Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no dog in this fight as we never bought a puddle jumper (ironically more so out of cheapness/laziness) but it seems the "documented dangers" are anecdotal? I mean those stories are terrifying but don't kids who have never had puddle jumpers also drown? How do we know it's the puddle jumper at fault and not the lack of supervision?

Yes. Reading along here and thinking about it-where I live unfortunately drownings happen due to the large amount of home pools (FL). In news coverage, it's always the child going out the door unnoticed to the pool area, pool gate left open, distracted adults at a party not watching, ect. Small children unfortunately are attracted to water whether they've ever worn a puddle jumper or not. The issue is an unsecured home pool.

This. It's almost always a child under 3 who went into the pool alone. Recently a friend's child drove a little motorized car into the pool when the nanny wasn't looking and drowned. It's not because kids are wearing puddle jumpers while their parents are an arm's reach away that is the big risk. People shrieking in here about it have no clue what they are talking about.

Many 3 year olds, especially the ones belonging to the lazy parents here, are not supervised every single second. Why not give them the best possible chance? Because - mom wants to be able to sit in her pool chair and not in the pool.

You keep saying this and yet 100% of the accidental drowning I read about involve kids who got access to a pool without their parents knowing.

I am unaware of a single child drowning WHILE wearing a life vest, and also I don't personally know anyone who would allow a kid in the pool with a life vest so they could sit under an umbrella somewhere else.

Go to any community or private club pool in the DMV this summer during the daytime and stay at least 15 minutes. You will see someone clip a puddle jumper on a kid a let them into the pool without an adult.

And? What happened last summer?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no dog in this fight as we never bought a puddle jumper (ironically more so out of cheapness/laziness) but it seems the "documented dangers" are anecdotal? I mean those stories are terrifying but don't kids who have never had puddle jumpers also drown? How do we know it's the puddle jumper at fault and not the lack of supervision?

Yes. Reading along here and thinking about it-where I live unfortunately drownings happen due to the large amount of home pools (FL). In news coverage, it's always the child going out the door unnoticed to the pool area, pool gate left open, distracted adults at a party not watching, ect. Small children unfortunately are attracted to water whether they've ever worn a puddle jumper or not. The issue is an unsecured home pool.

This. It's almost always a child under 3 who went into the pool alone. Recently a friend's child drove a little motorized car into the pool when the nanny wasn't looking and drowned. It's not because kids are wearing puddle jumpers while their parents are an arm's reach away that is the big risk. People shrieking in here about it have no clue what they are talking about.

Many 3 year olds, especially the ones belonging to the lazy parents here, are not supervised every single second. Why not give them the best possible chance? Because - mom wants to be able to sit in her pool chair and not in the pool.

You keep saying this and yet 100% of the accidental drowning I read about involve kids who got access to a pool without their parents knowing.

I am unaware of a single child drowning WHILE wearing a life vest, and also I don't personally know anyone who would allow a kid in the pool with a life vest so they could sit under an umbrella somewhere else.

Go to any community or private club pool in the DMV this summer during the daytime and stay at least 15 minutes. You will see someone clip a puddle jumper on a kid a let them into the pool without an adult.

Uh, no. This is explicitly not allowed at either our public school or our private club. Public pool requires an adult to be with any kid wearing a flotation. Private club only allows flotation devices in shallow end and also requires parental supervision-- kids are required to pass a swimming test in order to swim in areas that don't require parental supervision.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no dog in this fight as we never bought a puddle jumper (ironically more so out of cheapness/laziness) but it seems the "documented dangers" are anecdotal? I mean those stories are terrifying but don't kids who have never had puddle jumpers also drown? How do we know it's the puddle jumper at fault and not the lack of supervision?

Yes. Reading along here and thinking about it-where I live unfortunately drownings happen due to the large amount of home pools (FL). In news coverage, it's always the child going out the door unnoticed to the pool area, pool gate left open, distracted adults at a party not watching, ect. Small children unfortunately are attracted to water whether they've ever worn a puddle jumper or not. The issue is an unsecured home pool.

