Forums > Social Discussion > Should Children Spin with Fire?
Login/Join to ParticipateBRONZE Member
member
109 posts
Location: Back in the Future, United Kingdom
member
109 posts
Location: Back in the Future, United Kingdom
Posted:
I have a Niece who i would like to Introduce POI To....Obviously I'm not going to give her a set of Lighted Fire Poi and say:
"off you go then"
But i just wanted to get some Opinions on whether Minors should or should not use Fire.....
If they have the skill and they are supervised....is it ok......?
I have a Niece who i would like to Introduce POI To....Obviously I'm not going to give her a set of Lighted Fire Poi and say:
"off you go then"
But i just wanted to get some Opinions on whether Minors should or should not use Fire.....
If they have the skill and they are supervised....is it ok......?
It's a very interesting story, Future Boy....!
journeyman
91 posts
Location: Manchester
91 posts
Location: Manchester
Posted:
Uh oh, I first got drunk when I was 8 and used to drink quite a bit when I was 12, 13, 14, I must be so brain damaged as to be disqualified from commenting on this thread!
Written by: pricklyleaf
There can be quite a lot of difference actually. The part of the brain that controls rational behavior develops last, between the ages of 16-18. This is why you can smoke when your 16 (lungs fully developed by then) but not drink (brain not fully developed).
Uh oh, I first got drunk when I was 8 and used to drink quite a bit when I was 12, 13, 14, I must be so brain damaged as to be disqualified from commenting on this thread!
He's not the Messiah, he's a very naughty boy!
GOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
6,942 posts
Location: London, UK
Carpal \'Tunnel
6,942 posts
Location: London, UK
Posted:
*follows the responsible kids camp*
personally i wouldnt let a kid under the age of 16 spin - but at this age the majority of kids are responsible when they know that YOUR serious.
half the problem with kids acting stupidly is that they dont use fire. i was a scout for a while and we made camp fires and taught how to deal with it and what not to do. lots of kids arnt - there idea of fire is the stove or a lighter and this is what makes them irresponsible - they think it can be stopped with the flick of a switch. let a kid who might start fire spinning see what real raw fire is then train them how to deal with it THEN maybe let them spin it.
another point is that at this age when they hit 18 they'll do it anyway - id rather watch a kid at 16 spin fire and find out the hard way they dont like it - then find out about the kid who wasnt allowed to and snuck off to do it without forethought and was found too late.
another point is that at 16 age most kids are quick enough to by-pass anything you put up to stop them - this includes getting people older to buy stuff or just nicking it when your not looking - so if i was confident that the kid knew what they were doing id let them. if not id put up every obstacle i could.
as for the drive towards doing fire its not so much the show off aspect as the risk aspect. why do people do base jumping or BMXing? because its risky and you get a kick out of it. This isnt a bastardisation of poi - just another aspect. Poi is not just an art form it is a 'sport' ie people use it to push themselfs - not as competion but to see what they can do.
*follows the responsible kids camp*
personally i wouldnt let a kid under the age of 16 spin - but at this age the majority of kids are responsible when they know that YOUR serious.
half the problem with kids acting stupidly is that they dont use fire. i was a scout for a while and we made camp fires and taught how to deal with it and what not to do. lots of kids arnt - there idea of fire is the stove or a lighter and this is what makes them irresponsible - they think it can be stopped with the flick of a switch. let a kid who might start fire spinning see what real raw fire is then train them how to deal with it THEN maybe let them spin it.
another point is that at this age when they hit 18 they'll do it anyway - id rather watch a kid at 16 spin fire and find out the hard way they dont like it - then find out about the kid who wasnt allowed to and snuck off to do it without forethought and was found too late.
another point is that at 16 age most kids are quick enough to by-pass anything you put up to stop them - this includes getting people older to buy stuff or just nicking it when your not looking - so if i was confident that the kid knew what they were doing id let them. if not id put up every obstacle i could.
as for the drive towards doing fire its not so much the show off aspect as the risk aspect. why do people do base jumping or BMXing? because its risky and you get a kick out of it. This isnt a bastardisation of poi - just another aspect. Poi is not just an art form it is a 'sport' ie people use it to push themselfs - not as competion but to see what they can do.
back
GOLD Member
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posted:
Really, it's more like 22-25. Makes perfect sense. Why do you think draft age is 18? Because there are plenty of 18-year-olds who can be talked into being drafted.
Written by: pricklyleaf
There can be quite a lot of difference actually. The part of the brain that controls rational behavior develops last, between the ages of 16-18. This is why you can smoke when your 16 (lungs fully developed by then) but not drink (brain not fully developed).
Really, it's more like 22-25. Makes perfect sense. Why do you think draft age is 18? Because there are plenty of 18-year-olds who can be talked into being drafted.
-Mike
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella
A buckuht n a hooze! -Valura
SILVER Member
with added berries
1,365 posts
Location: Manchester, England (UK)
with added berries
1,365 posts
Location: Manchester, England (UK)
Posted:
sorry, Mr. Doctor! my mistake! Thats scary then, my brain still isn't properly developed!
The controlled way of learning about fire posted by Linden is quite a good point. There are many kids where I used to live that would play in he woods with fire near my house, setting lots of things on fire, walking round with lit branches etc.
However, I think that tying fire balls to your arms on the ends of string and flailing them around is perhaps not the safest way to go about things either. Campfires would be a much safer way!
I think you really have to consider what COULD happen, rather than using the 'it won't happen to me' attitude, especially when considering children. This is the line you have to take professionally when working with children.
And legally, its probably best to wait till 18, as thats when the individual takes responsibility for themselves. (like someone who I cant remember said before-you don't want the child concern services taking your children off you for irresponsibilty).
I'm sure there are many 15+ year olds out there who are ready to spin fire, it's very much down to the individual person. But its a huge risk and I would always air on the side of caution.
sorry, Mr. Doctor! my mistake! Thats scary then, my brain still isn't properly developed!
The controlled way of learning about fire posted by Linden is quite a good point. There are many kids where I used to live that would play in he woods with fire near my house, setting lots of things on fire, walking round with lit branches etc.
