Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if the parents thought no swimming meant no swimming, but wading is okay.

I'd probably be this way. I'd think, "Oh, the signs are there b/c it's too dangerous to swim, but wading does not count as swimming."

We were there last year and that's exactly what I thought. I let my kids wade and fill their bucket from the water. Now I think it was a bad decision, but at the time I didn't. I wish the signs had said "no going in the water" or something more than "no swimming," which is all they said.

I agree. I saw a photo of the signs in a news article - it clearly states that there is a steep drop off, no swimming. To me, that implies, wading at the edge would be ok but don't swim. Swim =/= wade. Nothing about bacteria in the water or alligators that would suggest STAY AWAY FROM THIS WATER.

If I see a sign that says "No Swimming", I take it to mean to not get in the water at all.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How is Disney negligent if there are signs that say not to go into the water? I'm serious.

[b]

+ 1

+100.
They said not to go in the water.
Kid's parents disregard signs.
Kid goes in water.
It's not Disney's fault.

No, they said not to swim. The child wasn't swimming.

I have been in Florida once, South Beach and Palm Beach. I didn't think about alligators then. I would not think of alligators at a Disney resort either. I grew up in the Southwest and know nothing about alligators, probably much like this Nebraska family. If a sign says no swimming, I would not go swimming. I would likely not let my kids wade in the water either since I have an irrational fear of brain-eating amoebas in fresh water. I don't think the parents are at fault. The were obeying the sign, no one was swimming.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if the parents thought no swimming meant no swimming, but wading is okay.

I'd probably be this way. I'd think, "Oh, the signs are there b/c it's too dangerous to swim, but wading does not count as swimming."

We were there last year and that's exactly what I thought. I let my kids wade and fill their bucket from the water. Now I think it was a bad decision, but at the time I didn't. I wish the signs had said "no going in the water" or something more than "no swimming," which is all they said.

I agree. I saw a photo of the signs in a news article - it clearly states that there is a steep drop off, no swimming. To me, that implies, wading at the edge would be ok but don't swim. Swim =/= wade. Nothing about bacteria in the water or alligators that would suggest STAY AWAY FROM THIS WATER.

When you go to a pool, even in the zero entry of water, it's considered swimming. If a lifeguard would say "no swimming for 15 mins while we add chemicals to the pool", you wouldn't go in the water at all, would you? So that's the logic I apply to "no swimming", it means no entry into the water. No wading, no nothing.

That said, I don't blame the parents, I don't blame Disney, or even the alligator. This was a freak, freak accident. My heart breaks for them.

Yeah, I'm not saying my interpretation (that wading was okay with a "no swimming" sign) was right -- I'm just pointing out that I didn't equate wading with swimming at the time, and I bet a lot of other parents at Disney did the same. Clearer signs would have helped me get the right message about not going in the water.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How is Disney negligent if there are signs that say not to go into the water? I'm serious.

[b]

+ 1

+100.
They said not to go in the water.
Kid's parents disregard signs.
Kid goes in water.
It's not Disney's fault.

Have you stayed in any of the Disney resorts along that lagoon?

They are designed to look like beaches where people would naturally frolic in the water.

They have cabanas. Pool toys. People building sand castles and wading along the shoreline.

And not one sign about alligators.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/15/us/alligator-attacks-child-disney-florida/index.html

Disney has closed all beaches in its resort area "out of an abundance of caution" after an alligator attacked a 2-year-old boy in a lagoon outside the Grand Floridian hotel Tuesday night, a Disney spokesperson said Wednesday.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if the parents thought no swimming meant no swimming, but wading is okay.

I'd probably be this way. I'd think, "Oh, the signs are there b/c it's too dangerous to swim, but wading does not count as swimming."

We were there last year and that's exactly what I thought. I let my kids wade and fill their bucket from the water. Now I think it was a bad decision, but at the time I didn't. I wish the signs had said "no going in the water" or something more than "no swimming," which is all they said.

