This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Helmets or no helmets if you are instructing a group of under 18 novices at a climbing wall?? Top roping - not bouldering or auto belays. Plenty of pros and cons here, wanted some other instructors opinions and current practices on this?
In reply to S1LL:
Some climbing walls will insist on it, I personally wouldn't unless there was potential for inverting but if that's the case, they should have a full-body harness anyway. I think it's something to do with the wall's insurance.
Some climbing walls will insist on it, I personally wouldn't unless there was potential for inverting but if that's the case, they should have a full-body harness anyway. I think it's something to do with the wall's insurance.
In reply to S1LL:
Most advisories I have seen have recommended that helmets have little benefit climbing indoors as they are designed for falling objects rather than protecting the head in a fall.
http://www.outdoor-learning.org/Portals/0/IOL%20Documents/AALSLogEntries/20...
Most advisories I have seen have recommended that helmets have little benefit climbing indoors as they are designed for falling objects rather than protecting the head in a fall.
http://www.outdoor-learning.org/Portals/0/IOL%20Documents/AALSLogEntries/20...
In reply to S1LL:
Most walls i have used let the provider use their own insurance and risk assessments, therefore very much up to the instructor and company they are working for. Some companies state that helmets are "up to the instructors discretion" - which is why i was wondering what other instructors opinions are here
Most walls i have used let the provider use their own insurance and risk assessments, therefore very much up to the instructor and company they are working for. Some companies state that helmets are "up to the instructors discretion" - which is why i was wondering what other instructors opinions are here
In reply to S1LL:
Thanks milesy - i saw this a few years back, which is why i tend not to use them, but a number of highly qualifies instructors have advised me recently to stick them in helmets until they can make informed decissions on whether to wear them or not. Was also advised, that if something happened, in a court of law, a normal joe jury member would see not wearing a helmet as a neglegent act by an instructor. Jury is still out for me!
Thanks milesy - i saw this a few years back, which is why i tend not to use them, but a number of highly qualifies instructors have advised me recently to stick them in helmets until they can make informed decissions on whether to wear them or not. Was also advised, that if something happened, in a court of law, a normal joe jury member would see not wearing a helmet as a neglegent act by an instructor. Jury is still out for me!
In reply to S1LL:
Im ignorant on these things.
Doesnt everyone being instructed , or their parent/Guardian Sign a participation Damage waiver anyway?
Im ignorant on these things.
Doesnt everyone being instructed , or their parent/Guardian Sign a participation Damage waiver anyway?
In reply to S1LL:
I will often use it as a teaching point to the group for risk awareness and hazard perception - something some kids are really bad at. I think telling them to just wear them with saying why or discussing it is rather disingenuous.
> a number of highly qualifies instructors have advised me recently to stick them in helmets until they can make informed decissions on whether to wear them or not.
I will often use it as a teaching point to the group for risk awareness and hazard perception - something some kids are really bad at. I think telling them to just wear them with saying why or discussing it is rather disingenuous.
In reply to S1LL:
It's all about duty of care - you need to be taking as much care as a careful parent would. Seeing as helmets seem to prevent more damage than they cause then there's no harm in wearing them. Anyone claiming they hurt performance needs to remember that it's probably the least of all evils, they're better off training harder.
It's all about duty of care - you need to be taking as much care as a careful parent would. Seeing as helmets seem to prevent more damage than they cause then there's no harm in wearing them. Anyone claiming they hurt performance needs to remember that it's probably the least of all evils, they're better off training harder.
In reply to Choss:
One of the great legal myths is that signing a waiver / disclaimer some how changes the law of professional negligence it doesn't.
U18s can't consent to risk in a meaningful way so risks should be minisised.
One of the great legal myths is that signing a waiver / disclaimer some how changes the law of professional negligence it doesn't.
U18s can't consent to risk in a meaningful way so risks should be minisised.
In reply to alasdair19:
I don't believe there are that many hazards in an indoor wall that a helmet would reduce the risk of encountering.
