5 Year Old Daughter Horse Riding Incident Advice

[rockits]

I have only done some brief research this week or so and uncovered some fairly stark and shocking statistics. There are no exact or firm statistics as not all incidents are recorded.

When you see statements like this it does make you stop and think:
A UK hospital found "that a motorcyclist would expect to have a serious accident once in every 7,500 hours they spent on a bike.
For horse riders they found there would be a serious accident once in every 350 hours. "

We know that motorbikes can be statistically dangerous. This is often with riders wearing a fairly high tech full face/head helmet and often some other additional forms of protection. Many horse riders don't always seem to be as well protected and the risk and danger for serious injury or death seems to be statistically higher than many other activities.

We all think differently and don't agree on many things. It would be good to have accurate statistics in place to be able to give parents/riders the information that is required to make a good solid/informed decision about the risks involved.

 

[fredT]

First off I wish your daughter a full and speedy recovery, it is a horrible thing having your kids injured in an accident, I do feel for you. Given the circumstances she was obviously very lucky though. You should thank your lucky star!

But, and no offence, you have been very naive about your little girls hobby. Even if you have no interest or knowledge about the activity it should be fairly obvious that sitting yourself on top of a big, strong, heavy animal could potentially be very dangerous.

Furthermore I can't see anything in your posts that seems unusual, and mentions of solicitors and police leaves a pretty bad taste to be honest.

You chose to send your girl to riding lessons, you were obviously happy with the school leading up to the accident as for 6 months prior you didn't stop proceedings. And even at the day of the accident you were there watching her ride for 20 minutes prior to the accident and I don't believe you wouldn't have stepped in if you thought she was in danger.

Accident happen and there doesn't always have to be someone to blame. Obviously if there was negligence somewhere along the line this should be addressed, but nothing you say in your posts suggests this.

All the best

 

[pipmk]

That horse appears very well schooled, plus the area is well enclosed with a high (solid) fence, so little to distract the horse.

I don't think it correct to call the guardian 'stupid'

Lets see eh! 3 year old falls off horse,horse either treads on her or kicks her in the head. Possible death or brain damage and you don't think thats stupid. How many small children have been kicked in the head by a tricycle, how far do they fall when they come off compared to a horse?

Well schooled or not accidents happen and you really want to put your childs life and welfare at risk,for what? Did the 3 year old form a clear desire to ride a horse being aware of the inherent risks,or is it parents expressing their desire to have a precocious child and filming the event for the world to admire? Vanity, vanity,all is vanity.

 

[fredT]

Lets see eh! 3 year old falls off horse,horse either treads on her or kicks her in the head. Possible death or brain damage and you don't think thats stupid. How many small children have been kicked in the head by a tricycle, how far do they fall when they come off compared to a horse?

Well schooled or not accidents happen and you really want to put your childs life and welfare at risk,for what? Did the 3 year old form a clear desire to ride a horse being aware of the inherent risks,or is it parents expressing their desire to have a precocious child and filming the event for the world to admire? Vanity, vanity,all is vanity.

You clearly don't have the same risk appetite as others, which is fine.

But in reality it doesn't matter if the child is 3, 10 or indeed an adult. The risk of injury or death would be similar. That little girl is FAR safer then I would be on a horse. It is obvious she is as comfortable and safe as anyone.

And by the way I would guess the child would be riding all day long if it was up to her. Horse people, specially children, are fanatical and would do it all day if they could.

 

[whitenemesis]

Lets see eh! 3 year old falls off horse,horse either treads on her or kicks her in the head. Possible death or brain damage and you don't think thats stupid. How many small children have been kicked in the head by a tricycle, how far do they fall when they come off compared to a horse?

Well schooled or not accidents happen and you really want to put your childs life and welfare at risk,for what? Did the 3 year old form a clear desire to ride a horse being aware of the inherent risks,or is it parents expressing their desire to have a precocious child and filming the event for the world to admire? Vanity, vanity,all is vanity.

You may in your opinion consider her irresponsible but you have no evidence to determine the guardian as stupid.

 

[Doodle]

I have only done some brief research this week or so and uncovered some fairly stark and shocking statistics. There are no exact or firm statistics as not all incidents are recorded.

When you see statements like this it does make you stop and think:
A UK hospital found "that a motorcyclist would expect to have a serious accident once in every 7,500 hours they spent on a bike.
For horse riders they found there would be a serious accident once in every 350 hours. "

Hence my less-than-gracious reply to the horsey-loving doctor when she suggested I that maybe I should consider giving up motorcycles as they were "dangerous".

