Mormon trek and not being wise

[smac97]

27 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I think it's a little silly dressing up like pioneers and reenacting historical events but that's beside the point.

The problem I have with this, along with other activities, is the lack of safety precautions. Is there a health professional to look after the physical safety of participants? If not, why not?

My daughter recently returned from girls camp. They were on a lake where they had multiple activities, swimming, canoeing etc. Guess how many certified lifeguards they had at camp. ZERO. Instead, they relied on the buddy system and the supervision of regular youth leaders who were untrained in water safety. Thankfully there were no tragedies like occurred on the trek, but unqualified, untrained leaders looking after the physical safety of my daughter is still negligent. I made the mistake of trusting stake leaders to be prepared. I won't do that again.

I don't know if it's laziness in getting professionally trained and certified leaders or maybe it's the expense, but the church seems to cut corners on these things.

I think your reckoning is a bit overwrought.  Every year tens (hundreds?) of millions of people all over the world visit and swim in lakes, reservoirs, rivers and oceans where there are no "certified lifeguards" around.  Are these folks "negligent" too?

Or is negligent only when Mormons are involved and there's a chance to faultfind?

Thanks,

-Smac

[bluebell]

34 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I think it's a little silly dressing up like pioneers and reenacting historical events but that's beside the point.

The problem I have with this, along with other activities, is the lack of safety precautions. Is there a health professional to look after the physical safety of participants? If not, why not?

My daughter recently returned from girls camp. They were on a lake where they had multiple activities, swimming, canoeing etc. Guess how many certified lifeguards they had at camp. ZERO. Instead, they relied on the buddy system and the supervision of regular youth leaders who were untrained in water safety. Thankfully there were no tragedies like occurred on the trek, but unqualified, untrained leaders looking after the physical safety of my daughter is still negligent. I made the mistake of trusting stake leaders to be prepared. I won't do that again.

I don't know if it's laziness in getting professionally trained and certified leaders or maybe it's the expense, but the church seems to cut corners on these things.

There have always been a doctor and a few nurses called to go on trek specifically to look after the participants of the treks  that a couple of my old stakes put on. 

I'm not sure what my current stake is doing. 

[jkwilliams]

5 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I think your reckoning is a bit overwrought.  Every year tens (hundreds?) of millions of people all over the world visit and swim in lakes, reservoirs, rivers and oceans where there are no "certified lifeguards" around.  Are these folks "negligent" too?

Or is negligent only when Mormons are involved and there's a chance to faultfind?

Thanks,

-Smac

For an organized camp, such as a Scout camp, a certified lifeguard is usual. My daughter worked several summers as a camp director for the Boy Scouts and the Girl Scouts. Their staff all had training in CPR, and there was at least one certified lifeguard on duty at the lake, no matter whether anything was scheduled or not. It's not too much to ask for an organized camp to have trained volunteers. I don't think I would send my kids to a camp near water where there was no lifeguard. I sure as heck wouldn't have allowed my kids to participate in the trek had I known just how poorly prepared it was: sending kids out in 104-degree weather in Oklahoma without adequate water and with no sunscreen or insect repellent (they were trying to be "authentic") is irresponsible, and led to needless hospitalizations. But then I'm just a fault-finder.

[Scott Lloyd]

18 minutes ago, Rain said:

Could be. I just figure the timing was right for some and not for others. She was open to it. The Lord didn't see it was needed for whatever reason. I'm ok with that. It took her awhile, but she is now ok with it as well. It's not that she didn't feel the Spirit, she just didn't feel the Spirit in a life changing way. 

My oldest went as well and as far I can tell he didn't have a spiritual experience, but then he also wasn't open to it. 

I'm curious how it will be for my youngest.  

Perhaps with your daughter, it was a matter of her having had spiritual experiences so frequently and intensely in other aspects of her life that trek paled in comparison to what she was used to.

I'm only saying I have observed enough young people who in their testimonies seemed visibly impacted in a positive way that I am not yet willing to jettison the concept as being not worthwhile.

[Scott Lloyd]

3 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

For an organized camp, such as a Scout camp, a certified lifeguard is usual. My daughter worked several summers as a camp director for the Boy Scouts and the Girl Scouts. Their staff all had training in CPR, and there was at least one certified lifeguard on duty at the lake, no matter whether anything was scheduled or not. It's not too much to ask for an organized camp to have trained volunteers. I don't think I would send my kids to a camp near water where there was no lifeguard. I sure as heck wouldn't have allowed my kids to participate in the trek had I known just how poorly prepared it was: sending kids out in 104-degree weather in Oklahoma without adequate water and with no sunscreen or insect repellent (they were trying to be "authentic") is irresponsible, and led to needless hospitalizations. But then I'm just a fault-finder.