I don't believe there are that many hazards in an indoor wall that a helmet would reduce the risk of encountering.
In reply to alasdair19:
Yeah but if wearing a helmet has been shown numerous times to not minimise risk then surely the act is as meaningful as a rasta hat and that by making a show of wearing helmets that serve no purpose then you are pandering to public perception.
> One of the great legal myths is that signing a waiver / disclaimer some how changes the law of professional negligence it doesn't.
> U18s can't consent to risk in a meaningful way so risks should be minisised.
Yeah but if wearing a helmet has been shown numerous times to not minimise risk then surely the act is as meaningful as a rasta hat and that by making a show of wearing helmets that serve no purpose then you are pandering to public perception.
Don't bother unless leading or belaying someone heavy.
In reply to Toerag:
Well this careful parent does not put helmets on his 7 and 9 yr old girls at the climbing wall.
> It's all about duty of care - you need to be taking as much care as a careful parent would.
Well this careful parent does not put helmets on his 7 and 9 yr old girls at the climbing wall.
In reply to S1LL:
You've answered your own question higher up.
In my opinion they should where helmets to start at least. After a few instructor lead sessions they could be in a position themselves to make an informed opinion as to whether they should or shouldn't.
As an aside an older insurance policy of mine dictated I had to put all my clients in helmets so then that was that.
The wall may have their own rules and if you're working for a company / provider they may also have their own.
You've answered your own question higher up.
In my opinion they should where helmets to start at least. After a few instructor lead sessions they could be in a position themselves to make an informed opinion as to whether they should or shouldn't.
As an aside an older insurance policy of mine dictated I had to put all my clients in helmets so then that was that.
The wall may have their own rules and if you're working for a company / provider they may also have their own.
In reply to jezb1: well my question was what other instructors' opinions and practices were, but thank you. Seems that it really is just the instructors decission if company / providers state that. Many opinions for and against out there.
In reply to S1LL:
Some walls ban helmets and harnesses from the bouldering area, whereas some make their novices boulder in helmets and harnesses.
I think that should show any jury that there is a huge and contradictory approach amongst the profession, rendering the decision non-vital.
Just as Mileys' article above shows, the risk is very small and there are many very small risks to be assessed.
Some walls ban helmets and harnesses from the bouldering area, whereas some make their novices boulder in helmets and harnesses.
I think that should show any jury that there is a huge and contradictory approach amongst the profession, rendering the decision non-vital.
Just as Mileys' article above shows, the risk is very small and there are many very small risks to be assessed.
In reply to higherclimbingwales:
There's the potential for anyone to invert if they catch their foot on something e.g. a hold, which is more likely when climbing easy stuff with big holds. Or bang their head on said holds.
Our Scout wall (and most others I know of) makes it a rule, and the general Scouting rulebook (POR) says helmets are mandatory for novices but not for experienced climbers on artificial walls, FWIW. It's just easier that way rather than arguing who is a novice and who isn't.
Neil
There's the potential for anyone to invert if they catch their foot on something e.g. a hold, which is more likely when climbing easy stuff with big holds. Or bang their head on said holds.
Our Scout wall (and most others I know of) makes it a rule, and the general Scouting rulebook (POR) says helmets are mandatory for novices but not for experienced climbers on artificial walls, FWIW. It's just easier that way rather than arguing who is a novice and who isn't.
Neil
In reply to winhill:
Helmets for bouldering is possibly debatable - there is a chance of an awkward fall involving a head injury, but there is also the chance of the strap catching and causing neck issues.
Harnesses for bouldering seems bloody stupid whichever way you look at it. Hardware on the harness is the main issue, but again a harness could catch on a hold and cause an awkward fall.
Neil
Helmets for bouldering is possibly debatable - there is a chance of an awkward fall involving a head injury, but there is also the chance of the strap catching and causing neck issues.
Harnesses for bouldering seems bloody stupid whichever way you look at it. Hardware on the harness is the main issue, but again a harness could catch on a hold and cause an awkward fall.