This. It's almost always a child under 3 who went into the pool alone. Recently a friend's child drove a little motorized car into the pool when the nanny wasn't looking and drowned. It's not because kids are wearing puddle jumpers while their parents are an arm's reach away that is the big risk. People shrieking in here about it have no clue what they are talking about.

Many 3 year olds, especially the ones belonging to the lazy parents here, are not supervised every single second. Why not give them the best possible chance? Because - mom wants to be able to sit in her pool chair and not in the pool.

You keep saying this and yet 100% of the accidental drowning I read about involve kids who got access to a pool without their parents knowing.

I am unaware of a single child drowning WHILE wearing a life vest, and also I don't personally know anyone who would allow a kid in the pool with a life vest so they could sit under an umbrella somewhere else.

Go to any community or private club pool in the DMV this summer during the daytime and stay at least 15 minutes. You will see someone clip a puddle jumper on a kid a let them into the pool without an adult.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mean, obviously you all will do what you want but when I see this in 2024 I view it as a low information parent. The same type who feeds lots of junk food and doesn’t use car seats properly.

The best parents know to ignore these types of judgements from insecure people. Nobody should be basing their parenting decisions based on what other parents think.

You’re right. They should listen to experts who say not to use these. But that would be inconvenient for you.

A quick Google will show you that there is not a consensus among experts regarding this.

It lines up that a quick google search is the extent of your research on this topic.

Considering that it easily proved you incorrect...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no dog in this fight as we never bought a puddle jumper (ironically more so out of cheapness/laziness) but it seems the "documented dangers" are anecdotal? I mean those stories are terrifying but don't kids who have never had puddle jumpers also drown? How do we know it's the puddle jumper at fault and not the lack of supervision?

Yes. Reading along here and thinking about it-where I live unfortunately drownings happen due to the large amount of home pools (FL). In news coverage, it's always the child going out the door unnoticed to the pool area, pool gate left open, distracted adults at a party not watching, ect. Small children unfortunately are attracted to water whether they've ever worn a puddle jumper or not. The issue is an unsecured home pool.

This. It's almost always a child under 3 who went into the pool alone. Recently a friend's child drove a little motorized car into the pool when the nanny wasn't looking and drowned. It's not because kids are wearing puddle jumpers while their parents are an arm's reach away that is the big risk. People shrieking in here about it have no clue what they are talking about.

Many 3 year olds, especially the ones belonging to the lazy parents here, are not supervised every single second. Why not give them the best possible chance? Because - mom wants to be able to sit in her pool chair and not in the pool.

Where is Dad in this scenario? Or are only moms lazy?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no dog in this fight as we never bought a puddle jumper (ironically more so out of cheapness/laziness) but it seems the "documented dangers" are anecdotal? I mean those stories are terrifying but don't kids who have never had puddle jumpers also drown? How do we know it's the puddle jumper at fault and not the lack of supervision?

Yes. Reading along here and thinking about it-where I live unfortunately drownings happen due to the large amount of home pools (FL). In news coverage, it's always the child going out the door unnoticed to the pool area, pool gate left open, distracted adults at a party not watching, ect. Small children unfortunately are attracted to water whether they've ever worn a puddle jumper or not. The issue is an unsecured home pool.

This. It's almost always a child under 3 who went into the pool alone. Recently a friend's child drove a little motorized car into the pool when the nanny wasn't looking and drowned. It's not because kids are wearing puddle jumpers while their parents are an arm's reach away that is the big risk. People shrieking in here about it have no clue what they are talking about.

Many 3 year olds, especially the ones belonging to the lazy parents here, are not supervised every single second. Why not give them the best possible chance? Because - mom wants to be able to sit in her pool chair and not in the pool.

You keep saying this and yet 100% of the accidental drowning I read about involve kids who got access to a pool without their parents knowing.

I am unaware of a single child drowning WHILE wearing a life vest, and also I don't personally know anyone who would allow a kid in the pool with a life vest so they could sit under an umbrella somewhere else.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no dog in this fight as we never bought a puddle jumper (ironically more so out of cheapness/laziness) but it seems the "documented dangers" are anecdotal? I mean those stories are terrifying but don't kids who have never had puddle jumpers also drown? How do we know it's the puddle jumper at fault and not the lack of supervision?