I agree. I saw a photo of the signs in a news article - it clearly states that there is a steep drop off, no swimming. To me, that implies, wading at the edge would be ok but don't swim. Swim =/= wade. Nothing about bacteria in the water or alligators that would suggest STAY AWAY FROM THIS WATER.

When you go to a pool, even in the zero entry of water, it's considered swimming. If a lifeguard would say "no swimming for 15 mins while we add chemicals to the pool", you wouldn't go in the water at all, would you? So that's the logic I apply to "no swimming", it means no entry into the water. No wading, no nothing.

That said, I don't blame the parents, I don't blame Disney, or even the alligator. This was a freak, freak accident. My heart breaks for them.

The lake is not a naturally occurring lake, it is a man made lake. Disney made the lake in an area infested with alligators. They didn't rope off this attractive nuisance, and encouraged families to congregate on the beach by hosting a boat parade, movies, and activities. I can't believe people are blaming the parents.

+1.

+100. What is the point of these ridiculous contortions to somehow find the parents to blame? Desire to find the "Magic Kingdom" perfect and unaccountable? Attempt to reassure oneself that "this couldn't happen to me"?

Also putting aside the legal questions, I don't see how the fact the toddler was (allegedly) dipping his toes in really is all that relevant. I could see that it would have significantly changed the risks if he had waded say, 5-6 feet in, but if a gator is willing to grab the kid when he's less than a foot in in the water, why wouldn't it have grabbed him if he was right at the water's edge - I doubt those last 11 inches offer some sort of magic protection.

Anonymous wrote:OMG. How is it possible that they have gators on their property?!?! You'd think it was a man-made lagoon free of gators.

I'm sure someone has already said this, but I'm a Floridan and will say it again. You assume there could be a gator in ANY fresh water in Florida. We just had a little dog eaten by a gator in my neighborhood. We have retention ponds all over to control storm water. The dog was getting a drink and a gator got him. My kids were raised to know how to avoid gators. Disney should have signs everywhere warning people of the possibility of gators in any water.

This is also breeding and nesting season and gators become very territorial when protecting eggs.

So sad, but completely avoidable.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How is Disney negligent if there are signs that say not to go into the water? I'm serious.

+ 1

+100.
[b]They said not to go in the water.
Kid's parents disregard signs.
Kid goes in water.
It's not Disney's fault.

But they didn't say "don't go in the water", they said "no swimming". That's not the same thing.

We were in Disney World last summer I would tell my husband to look outside our hotel before opening the door. It's Florida we could have a gator at our door/only half joking. Those poor parents/that poor child. No judgement from me.

Anonymous wrote:There were signs posted that said NO SWIMMING and these idiot parents let their 2 yo in the water? Um, I feel bad for the 4 gators that they've had to euthanize looking for the kids remains.
You need a license to drive a car, but any idiot can "parent"?

Letting water lap at your ankles is not swimming. Had there been any mention on the signs of gators, I'm sure the parents would not have been anywhere near the water.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if the parents thought no swimming meant no swimming, but wading is okay.

I'd probably be this way. I'd think, "Oh, the signs are there b/c it's too dangerous to swim, but wading does not count as swimming."

We were there last year and that's exactly what I thought. I let my kids wade and fill their bucket from the water. Now I think it was a bad decision, but at the time I didn't. I wish the signs had said "no going in the water" or something more than "no swimming," which is all they said.

I agree. I saw a photo of the signs in a news article - it clearly states that there is a steep drop off, no swimming. To me, that implies, wading at the edge would be ok but don't swim. Swim =/= wade. Nothing about bacteria in the water or alligators that would suggest STAY AWAY FROM THIS WATER.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How is Disney negligent if there are signs that say not to go into the water? I'm serious.

[b]

+ 1

+100.
They said not to go in the water.
Kid's parents disregard signs.
Kid goes in water.
It's not Disney's fault.

Anonymous wrote:There were signs posted that said NO SWIMMING and these idiot parents let their 2 yo in the water? Um, I feel bad for the 4 gators that they've had to euthanize looking for the kids remains.
You need a license to drive a car, but any idiot can "parent"?

Looks like you were parented by idiots yourself.