Is caving a suitable activity for children?

[Cookie]

All this waffle going into detail evades the prime concern expressed in this debate, which is that to make a public statement from a position of apparent authority which implies caving is unsuitable for young people, in whatever context was originally intended but not spelled out properly, damages caving and stifles the potential inflow of future participants.

OK, I've got a copy of the letter now.

The letter is addressed to the Club Secretary/Treasurer which confirms my assertion that the statement is about caving clubs. I agree that the scope of the statement could be made clearer.

It wasn't a public statement until Andy posted it here.

The question that is being evaded is: what age limit should clubs set on membership? It would be interesting to hear from the clubs.

 

[Cookie]

The statement is about children who want to become members of a club, not about all children.

the BCA have stated that 'we do not regard caving as a suitable activity for "children"'   

Clarification please!!

See above.

 

[Hughie]

[

It wasn't a public statement until Andy posted it here.

I've seen it. But only just.

 

[Clive G]

Caving clubs will have recently received child protection policy guidance notes with an accompanying letter from David Judson.  The letter says that in a recent communication with the government the BCA have stated that 'we do not regard caving as a suitable activity for "children"'   

I don't think Andy is the one at fault for making this issue more widely known. How more public can you get than "communication with the government . . ." ?

 

[Cookie]

I don't think Andy is the one at fault for making this issue more widely known. How more public can you get than "communication with the government . . ." ?

Sending one letter to one bored bureaucrat in Whitehall who's probably forgotten it as he's read it is not what I would call 'public', a better word would be 'buried'. 

 

[ian.p]

I would say the difference is that you have a group of dedicated and trained volunteers who are willing to put the time and effort into taking young members caving, I think that is rarer in a normal club.

but shouldnt the role of the BCA be to encourage normal caving clubs to do more to help and encourage new young members not to just right them all of as underage and therfore not capable.
i would be very interested to see the letter i asume EECC will have been sent a copy but if somone could PM a copy to me i would be very gratefull.

 

[graham]

but shouldnt the role of the BCA be to encourage normal caving clubs to do more to help and encourage new young members not to just right them all of as underage and therfore not capable.
i would be very interested to see the letter i asume EECC will have been sent a copy but if somone could PM a copy to me i would be very gratefull.

Alternatively, isn't it the role of the BCA to inform clubs of the very serious issues that surround their activities in this area. BCA did not draft the child protection legislation in this country and would have been able to influence it virtually not at all.

 

[ian.p]

im sory but what does "we do not regard caving as a suitable activity for "children"' inform anyone of in terms of child protection i admit i have yet to see this in the context of the original letter but this doesnt seem to be of any use to clubs in formulating a child protection policy.

 

[Andy Sparrow]

I don't think Andy is the one at fault for making this issue more widely known. How more public can you get than "communication with the government . . ." ?

Sending one letter to one bored bureaucrat in Whitehall who's probably forgotten it as he's read it is not what I would call 'public', a better word would be 'buried'. 

Let us not forget that the letter was sent to every caving club in the UK and will it not also be made available on the BCA website?  The problem is not with this issue being brought into the public domain - the problem is that BCA have made a statement with which the majority of cavers (as already indicated by the poll) strongly disagree and that could be used to undermine the activities and status of those dedicated to introducing young people to caving.  It's one huge cock-up which needs to be rectified ASAP.  Over to you BCA....

 

[Glenn]

The supporting information requested feedback (by letter or email) to David Judson. That is the correct way to make progress on this issue.

Cheers,

Glenn

via the Speleo Vercors wifi LAN at La Jarjatte-en-Vercors

PS: Ian.P I can confirm Flow was sent the information. I can not email you a copy before next monday. PM me if still you want a copy

 

[cap n chris]

Sending one letter to one bored bureaucrat in Whitehall who's probably forgotten it as he's read it is not what I would call 'public', a better word would be 'buried'. 

Let us not forget that the letter was sent to every caving club in the UK and will it not also be made available on the BCA website?  The problem is not with this issue being brought into the public domain - the problem is that BCA have made a statement with which the majority of cavers (as already indicated by the poll) strongly disagree and that could be used to undermine the activities and status of those dedicated to introducing young people to caving. 

Heartily agree with Andy; whether or not the letter ends up being "buried" (at the receiving end) does not detract from the questionability of sending such a wording in the first place. Even if the statement/letter subsequently becomes retracted and rewritten it exists as a document (Interviewer: "Is it true that in 2008 BCA advised its member clubs caving was an unsuitable activity for under 14s?")*.

IIRC the BCA Try Caving scheme was a result of the agreed BCA policy to promote caving (via clubs) and, as Cookie has stated, clubs have to work out what their workable age range is so that they can direct their "marketing" efforts accordingly - do clubs, when confronted with enquiries from motivated youngsters (without a parent member), presently generally direct them to the Scouts, or elsewhere, or do they say "Good luck, don't get hurt, off you go, sort yourself out, we can't help you"?



* Were I on a committee of a club with memberships extending to family groups containing children under 14 I would be alarmed at how, diplomatically, the fallout of this topic was to be dealt with amicably, for starters.

 

[ttxela]

* Were I on a committee of a club with memberships extending to family groups containing children under 14 I would be alarmed at how, diplomatically, the fallout of this topic was to be dealt with amicably, for starters.

I'm not involved with the BCA or with the running of a club, however I do take my child underground on club trips, on my own, with friends and on occasions with a commercial instructor and find the statement as presented on here a bit alarming. I haven't seen the document though and rather than get worked up can those in the know answer;

Q. Are the BCA advising my club not to let my child attend trips (or is the letter easily mis-interpreted as such advice)

Q. Are the BCA advising that caving is physically unsuitable for under 14's or just that it's difficult to put the necessary "Child Protection" measures in place.