Yes. Reading along here and thinking about it-where I live unfortunately drownings happen due to the large amount of home pools (FL). In news coverage, it's always the child going out the door unnoticed to the pool area, pool gate left open, distracted adults at a party not watching, ect. Small children unfortunately are attracted to water whether they've ever worn a puddle jumper or not. The issue is an unsecured home pool.

Very telling that you think this is true. No, this is the result of puddle jumpers and other flotation devices that kids get used to and think they love and are more secure in water than they should. A kid who never uses a flotation device is welllll aware of their limitations.

-swim instructor

You think a 2 year old who has never used a flotation device is 'well aware of their limitations' around water??? That is literally a drowning waiting to happen! Please tell me you are not serious.

Tell me you’ve never been around a large number of toddlers learning to swim without telling me. If a parent is responsibly teaching their child how to be around water (should start at 6 months) without the use of flotation devices, yes a neurotypical 2 year old 1000% knows their limitations. Drowning prevention isn’t a one and done lesson, it’s taught over years with many building blocks. Flotation devices just knock that down. ISR is proven to be one of the biggest ways to prevent drownings (up there with pool gates) and it’s telling that their *global policy* is no flotation devices for kids ever unless in an open body of water.

No 2 year old can be trusted to know their limitations. Please post where you work so we can avoid it.

DP who grew up in FL. There is a difference between trusting a 2 year old around water and deciding not to use floaties. I have never used them with any of my 3 kids because I wanted them to know what their bodies actually feel like in water. Kids wearing floaties get comfortable with a straight up and down position, which is a recipe for sinking right to the bottom of the pool.

But even still, I always kept an eye on them around water when they were young. If anything, I think the floaties give parents a false sense of security. Not to mention a lot of drownings happen when no one else is in the pool (meaning the child slipped out during nap time or while the parent thought thu were playing indoors), so these are not times the child would be in any sort of floatation device.

Overall, I just don’t see the point of them. The only device we use is a coast guard certified life jacket while on boats or when my kids were small and playing near the shoreline at the beach.

For me the point was that when I took my kid to the pool at 2/3, I would get tired of always holding her in the water and want a break. Sometimes Wes take that break by going into the kiddie pool or the very shallow end in a zero-entry pool, but sometimes I'd put her in a puddle jumper.

Also we did work on some swim skills in the puddle jumper. Unlike a regular life vest, it actually is possible for a kid their legs up behind them in the puddle jumper, so we'd practice kicks in it sometimes, just like you would with holding onto the edge of the pool or a kickboard, but more secure because it was attached to her. Obviously we took it off to practice floating on her back and putting her face in the water. By the time she was ready to kick off the wall we were done with it. But it was really useful for that in between time to just give me a break during pool trips. Especially as she got older and was super active-- holding onto an almost 4 year old who wants to kick and play in the water but is not yet ready to swim independently is tiring.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no dog in this fight as we never bought a puddle jumper (ironically more so out of cheapness/laziness) but it seems the "documented dangers" are anecdotal? I mean those stories are terrifying but don't kids who have never had puddle jumpers also drown? How do we know it's the puddle jumper at fault and not the lack of supervision?

Yes. Reading along here and thinking about it-where I live unfortunately drownings happen due to the large amount of home pools (FL). In news coverage, it's always the child going out the door unnoticed to the pool area, pool gate left open, distracted adults at a party not watching, ect. Small children unfortunately are attracted to water whether they've ever worn a puddle jumper or not. The issue is an unsecured home pool.

This. It's almost always a child under 3 who went into the pool alone. Recently a friend's child drove a little motorized car into the pool when the nanny wasn't looking and drowned. It's not because kids are wearing puddle jumpers while their parents are an arm's reach away that is the big risk. People shrieking in here about it have no clue what they are talking about.

Many 3 year olds, especially the ones belonging to the lazy parents here, are not supervised every single second. Why not give them the best possible chance? Because - mom wants to be able to sit in her pool chair and not in the pool.

My three year old doesn’t swim very often. We don’t have a pool. We’ve done swim lessons, but they haven’t achieved anything because they’re not frequent enough, she hates/is afraid of putting her head under and we didn’t force the issue (like the style of swim lessons for babies who live with a pool).