Neil
In reply to Neil Williams:
Of course, but I was refering to either the really young and the generally top-heavy kids (read Obese). The former tend to also be top heavy.
I don't believe a top-roped novice (or any climber) should ever be in a situation where they could free fall and get flipped upside down with enough force to smack their head hard enough to warrant a helmet - if they did then It wouldn't be the lack of helmets that the court would be interested in!
> There's the potential for anyone to invert if they catch their foot on something e.g. a hold, which is more likely when climbing easy stuff with big holds. Or bang their head on said holds.
> Our Scout wall (and most others I know of) makes it a rule, and the general Scouting rulebook (POR) says helmets are mandatory for novices but not for experienced climbers on artificial walls, FWIW. It's just easier that way rather than arguing who is a novice and who isn't.
Of course, but I was refering to either the really young and the generally top-heavy kids (read Obese). The former tend to also be top heavy.
I don't believe a top-roped novice (or any climber) should ever be in a situation where they could free fall and get flipped upside down with enough force to smack their head hard enough to warrant a helmet - if they did then It wouldn't be the lack of helmets that the court would be interested in!
In reply to S1LL:
Don't forget it could just as likely be the belayer getting injured, falling coin or iphone from climbers pocket, broken hold. I've seen each of those happen. They'd make quite an impression on little Johnny's head if they hit him.
Unlikely maybe, but possible.
Don't forget it could just as likely be the belayer getting injured, falling coin or iphone from climbers pocket, broken hold. I've seen each of those happen. They'd make quite an impression on little Johnny's head if they hit him.
Unlikely maybe, but possible.
In reply to S1LL:
Helmets, safety goggles, steel toe capped footwear, ear protectors, and a big fluorescent yellow waist coat.
(SPSA holder and ex wall 'instructor'.)
The above may be facetious. (Not the bit in brackets, mind.)
Helmets, safety goggles, steel toe capped footwear, ear protectors, and a big fluorescent yellow waist coat.
(SPSA holder and ex wall 'instructor'.)
The above may be facetious. (Not the bit in brackets, mind.)
In reply to Milesy:
So wearing a helmet has been SHOWN to not 'minimise risk'?
You got back-up?
> if wearing a helmet has been shown numerous times to not minimise risk then surely the act is as meaningful as a rasta hat and that by making a show of wearing helmets that serve no purpose then you are pandering to public perception.
So wearing a helmet has been SHOWN to not 'minimise risk'?
You got back-up?
In reply to winhill:
I've never come across an insistence that kids boulder in harnesses. Ever. Helmets - yes.
> Some walls ban helmets and harnesses from the bouldering area, whereas some make their novices boulder in helmets and harnesses.
> I think that should show any jury that there is a huge and contradictory approach amongst the profession, rendering the decision non-vital.
> Just as Mileys' article above shows, the risk is very small and there are many very small risks to be assessed.
I've never come across an insistence that kids boulder in harnesses. Ever. Helmets - yes.
In reply to andyathome:
You're at the wrong walls.
> I've never come across an insistence that kids boulder in harnesses. Ever. Helmets - yes.
You're at the wrong walls.
In reply to andyathome:
Helmets don't reduce the risk of being hit or hitting something.
Helmets don't reduce the risk of being hit or hitting something.
> So wearing a helmet has been SHOWN to not 'minimise risk'?
> You got back-up?
In reply to S1LL:
On another note, my local wall does hundreds of kids birthday parties where the parents (mostly inexperienced) do the belaying. Not a single helmet is ever worn.
On another note, my local wall does hundreds of kids birthday parties where the parents (mostly inexperienced) do the belaying. Not a single helmet is ever worn.
In reply to jezb1:
But worth considering.
Some kids and student groups have members that seem to have a fairly thin 'field of awareness', its rare but sometimes they lower their partner onto somebody elses head! I'm wary around student climbing club groups for this reason, so often it seems like the belayer is only focused on his/her climber, then they lower off at speed or without looking around and warning people and almost nail the belayer next to them.
