I see what you are getting at Troppus – no one puts a gorbie in a raft or on a zip line if it looks like the person will be killed by the activity, but the fact of the matter is that a lot of very fat people go rafting in class I (with fitness usually being self-assessed by the gorbie) and (giving weight restrictions such as discussed above) go zip lining, neither of which are particularly stressful activities compared to high end roller coasters. More to the point, rafting is an activity used at weight loss camps.
I don’t have any idea what a gorbie is or what the purpose of any of your links are. As I mentioned, the Scouts may be attempting to lessen their liability by employing doctor’s recommendations. Hell, the Scouts have been sued by parents of lightning strike victims, you really think they should risk the health and life of a child too unhealthy to sleep without a breathing device? A kid who can’t pass the standard fitness tests at public school? A kid who obviously has little experience with exercise?
Don’t take it personally. Someone with a BMI of 40 will not be as easy to recover if he/she panics in the water. He or she will not be as likely to have the stamina to tread water or swim to safety. Zipline operators also have restrictions and bar pregnant women, those with asthma and other breathing limitations and heart conditions, and it would be unusual to find a child with a BMI of 40 without at least one of those associated medical conditions. Kids with a BMI of 40 are simply not fit enough to complete these exercises and hikes, and it’s a pretty unfair burden on the staff who would be expected to take part in rescues of these kids.
This isn’t discrimination against heavy kids. This is an attempt to avoid causing further harm to kids who are already limited and clinically sick.
No, they have a BMI of 40. They may or may not have other limiting medical conditions; you can’t tell that merely by looking at their BMI. I have a BMI near that range, and I certainly don’t have a limited range of motion. I can hike 10 miles, have done quite a bit of backcountry hiking (including summiting Mount Washburn in Yellowstone and hiking in the Grand Canyon), ride horses (including jumping over fences), and have rafted through Lava Falls (which is a bit tougher than anything those Scouts are going to encounter on their rafting trip).
Test fitness, not just BMI. Yes, most of the really heavy kids will flunk - but not all. And so will a surprising number of the skinny ones! Thin does NOT equal fit, and these days it’s dangerous to make the assumption that any kid is in good physical shape based merely on his appearance. Too many kids both fat and skinny are only exercising their thumbs playing videogames these days.
For example, google about for images under the key word phrase “Wellspring camps” and you’ll come up with returns such as a261 lb. tubing twelve year old, extremely fat girls swimming, and a Zeppelinesque zip lining lad. These are kids living their lives rather than being left behind. Too bad that the Boy Scouts of America would arbitrarily collectively leave them behind rather than have individual decisions made concerning specific children and specific activities based on physicians’ recommendations.
These rules have always been in place for BSA high adventure camps (Philmont, Northern Tier, Florida Sea Base). The BSA has now adopted BMI as one of the measures - along with a physician signature. If your BMI is between 30 and 40, you have to get a physician signature. Above 40 - the medical community puts you at risk.
Yes - this is about risk.
The rules apply to EVERYONE. This ruling is hitting adults more than it hits kids. A lot of Scout leaders have found out that they can not go to Jamboree either.
Now, maybe they should not have made National Jamboree a high adventure base with the commensurate health requirements to participate. But if you read further about the location, the walking required to get to things, the higher emphasis on physical events (zip line, rock climbing, whitewater) - this is why there is a health sign off required.
Well, artemis, good for you, but I wouldn’t dare take anyone down the river with me who was in that condition. I wouldn’t risk it, and I wouldn’t assume I could rescue anyone of that weight. And that’s my prerogative as a guide. If you got in trouble, I, at 125 pounds could not help a panicked, exhausted, clinically obese person nor could I stuff such a person back in the boat. We’d be stuck in cold water until several people came to help. That’s not optimal for either of us.
Are the two of you insisting that the Scouts should be forced to hire a physician and subject all the kids and counselors to fitness tests in the interest of fairness? Why not just follow recommended DoH guidelines and avoid risking a kid’s life? We can force employers to hire anyone physically able to perform a task. We cannot force a recreational business to accept the risk of someone who has been deemed by medical science to be chronically ill. Take it up with Disneyland, Six Flags, and all the other theme parks who restrict rides to persons of good health. This isn’t a new thing. This is a sensible business decision which respects the lives of those in charge and the kids in their care.
What’s next, forcing theme parks, zip lines, and carnivals to allow pregnant women to ride all the rides? Or vertically challenged people who don’t meet the height requirements for the safety devices? Insisting that persons with heart conditions be allowed to pilot planes?
But Troppus, if you’ve been rafting you would know. 
(It’s a term for clients on the Ottawa River)
They do just that. That is not a restriction at the jamboree, but participants are advised to bring backup batteries for their CPAP machines. Furthermore, handicapped scouts are welcome.
Yeh, I’ve fished out enough over the years. Basically they float, and that’s about it. Which is fine for class I, where floating and being towed in is usually safer than them trying to stand up and wade to shore.
Nope, just don’t put an arbitrary cut off at 40 BMI, and instead have the kid’s physician (at the kid’s/parent’s expense) make the medical decision as to whether or not the child is fit enough for specific activities – essentially the procedure set out for kids between 30 and 40 BMI.