 

[Maxi4]

Rockits - I hope and pray that your little daughter gets better soon. I didnt read the whole thread, read the first 2 pages and thats enough. Its hard to read about this kind of accidents, especially when its a small person! Being a dad myself I know how hard it can be when your kids are hurt. Look after yourself and the family. Dont blame yourself (I know its easy for me to say!!!), look up to the future and see what needs to be done to get her better and work on that. Look forward not back
I wish you and your family the best

Regards - Pete

 

[pipmk]

You clearly don't have the same risk appetite as others, which is fine.

But in reality it doesn't matter if the child is 3, 10 or indeed an adult. The risk of injury or death would be similar. That little girl is FAR safer then I would be on a horse. It is obvious she is as comfortable and safe as anyone.

And by the way I would guess the child would be riding all day long if it was up to her. Horse people, specially children, are fanatical and would do it all day if they could.

I do hope you are not a parent. It does not matter what a child wants to do,it is a parents responsibility to ensure they are not allowed to do anything which exposes them to severe risk,it that really a concept you cannot grasp? It is enshrined in law, so important does society think it and children will be removed from parents who fail in this duty

My attitude towards risk taking is neither here or there,we are discussing people who impose their views of risk on those who by their immaturity are unable to form a proper judgement,again is that hard to grasp?.

You simply cannot tell that the child in the film is safe,you are making that judgement because it suits your viewpoint.

 

[fredT]

I do hope you are not a parent. It does not matter what a child wants to do,it is a parents responsibility to ensure they are not allowed to do anything which exposes them to severe risk,it that really a concept you cannot grasp? It is enshrined in law, so important does society think it and children will be removed from parents who fail in this duty

My attitude towards risk taking is neither here or there,we are discussing people who impose their views of risk on those who by their immaturity are unable to form a proper judgement,again is that hard to grasp?.

You simply cannot tell that the child in the film is safe,you are making that judgement because it suits your viewpoint.

I hate to break it to you but there are many sports out there that can be very dangerous, even lethal. And horrible parents all over the world let their kids participate sports like

Horse riding
Motorsport
Ice hockey
Cycling
Boxing
Football



All of the above carry a risk of injury on a sliding scale from a grazed elbow to death. Obviously it is the parent, not the child, determining what risk they are willing to take.

It's ironic that you think MY viewpoint of the safety of the child in the video is skewed, when you seem completely blind to what is happening there. You base your opinion on the age of the child and nothing else. I see a skilled child under experienced supervision in a controlled environment.

I'd love to hear your argument why an older child or even adult would be safer then the child in video?
At what point in that video was the child made to do anything she didn't seem comfortable with, didn't seem capable of doing or was subjected to unnecessary risk?

No matter how careful you are, accidents will happen. And when you take part in any sport or activity you will have to accept that.

 

[BTB 500]

Horse riding
Motorsport
Ice hockey
Cycling
Boxing
Football



All of the above carry a risk of injury on a sliding scale from a grazed elbow to death.

I think the point is though that some of those activities carry a much higher risk of serious injury or death than others. I'm sure it's possible for a small child to be killed playing football, but it's pretty unlikely.

 

[fredT]

I think the point is though that some of those activities carry a much higher risk of serious injury or death than others. I'm sure it's possible for a small child to be killed playing football, but it's pretty unlikely.

Well that's sort of my point mate

Just because your comfort point on the risk scale is different to mine does not make either of us a bad parent.

 

[wongl]

Physically, perhaps. They lack maturity in making decisions though - which is why they're not allowed to have guns, drive cars, vote, etc.

That's actually a good point. You have to be 16(?) to ride a moped on the road. You need a licence, tax, insurance ... plus an MOT to confirm the brakes, steering, etc. work.

Yet an 8 year old can legally ride a horse on the road with no insurance, despite the fact it weighs far more than a moped and is probably capable of similar speeds. And has intrinsically unreliable steering and brakes. And don't mention the emissions ...

I never suggested that a 3 year old should ride a horse on the road, own a horse or a gun! We are talking about kids learning to ride in a school compound. Actually 3 year old can and do learn to ride quad bikes and karts on private compound quite legally I believe.

 

[wongl]

Forget the HSE. So you think this seems OK to you? Just because it is in the US it is OK? I don' think so. Surely the majority of people would look at this and think this is a little irresponsible and stupidity. Or maybe I am the idiot and I am in the minority. Maybe that is why I am confused!