However, I think that tying fire balls to your arms on the ends of string and flailing them around is perhaps not the safest way to go about things either. Campfires would be a much safer way!
I think you really have to consider what COULD happen, rather than using the 'it won't happen to me' attitude, especially when considering children. This is the line you have to take professionally when working with children.
And legally, its probably best to wait till 18, as thats when the individual takes responsibility for themselves. (like someone who I cant remember said before-you don't want the child concern services taking your children off you for irresponsibilty).
I'm sure there are many 15+ year olds out there who are ready to spin fire, it's very much down to the individual person. But its a huge risk and I would always air on the side of caution.
Live like there is no tomorrow,
dance like nobody is watching
and hula hoop like wiggling will save the world.
“What lies behind us and what lies before us are tiny matters compared to what lies within us.”
Ralph Waldo Emerson
Thinking...
179 posts
Location: Oxford
179 posts
Location: Oxford
Posted:
I don't see how campfires could be seen as less dengerous than fire poi....especially if you don't know how to look after them (and what's more, although I have no scientiffic knowledge to back this up, I'm sure far more fumes come off a campfire than a set of fire poi).
Someone told me recently about his son and son's friend, who made a campfire in their garden when the dad was away. It was not going very well, so they put petrol on it, bad idea of course, and both ended up in the burns unit at hospital. Now, if they'd been taught about the dangers of fire, taught how to look after it, and what not to do (personally, I was taught how to light a fire at abou the age of 10) then they would not have made such a mistake.
In a way, the same can apply to fire poi. A child who is curious about the art needs to be taught about it, how it works etc.- in theory at least to start with, and maybe in practise later. And the thing is, just because they're being given the opportunity of trying it out, still doesn't mean it's the ultimate goal in poi spinning ability- it isn't and we all know it isn't, but it is part of the art- as this website suggests "Home of poi and fire twirling".
And the thing about reason not developing till ages 16-17, although this may be the case, you CAN'T make that assumption for all people, everyone develops at different ages- just take a class of 13 year olds and you will see that. This is where parental consent comes in though- because a parent is the perosn who will know best whether or not their child has the maturity to handle fire.
I don't see how campfires could be seen as less dengerous than fire poi....especially if you don't know how to look after them (and what's more, although I have no scientiffic knowledge to back this up, I'm sure far more fumes come off a campfire than a set of fire poi).
Someone told me recently about his son and son's friend, who made a campfire in their garden when the dad was away. It was not going very well, so they put petrol on it, bad idea of course, and both ended up in the burns unit at hospital. Now, if they'd been taught about the dangers of fire, taught how to look after it, and what not to do (personally, I was taught how to light a fire at abou the age of 10) then they would not have made such a mistake.
In a way, the same can apply to fire poi. A child who is curious about the art needs to be taught about it, how it works etc.- in theory at least to start with, and maybe in practise later. And the thing is, just because they're being given the opportunity of trying it out, still doesn't mean it's the ultimate goal in poi spinning ability- it isn't and we all know it isn't, but it is part of the art- as this website suggests "Home of poi and fire twirling".
And the thing about reason not developing till ages 16-17, although this may be the case, you CAN'T make that assumption for all people, everyone develops at different ages- just take a class of 13 year olds and you will see that. This is where parental consent comes in though- because a parent is the perosn who will know best whether or not their child has the maturity to handle fire.
Practice as if your hair was on fire...
NYC
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA
Posted:
I find this a bit scary.
Written by: Anna-pananna
I don't see how campfires could be seen as less dengerous than fire poi....
I find this a bit scary.
Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]
SILVER Member
big and good and broken
7,330 posts
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kingdom
big and good and broken
7,330 posts
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kingdom
Posted:
whay scary - not sure what its like in the u.s. but you possibly wouldn't think its so crazy if you lived in england.
as i'm sure you know, annually we have bonfires the size of houses lit up all over the country and we encourage kids to make effigys to throw onto them while we stand around and watch.
lots of traditional, 'harmless' fun but try telling a fireman or an accident and emergency doctor that.
i've seen many, many more examples of serious adult burns injuries through bonfires than i have ever seen from firespinning...
cole. x
whay scary - not sure what its like in the u.s. but you possibly wouldn't think its so crazy if you lived in england.
as i'm sure you know, annually we have bonfires the size of houses lit up all over the country and we encourage kids to make effigys to throw onto them while we stand around and watch.
lots of traditional, 'harmless' fun but try telling a fireman or an accident and emergency doctor that.
i've seen many, many more examples of serious adult burns injuries through bonfires than i have ever seen from firespinning...
cole. x
"i see you at 'dis cafe.
i come to 'dis cafe quite a lot myself.
they do porridge."
- tim westwood
NYC
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA
Posted:
And there are less sharkbites than car accidents so we should all ride sharks to work.
There are obviously more per capita fire spinning injuries than bonfire injuries.
And there are less sharkbites than car accidents so we should all ride sharks to work.
There are obviously more per capita fire spinning injuries than bonfire injuries.
Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]
Pooh-Bah
2,354 posts
Location: Away from home
2,354 posts
Location: Away from home
Posted:
more New Yorkers are bitten by other New Yorkers than there are people bitten by shark attacks in a year
more New Yorkers are bitten by other New Yorkers than there are people bitten by shark attacks in a year
NYC
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA
Posted:
But what about the sharks bitten by New Yorkers?
But what about the sharks bitten by New Yorkers?
Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]
SILVER Member
big and good and broken
7,330 posts
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kingdom
big and good and broken
7,330 posts
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kingdom
Posted:
its an epidemic i tell you.
the sharks are out for revenge...
that argument is a bit crap nyc - i'm not suggetsing we ride sharks to work and i'm not suggeting we spin bonfires either.
what i'm saying is that fire safety is often overlooked in general and as such, i think a firespinning child is actually *less* likely to encounter serious burn injuries than one that has no experience/education of the seriousness of fire.