The puddle jumper is irrelevant, imo. My kid can’t swim. We’re not practicing real swimming at this point. If her feet can’t touch, it’s just a question of whether she’s holding me to float or the floatie, or noodle or whatever.

Once she’s old enough/motivated enough to be actually learning to swim, maybe we will need to be more strict about not having a float tool when practicing. But I think you’re all way overestimating the impact.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no dog in this fight as we never bought a puddle jumper (ironically more so out of cheapness/laziness) but it seems the "documented dangers" are anecdotal? I mean those stories are terrifying but don't kids who have never had puddle jumpers also drown? How do we know it's the puddle jumper at fault and not the lack of supervision?

Yes. Reading along here and thinking about it-where I live unfortunately drownings happen due to the large amount of home pools (FL). In news coverage, it's always the child going out the door unnoticed to the pool area, pool gate left open, distracted adults at a party not watching, ect. Small children unfortunately are attracted to water whether they've ever worn a puddle jumper or not. The issue is an unsecured home pool.

Very telling that you think this is true. No, this is the result of puddle jumpers and other flotation devices that kids get used to and think they love and are more secure in water than they should. A kid who never uses a flotation device is welllll aware of their limitations.

-swim instructor

You think a 2 year old who has never used a flotation device is 'well aware of their limitations' around water??? That is literally a drowning waiting to happen! Please tell me you are not serious.

Tell me you’ve never been around a large number of toddlers learning to swim without telling me. If a parent is responsibly teaching their child how to be around water (should start at 6 months) without the use of flotation devices, yes a neurotypical 2 year old 1000% knows their limitations. Drowning prevention isn’t a one and done lesson, it’s taught over years with many building blocks. Flotation devices just knock that down. ISR is proven to be one of the biggest ways to prevent drownings (up there with pool gates) and it’s telling that their *global policy* is no flotation devices for kids ever unless in an open body of water.

No 2 year old can be trusted to know their limitations. Please post where you work so we can avoid it.

DP who grew up in FL. There is a difference between trusting a 2 year old around water and deciding not to use floaties. I have never used them with any of my 3 kids because I wanted them to know what their bodies actually feel like in water. Kids wearing floaties get comfortable with a straight up and down position, which is a recipe for sinking right to the bottom of the pool.

But even still, I always kept an eye on them around water when they were young. If anything, I think the floaties give parents a false sense of security. Not to mention a lot of drownings happen when no one else is in the pool (meaning the child slipped out during nap time or while the parent thought thu were playing indoors), so these are not times the child would be in any sort of floatation device.

Overall, I just don’t see the point of them. The only device we use is a coast guard certified life jacket while on boats or when my kids were small and playing near the shoreline at the beach.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no dog in this fight as we never bought a puddle jumper (ironically more so out of cheapness/laziness) but it seems the "documented dangers" are anecdotal? I mean those stories are terrifying but don't kids who have never had puddle jumpers also drown? How do we know it's the puddle jumper at fault and not the lack of supervision?

Yes. Reading along here and thinking about it-where I live unfortunately drownings happen due to the large amount of home pools (FL). In news coverage, it's always the child going out the door unnoticed to the pool area, pool gate left open, distracted adults at a party not watching, ect. Small children unfortunately are attracted to water whether they've ever worn a puddle jumper or not. The issue is an unsecured home pool.

This. It's almost always a child under 3 who went into the pool alone. Recently a friend's child drove a little motorized car into the pool when the nanny wasn't looking and drowned. It's not because kids are wearing puddle jumpers while their parents are an arm's reach away that is the big risk. People shrieking in here about it have no clue what they are talking about.

You have shockingly bad reading comprehension. No s*** Sherlock, kids drown in pools without parental supervision. And kids feel comfortable going in without a parent because parents (many here) are idiots and are setting their kids up for that horrific scenario.

There's no data to support the notion that drownings primarily occur among kids that typically use puddle jumpers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no dog in this fight as we never bought a puddle jumper (ironically more so out of cheapness/laziness) but it seems the "documented dangers" are anecdotal? I mean those stories are terrifying but don't kids who have never had puddle jumpers also drown? How do we know it's the puddle jumper at fault and not the lack of supervision?

