included trip hazards, bike riding behaviour, badly lit footpaths and parks, drivers not wearing seat belts, poorly designed playground equipment etc. Their school and the local health unit supported the children to write letter to the organisations responsible for the hazards, It included the police, Telstra, the Council, the water and sewerage department. The departments were given one month to decide what if anything they should do and then had to send a representative to the school to report to the children whether they agreed that there was a hazard and what there solution was and when it would be completed. There was a lot of work done and the kids started to believe that you can predict when an injury would occur and do something to avoid it. Unfortunately we didn't have good enough injury stats to do a before and after study and we didn't have the money for a control group in another school. The teachers however reported that some of the kids that were blatant risk takers before the program seemed to have a different attitude and different skills.

This clearly is no scientific proof, but few such observations and the literature on child development and patterns of risk taking has convinced me that kids have to know that controlling risk and its effect is possible. Those that live in high risk environments come to believe that you can't do anything about it and kids who live in cotton wool environments think that it is someone else's job to protect them. In between there is a whole continuum.

I I apply my idea to the child chasing beetles falling into the pool. It means that the child should be protected from drowning. However the slight delay to see if the child would respond gave the child a chance to learn that he could take an action to make a difference. If the delay had little or no impact on the risk of drowning then it was OK. On the other hand my knowledge of child behaviour at that age tells me that it would be irresponsible to put the child in a situation where you had to rely on the child saving himself. When my kids were tired or cranky or off colour, they were much more likely to ride a trike over a dangerous edge, or bang their heads. That's kids.

SO where do I stand on teaching very young children to swim. I think it is a good idea but if you look at the hierarchy of effectiveness , it will only make a very small difference to their risk of drowning. If their swimming ability is used to fail to implement higher order protection, that is a problem.

The Swiss cheese analogy is a good one. The more layers of imperfect hazard management, the more likely that the system will not fail completely.

With thing like drowning or near drowning the outcomes are so severe you don't take risks. But if the outcome is a bit of pain or bleeding and the kids learns that the frequency and severity of injury can be altered by intervening, then the outcomes are likely to be positive.

To throw in a further idea to prod the controversy, I have been wondering if our increase rate of injury and death among young drivers is related to cotton wooling and whether it is made worse by the use of electronic games where you never get to take the responsibility for your actions and death can be wiped out by the reset button.


----------



## grinner

jerry always interesting hearing your thoughts.

big kev, you made 100% the right decision , in fact i would have supported you if you had gone and pushed your toddler into the pool.

jerry one of your points in risk management. i think it was number 2 was

"reduce the frequency of your exposure to the hazardous activity"

i tend to disagree with this one though i see it implemented all the time.

i feel if i have a break away from boating or motorcycle riding (a few weeks in winter) i am more at risk when i first resume these activities. in fact i believe if something is a tad risky, continual exposure and mindfulness reduces the overall risk.

i know as part of risk management qld health send many many cases (even down to appendiexes) to bigger centres. eg gympie a town of about 30,000 sends patients to nambour for appendix surgery. this merely leads to a de skilling of the workforce and raises the hazard in regional centres as people lose their skills.

regarding young drivers. your opinion on whether kids should start learning to drive at a much earlier age. i believe the scandinavian countires encourage kids to go and race bombers on the weekend form the age of 13. hence why they probably win so many WRC events.

your opinion on advanced driver schools, skidpans, braking on oil etc etc . i sent both my girls to one. a wise decision??

also just regarding safety.

again the regulators seem to continually miss the point. my 129 page "guide to commercial and aged driver certification book" whilst a good read involves (if done by the book) several pages of "tick the box stuff" with such gems as the state of the patients tongue?? , the patients knee jerk reflexes?? , presence of heart murmurs??

i can learn a lot more by saying to a 75 year old, come with me for a walk out the back. i can see if he hears me, if he bangs into walls, if his legs work. the nurse can then check his eyesight , check his wee for sugar and in one tenth of the time ive learnt a hell of a lot more.

it reminds me of when the authorities check my boat out on the water. show me your mirror, show me the v sheet, show me your fire extinguisher expirey date.
surely a more meaningful functional test would be to pull up and say

"your boats sinking, you have 60 seconds to have everyone on board in a lifejacket, your grab bag in your hand and a flare in your other hand" ie a functional test.

if memebrs want to do a meaningful test of safety on yaks i would suggest the following.

when out with someone, sneak up behind him, flip his yak over , then tow it 25 m away and check his recovery.
this would give a more realistic test of how one is going.

thanks for the posts jerry, i really appreciate the time you put into those.