To be fair in all cases its not entirely the student pairs fault, everyone should really have one eye looking up when they are wandering though any part of a wall anyone is climbing in.
One thing i see VERY often is the proper young 'uns getting out of control for a moment and then wandering into the fallpath of a climber while totally oblivious to whats above them. Having personally had to throw a 6 year old like a rugby ball out of the path of a falling boulderer I'd personally say sticking a lid on the little kids is worth it, even if its just for the rare occasion Tarquin takes a rockshoe in the head.
Main thing with helmets, they are there to prevent a rare accident possibly having worse consequences. Not to prevent that accident happening in the first place. Important to remember that.
> Don't forget it could just as likely be the belayer getting injured, falling coin or iphone from climbers pocket, broken hold. I've seen each of those happen. They'd make quite an impression on little Johnny's head if they hit him.
> Unlikely maybe, but possible.
But worth considering.
Some kids and student groups have members that seem to have a fairly thin 'field of awareness', its rare but sometimes they lower their partner onto somebody elses head! I'm wary around student climbing club groups for this reason, so often it seems like the belayer is only focused on his/her climber, then they lower off at speed or without looking around and warning people and almost nail the belayer next to them.
To be fair in all cases its not entirely the student pairs fault, everyone should really have one eye looking up when they are wandering though any part of a wall anyone is climbing in.
One thing i see VERY often is the proper young 'uns getting out of control for a moment and then wandering into the fallpath of a climber while totally oblivious to whats above them. Having personally had to throw a 6 year old like a rugby ball out of the path of a falling boulderer I'd personally say sticking a lid on the little kids is worth it, even if its just for the rare occasion Tarquin takes a rockshoe in the head.
Main thing with helmets, they are there to prevent a rare accident possibly having worse consequences. Not to prevent that accident happening in the first place. Important to remember that.
In reply to Milesy:
If helmets only protect from falling things from above why all the advice to wear them on lead on small crags? I smell bs from someone, so is it you or organisations like the BMC
If helmets only protect from falling things from above why all the advice to wear them on lead on small crags? I smell bs from someone, so is it you or organisations like the BMC
In reply to Steve nevers:
I remember having to scream at a parent to shift their small kid as they walked under me just as I came off a bouldering wall once. Wasn't much I could have done to avoid causing them serious injury by falling on them if they hadn't done. But I doubt a helmet would have made any difference - 17 and a bit stone on their head from a few metres would have broken a lot of bones.
FWIW, helmets are not allowed on the CrazyClimb at Big Rock, because of the possibility of the strap catching on a hold and causing a neck injury, I believe.
Neil
I remember having to scream at a parent to shift their small kid as they walked under me just as I came off a bouldering wall once. Wasn't much I could have done to avoid causing them serious injury by falling on them if they hadn't done. But I doubt a helmet would have made any difference - 17 and a bit stone on their head from a few metres would have broken a lot of bones.
FWIW, helmets are not allowed on the CrazyClimb at Big Rock, because of the possibility of the strap catching on a hold and causing a neck injury, I believe.
Neil
In reply to Neil Williams:
But I doubt a helmet would have made any difference - 17 and a bit stone on their head from a few metres would have broken a lot of bones.
in that case i agree. but in other cases of crowded walls it can be handy to save someone the guilt of kicking a kid that they haven't even seen in the head.
Guess the best way to decide 'Helmets or no?' is if your insurance or policy states you have too, on they go. Otherwise as everything in climbing, its all situational and up to your judgment.
But I doubt a helmet would have made any difference - 17 and a bit stone on their head from a few metres would have broken a lot of bones.
> Neil
in that case i agree. but in other cases of crowded walls it can be handy to save someone the guilt of kicking a kid that they haven't even seen in the head.
Guess the best way to decide 'Helmets or no?' is if your insurance or policy states you have too, on they go. Otherwise as everything in climbing, its all situational and up to your judgment.
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...