A 3 year old may be very talented and able to do many things. This girl may be very talented and very clever. However she is 3. Let me say that again....3 years old. That is 36 months old. She is a long way off being a responsible adult. She is a very long way off being able to make rational and safe decisions for herself.

How many deaths per year are attributed to by Violin accidents? Even karting is dangerous but not statistically anywhere remotely near as dangerous as horse riding as I am finding out this last week or so.

Yes I do think it is okay actually. If my 3 year daughter wanted to ride, and assuming I can find the money and most importantly the correct teacher/school, then why not? I do not live my life by what the majority of people think. When I came to this country I was openly called a WOG by my fellow students and some teachers. On many occasions I was told to go home. This seemed to be the majority thinking in the seventies and does not make it right. Prior to that, the majority of people considered the world to be flat. It was later proven that they were wrong too. So I live by my own judgement on a case by case basis, weighting out the circumstance and forming my own conclusion. Of course I will weigh the opinion of others, but in the end it has to be my decision based on the facts and circumstances that are important to me.

I have lived in several countries with different safety standards - just because we tend to have a higher safety standard here in the UK doesn't actually make us more safe statistically. We raise our safety standards to lower our accident rates.

A visiting safety expert visits a major car manufacture in Japan and commented that the car body pressing machine had no safety guard rails to prevent fingers from being crush by the press. The Japanese counter part replied why would any one in the right mind put their hands in to the press? Installing a safety guard rail would be a waste of money. Of course perhaps Japanese shop floor worker is not allow to drink alcohol at lunch or maybe they are more disciplined while operating the press. But a review of the accident book revealed no record of crushed hands/fingers at said plant. We should not judge others by our standards especially when the circumstances may be different.

 

[grober]

The whole affair centres round duty of care and perception of risk issues. I think the OP's feelings probably stem from the fact he was not made fully aware of the potential risks associated with his daughters horse riding activity. There are many "duty of care " situations where people entrust the safety of their children to professionals such as teachers or medical staff on the tacit understanding that their perception of risk to their child is the same as theirs. This is not always the case since the professional has training and experience on their side to make that judgement whereas the parent doesn't and in many circumstances could not reasonably be expected to have . To counteract this perception of risk "mismatch" - full disclosure practices have evolved whereby all parties are made aware of the risks involved. If you undergo a minor surgical proceedure in the NHS nowadays part of the consent procedure involves supplying the patient with information of the risks involved with a professional medical assessment as to likely occurence- thus the patient signs an "informed consent" form which affords a degree of protection to both parties.
I get the impression that the "horse riding industry" is largely run on advisory/good practice lines rather then mandatory/statutory practice. It is largely run by enthusiasts for enthusiasts but there is a business element to it. Under those circumstances this might naturally incline the owners of such establishments to accentuate the positive aspects of the activity [ for which there are many] and perhaps play down any associated risks.
Without knowing the working practices of the particular riding school concerned and any associated documentation signed its difficult to make judgement but ultimately I would offer the onus is on the riding school as the "professional in charge of the activity" with a " duty of care" to make any parent aware of the potential risks [ [however slight] involved.

 

[fredT]

The whole affair centres round duty of care and perception of risk issues. I think the OP's feelings probably stem from the fact he was not made fully aware of the potential risks associated with his daughters horse riding activity. There are many "duty of care " situations where people entrust the safety of their children to professionals such as teachers or medical staff on the tacit understanding that their perception of risk to their child is the same as theirs. This is not always the case since the professional has training and experience on their side to make that judgement whereas the parent doesn't and in many circumstances could not reasonably be expected to have . To counteract this perception of risk "mismatch" - full disclosure practices have evolved whereby all parties are made aware of the risks involved. If you undergo a minor surgical proceedure in the NHS nowadays part of the consent procedure involves supplying the patient with information of the risks involved with a professional medical assessment as to likely occurence- thus the patient signs an "informed consent" form which affords a degree of protection to both parties.
I get the impression that the "horse riding industry" is largely run on advisory/good practice lines rather then mandatory/statutory practice. It is largely run by enthusiasts for enthusiasts but there is a business element to it. Under those circumstances this might naturally incline the owners of such establishments to accentuate the positive aspects of the activity [ for which there are many] and perhaps play down any associated risks.
Without knowing the working practices of the particular riding school concerned and any associated documentation signed its difficult to make judgement but ultimately I would offer the onus is on the riding school as the "professional in charge of the activity" with a " duty of care" to make any parent aware of the potential risks [ [however slight] involved.

