Actually, what the fuck, I don’t agree at all.
Breaking news: Child and his Father die on Everest, story of 14 (or was it 16?) sailing around the world at 11.
I agree that the 13 year old is incapable of understanding how a permanent disability from a mishap will effect him for the rest of his life. The thought of him dying up there is not possible, I mean come on you were 13 at once, that shit just can’t happen when you do something stupid.
Conclusion, Father is being stupid.
Climbing Everest no longer seems to be a good think to encourage IMHO.
That said, as I jump over the excluded middle - I think it is great that someone is not treating their kid as a special snowflake that must be coddled and protected. Given how much the media is full of parents who insist on driving their children 2 blocks to school in the suburbs, it is nice to find on the other side young kids swimming the channel, sailing around the world, or climbing high mountains.
I don’t have the cash to pay for an Everest ascent for my son, so I can not honestly answer if I would let him do something like that. I am sending him to Philmont (Boy Scout ranch in New Mexico) to hit the trail for 10 days. We regularly climb mountains in bear and cougar country here in Southern California. He serves on the crew of a racing yacht, going offshore on runs from the LA area to the Mexican border. He is 14.
We risk in exchange for adventure in our family. Is that child endangerment? What percent risk factor makes it child endangerment?
Are they afraid it’s not going to be there in five years? They can’t find anything else to do or climb, any other way to foster their son’s mental, physical and spiritual growth in the meantime? It’s hard to see this as anything other than a stunt.
I’m a wimpy introvert beta, so I can’t really relate to wanting to put yourself in extremely dangerous situations, but man! This kid is gonna get an unbelievable amount of booty if he doesn’t freeze to death or fall down a crevice or what have you. That beats QB of the football team any day of the week.
Losing fingers and limbs would limit his potential as well as the mental trauma of seeing his parents freeze to death. Perhaps dads right and it’ll take the icy grip of hypoxia to foster his growth physically, mentally, and spiritually. Or perhaps a fathers ultimate responsibility is doing what he can to see his child turn 18.
If the shark can bite through it, it wasn’t made properly. The issue is that if the shark can bite through the cage, they went for the cheap and they are idiots, not that shark cages don’t work. Properly build, a shark cage works.
I agree with Algher-it is a meaningless stunt. The fact is though, if you are prepared to pay $40,000-$60,000, anybody can do it.
I am sure this kid’s parents are looking for big bucks out of it.
My question: would it be feasible to take people to the top of Everest via helicopter? Then they could stand on the summit, get their pictures, and climb down in relative safety.
Exactly what is the point of this anyway? The final ascent is via fixed ropes and a ladder (bolted to the mountain), so its really an expensive version of Disneyland.
Of course, it means jobs and cash for the poor Nepalese, but what about turning the mountain into a gigantic trash dump?:smack:
I once build a cage around my house and Michael Faraday still kept showing up unannounced. Lousy chemist mooch, always borrowing sugar and stuff.
On the other hand, if Everest is that dangerous, should parents be climbing it, with or without their kids, and risk making the kid an orphan?
Anybody wanting to climb Everest these days should be permitted to only on condition that they bring down more garbage then they take up. Otherwise, no deal.
Well, by taking their son with them, it’s less likely that he’ll be an orphan …
I actually think not. I’m generally opposed to people with families having hobbies that put them at great risk for no good reason other than their own personal satisfaction. Climb Everest before you have kids, or after they’re grown up, if it’s something you really feel the need to do. Otherwise, it’s a small sacrifice you make for their benefit.
As far as the 13-year-old, no way should his parents be doing this. It’s absurd, in my mind. They are responsible for him, and it’s their job to keep him out of harm’s way to the best of their ability, and within reason.
This is simply not true. Even in perfect conditions, climbing Everest is one of the most challenging and dangerous activities out there. Friends who were in fantastic shape, mentally tough, and extremely experienced have failed to summit. The vast, vast, majority of people on the planet are incapable of climbing Everest with all the training and money in the world. It’s just that tough.
There’s not that much money to be had. Too many people have climbed Everest, too many books written, too many motivational speakers out there. They may be doing it for fame, but not money. I’m pretty sure they won’t make back their investment.
No, it’s not possible with current technology, probably never will be, and bringing unacclimatized people to the summit (even with supplemental oxygen) is more dangerous than working your way up slowly.
And that doesn’t factor at all in your support for the parents to do this then?
Generally, I don’t either. But when an activity has a very significant chance of death or permanent disability, should a minor really be allowed to agree? Heck, in many jurisdictions, this kid can’t get a tattoo or a body piercing, but it’s okay that he risks coming back blind or with no fingers or toes?
Granted, it’s not my decision; it’s up to the national authorities (which one depending on which side of the mountain). But Everest is an incredibly dangerous place. It’s not one person dying every few years - lots of activities fall under such a general amount, because there could always be some freak accident. On Everest, multiple people die every year. People are disfigured every year.
Very tall mountains (over 8k specifically) have exponentially larger risks than smaller peaks.
I agree with you completely, but again it’s simply a matter of where you draw the line. There are things I think of as too risky for a parent to let their child attempt. I happen to not think this is one of them because anyone motivated to do something like this can easily find other, more dangerous activities to attempt. As 8000 meter peaks go, Everest, as difficult as it is, is rather tame. You could also attempt mountaineering routes on other peaks that are extremely risky. If the kid is motivated enough he will find places to challenge himself. Heck, he could take up free solo rock climbing, a sport I consider deferred suicide. I know kids of his age who dabble in it now.
The place where I could see drawing the line is if we had research on how extremely high altitude effects the growing brains of children compared to adults. I don’t have enough information to know if this has been studied (I doubt out) but I could see data being gathered to conclude that this was particularly risky for kids. In general, I’m willing to give parents a great deal of latitude in deciding what outdoors activities they are comfortable with. Since I spend so much of my time in the outdoors, perhaps familiarity has breed complacency, I don’t know.
I heard this discussed on NPR today. I don’t know if this has been pointed out in this thread (I only skimmed it) but the boy and his parents are not only planning to climb Mr. E, they’re going without a guide. It’s not just irresponsible, it’s monumentally stupid.
Also, in addition to questions about his physical ability, you have to consider his emotional maturity. Experienced climbers know when it’s time to turn around a go back down – because of weather, or your climbing strength, or whatever. Is a 13 year old mature enough to to do that?
I just have to say that a few years ago I was working a Mountain Film Festival and a Sherpa (a son of Tenzing Norgay) said that on a good day anyone can climb Everest. There are just not that many good days.
Take that as you will.
I guess it’s all relative - he could be climbing Annapurna, which has almost a 43% chance of killing you dead. Jesus Christ, who on earth is that stupid?