There are plenty of Scout activities that do not take place at a BSA-owned or organized camp.

I've experienced a trek adventure at Martin's Cove (not a youth trek exclusively, but very similar). They are handled very well and are probably analogous to the organized Scout camps you refer to here.

[Storm Rider]

37 minutes ago, bluebell said:

A woman died on trek in Arkansas.

A. Woman. Died. 

And you think sarcasm is a good way to respond to parents concerned about their kids safety at trek?

First, does anyone know the medical history of the woman that died here?  No?  Then maybe everyone needs to take a breath and wait to find out if there any extenuating circumstances. 

Second, do any of you read all of the published articles on this specific trek?  Everyone was warned of heat exposure; there were medical personnel on site; she was the daughter of one of members of the stake presidency - her father was present on the trek and he was one of the individuals warning everyone about the symptoms of heat exposure.  Now, tell me, what else would you want done?  

People die every day for all kinds of reasons.  They die sitting on the couch; sitting in a chair; walking down the street; driving in their car; and sitting on the toilet (my grandfather died after Sunday dinner this way).  Crap happens and there is no need to start screaming the sky is falling and stopping every activity because someone died.  

Yes, I think sarcasm was appropriate.  Everyone is a drama queen of late and we are producing a generation of totally spoiled do nothings.  They are not capable of walking down the street much less exerting a little effort in an uncomfortable environment.  People walk in heat all over the world every day, EVERY DAY!!!  US youth are not so fragile that they need a bunch of hall monitors to prevent them from scrapping knee, getting a sun burn, or have to sleep on the ground.  

 

[jkwilliams]

1 minute ago, Scott Lloyd said:

There are plenty of Scout activities that do not take place at a BSA-owned or organized camp.

I've experienced a trek adventure at Martin's Cove (not a youth trek exclusively, but very similar). They are handled very well and are probably analogous to the organized Scout camps you refer to here.

I know that. I'm saying that these activities are organized by the sponsoring institution, in this case, the LDS church. The church ought to have basic guidelines for these activities to prevent such tragedies. My children's trek was a disaster because, whoever planned it had not thought through what would be needed. I still feel guilty that I trusted the leaders and did not ask the pertinent questions. Later, when my daughter attended the Martin's Cove trek, I made sure I knew exactly what was going to happen, who would be there, and what precautions were taken for emergencies. 

[smac97]

2 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

For an organized camp, such as a Scout camp, a certified lifeguard is usual.

Reasonable minds will have to disagree about that, I suppose.  I've never seen a certified lifeguard at any scout camp or girl's camp.

But that is neither here nor there.  Each year hundreds of millions of people go swimming in water without having a "certified lifeguard."  Again, are these people being "negligent?"  Or is it only when Mormons do it?

Quote

My daughter worked several summers as a camp director for the Boy Scouts and the Girl Scouts. Their staff all had training in CPR, and there was at least one certified lifeguard on duty at the lake, no matter whether anything was scheduled or not.

That's nice.  But is the absence of such personnel "negligent?"  Or is it only when Mormons do it?

Quote

It's not too much to ask for an organized camp to have trained volunteers.

Way to shift the goal posts!

Quote

I don't think I would send my kids to a camp near water where there was no lifeguard.

As you like.  Next week I'm going up to Washington State.  We plan on visiting "Second Beach," one of the most beautiful places I have ever seen.  It's on the northwest coast of the Olympic Peninsuela.  There is a Honey Bucket there, but that's about it.  No lifeguards.  My kids will go swimming there, and I and my wife and my in-laws will keep an eye on them, and the older ones will also help out.  By your reckoning, that's "negligent."  I don't think that this reckoning is reasonable.

Quote

I sure as heck wouldn't have allowed my kids to participate in the trek had I known just how poorly prepared it was: sending kids out in 104-degree weather in Oklahoma without adequate water and with no sunscreen or insect repellent (they were trying to be "authentic") is irresponsible, and led to needless hospitalizations.

Nobody is disagreeing with you here, I think.  Please see my previous post regarding the importance of paying attention to heat, physical exertion, and hydration.

Quote

But then I'm just a fault-finder. 

Again, each year hundreds of millions of people go swimming in water without having a "certified lifeguard" around.  Are these people being "negligent?"  Or is it only when Mormons do it?

Thanks,

-Smac

[Rain]

5 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Perhaps with your daughter, it was a matter of her having had spiritual experiences so frequently and intensely in other aspects of her life that trek paled in comparison to what she was used to.