You are quite right. They need to explain that horses are wild animals that might do unpredictable things. Things that could lead you to falling off. Might even kick/bite. Who would have thought it?

Also if they have a cafeteria they need to make very clear that the tea and coffee they serve could potentially be very hot!

 

[fredT]

Anyone that needs that explaining to them, probably wont understand what they are being told anyway.

 

[Steve320]

I'm not sure whether there's a thread that has such consistently long posts through seven pages (currently) as this one, and my overriding thought is simply that I hope, rockits, that your daughter makes a complete recovery, both physically and mentally.

Regardless of whether you were there or not, and what level, ultimately, duty of care either rests with you, as a parent, or the stables, as the contracted provider, there is a need to ask formal questions as to whether a child of that age, should have been left in full control of an unpredictable animal.

That was their decision, and their decision alone to risk assess. You, as a parent, placed your most precious possession in their professional hands, and nothing else can change that position. They put themselves in that position, no-one else.

Whether or not it leads to any legal action is an entirely different matter, but they must answer how they assessed risk and took the decision to allow your daughter total control of THAT horse.

 

[pipmk]

I hate to break it to you but there are many sports out there that can be very dangerous, even lethal. And horrible parents all over the world let their kids participate sports like

Horse riding
Motorsport
Ice hockey
Cycling
Boxing
Football



All of the above carry a risk of injury on a sliding scale from a grazed elbow to death. Obviously it is the parent, not the child, determining what risk they are willing to take.

It's ironic that you think MY viewpoint of the safety of the child in the video is skewed, when you seem completely blind to what is happening there. You base your opinion on the age of the child and nothing else. I see a skilled child under experienced supervision in a controlled environment.

I'd love to hear your argument why an older child or even adult would be safer then the child in video?
At what point in that video was the child made to do anything she didn't seem comfortable with, didn't seem capable of doing or was subjected to unnecessary risk?

No matter how careful you are, accidents will happen. And when you take part in any sport or activity you will have to accept that.

Again you perversely avoid the point, a 3 year old child cannot assess risk, a 3 year old child cannot be skilled in controlling a horse many times its weight and strength, so it is its parents who are deciding, not for the child who I expect would have been just as happy on a toy horse.It is all about them,not their child and that is not how a responsible parent behaves. You clearly have little comprehension of the reasoning ability of very small children,just as I have little about yours.

 

[wongl]

I'm not sure whether there's a thread that has such consistently long posts through seven pages (currently) as this one, and my overriding thought is simply that I hope, rockits, that your daughter makes a complete recovery, both physically and mentally.

Regardless of whether you were there or not, and what level, ultimately, duty of care either rests with you, as a parent, or the stables, as the contracted provider, there is a need to ask formal questions as to whether a child of that age, should have been left in full control of an unpredictable animal.

That was their decision, and their decision alone to risk assess. You, as a parent, placed your most precious possession in their professional hands, and nothing else can change that position. They put themselves in that position, no-one else.

Whether or not it leads to any legal action is an entirely different matter, but they must answer how they assessed risk and took the decision to allow your daughter total control of THAT horse.

Duty of care by the stables/professionals is only part of it - while they can take actions to mitigate risks to make it safer, they cannot ultimately remove all the dangers from what is a dangerous activity. The only way to do this is to not to participate from such activities completely. So in this respect the parents of children must share the duty of care with the professionals by placing or removing their children from potentially dangerous activities and the mitigations of the risks such as buying the appropriate gear, fit and size, etc.

If a child wants to learn to ride a horse, they (including their parents) must be prepared to take a few falls at some stage as no professional person can completely mitigate a rider from falling in the real world due to an infinite number of variables.

In my opinion, their main duty of care is to ensure the horse selected for the rider is appropriate for the rider - but even so, the stables have to, from time to time, put a rider on a slightly more demanding horse in order for the rider to develop more advance skills. As far as I am aware, no stables that I know would knowing put a rider on a horse that is too advanced for the rider. There is nothing to be gain by endangering the rider and/or the public.

 

[wongl]

a 3 year old child cannot be skilled in controlling a horse many times its weight and strength

Did you actually watched the video? The three year old child seems to be perfectly in control of the horse at all times to me. So I cannot agree with your comment especially if you are referring to the child in the video.