I let my now 8 year old ride last fall. But I made dh go with him. Some of the rides did scare him and he didn't want to ride those anymore, but he had a blast on the others.

The free fall type things, never if I'm around. I know I can't watch my child do something like that and there's no way I'll be doing it with him. Now dh loves those kind of things and will happily go on anything that ds wants, so as long as he's tall enough and has an adult that I trust to go with him, I don't mind at all. But I won't always watch.

 

I'd let her go on them now. The ones that are really too intense, she'll be too short for if she's not 54". But a regular roller coaster? Why not?

 

My 4 year old (5 in june) loves the thrill rides. We just went to Great adventure where he rode the big log flume, the buccaneer and the wildest roller coaster he was allowed on. He has also ridden on the Big thunder mountain train roller coaster in Disney world.
My 7 year old DD hates thrilling rides and sticks with the smaller ones. So I think it is really based on each kid's preference.

 

Thanks everyone.

These are the rides she wants to go on. She's tall enough for about half of them.

 

DD was 3 when she rode her first wooden roller coaster. She was just barely 36" and I was surprised they let her on! She LOVED it. She also rode the Paratrooper and a bunch of kiddie rides that day.

 

I took DS on the Matterhorn at Disneyland when he was just shy of 3. I took him on Space Mountain a couple of months ago. If he meets the height requirement and is willing to go on a rollercoaster, I have no problems taking him.

He did NOT like Space Mountain, LOL.

 

We don't do Disney anything in our house, so it's not at Disneyland or any place like that. I don't know how to compare to Disney roller coasters.

Dh doesn't want dd to go on these rides because they invert or go up to 80mph with negative grade drops. Dh's scared to go on them, himself. I'm talking about the major coasters that people travel the world to ride. These are not coasters that kids 4 or 5 could go on. This is one that she is asking to go on (out on the east coast). We have one very similar close to us that is about the same size. If they don't invert, then they usually have a 48" height requirement. Some of them that *do* invert still have only a 48" height requirement.

I'm just explaining more because I'm not talking about the little roller coasters she's been riding since she grew to 36" (the first height requirement for small roller coasters). I'm talking about the coasters that have warnings for people with weak hearts because they cause heart attacks. Just wanted to clarify so I didn't seem like this over-the-top-protective kook. These are SERIOUS coasters I'm talking about.

 

My older son started riding the big coasters when he was 5 or 6. He always goes with an adult, and we always make sure he meets all the requirements first and that he understands what will happen on the coaster (watch it repeatedly). I wasn't exactly thrilled with the idea of letting him ride the coasters at first, but the equipment always fits him just fine, and he has a blast! The older he gets, the more comfortable I am with letting him ride, but I'll still insist on an adult going with him for at least another year.

 

My dd went on the biggest coaster at the fair last year when she was six and clung to the bar the entire time. She was crying when she got off and she told me she thought that she was going to fall off the entire time. I did the same thing as a child. I think that waiting or compromising on a medium roller coaster would be a good idea. The kid roller coaster and the grown up roller coaster have completely different sensations so she may think she is ready for something she isn't ready for. The coasters that we went on were nothing like the ones in your picture. There is no way I would let dd go on those until she is a teenager who is capable of going to a place like the fair alone and can pay for the rides herself.

 

I would go on the 'least scary' one first and work your way up!

The only ones I'd be worried about, safety wise, are the kind with just a lap bar if you are sitting with her, b/c they will only go down tight as far as the larger person, so the smaller person the bar would be looser on. The kind with the individual harnesses are more 'custom' for each person, so if she is in the height limit, it will be fine!

I took my SIL on her first roller coaster when she was amost 9, smaller for her age and skinny, and we went on all of them except for the 54" limit ones. This was at 6 Flags, where they have a TON of rollercoasters. She was perfectly fine. On the lap bar kind I just had her sit w/her brother who was 13 and closer to her size.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by leighi123 I would go on the 'least scary' one first and work your way up! The only ones I'd be worried about, safety wise, are the kind with just a lap bar if you are sitting with her, b/c they will only go down tight as far as the larger person, so the smaller person the bar would be looser on. The kind with the individual harnesses are more 'custom' for each person, so if she is in the height limit, it will be fine! I took my SIL on her first roller coaster when she was amost 9, smaller for her age and skinny, and we went on all of them except for the 54" limit ones. This was at 6 Flags, where they have a TON of rollercoasters. She was perfectly fine. On the lap bar kind I just had her sit w/her brother who was 13 and closer to her size.