I'm only saying I have observed enough young people who in their testimonies seemed visibly impacted in a positive way that I am not yet willing to jettison the concept as being not worthwhile.

That's my belief about her.  She just had that gift.  

And I agree that I wouldn't get rid of them either.  I just wanted to put out there that it is important to let the kids know it is ok if they don't have that experience. It really bothered her for awhile and when I asked the stake to please say something to all the kids, some of which are not as open with parents as she is with me, they seemed uncomfortable with the idea. 

Even without the big experience that I felt it was a benefit to both kids. 

[jkwilliams]

22 minutes ago, bluebell said:

There have always been a doctor and a few nurses called to go on trek specifically to look after the participants of the treks  that a couple of my old stakes put on. 

I'm not sure what my current stake is doing. 

Our stake in Texas did not have a doctor or medical professional assigned, there wasn't enough water, and they carried no sunscreen or insect repellent, with predictable results. I guess I'm just being a drama queen in saying I think our stake leaders were being irresponsible and foolish. My daughter spent a few days in bed recovering from the heat exhaustion, severe sunburn (she still has scars on her upper torso), ticks, and chiggers.

Edited June 22, 2016 by jkwilliams

[bluebell]

Just now, Storm Rider said:

First, does anyone know the medical history of the woman that died here?  No?  Then maybe everyone needs to take a breath and wait to find out if there any extenuating circumstances. 

The articles haven't mentioned that she had any underlying medical issues.  Maybe they will release more information later and that will change.

Quote

Second, do any of you read all of the published articles on this specific trek?  Everyone was warned of heat exposure; there were medical personnel on site; she was the daughter of one of members of the stake presidency - her father was present on the trek and he was one of the individuals warning everyone about the symptoms of heat exposure.  Now, tell me, what else would you want done?  

I would want it canceled.  If there is a reasonable chance that someone is going to die playing dress up, then the activity should probably be significantly changed or canceled.   

Quote

People die every day for all kinds of reasons.  They die sitting on the couch; sitting in a chair; walking down the street; driving in their car; and sitting on the toilet (my grandfather died after Sunday dinner this way).  Crap happens and there is no need to start screaming the sky is falling and stopping every activity because someone died.

This isn't a freak accident.  It's not a medical issue that came out of no where. People were warned that death due to heat exhaustion was possible and then someone died of heat exhaustion.  You obviously feel that the risk was worth the potential reward.  Others disagree.    

Quote

Yes, I think sarcasm was appropriate.  Everyone is a drama queen of late and we are producing a generation of totally spoiled do nothings.  They are not capable of walking down the street much less exerting a little effort in an uncomfortable environment.  People walk in heat all over the world every day, EVERY DAY!!!  US youth are not so fragile that they need a bunch of hall monitors to prevent them from scrapping knee, getting a sun burn, or have to sleep on the ground.  

 

[bluebell]

2 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

Our stake in Texas did not have a doctor or medical professional assigned, there wasn't enough water, and they carried no sunscreen or insect repellent, with predictable results. I guess I'm just being a drama queen in saying I think our stake leaders were being irresponsible and foolish. My daughter spent a few days in bed recovering from the heat exhaustion, severe sunburn (she still has scars on her upper torso), ticks, and chiggers.

Some stakes understand the risks.  Others though seem to have the idea that because they are trying to do something spiritual, God will make sure no one suffers too much.  It's completely irrational.   Accidents happen.  Negligent and accident are two different things.

When you are responsible for the life of someone else's child, you should take that responsibility extremely seriously.   You don't take chances.

[stemelbow]

36 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I think you are making an unjust blanket generalization here. No doubt in the past some have been unwise in how they have undertaken these ventures. But if all or even most had been as irresponsible as you imply, I think we would have had many more tragedies by now.

Again, I have to compare it to Boy Scout outdoor adventures: Do we rule all of them out just because some in the past have been unwise in how they have undertaken them?

I'm not advocating we rule them out.  I'm trying to offer an added caution of we need to be far more wise about them. 

[Scott Lloyd]

17 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

I know that. I'm saying that these activities are organized by the sponsoring institution, in this case, the LDS church. The church ought to have basic guidelines for these activities to prevent such tragedies. My children's trek was a disaster because, whoever planned it had not thought through what would be needed. I still feel guilty that I trusted the leaders and did not ask the pertinent questions. Later, when my daughter attended the Martin's Cove trek, I made sure I knew exactly what was going to happen, who would be there, and what precautions were taken for emergencies. 

I think it has been pointed out here that the Church does have such basic guidelines. Again, if these things were being undertaken willy-nilly with no oversight or responsibility, I think there would have been many more tragedies by now.