"There are obviously more per capita fire spinning injuries than bonfire injuries."
by your logic then, we should keep kids away from campfires at all times then, no?
if we reduce the number of children around bonfires, the number of related injuries will as a direct result diminish.
is surfing too dangerous when a child could very well learn to skateboard until they are perceived to be old enough to swim in the sea?
do you *ever* do chemistry experiments with your students that involve potentially harmful substances?
why do schools take kids on field trips when they can learn the same material from a classroom, away from the dangers that taking them out into the open presents...?
my main problem with children spinning fire is that if the kids have spun fire before and been safe but have not been properly versed in how dangerous fire can be, may then think it is safe for them to do unsupervised.
psycho44 and cody's approaches to this are admirable and i are what i would like to think i would do if i had children of my own that had an interest in firespinning.
if you get a kid into spinning, at some point (probably sooner rather than later) they will want to spin fire.
if the child is well-educated in the risks and seriousness of what they are doing, is properly supervised at all times and the risk is reduced to a minimum by the supervisors, i cannot see how just saying 'no' could be perceived as a better plan.
i know that if it were me and my parents had said no to something i wanted to try that i was passionate about, i would probably have found a way to try it without them.
cole. x
its an epidemic i tell you.
the sharks are out for revenge...
that argument is a bit crap nyc - i'm not suggetsing we ride sharks to work and i'm not suggeting we spin bonfires either.
what i'm saying is that fire safety is often overlooked in general and as such, i think a firespinning child is actually *less* likely to encounter serious burn injuries than one that has no experience/education of the seriousness of fire.
"There are obviously more per capita fire spinning injuries than bonfire injuries."
by your logic then, we should keep kids away from campfires at all times then, no?
if we reduce the number of children around bonfires, the number of related injuries will as a direct result diminish.
is surfing too dangerous when a child could very well learn to skateboard until they are perceived to be old enough to swim in the sea?
do you *ever* do chemistry experiments with your students that involve potentially harmful substances?
why do schools take kids on field trips when they can learn the same material from a classroom, away from the dangers that taking them out into the open presents...?
my main problem with children spinning fire is that if the kids have spun fire before and been safe but have not been properly versed in how dangerous fire can be, may then think it is safe for them to do unsupervised.
psycho44 and cody's approaches to this are admirable and i are what i would like to think i would do if i had children of my own that had an interest in firespinning.
if you get a kid into spinning, at some point (probably sooner rather than later) they will want to spin fire.
if the child is well-educated in the risks and seriousness of what they are doing, is properly supervised at all times and the risk is reduced to a minimum by the supervisors, i cannot see how just saying 'no' could be perceived as a better plan.
i know that if it were me and my parents had said no to something i wanted to try that i was passionate about, i would probably have found a way to try it without them.
cole. x
"i see you at 'dis cafe.
i come to 'dis cafe quite a lot myself.
they do porridge."
- tim westwood
NYC
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA
Posted:
You usually make sense.
I think kids should be kept away from things with HIGH per capita injurys.
I do know that there have been more than a few bonfire injuries (600 in the UK in 2002) but that's pretty DAMN low considering how many people attend.
I'm honestly confused that your confused.
We're comparing numerators and denominators here.
Low number of injuries/Extremely high number of participants = Low Risk.
Things like Chemistry class, Bicycling, bonfires.
Mid level of injuries/low amount of people participating = High Risk.
Mountian climbing, Firespinning, Neverland Ranch.
You're compaing apples and oranges.
I'd say that a kid well educated in fire prevention that does not spin fire is less likely to get burned than a kid well educated in fire prevention that does spin fire.
If you're arguing that children should be better educated in fire safety, I'll agree. If you're argueing that children should spin fire so they'll be better educated in fire safety so that they'll be less likely to get burned, I disagree.
[Bad experiencal logic ahead.]
I don't know any of my friends that got seriously burned in the last 3 years that weren't firespinners. The whole "Burns Heal, Chicks Dig Scars" craze among the burner crowd might suggest that introducing a child to firespinning might actually have the opposite effect.
[More bad logic...]
The ONLY injuries that I've gotten that required even a bandaid over the last 3 years were firespinning related. And I'm about as safe as they get.
But go back to the numerator/denominator stuff. That's the better logic. OBVIOUSLY children can and should do acitvities with some risk involved (like crossing the street) BUT it's up to us to limit the unnecessary risk that our children are exposed to.
You usually make sense.
I think kids should be kept away from things with HIGH per capita injurys.
I do know that there have been more than a few bonfire injuries (600 in the UK in 2002) but that's pretty DAMN low considering how many people attend.
I'm honestly confused that your confused.
We're comparing numerators and denominators here.
Low number of injuries/Extremely high number of participants = Low Risk.
Things like Chemistry class, Bicycling, bonfires.
Mid level of injuries/low amount of people participating = High Risk.
Mountian climbing, Firespinning, Neverland Ranch.
Written by:
what i'm saying is that fire safety is often overlooked in general and as such, i think a firespinning child is actually *less* likely to encounter serious burn injuries than one that has no experience/education of the seriousness of fire.
You're compaing apples and oranges.
I'd say that a kid well educated in fire prevention that does not spin fire is less likely to get burned than a kid well educated in fire prevention that does spin fire.
If you're arguing that children should be better educated in fire safety, I'll agree. If you're argueing that children should spin fire so they'll be better educated in fire safety so that they'll be less likely to get burned, I disagree.
[Bad experiencal logic ahead.]
I don't know any of my friends that got seriously burned in the last 3 years that weren't firespinners. The whole "Burns Heal, Chicks Dig Scars" craze among the burner crowd might suggest that introducing a child to firespinning might actually have the opposite effect.
[More bad logic...]
The ONLY injuries that I've gotten that required even a bandaid over the last 3 years were firespinning related. And I'm about as safe as they get.
But go back to the numerator/denominator stuff. That's the better logic. OBVIOUSLY children can and should do acitvities with some risk involved (like crossing the street) BUT it's up to us to limit the unnecessary risk that our children are exposed to.
Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]
SILVER Member
That guy from Reno
556 posts
Location: Reno, Nevada USA
That guy from Reno
556 posts
Location: Reno, Nevada USA
Posted:
So with Pele and NYC in the lead in a rush to CPS lets compile a list of activitees we say kids cannot do.