 

[Ouan]

Let's take this to the next stage and assume that the BCA's statement that caving (in a normal club environment) is not suitable for children under 14 is not withdrawn and is adopted by the BCA as policy.

My club has 3 age groupings: Over 18's (full rights), 14 - 18 (limited rights and parental agreement required before going on club trips, etc.) and under 14s (parents must accompany the child when on club activities).

Would this new BCA policy result in the withdrawl of PL insurance from the under 14s? This would open a whole new can of worms as one of the conditions of the PL policy is that all the club members have to be insured.  If the insurance is not withdrawn from the under 14s than the BCA appears to be contradicting itself.  Does the BCA itself have a minimum age for a DIM (from a quick look the membership application form doesn't obviously mention a minimum age)?

 

[ditzy 24//7]

DIM has no age limit.

i have been told that CRB checking isnt a requirement int he club sector, i have also been told that getting a under 14 cold and wet or exspecting them to go more than 45 minutes without a break (half a football match) might be considered abuse.

 

[Cookie]

I'm not involved with the BCA or with the running of a club, however I do take my child underground on club trips, on my own, with friends and on occasions with a commercial instructor and find the statement as presented on here a bit alarming. I haven't seen the document though and rather than get worked up can those in the know answer;

Q. Are the BCA advising my club not to let my child attend trips (or is the letter easily mis-interpreted as such advice)

Q. Are the BCA advising that caving is physically unsuitable for under 14's or just that it's difficult to put the necessary "Child Protection" measures in place.

As I posted earlier in this topic

Bearing in mind 2 and 3 above, it is my considered opinion that we should not be encouraging ?children? into caving. If caving parents wish to take their children caving (as a caving club activity or otherwise) then that is fine and we should support this, but we should not support it as a mainstream club activity.

So we are talking about advice to mainstream caving clubs.

To answer your questions:

1) No, not at all so long as the parent is present for under 14 year olds.

2) Again no but the adults present need to be aware of the common sense requirement for the child's safety and well being. For example children get colder quicker.

 

[Cookie]

My club has 3 age groupings: Over 18's (full rights), 14 - 18 (limited rights and parental agreement required before going on club trips, etc.) and under 14s (parents must accompany the child when on club activities).

Yes, this is exactly what BCA is aiming at.

Would this new BCA policy result in the withdrawl of PL insurance from the under 14s? This would open a whole new can of worms as one of the conditions of the PL policy is that all the club members have to be insured.  If the insurance is not withdrawn from the under 14s than the BCA appears to be contradicting itself.  Does the BCA itself have a minimum age for a DIM (from a quick look the membership application form doesn't obviously mention a minimum age)?

Insurance is not an issue here. The BCA policy insures children. There are no age limits.

 

[whitelackington]

Er, no; beg to differ.

Isn't that similar to arguing that car manufacturers are responsible for speeding because they make cars capable of breaking the speed limit? - surely, it is the driver's responsibility. Don't be keen to pass the buck!

P.S. If obesity is one of your favourite topics, you'll enjoy a happy hour reading this:
http://ukcaving.com/board/index.php/topic,638.0.html

Personally I can't understand why this very important topic has been trash canned.
:-\

 

[Cookie]

DIM has no age limit.

No age limit for CIMs either.

i have been told that CRB checking isnt a requirement int he club sector

There is no legal requirement for CRB checks in the voluntary sector although an organisation can choose to do CRB checks if they desire.

i have also been told that getting a under 14 cold and wet or exspecting them to go more than 45 minutes without a break (half a football match) might be considered abuse.

Depends upon the child's capabilities but yes, you mustn't "neglect" a child - as the legislation would put it.

 

[Cookie]

Let us not forget that the letter was sent to every caving club in the UK

Good point, well made. Although, it was a letter only addressed to BCA members.

 

[Clive G]

My club has 3 age groupings: Over 18's (full rights), 14 - 18 (limited rights and parental agreement required before going on club trips, etc.) and under 14s (parents must accompany the child when on club activities).

Yes, this is exactly what BCA is aiming at.

Would this new BCA policy result in the withdrawl of PL insurance from the under 14s? This would open a whole new can of worms as one of the conditions of the PL policy is that all the club members have to be insured.  If the insurance is not withdrawn from the under 14s than the BCA appears to be contradicting itself.  Does the BCA itself have a minimum age for a DIM (from a quick look the membership application form doesn't obviously mention a minimum age)?

Insurance is not an issue here. The BCA policy insures children. There are no age limits.

It does seem that the opinion voiced through this debate has helped bring about a complete reversal of policy by BCA. If in doubt, read the first posting by Andy Sparrow once again. Otherwise there are different branches of BCA putting out contradictory viewpoints. How much better to canvass opinion first and pronounce later?

What you need to know is that bored bureaucrats file away boring bits of paper, but then, when there's an axe to grind, the beavers get to work on the files, find the boring bits of paper, photocopy anything relevant and then go for tea in the Hilton Hotel with 'a journalist in the know (in tow).' The journalist has a scoop, his editor is fully behind him, and the piece is published - 'shock horror' - and every tabloid reprints the same story in their own style, but with more lurid details added for good measure.

You end up with thousands of copies of the same story listed in Google and the person who believed they were doing what everyone else has always done before them is roasted. The journalist gets a pat on the back and a pay rise. The bored bureaucrat goes back to perusing and filing away his boring bits of paper. Everyone else, quite rightly, asks, "How on earth could all this have happened?!"