I'll take DS on any rollercoaster he wants to go on, as long as he meets the height minimum, LOL. I remember going on Six Flags coasters as a little kid, when my mom would encourage me to stand on my toes so I would look tall enough to get on.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bokonon I took DS on the Matterhorn at Disneyland when he was just shy of 3. I took him on Space Mountain a couple of months ago. If he meets the height requirement and is willing to go on a rollercoaster, I have no problems taking him. He did NOT like Space Mountain, LOL.

My 3 yo went on the Matterhorn, too - well, he was 2 then, but tall for his age and loved it! Didn't even chance it on space mountain, though. I'm pretty sure it would freak out my 5 yo b/c of the darkness.

I think when they meet the height req's and have the desire it's okay. My 9 yo DD was too scared to go on a fairly mild rollercoaster at Legoland a couple months ago - yet the younger boys had a blast.

 

My ds has been going on roller coasters since he was 3 or 4. If he's tall enough and wants to go on it, I let him.

 

Um, my almost 4 year old could ride some of those by the standards and NO way I would let him. Wow. I hadn't even really considered this. One of those rides goes upside down 4 times and only has a lap belt. My kid is still in a 5 point harness car seat.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by pbjmama Um, my almost 4 year old could ride some of those by the standards and NO way I would let him. Wow. I hadn't even really considered this. One of those rides goes upside down 4 times and only has a lap belt. My kid is still in a 5 point harness car seat.

Exactly! Finally, someone who gets where I'm coming from. I don't think others are understanding how extreme these rides are. They are not roller coasters for young children.

These extreme coasters jerk the neck around, create some serious G-forces on the body, have negative grade drops of HUNDREDS of feet (up to 400), with inversions and extreme speeds... 80mph, 90mph, even 120mph. These are the extreme (class 5) thrill rides, not a roller coaster that a 4 or 5 or even 6 year old would ride. And they wouldn't be tall enough at that age, anyway.

I'm afraid that the restraints are not sufficient for a tall, thin older child and also that the forces on the body would cause some damage. They hurt *my* neck, and sometimes the speeds are so extreme I can't even lift my head off of the head rest. They can cause concussions. Dd is only 2" shy of being able to ride the most extreme of the extreme rides. And she can't WAIT!

Again, I'll post a link with the coasters I'm talking about:
http://attractions.uptake.com/blog/t...ters-4014.html

I'm starting to think that we'll hold off for a few more years until her body matures more and she gets stronger overall.

ETA: Dd has been going on the rinky-dink coasters since she was 2 yo, too.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by leighi123 I would go on the 'least scary' one first and work your way up! The only ones I'd be worried about, safety wise, are the kind with just a lap bar if you are sitting with her, b/c they will only go down tight as far as the larger person, so the smaller person the bar would be looser on. The kind with the individual harnesses are more 'custom' for each person, so if she is in the height limit, it will be fine!

I don't think she would be scared on any of them. It's not about scare factor - she is a daredevil. The "least scary" ones *are* those that have just a lap bar. She would be riding with me, and I am *much* bigger than her. This would be on something like The Beast at King's Island in Sandusky, Ohio. It only gets up to about 70mph and has no inversions with I think just a 150ft. or so drop from 180ft. It's wooden, though, and that really jerks you around. I don't think *my* body could take that any more at my age.

I'd rather that she ride the coasters with the overhead/lap belt combination harnesses, but she's so slight, I just don't know if they would be tight enough to keep her from really getting thrown around even if they kept her in.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by velochic Exactly! Finally, someone who gets where I'm coming from. I don't think others are understanding how extreme these rides are. They are not roller coasters for young children. These extreme coasters jerk the neck around, create some serious G-forces on the body, have negative grade drops of HUNDREDS of feet (up to 400), with inversions and extreme speeds... 80mph, 90mph, even 120mph. These are the extreme (class 5) thrill rides, not a roller coaster that a 4 or 5 or even 6 year old would ride. And they wouldn't be tall enough at that age, anyway. I'm afraid that the restraints are not sufficient for a tall, thin older child and also that the forces on the body would cause some damage. They hurt *my* neck, and sometimes the speeds are so extreme I can't even lift my head off of the head rest. They can cause concussions. Dd is only 2" shy of being able to ride the most extreme of the extreme rides. And she can't WAIT! Again, I'll post a link with the coasters I'm talking about: http://attractions.uptake.com/blog/t...ters-4014.html I'm starting to think that we'll hold off for a few more years until her body matures more and she gets stronger overall. ETA: Dd has been going on the rinky-dink coasters since she was 2 yo, too.