Fire spinning
Rock Climbing
Gymnastics
Surfing
Karati
Judo
Baseball
Football
Soccer
Knitting - (ok with dull plastic needles)
Common add to the list, lets lock up these parents for keeping them active and involved in sports and arts. Stick the kids in foster homes with video games. That way we know there safe.
Written by:
BUT it's up to us to limit the unnecessary risk that our children are exposed to.
So with Pele and NYC in the lead in a rush to CPS lets compile a list of activitees we say kids cannot do.
Fire spinning
Rock Climbing
Gymnastics
Surfing
Karati
Judo
Baseball
Football
Soccer
Knitting - (ok with dull plastic needles)
Common add to the list, lets lock up these parents for keeping them active and involved in sports and arts. Stick the kids in foster homes with video games. That way we know there safe.
Cody Canon
Controlled Burn, Reno Nevada
Pooh-Bah
2,354 posts
Location: Away from home
2,354 posts
Location: Away from home
Posted:
I don't think that is a question of prohibiting potentially risky activities as much as making them as safe as possible. If I played catch with a child I would use a soft ball and not a rock. If I took a child spinning I would make sure that their toys were not on fire.
Why is the fire so important in this equation when it is, in my opinion, secondary to the activity?
I don't think that is a question of prohibiting potentially risky activities as much as making them as safe as possible. If I played catch with a child I would use a soft ball and not a rock. If I took a child spinning I would make sure that their toys were not on fire.
Why is the fire so important in this equation when it is, in my opinion, secondary to the activity?
SILVER Member
big and good and broken
7,330 posts
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kingdom
big and good and broken
7,330 posts
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kingdom
Posted:
"You usually make sense."
sorry, i never, ever meant to make sense, it just happens
okay, i get your point that if they don't do dangerous things, they can't get hurt.
but you completely ignored my point that if they get into spinning, they *will* want to spin fire - and many will do it, with or without the parent's supervision.
i'm saying, it makes more sense to let them do it very occasionally with full safety supervision than to say "no, you're simply not old enough yet."
"you're not good enough yet" is what should preclude them from them from trying it out.
"I think kids should be kept away from things with HIGH per capita injurys."
then we would be devoid of the world best gymnasts, skateboarders, snowboarders, trampolinists, martial artists, surfers, mountain bikers, bmx'ers and so on.
you may see that as a small loss to prevent a few broken bones but i don't - i see it as a restriction that with proper time and effort invested, need not be placed upon them.
this is completely unbased in fact but, i think you'll find in all of these sports, if you compare the number of per capita injuries of those over 15 to those under 15, the second figure will be *drastically* lower due to the high amount of supervision given to children practicing these sports.
[and the bad logic section cos you got to use it]
i've only ever had one serious burn from firespinning and it happened when i span whilst drunk (i'll never do that again) - other than that, in nearly three years of spinning fire, i have not had a single burn.
in fact that's a lie, i have had several burns, but none from firspinning.
with the extra precautions that would be employed with a child, i think that firespinning could quite well be described as a mid- to low-risk activity when under proper supervision.
how many times have you spun fire?
and how many times have you been burnt?
my estimate for me is approximately 1000:1
which ain't bad
cole. x
p.s. "Mountian climbing, Firespinning, Neverland Ranch"
that was f****n funny!
"You usually make sense.
"sorry, i never, ever meant to make sense, it just happens
okay, i get your point that if they don't do dangerous things, they can't get hurt.
but you completely ignored my point that if they get into spinning, they *will* want to spin fire - and many will do it, with or without the parent's supervision.
i'm saying, it makes more sense to let them do it very occasionally with full safety supervision than to say "no, you're simply not old enough yet."
"you're not good enough yet" is what should preclude them from them from trying it out.
"I think kids should be kept away from things with HIGH per capita injurys."
then we would be devoid of the world best gymnasts, skateboarders, snowboarders, trampolinists, martial artists, surfers, mountain bikers, bmx'ers and so on.
you may see that as a small loss to prevent a few broken bones but i don't - i see it as a restriction that with proper time and effort invested, need not be placed upon them.
this is completely unbased in fact but, i think you'll find in all of these sports, if you compare the number of per capita injuries of those over 15 to those under 15, the second figure will be *drastically* lower due to the high amount of supervision given to children practicing these sports.
[and the bad logic section cos you got to use it
]i've only ever had one serious burn from firespinning and it happened when i span whilst drunk (i'll never do that again) - other than that, in nearly three years of spinning fire, i have not had a single burn.
in fact that's a lie, i have had several burns, but none from firspinning.
with the extra precautions that would be employed with a child, i think that firespinning could quite well be described as a mid- to low-risk activity when under proper supervision.
how many times have you spun fire?
and how many times have you been burnt?
my estimate for me is approximately 1000:1
which ain't bad
cole. x
p.s. "Mountian climbing, Firespinning, Neverland Ranch"
that was f****n funny!
"i see you at 'dis cafe.
i come to 'dis cafe quite a lot myself.
they do porridge."
- tim westwood
SILVER Member
big and good and broken
7,330 posts
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kingdom
big and good and broken
7,330 posts
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kingdom
Posted:
molly - comparing spinning in general to firespinning is like comparing rock climbing to indoor wall climbing or boarding in a snowdome compared to on a mountian.
the principles are almost identical, but there are things that you can only learn by doing the actual activity.
what heppens when a kid who has been indoor wall climbing for 10 years goes out on his 18th birthday to a mountain and finds its a little bit windier outside?
if you have a kid that has spent 10 years spinning sock poi and then you give them some fire poi i can see a disaster waiting to happen - they would very likely treat fire with as little respect as they did their practice poi and their vast experience could well trick them into believing that they can have the skill to not have to worry about the added dangers of spinning with fire.
if however they have been allowed to occasionally spin fire under strict supervision for a half of that time, being educated about the risks and the safety procedures involved, by the time they are old enough to go out and do it themselves, they will probably be one of the most safe and competent firespinners around.