If you’re trying to claim that a kid with a BMI of 40 or above is incapable of drowning, panicking, and somehow agile enough to climb back into a tippy boat I simply don’t believe you.
Most people, regardless of BMI, are capable of drowning and of panicking, and are not agile enough to climb back into a tippy boat. The less athletic and the less technically skilled people are, the less they are able to assist in their own rescue. The greater the BMI, the greater the probability that they will lack athleticism. Whatever made you think I was putting forth otherwise?
Quite simply, there is more risk in unassisted wading in class I than in floating while being towed to a recovery point in class I, for with unassisted wading the M&M risks a foot pin as opposed to a few butt bruises from bobbing along.
Yeah, and I, as an occasional guide for a birding club full of elderly but physical fit people am telling you that I am not willing or able to wrangle a person twice or three times my size who is also unaccustomed to physical exertion back into a boat or to shore. And no amount of guilt would make me take on the risk of injury or death to a physically inactive morbidly obese child. I wouldn’t expect any business to be forced to do so.
Honestly all the energy wasted on protesting the IMO reasonable limit should be spent on preventative care and exercise programs that discourage a BMI of 40 and encourage kids to take charge of the health their parents won’t.
Could you rescue a panicked, exhausted non-obese person who happened to weigh 200 lbs (ie, many males)? If yes, then you could indeed rescue me. If not, then you ought to be looking at more than just BMI when you decide who rafts with you, as you’ve just admitted to being incapable of rescuing many completely healthy and fit clients (not just the obese).
No, the kids’ own physicians can do that, as can their Scoutmasters, who could sign off on their individual troop members’ ability to successfully perform such activities as long hikes and swimming. Presumably the troops are doing physical things before Jamboree, so the Scoutmasters should know how well their kids can be expected to perform in a high adventure setting.
I’ve no objection to requiring kids to demonstrate appropriate levels of fitness for various activities. But fitness and weight are NOT the same, no matter how much our society wants to conflate the two.
Then why are kids with other medical conditions like paraplegia allowed to participate?
Go to Wellspring’s Website and read their FAQ.
The kids at that camp are being supported by highly trained staff who work year round to create programs they can excel in. The Boy Scouts isn’t a specialized program for kids like this, so it’s absurd to think that you’re comparing apples to apples here.
I have only had to do so once, but yes, I did. He was strong enough to hang onto the boat until I could paddle back to him and once righted, agile enough able to climb back into the boat. He was winded, but didn’t need an inhaler and his heart was in no danger.
But I am not a doctor, so admittedly my decision not to take a person down the river who has a BMI at 40 would be entirely due to my assumption that the obese person would not have experience with exercise, the stamina to complete the trip, or the experience with the elements to handle the weather or the critters. I would not assume that he or she has a good sense of balance. I could not ensure that I could wrangle him or her back into a wobbly boat. I could not ensure such a person’s comfort or good time. And I couldn’t insure that the person’s heart and lungs were up for the exertion, that his or her likely blood sugar problem was well-controlled. I wouldn’t do it, and I don’t blame the Scouts for following Surgeon General’s or physician’s guidelines.
Same for pregnant women. Or those with heart conditions. Same exact scenario. Just not a risk I would take with someone’s child.
Some persons with physical disabilities or medical conditions are excluded from doing things that might endanger their health, at camps, at theme parks, at all sorts of recreational activities. If the Scouts choose to alter some activities or include volunteers who can help in order to include certain disabilities, that’s their prerogative.
Why aren’t you beating the drum to force recreation providers to allow pregnant women to participate?
I’m not talking about forcing anyone to do anything. I’m simply criticizing the Boy Scouts’ policy. Assuming that it’s their prerogative to exclude fatties, members of the public are perfectly free to voice objections on computer message boards. That’s my prerogative. (Assuming the operators of those boards permit it, of course.)
Sure it is. But I’ll ask again, why criticize them for declining to serve kids with a BMI above 40 but you’re not criticizing Disney for excluding pregnant women from rides?
That’s not the question you asked before. Before, you pretended I was calling for legislation.
Lol, I wasn’t aware until this moment that Disney excludes pregnant women from its rides. If that’s what they do, then they probably deserve criticism since there are plenty of theme park rides which don’t strike me as being a problem for pregnant women.
By analogy, if the Boy Scouts allowed fatties to attend the Jamboree but simply excluded them from activities which are problematic for fatties (cave exploring maybe?), then I would not have an objection.
I believe here is where the problem comes in. The scouts have specifically designed the entirety of their new Jamboree **location **in West Virgina to be “problematic for fatties.”
Thus, the logic of excluding them entirely from attending.
I would also like to add to the chorus that there is a vast difference between a 200 pound grown-ass man with normal musculature, a adult brain, and mature reflexes and a 200 pound 12 year old kid with an immature brain and uncoordinated reflexes.
As a lifeguard, I could handle the first. Not easily, but I can do it. I know I can - It’s what I’ve trained for, and specifically *who *I’ve trained with. The second? I would be very uneasy being responsible for that child’s safety.