----------



## emufingers

Here goes with a few ideas

jerry one of your points in risk management. i think it was number 2 was

"reduce the frequency of your exposure to the hazardous activity"

i tend to disagree with this one though i see it implemented all the time.

i feel if i have a break away from boating or motorcycle riding (a few weeks in winter) i am more at risk when i first resume these activities. in fact i believe if something is a tad risky, continual exposure and mindfulness reduces the overall risk.

i know as part of risk management qld health send many many cases (even down to appendiexes) to bigger centres. eg gympie a town of about 30,000 sends patients to nambour for appendix surgery. this merely leads to a de skilling of the workforce and raises the hazard in regional centres as people lose their skills.

*The heirarchy of management needs to be carefully applied. In a case like drowning, the less often you kid under 4 is near a swimming pool without immediate supervision the better. In your example the less often you go riding your motorbike after not riding it for a while the better. That is if th problem is increased by deskilling then practice is needed. Then you either manage the risk of more frequent riding or develop a strategy to offset the risk of deskilling, by modifying where you ride until the skills return*

regarding young drivers. your opinion on whether kids should start learning to drive at a much earlier age. i believe the scandinavian countires encourage kids to go and race bombers on the weekend form the age of 13. hence why they probably win so many WRC events.

* I love the swedish traffic model which give the 16yo a 50cc moped with no pillion seat. If you have ever ridden a moped you will know that your feeling of vulnerability is immense. You know you are responsible for your safety. The Swedes get away with it because their road and safety systems are excellent and the mopeds are banned from all high speed roads. Australia could copy this in 50k areas, if only it had decent roads. *

your opinion on advanced driver schools, skidpans, braking on oil etc etc . i sent both my girls to one. a wise decision??

*Skid pans and defensive driving courses are a great idea. I recommended med students going for their country placements do a course on diving on dirt roads with a front wheel drive. It go knocked back and guess what happenend withint a year there was one death invilving loss of control of a front wheel drive on a dirt road,by a city dwelling student.*

also just regarding safety.

again the regulators seem to continually miss the point. my 129 page "guide to commercial and aged driver certification book" whilst a good read involves (if done by the book) several pages of "tick the box stuff" with such gems as the state of the patients tongue?? , the patients knee jerk reflexes?? , presence of heart murmurs??

i can learn a lot more by saying to a 75 year old, come with me for a walk out the back. i can see if he hears me, if he bangs into walls, if his legs work. the nurse can then check his eyesight , check his wee for sugar and in one tenth of the time ive learnt a hell of a lot more.

*I agree. There is alot of ridiculous porotocols out there, usually developed by a camel committee of medical specialists who want to prove their speciality is important. The best profession to do the assessment is occupational therapists,. They wanted to try this in SA but the doctors kicked up a fuss. My view is a driving simulator is the best way, because people with similar diagnoses can often have very different function and as complexity increases sometimes a patient will lose it on a simulator. Its hard to stress the patient sufficiently if you are a prqactitioner whpo doesn't want to have a complaint to deal with.*

it reminds me of when the authorities check my boat out on the water. show me your mirror, show me the v sheet, show me your fire extinguisher expirey date.
surely a more meaningful functional test would be to pull up and say

"your boats sinking, you have 60 seconds to have everyone on board in a lifejacket, your grab bag in your hand and a flare in your other hand" ie a functional test.

if memebrs want to do a meaningful test of safety on yaks i would suggest the following.

when out with someone, sneak up behind him, flip his yak over , then tow it 25 m away and check his recovery.
this would give a more realistic test of how one is going.

*I think you only need to tow it 5 metres. By the time the kayaker stops trying ytop retrieve a grqand worth of fishing gear, the yak will be 50 metres away.*

thanks for the posts jerry, i really appreciate the time you put into those.


----------



## GetSharkd

Very interesting posts, well worth the read and thought about mine and others safety on the water. Thanks to all who contributed, much appreciated.


----------



## chrisssigns

brings it all home very clearly!! thanks for sharing..

quote Grinner...*if memebrs want to do a meaningful test of safety on yaks i would suggest the following.

when out with someone, sneak up behind him, flip his yak over , then tow it 25 m away and check his recovery.
this would give a more realistic test of how one is going.
*

its a good way to test your fitness too...coz when i get back on and we are on the ground, you better run like hell... :lol:


----------



## Shorty

Might bring this back up to the top of the page for those that have not seen it .


----------



## kayakone

Shorty said:


> Might bring this back up to the top of the page for those that have not seen it .


Good move Shorty. One of the best safety threads ever. I see the world is still your urinal. :lol:


----------