all just my opinion of course - i ain't got no kids to test all this out on
cole. x
molly - comparing spinning in general to firespinning is like comparing rock climbing to indoor wall climbing or boarding in a snowdome compared to on a mountian.
the principles are almost identical, but there are things that you can only learn by doing the actual activity.
what heppens when a kid who has been indoor wall climbing for 10 years goes out on his 18th birthday to a mountain and finds its a little bit windier outside?
if you have a kid that has spent 10 years spinning sock poi and then you give them some fire poi i can see a disaster waiting to happen - they would very likely treat fire with as little respect as they did their practice poi and their vast experience could well trick them into believing that they can have the skill to not have to worry about the added dangers of spinning with fire.
if however they have been allowed to occasionally spin fire under strict supervision for a half of that time, being educated about the risks and the safety procedures involved, by the time they are old enough to go out and do it themselves, they will probably be one of the most safe and competent firespinners around.
all just my opinion of course - i ain't got no kids to test all this out on
cole. x
"i see you at 'dis cafe.
i come to 'dis cafe quite a lot myself.
they do porridge."
- tim westwood
AnonymousPLATINUM Member
Posted:
Matthew O'Keyes
There's nothing new I have to say but I just thought I would comment, as I’m only 15.
Last year our year level had a school-hiking trip where one of the youth ministers did fire eating on our "entertainment night". When we got back a couple of my classmates asked him to teach them, as did myself and I’m the only one that he actually taught. He plainly said no to everyone else but with no hesitation gave me his contact details. I am a lot more mature then my fellow classmates and am more responsible. My point is; I understand the health risks and I respect the fire. I think there's no way I would of been able to fully respect and understand what I was doing if I was any younger and like I said, I am more mature (it's from not having any siblings) so I think 16 is a good age for any type of fire handling. I think that you really need to understand that fire is not a toy, I'm sure that most kids know this but even when I was younger I played with matches (
burning small sticks and things). I think most boys have that pyromaniac stage. Now that I actually perform with fire I get quite frustrated if someone abuses the use of it but that's a whole different story! It comes down to your decision (the parents decision) if your kids ready or not and it's up to the parents to teach them common sense so they don't try things like glass walking just because they saw someone else do it.
So there you have it: My pointless two cents.
Matt.
Matthew O'Keyes
There's nothing new I have to say but I just thought I would comment, as I’m only 15.
Last year our year level had a school-hiking trip where one of the youth ministers did fire eating on our "entertainment night". When we got back a couple of my classmates asked him to teach them, as did myself and I’m the only one that he actually taught. He plainly said no to everyone else but with no hesitation gave me his contact details. I am a lot more mature then my fellow classmates and am more responsible. My point is; I understand the health risks and I respect the fire. I think there's no way I would of been able to fully respect and understand what I was doing if I was any younger and like I said, I am more mature (it's from not having any siblings
) so I think 16 is a good age for any type of fire handling. I think that you really need to understand that fire is not a toy, I'm sure that most kids know this but even when I was younger I played with matches ( burning small sticks and things). I think most boys have that pyromaniac stage. Now that I actually perform with fire I get quite frustrated if someone abuses the use of it but that's a whole different story! It comes down to your decision (the parents decision) if your kids ready or not and it's up to the parents to teach them common sense so they don't try things like glass walking just because they saw someone else do it. So there you have it: My pointless two cents.
Matt.
SILVER Member
Star Trekker
1,733 posts
Location: Cheshire, United Kingdom
Star Trekker
1,733 posts
Location: Cheshire, United Kingdom
Posted:
For me it's all about adequate, intelligent supervision and that starts with a thorough understanding of the child's ability, not only to spin but also to understand the requirements for fire. Then there's preparing them adequately, reading up on fire saftey, passing little tests, practising with unlit poi, working on a simple routine without mistakes and the mental preparation.
At the end of the day, spinning poi is fun and kids think of them as toys - the minute you set fire to them they are NOT toys so both supervisor and supervisee need to get that clear from the start.
My neice is 13 and I wouldn't hesitate to let her spin fire when I think she's ready for it, even this year - however the 10 yr-old is a LONG way off being ready mentally and emotionally to deal with it so I reckon she'll be 27 before I'll let her loose with anything alight!
Children have a right to be protected but blanket rules have to be set at the lowest common denominator and that takes away freedom and personal choice and that's never a good thing.
For me it's all about adequate, intelligent supervision and that starts with a thorough understanding of the child's ability, not only to spin but also to understand the requirements for fire. Then there's preparing them adequately, reading up on fire saftey, passing little tests, practising with unlit poi, working on a simple routine without mistakes and the mental preparation.
At the end of the day, spinning poi is fun and kids think of them as toys - the minute you set fire to them they are NOT toys so both supervisor and supervisee need to get that clear from the start.
My neice is 13 and I wouldn't hesitate to let her spin fire when I think she's ready for it, even this year - however the 10 yr-old is a LONG way off being ready mentally and emotionally to deal with it so I reckon she'll be 27 before I'll let her loose with anything alight!
Children have a right to be protected but blanket rules have to be set at the lowest common denominator and that takes away freedom and personal choice and that's never a good thing.
'The last rays of crimson on the spindle tree as the cerise fruit splits and reveals its orange seeds in a gloriously clashing colour scheme no-one would ever dare to wear'
Euonymous Europeus
AnonymousPLATINUM Member
Posted:
Just another idea:
A true burn victim story with a picture, nothing terribly horrible just a black & white picture of a victim in bandages. This is what you find in Brian Brushwoods guide to fire eating and this gets the point across of how serious it is to use fire. Let's face it, before starting to use fire i think you need to know and see that picture of what might happen (if things did go for worse). When the proper precautions are taken bad things shouldn't happen but never say never. I think kids don't realise what COULD happen, if your kids aren't ready to understand that, then they shouldn't be using fire.
did that sound mean?
Just another idea:
A true burn victim story with a picture, nothing terribly horrible just a black & white picture of a victim in bandages. This is what you find in Brian Brushwoods guide to fire eating and this gets the point across of how serious it is to use fire. Let's face it, before starting to use fire i think you need to know and see that picture of what might happen (if things did go for worse). When the proper precautions are taken bad things shouldn't happen but never say never. I think kids don't realise what COULD happen, if your kids aren't ready to understand that, then they shouldn't be using fire.
did that sound mean?