[bsjkki]

6 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Reasonable minds will have to disagree about that, I suppose.  I've never seen a certified lifeguard at any scout camp or girl's camp.

But that is neither here nor there.  Each year hundreds of millions of people go swimming in water without having a "certified lifeguard."  Again, are these people being "negligent?"  Or is it only when Mormons do it?

That's nice.  But is the absence of such personnel "negligent?"  Or is it only when Mormons do it?

Way to shift the goal posts!

As you like.  Next week I'm going up to Washington State.  We plan on visiting "Second Beach," one of the most beautiful places I have ever seen.  It's on the northwest coast of the Olympic Peninsuela.  There is a Honey Bucket there, but that's about it.  No lifeguards.  My kids will go swimming there, and I and my wife and my in-laws will keep an eye on them, and the older ones will also help out.  By your reckoning, that's "negligent."  I don't think that this reckoning is reasonable.

Nobody is disagreeing with you here, I think.  Please see my previous post regarding the importance of paying attention to heat, physical exertion, and hydration.

Again, each year hundreds of millions of people go swimming in water without having a "certified lifeguard" around.  Are these people being "negligent?"  Or is it only when Mormons do it?

Thanks,

-Smac

The scouts take safe swimming very seriously.  Each boy must pass a swim test and at the scout camps I have seen, there are always lifeguards.http://www.scouting.org/scoutsource/HealthandSafety/GSS/gss02.aspx. Also, at girls camp there must be a lifeguard present to swim at the lake. I am sure each stake is a little different.  Currently, my stake girls camp location gets invaded by bears.  They give the priesthood beanbag guns to shoot at them.  The bears come into camp and are seen frequently.  I also think this is unwise.  The church bought the camp and we are not allowed to go elsewhere.  The girls once had to gather under the mess hall and prayed for protection as the Bears roamed the camp.  I have a new beehive and want her to participate but I think not switching camps is idiotic. 

[Scott Lloyd]

14 minutes ago, Rain said:

That's my belief about her.  She just had that gift.  

And I agree that I wouldn't get rid of them either.  I just wanted to put out there that it is important to let the kids know it is ok if they don't have that experience. It really bothered her for awhile and when I asked the stake to please say something to all the kids, some of which are not as open with parents as she is with me, they seemed uncomfortable with the idea. 

Even without the big experience that I felt it was a benefit to both kids. 

I think you are right, that the message needs to go out.

As I mentioned, my son was not all that thrilled with the first experience. For some reason, he decided to give it another shot, and that one made the difference. I have a hunch that it was partly due to the fact that it transpired during the summer when he was preparing for his mission.

[HappyJackWagon]

44 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I think your reckoning is a bit overwrought.  Every year tens (hundreds?) of millions of people all over the world visit and swim in lakes, reservoirs, rivers and oceans where there are no "certified lifeguards" around.  Are these folks "negligent" too?

Or is negligent only when Mormons are involved and there's a chance to faultfind?

Thanks,

-Smac

I find this funny. You will even defend negligence on safety.

I would expect the same from any organized group, whether it be school, church, etc.

On scouting high adventures that involve water, it is at least required to have a certified lifeguard and each boy has to be certified in water safety which includes swimming safety.

But go ahead and pretend like safety isn't important. From the way I've seen many church activities run you may be in the majority

[Guest]

56 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

So sorry to read that. I've written before how poorly prepared the trek was that my two oldest participated in several years ago in Oklahoma. Quite a few people ended up in the hospital with heat stroke, and they all came home with ticks and chiggers and bad sunburns. My daughter later was assigned to write a paper in school about "the worst experience of my life," and she wrote about trek. The ones they do in Martin's Cove seem to be well organized, but other experiences vary dramatically.

I think that is the point of the trek, to show the horror and determination of the early Saints trek. Also what they had to endure for their Faith and their safety. But, this not a lesson easily learned on the open planes, because many of the early Saints died in the sma e manner. So, "No One" should put at risk their lives and healt to learn that lesson today. This is an unnecessary death and a heartbreaking story! 

[Thinking]

There's a reason the pioneers traveled as close to the Platte River as possible.

[smac97]

7 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I find this funny. You will even defend negligence on safety.

No, I won't.  But I suspect we have different understandings of the concept of "negligence."  Mine is informed and governed by extensive legal principles developed over centuries in the U.K. and the U.S.  Yours, I think, is governed by a dislike of Mormons.

"Negligence" as a legal concept involves analysis of an activity and the perception of that activity by a "reasonably prudent person."  

Every year hundreds of millions of people go swimming without a lifeguard.  The absence of a lifeguard is not, in my view, generally "negligent."