I do understand the coasters you're talking about. My son isn't tall enough for some, but some he is. Some that he's tall enough for he'd be allowed to ride. If there was one that he was tall enough for that we felt wasn't safe, we wouldn't allow him to ride it.

Your decision and reasoning are sound. You don't need any of us to agree with you on it or back you up. You get to decide for your own kid, just like the rest of us get to decide for our own kids. We can all look at the same coasters and come to different decisions, and all be right for our own children and circumstances.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by velochic On a side note, she is very much a daredevil and I also fear that she will become an adrenaline junkie when she gets older. Talks about rock climbing and sky diving and bungee jumping. I scuba dive and she can't wait to take lessons and get certified. These we can still hold off a few years for, though.

I'll let you come to your own decision about roller coasters. (I used to love riding roller coasters, but then I went and married a man who throws up on rides that are more exciting than carousels.

)

My sister and I learned to rock climb in high school. Although I have not gone rock climbing since then, my sister does it all the time. All during the 25 years since high school, she has been a serious rock climber. All that stuff with the ropes, rappelling down cliffs, she does that on a regular basis. To be honest, it is not nearly as dangerous as it looks, and is really quite safe. It looks dangerous, and it makes for spectacular photos, but it is very safe. It is more mental than physical, because you have to think your way up by looking for hand/foot holds, and strategically shifting your weight from one foot to the next.

Our local community center has a 17 foot climbing wall, and they offer lessons for children as young as 4 years old.

My sister is, and always has been since childhood, extremely cautious by nature. When I went bungy jumping on vacation, she thought I was absolutely crazy. I also considered going sky diving on that same vacation, but that was kind of expensive and required waking up at 5am, which I was not willing to do.

So, if it is any consolation, my thought is that rock climbing is by far safer than bungy jumping or sky diving. Also my experience is that rock climbing has a much less chance of injury than a conventional sport like basketball or soccer. I would let my dd go rock climbing any day, as long as she went with responsible experienced instructors.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by lotusdebi I do understand the coasters you're talking about. My son isn't tall enough for some, but some he is. Some that he's tall enough for he'd be allowed to ride. If there was one that he was tall enough for that we felt wasn't safe, we wouldn't allow him to ride it. Your decision and reasoning are sound. You don't need any of us to agree with you on it or back you up. You get to decide for your own kid, just like the rest of us get to decide for our own kids. We can all look at the same coasters and come to different decisions, and all be right for our own children and circumstances.

Thank you. I want to be fair to dd, though. I *do* tend to be over-protective. I'm not apologetic about that, at all. If others are letting their 8 yo children on these rides and it's not causing physical damage to their necks, etc., then I think it's fair to dd to reevaluate my decision to wait a year or two or more.

I was just getting frustrated that everyone was saying "My child was riding them at 3 or 4 or whatever" and I didn't feel that they were understanding the rides I was talking about.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by emilysmama So, if it is any consolation, my thought is that rock climbing is by far safer than bungy jumping or sky diving. Also my experience is that rock climbing has a much less chance of injury than a conventional sport like basketball or soccer. I would let my dd go rock climbing any day, as long as she went with responsible experienced instructors.

Thanks for your thoughts on this. I learned to rock climb in my early 20's as well. I was into extreme sports back then, was a competitive cyclist (road and mountain) and enjoyed many other sports as an amateur. I have to disagree that rock climbing is that safe. Of course, it depends on where and what you are climbing and your proficiency. You're more likely to injure yourself when you are overconfident (which I found out). We have nothing where I live, so the only access dd would have would be a rock climbing wall (which is 1.5 hours away), so safety on this front will not be an issue for many years yet. I'm too old and out of shape to climb any more, so I won't be taking her on any trips. I also was never highly proficient, myself, so would not be a good teacher. I doubt I'll ever get back to it at my age.

 

You make a some very convincing points. I agree with you.

A couple weeks ago, my dd was in the children's hospital, and her roommate was a high school girl who got her leg broken in a soccer game. It wasn't just a simple break, either. The poor child had innocently collided with an opponent, and while they were both still down on the ground, another girl from the opposing team came over and deliberately stomped on the child's leg with cleats. The break was really really serious, and required very sophisticated orthapedic surgery and high tech materials to fix. Worst of all, this poor child was in agonizing pain both before and after the surgery.

I can tell you that after hearing about that, I was horrified, so my previous post was colored by this incident.

I was wrong to suggest that rock climbing is as safe as, say, chess.