Thinking...
179 posts
Location: Oxford
179 posts
Location: Oxford
Posted:
Presumably this is only the number of recorded accidents with bonfires though. Think of the number of unreported accidents that happen with fires, where the accidents are not quite bad enough to merit a trip to the hospital....although I obviously don't have statistics to back this up, I'm sure they are more than accidents that happen with SUPERVISED fire spinning. And anyway- have these 600 injuries happened to children and/or adults?? As it is danger to children we are focussing on here.
Are you saying that all your fire spinning friends have had serious burn injuries in the last three years?? This really amazes me. I have been spinning fire regularly for nearly 3 years now. I have never burnt myself, only singed my hair slightly. If you take safety so seriously, how are you managing to have such serious accidents?? Furthermore, perhaps your fire spinning crowd has the "Burns Heal, Chicks Dig Scars" mentality, but I have not come accross this, and it is something I would NEVER advocate to children or anyone for that matter.
As Coleman and others have said, this is not necessarily an issue of age, it is an issue of ability, maturity, and confidence.
I wonder what Hairy Tait thinks about this now... are you there Hairy Tait? What are you thinking? We have rather bombarded you with opinions on the matter haven't we!
Written by: NYC
I do know that there have been more than a few bonfire injuries (600 in the UK in 2002) but that's pretty DAMN low considering how many people attend.
Presumably this is only the number of recorded accidents with bonfires though. Think of the number of unreported accidents that happen with fires, where the accidents are not quite bad enough to merit a trip to the hospital....although I obviously don't have statistics to back this up, I'm sure they are more than accidents that happen with SUPERVISED fire spinning. And anyway- have these 600 injuries happened to children and/or adults?? As it is danger to children we are focussing on here.
Written by: NYC
[Bad experiencal logic ahead.]
I don't know any of my friends that got seriously burned in the last 3 years that weren't firespinners. The whole "Burns Heal, Chicks Dig Scars" craze among the burner crowd might suggest that introducing a child to firespinning might actually have the opposite effect.
[More bad logic...]
The ONLY injuries that I've gotten that required even a bandaid over the last 3 years were firespinning related. And I'm about as safe as they get.
Are you saying that all your fire spinning friends have had serious burn injuries in the last three years?? This really amazes me. I have been spinning fire regularly for nearly 3 years now. I have never burnt myself, only singed my hair slightly. If you take safety so seriously, how are you managing to have such serious accidents?? Furthermore, perhaps your fire spinning crowd has the "Burns Heal, Chicks Dig Scars" mentality, but I have not come accross this, and it is something I would NEVER advocate to children or anyone for that matter.
As Coleman and others have said, this is not necessarily an issue of age, it is an issue of ability, maturity, and confidence.
I wonder what Hairy Tait thinks about this now... are you there Hairy Tait? What are you thinking? We have rather bombarded you with opinions on the matter haven't we!
Practice as if your hair was on fire...
GOLD Member
enthusiast, but not enthusiastic
367 posts
Location: Los Angeles, California, USA
enthusiast, but not enthusiastic
367 posts
Location: Los Angeles, California, USA
Posted:
Coincidentally, I allowed a child of 9 to spin fire over the weekend, and he lit his shirt on fire within a minute. It was a stupid and irresponsible thing to do, but his mother was right there and okayed it ahead of time. Nothing happened except his shirt was singed, and his mom sort of thought it was a good thing that now the kid understands how dangerous it is and won't be bugging her about fire poi for a long time. That's how it got started, he was really excited and mesmerized by the fire; because I understood the longing and I was excited to pass it on (I have no children myself and often give kids more credit than they deserve - and I tend to relate better to the kid's excitement than the parental concerns), I checked with his mother and we gave him one small wick.
The good consequence is that he will stay away from fire for quite a while - hopefully - he said he thought in a year or so he might want to try again, but within fifteen minutes afterward, he was excited about telling his friends about his experience and he wanted to wear the singed shirt to school. And I learned a huge lesson about children. There are confidence, ability, and maturity concerns regardless of who the child is, and sometimes it's better to assume that something is beyond a kid's reach.
Coincidentally, I allowed a child of 9 to spin fire over the weekend, and he lit his shirt on fire within a minute. It was a stupid and irresponsible thing to do, but his mother was right there and okayed it ahead of time. Nothing happened except his shirt was singed, and his mom sort of thought it was a good thing that now the kid understands how dangerous it is and won't be bugging her about fire poi for a long time. That's how it got started, he was really excited and mesmerized by the fire; because I understood the longing and I was excited to pass it on (I have no children myself and often give kids more credit than they deserve - and I tend to relate better to the kid's excitement than the parental concerns), I checked with his mother and we gave him one small wick.
The good consequence is that he will stay away from fire for quite a while - hopefully - he said he thought in a year or so he might want to try again, but within fifteen minutes afterward, he was excited about telling his friends about his experience and he wanted to wear the singed shirt to school. And I learned a huge lesson about children. There are confidence, ability, and maturity concerns regardless of who the child is, and sometimes it's better to assume that something is beyond a kid's reach.
You can't fall off the floor, but sometimes you need a chair to reach the cookie jar.
NYC
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA
Posted:
And if you only read every THIRD word I write, you'll be able to miss my point even more.
And then you could write even funnier stuff about how we shouldn't even let them out of the womb.
On a side note, I am actually legally bound to report any child neglect or mistreatment. If I saw a kid coming in with the same burn scars that I have after a long night of firespinning, and didn't report it, I could and should be charged with a crime.
Written by: Cody
So with Pele and NYC in the lead in a rush to CPS lets compile a list of activitees we say kids cannot do.
Fire spinning
Rock Climbing
Gymnastics
Surfing
Karati
Judo
Baseball
Football
Soccer
Knitting - (ok with dull plastic needles)
Common add to the list, lets lock up these parents for keeping them active and involved in sports and arts. Stick the kids in foster homes with video games. That way we know there safe.