You feel otherwise, but you have repeatedly failed to explain your reasoning.  

Quote

But go ahead and pretend like safety isn't important. 

I've never said that "safety isn't important," let alone pretended as much.  You are bearing false witness here.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Scott Lloyd]

36 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I find this funny. You will even defend negligence on safety.

I would expect the same from any organized group, whether it be school, church, etc.

On scouting high adventures that involve water, it is at least required to have a certified lifeguard and each boy has to be certified in water safety which includes swimming safety.

But go ahead and pretend like safety isn't important. From the way I've seen many church activities run you may be in the majority

This is a blatant cheap shot. Smac never said or implied that "safety isn't important." Nor did he "defend negligence."  In fact, he has said just the opposite on this very thread.

 

Edited June 22, 2016 by Scott Lloyd

[ttribe]

56 minutes ago, Storm Rider said:

First, does anyone know the medical history of the woman that died here?  No?  Then maybe everyone needs to take a breath and wait to find out if there any extenuating circumstances. 

Second, do any of you read all of the published articles on this specific trek?  Everyone was warned of heat exposure; there were medical personnel on site; she was the daughter of one of members of the stake presidency - her father was present on the trek and he was one of the individuals warning everyone about the symptoms of heat exposure.  Now, tell me, what else would you want done?  

People die every day for all kinds of reasons.  They die sitting on the couch; sitting in a chair; walking down the street; driving in their car; and sitting on the toilet (my grandfather died after Sunday dinner this way).  Crap happens and there is no need to start screaming the sky is falling and stopping every activity because someone died.  

Yes, I think sarcasm was appropriate.  Everyone is a drama queen of late and we are producing a generation of totally spoiled do nothings.  They are not capable of walking down the street much less exerting a little effort in an uncomfortable environment.  People walk in heat all over the world every day, EVERY DAY!!!  US youth are not so fragile that they need a bunch of hall monitors to prevent them from scrapping knee, getting a sun burn, or have to sleep on the ground.  

 

Ummm, I'm curious.  Would say these things if it was YOUR wife or daughter who died?  Your cavalier attitude towards this woman's unnecessary death is mind boggling.  No big deal, though, right?  Happens everyday.  The fact that it was entirely preventable doesn't matter either, right?

Unbelievable.

[jkwilliams]

1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said:

There are plenty of Scout activities that do not take place at a BSA-owned or organized camp.

I've experienced a trek adventure at Martin's Cove (not a youth trek exclusively, but very similar). They are handled very well and are probably analogous to the organized Scout camps you refer to here.

I think you understand the difference between a Scout activity and a large group activity lasting multiple days and involving a lot of people. 

[Rock_N_Roll]

My wife and I were a “Ma & Pa” for Trek a few years ago.  3 days spent pushing/pulling/and lifting a handcart over logs, through rivers and up long, steep, rocky trails was excruciating.  Two nights spent freezing (we were not allowed to bring sleeping pads or extra blankets) and food that was barely palatable.  The “spiritual experiences” seemed fake and manufactured.  Not something I will do again.

[jkwilliams]

1 hour ago, smac97 said:

Reasonable minds will have to disagree about that, I suppose.  I've never seen a certified lifeguard at any scout camp or girl's camp.

But that is neither here nor there.  Each year hundreds of millions of people go swimming in water without having a "certified lifeguard."  Again, are these people being "negligent?"  Or is it only when Mormons do it?

That's nice.  But is the absence of such personnel "negligent?"  Or is it only when Mormons do it?

Way to shift the goal posts!

As you like.  Next week I'm going up to Washington State.  We plan on visiting "Second Beach," one of the most beautiful places I have ever seen.  It's on the northwest coast of the Olympic Peninsuela.  There is a Honey Bucket there, but that's about it.  No lifeguards.  My kids will go swimming there, and I and my wife and my in-laws will keep an eye on them, and the older ones will also help out.  By your reckoning, that's "negligent."  I don't think that this reckoning is reasonable.

Nobody is disagreeing with you here, I think.  Please see my previous post regarding the importance of paying attention to heat, physical exertion, and hydration.

Again, each year hundreds of millions of people go swimming in water without having a "certified lifeguard" around.  Are these people being "negligent?"  Or is it only when Mormons do it?

Thanks,

-Smac

Now you're accusing me of fault-finding only when Mormons are involved? Cheap shot, indeed. 

My point: I would like to make sure these things are conducted like the one my daughter attended at Martin's Cove, not like the one in Oklahoma. Both were sponsored by the church, but one was unsafe and irresponsible. So, no, Mormon != negligent. Sheesh.