Yes. Reading along here and thinking about it-where I live unfortunately drownings happen due to the large amount of home pools (FL). In news coverage, it's always the child going out the door unnoticed to the pool area, pool gate left open, distracted adults at a party not watching, ect. Small children unfortunately are attracted to water whether they've ever worn a puddle jumper or not. The issue is an unsecured home pool.

This. It's almost always a child under 3 who went into the pool alone. Recently a friend's child drove a little motorized car into the pool when the nanny wasn't looking and drowned. It's not because kids are wearing puddle jumpers while their parents are an arm's reach away that is the big risk. People shrieking in here about it have no clue what they are talking about.

You have shockingly bad reading comprehension. No s*** Sherlock, kids drown in pools without parental supervision. And kids feel comfortable going in without a parent because parents (many here) are idiots and are setting their kids up for that horrific scenario.

This is so dumb. We're talking about toddlers here. There is no logic. You can avoid ever using a puddle jumper and if your kid is left unattended with access to a pool, they may "feel comfortable" going in the pool without their parents because they are 2 or 3 and their brains are not yet capable of understanding the consequences of that action. Or they don't mean to go in but fall because they have undeveloped motor skills.

Kids are not spending time in puddle jumpers and then thinking "oh cool I guess I float in water, I will jump in it all the time now." And EVEN IF they did, if you just make sure your kid never has access to water without you present until they can swim (which is not that hard), it doesn't matter.

Kids drown because parents aren't watching them. Or the parents are drinking. Puddle jumpers are really not the bogeyman here.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no dog in this fight as we never bought a puddle jumper (ironically more so out of cheapness/laziness) but it seems the "documented dangers" are anecdotal? I mean those stories are terrifying but don't kids who have never had puddle jumpers also drown? How do we know it's the puddle jumper at fault and not the lack of supervision?

Yes. Reading along here and thinking about it-where I live unfortunately drownings happen due to the large amount of home pools (FL). In news coverage, it's always the child going out the door unnoticed to the pool area, pool gate left open, distracted adults at a party not watching, ect. Small children unfortunately are attracted to water whether they've ever worn a puddle jumper or not. The issue is an unsecured home pool.

This. It's almost always a child under 3 who went into the pool alone. Recently a friend's child drove a little motorized car into the pool when the nanny wasn't looking and drowned. It's not because kids are wearing puddle jumpers while their parents are an arm's reach away that is the big risk. People shrieking in here about it have no clue what they are talking about.

You have shockingly bad reading comprehension. No s*** Sherlock, kids drown in pools without parental supervision. And kids feel comfortable going in without a parent because parents (many here) are idiots and are setting their kids up for that horrific scenario.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no dog in this fight as we never bought a puddle jumper (ironically more so out of cheapness/laziness) but it seems the "documented dangers" are anecdotal? I mean those stories are terrifying but don't kids who have never had puddle jumpers also drown? How do we know it's the puddle jumper at fault and not the lack of supervision?

Yes. Reading along here and thinking about it-where I live unfortunately drownings happen due to the large amount of home pools (FL). In news coverage, it's always the child going out the door unnoticed to the pool area, pool gate left open, distracted adults at a party not watching, ect. Small children unfortunately are attracted to water whether they've ever worn a puddle jumper or not. The issue is an unsecured home pool.

This. It's almost always a child under 3 who went into the pool alone. Recently a friend's child drove a little motorized car into the pool when the nanny wasn't looking and drowned. It's not because kids are wearing puddle jumpers while their parents are an arm's reach away that is the big risk. People shrieking in here about it have no clue what they are talking about.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mean, obviously you all will do what you want but when I see this in 2024 I view it as a low information parent. The same type who feeds lots of junk food and doesn’t use car seats properly.

The best parents know to ignore these types of judgements from insecure people. Nobody should be basing their parenting decisions based on what other parents think.

You’re right. They should listen to experts who say not to use these. But that would be inconvenient for you.

What's inconvenient for you is that we don't use puddle jumpers and I still think you're an idiot.