And if you only read every THIRD word I write, you'll be able to miss my point even more.
And then you could write even funnier stuff about how we shouldn't even let them out of the womb.
On a side note, I am actually legally bound to report any child neglect or mistreatment. If I saw a kid coming in with the same burn scars that I have after a long night of firespinning, and didn't report it, I could and should be charged with a crime.
Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]
NYC
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA
Posted:
Yup. That's exactly what I said. We all died in fact. All of us.
Oh no wait, I didn't write that at all did I?
This grows tiresome with people exagerating everything I'm writing to the point of being obviously false.
Coleman, thanks for reading all of my words.
Clearly there are 9 year olds out there setting themselves on fire. I find that unacceptable. Some people don't.
I would hope that any parent would seriously look at ANY risk their kid would take and then made a consious decision (rather than a lazy one in which they simply don't want to parent.)
If a parent believes, after analysing both the activity and the child, that something is safe enough for the child to do, then so be it.
I don't think the benefit/risk of firespinning is great enough to endanger kids.
That's my point and I'm sticking to it.
No, I'm not.
No.
Nope.
All I'm saying is:
I don't think the benefit/risk of firespinning is great enough to endanger kids.
Written by: Anna-pananna
Are you saying that all your fire spinning friends have had serious burn injuries in the last three years??
Yup. That's exactly what I said. We all died in fact. All of us.
Oh no wait, I didn't write that at all did I?
This grows tiresome with people exagerating everything I'm writing to the point of being obviously false.
Coleman, thanks for reading all of my words.
Clearly there are 9 year olds out there setting themselves on fire. I find that unacceptable. Some people don't.
I would hope that any parent would seriously look at ANY risk their kid would take and then made a consious decision (rather than a lazy one in which they simply don't want to parent.)
If a parent believes, after analysing both the activity and the child, that something is safe enough for the child to do, then so be it.
I don't think the benefit/risk of firespinning is great enough to endanger kids.
That's my point and I'm sticking to it.
Written by:
So what you saying is that all children...
No, I'm not.
Written by:
So you think that everyone ...
No.
Written by:
So why don't we just..
Nope.
All I'm saying is:
I don't think the benefit/risk of firespinning is great enough to endanger kids.
Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]
lovable smart-ass
785 posts
Location: vineyards, Vienna, Austria
785 posts
Location: vineyards, Vienna, Austria
Posted:
what so you are saying that if you see a 16 year old come into class with a few obvious spinning burns on their arms, you are going to report it as neglect or mistreatment?
i think that goes too far.
what if the kid skateboards/ inlines/ bmx on the way to school and gets a bruised knee?
are you going to report that?
especially in the US where authorities tend to freak out easily, i think thats very damaging to the family.
also by doing that you create a precident for teachers meddling with private business....
if my teacher would have called my parents and accused them of neglecting me just because of spinning burns or bruised knees from skateboarding, i probably would leave that school.
i realize that teachers have to point out serious problems in their students.
such as girlies cutting themselves or heavy drug problems.
just out of curiosity NYC, going off topic here.
would you report a student that is obviously stoned but gets their work done properly and is not disturbing in class? and why?
thx
Written by:
On a side note, I am actually legally bound to report any child neglect or mistreatment. If I saw a kid coming in with the same burn scars that I have after a long night of firespinning, and didn't report it, I could and should be charged with a crime
what so you are saying that if you see a 16 year old come into class with a few obvious spinning burns on their arms, you are going to report it as neglect or mistreatment?
i think that goes too far.
what if the kid skateboards/ inlines/ bmx on the way to school and gets a bruised knee?
are you going to report that?
especially in the US where authorities tend to freak out easily, i think thats very damaging to the family.
also by doing that you create a precident for teachers meddling with private business....
if my teacher would have called my parents and accused them of neglecting me just because of spinning burns or bruised knees from skateboarding, i probably would leave that school.
i realize that teachers have to point out serious problems in their students.
such as girlies cutting themselves or heavy drug problems.
just out of curiosity NYC, going off topic here.
would you report a student that is obviously stoned but gets their work done properly and is not disturbing in class? and why?
thx
"is optimism in austria just a lack of information?"
-Alfred Dorfer
NYC
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA
Posted:
You're not understanding me here. This is not my decision. It is a federal law and every teacher in America must do it.
It is then investigated by someone else and it's up to THEM to decide if it was neglect.
I don't think you understand the situation or context.
I'll give you an extreme example:
If a kid comes in with an injury that seems suspicious, and I don't report it, THE KID's family can sue me and I will lose my job.
The same is true for drugs.
I would and have absolutely reported kids for drugs and abuse.
It's the law.
*IMPORTANT NOTE*
I only REPORT it.
I'm at a school with a VERY qualified psychaitric team. The team then looks into it and asks "Is this child in danger?" THEY determine if it's probably from fall down a stairwell or a dad beating the crap out of them. If the child is NOT in imminent danger (for something like pot), then they can be referred for optional counseling but it is NOT turned over to the police.
So:
Girl comes in with black eye.
I simply drop a note to a qualified therapist (as I do NOT feel qualified to asses the danger that a student is in, nor do I want to)
Therapist says "Hey, how'd you get the black eye?"
Child says "My dad hit me in the face"
Therapist raises red flag.
OR
Child says "I got hit with in my softball game"
Therapist checks with coach and tells the kid to feel better.
It works, it's useful, it's noninvasive.
SO:
A child comes in with burns.
I report.
Child tells therapist that she got it 'spinning fire'
Therapist calls mom.
Mom says "Yeah, she's supervised, it was an accident"
Therapist does nothing.
OR:
Child comes in with burn.
I report her.
Child tells therapist "I got it spinning fire"
Therapist calls mom.
Mom says actually, it's dad that burns her with cigarettes when he's drunk.
Therapist raises red flag.
Of course, I don't make Federal Legislation here in the US.
If it sounds facist, and in a way, it is invasive, remember that school teachers are often the ONLY ones that will see a child and be able to get the child help.
Child abuse is VERY common. And if the child abuse has gotten to the point where the child is showing BRUISES then there is clearly a danger.
