Re: [RC] [RC] Kids, ponies and distance riding... now age requirement - Karen Sullivan
Hello Ed and all,
I think all the issues mention could be sensibly
adressed with some good legal counsell, AND some
imput from doctors and childhood-development specialists.
Obviously, SEDRA (Ihope I hope I have the right
organization), found a way to implement a minimunm age rule, as do many other
sports.
Now......AERC currently DOES have a helmet
requirement for junior riders. Following your line of thnking.......a kid
could fall an an AERC ride, hit their head (even with a helmet) and die.....and
the parents could sue AERC saying they believed AERC somewhow promised that the
helmet would protect their kid.......
What is the difference between a helmet requirement
and a min. age requirement?
Subject: Re: [RC] [RC] Kids, ponies and
distance riding... now age requirement
".... If we, as the AERC, decide that there is
a 'minimum safe age' for kids to ride endurance then that opens a whole
new can of worms...."
I can hear the argument now. A junior gets
injured. He/she was the minimum age. A lawsuit is
filed. The attorney argues: "The AERC admitted that children
younger than X years old should not ride endurance, but my expert says that
they were wrong, the age should be X+2. The AERC's negligence in not
properly researching the issue and then prohibiting riders younger than X+2
years old caused the injury..." Another potential argument would be:
"The injured child suffers from (insert any disease, birth defect, or
condition that affects balence, or coordination), the AERC admits that
children younger than X should not ride, they also had a duty to prohibit
children with (insert the condition) from riding."
As it is now, with no mention of age, the AERC
can rightly defend itself by stating that horse related activities are
dangerous, and it is the parents right and duty to decide if their child
should participate. The parent of the injured child did agree in writing
that they knew this and felt that the child should participate.
Parents, good, bad, prudent, imprudent, overly
protective, or properly protective have the right and duty to raise their
children, with only minimal interfearance by outside authorities and
forces. The AERC charter does not say that a purpose of the AERC is
to raise children for their parents.
I also personally feel that at times our duly
elected government (Which, by the way, does have in its charter the duty
to protect all citizens, including children.) interfears with the right of
parents to raise their children.
Ed
Ed & Wendy Hauser 2994 Mittower
Road Victor, MT 59875