*Please note the above was entirely offtopic*
Oh jeez... I quit.
Written by: Konsti
what so you are saying that if you see a 16 year old come into class with a few obvious spinning burns on their arms, you are going to report it as neglect or mistreatment?
You're not understanding me here. This is not my decision. It is a federal law and every teacher in America must do it.
It is then investigated by someone else and it's up to THEM to decide if it was neglect.
I don't think you understand the situation or context.
I'll give you an extreme example:
If a kid comes in with an injury that seems suspicious, and I don't report it, THE KID's family can sue me and I will lose my job.
The same is true for drugs.
I would and have absolutely reported kids for drugs and abuse.
It's the law.
*IMPORTANT NOTE*
I only REPORT it.
I'm at a school with a VERY qualified psychaitric team. The team then looks into it and asks "Is this child in danger?" THEY determine if it's probably from fall down a stairwell or a dad beating the crap out of them. If the child is NOT in imminent danger (for something like pot), then they can be referred for optional counseling but it is NOT turned over to the police.
So:
Girl comes in with black eye.
I simply drop a note to a qualified therapist (as I do NOT feel qualified to asses the danger that a student is in, nor do I want to)
Therapist says "Hey, how'd you get the black eye?"
Child says "My dad hit me in the face"
Therapist raises red flag.
OR
Child says "I got hit with in my softball game"
Therapist checks with coach and tells the kid to feel better.
It works, it's useful, it's noninvasive.
SO:
A child comes in with burns.
I report.
Child tells therapist that she got it 'spinning fire'
Therapist calls mom.
Mom says "Yeah, she's supervised, it was an accident"
Therapist does nothing.
OR:
Child comes in with burn.
I report her.
Child tells therapist "I got it spinning fire"
Therapist calls mom.
Mom says actually, it's dad that burns her with cigarettes when he's drunk.
Therapist raises red flag.
Of course, I don't make Federal Legislation here in the US.
If it sounds facist, and in a way, it is invasive, remember that school teachers are often the ONLY ones that will see a child and be able to get the child help.
Child abuse is VERY common. And if the child abuse has gotten to the point where the child is showing BRUISES then there is clearly a danger.
*Please note the above was entirely offtopic*
Written by:
So if a child falls off a bike, that's child abuse?
Oh jeez... I quit.
Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]
GOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Posted:
It's a little presumptious to call burns on a childs arm 'spinning burns'; however much they may resemble burns from spinning they could well have been caused by many other means, including abuse.
I don't think NYC would presume to be able to tell the difference for sure; how much less another professional (who does not spin) working with young children.
Written by: Konsti
what so you are saying that if you see a 16 year old come into class with a few obvious spinning burns on their arms, you are going to report it as neglect or mistreatment?
It's a little presumptious to call burns on a childs arm 'spinning burns'; however much they may resemble burns from spinning they could well have been caused by many other means, including abuse.
I don't think NYC would presume to be able to tell the difference for sure; how much less another professional (who does not spin) working with young children.
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
lovable smart-ass
785 posts
Location: vineyards, Vienna, Austria
785 posts
Location: vineyards, Vienna, Austria
Posted:
fair enough,
i thought that you were doing that deliberatly.
sorry dude.
fair enough,
i thought that you were doing that deliberatly.
sorry dude.
"is optimism in austria just a lack of information?"
-Alfred Dorfer
Thinking...
179 posts
Location: Oxford
179 posts
Location: Oxford
Posted:
Ok I'm sorry about that, I wasn't trying to exaggerate what you were saying, but I genuinley didn't quite understand what you meant by
Are you saying that the people you know who've had serious burns have got them from fire spinning, not from something else?
I promise, I'm not trying to disrespect your points or anything, I just want to clarify what you're saying.
Written by: NYCWritten by: Anna-pananna
Are you saying that all your fire spinning friends have had serious burn injuries in the last three years??
Yup. That's exactly what I said. We all died in fact. All of us.
Oh no wait, I didn't write that at all did I?
This grows tiresome with people exagerating everything I'm writing to the point of being obviously false.
Ok I'm sorry about that, I wasn't trying to exaggerate what you were saying, but I genuinley didn't quite understand what you meant by
Written by: NYC
I don't know any of my friends that got seriously burned in the last 3 years that weren't firespinners.
Are you saying that the people you know who've had serious burns have got them from fire spinning, not from something else?
I promise, I'm not trying to disrespect your points or anything, I just want to clarify what you're saying.
Practice as if your hair was on fire...
GOLD Member
enthusiast, but not enthusiastic
367 posts
Location: Los Angeles, California, USA
enthusiast, but not enthusiastic
367 posts
Location: Los Angeles, California, USA
Posted:
Anyone working in a school is required to report potential child neglect or abuse. Applies to medical providers too. Seems it's partially to prevent teachers, nurses, etc. from getting sued if they do report.
You gotta realize that, as much as America claims to be the country of freedom and self-determination, we regulate the hell out of a lot of stuff that other, more "socialized" countries would think is ridiculous. And a lot of Americans think it's ridiculous.
Written by: Konsti
fair enough,
i thought that you were doing that deliberatly.
sorry dude.
Anyone working in a school is required to report potential child neglect or abuse. Applies to medical providers too. Seems it's partially to prevent teachers, nurses, etc. from getting sued if they do report.
You gotta realize that, as much as America claims to be the country of freedom and self-determination, we regulate the hell out of a lot of stuff that other, more "socialized" countries would think is ridiculous. And a lot of Americans think it's ridiculous.
You can't fall off the floor, but sometimes you need a chair to reach the cookie jar.
lovable smart-ass
785 posts
Location: vineyards, Vienna, Austria
785 posts
Location: vineyards, Vienna, Austria
Posted:
that brings me to another question.
Are there any laws that would be applicable to a minor spinning fire?
that brings me to another question.
Are there any laws that would be applicable to a minor spinning fire?
"is optimism in austria just a lack of information?"
-Alfred Dorfer
© 1998 - 2024 Home of Poi
All prices converted to United States dollars using XE.com