# Infant Swim Self Rescue - anyone try it?



## marsupial-mom

Does anyone have experience with these kinds of swimming lessons: http://www.infantswim.com/

They teach kids as young as 6 months!

My son is 2 and he's at the point where he is very comfortable in the pool but he refuses to float on his back or put his face in the water. He just kicks around floating with a lifejacket. I am a swimmer and really want him to be able to swim correctly - for fun and safety.

I just signed up and start lessons for my son next week. It's rather expensive and very different from other forms of swimming lessons, but it gets such great reviews and the videos are amazing. Anyone try it?


----------



## Kaydove

My DD who is 4 months just started 'swim lessons' with DH. We did for several reasons - my DH has to work a lot for the time being so I wanted maximize the quality of time he has with her, and the largest statistic for children in San Diego is drowning so we wanted to teach water safety at a early age. Plus her teacher will be the same teacher until she outgrows swim lessons at late grade school! Here's the website for the place http://www.floatiesswimschool.com/ not sure if the philosophy is the same...we're really excited about it since its the cutest thing you've ever seen ever!


----------



## alegna

I find the ISR to be an abusive method. No way I would subject my kids to it. We have started swim lessons at a year here and they both swim well.


----------



## marsupial-mom

I think it's hard to make a case calling it abusive. If it were clearly abusive then they wouldn't offer classes at the YMCA or the city community pools.

We've already done "parent and me" classes multiple times but those don't teach survival skills. We started those at 6 months. And took them again at 18 months. That's why he's so good at kicking and can move all around the pool where ever he wants with a lifejack on. And that's why he's so comfortable in the pool that I fear for his safety. He loves it and will jump in easily.

I'm always with him and he listens when I tell him to wait and not jump in just yet, but I worry that if he's with another family member, they won't be as careful with him. I can't force them all to take water safety classes and CPR but I can make him take survival swimming lessons.


----------



## DahliaRW

There are alternatives to ISR that teach survival skills. My kid's swim classes teach them to turn and find the wall of the pool if they fall in at a very young age. They are also very gradual to introduce submersion and get kids comfortable in the water. I'll never forget that around 1yo my daughter fell into the hot tub at the pool (right after her lesson) and I heard the splash, looked over, and she was already holding the wall keeping herself safe. She also could climb out from that position. So you may want to research and see what there is in your area, ask friends, read reviews, etc.


----------



## dejagerw

From talking with people that did ISR, they literally throw the baby in the deep end of the pool on the first day. Personally, I don't think ISR jives with my parenting style. If you don't believe in cry it out, then I don't think you'll agree with the ISR methods either. Really, if your 2 year old doesn't like putting his face under, he's going to HATE getting thrown in the deep end over and over and over again. Really, the fastest way to get him to hate swimming might be to try this method. By the end of the classes, he may have learned not to drown, maybe to swim, but at what cost to your relationship? And at what detriment to his interest in swimming that you hope to foster?


----------



## Adaline'sMama

I think ISR (as in forcing them to figure out how to swim) is wrong and dangerous. However, I did start introducing DD to the pool at about 6 weeks by gently swooping her under water and then bringing her back up. We started jumping in the pool last summer, and she is just now starting to be able to float on her back and let go of me for a few moments without sinking.

I agree with PP that thinks that ISR just doesnt jive with my parenting style. IMO, it's not very AP to force your child to do something without feeling safe and secure. But it does seem like most of the time people arent just throwing their kid in the water. It seems like the programs are designed to teach stuff step by step.


----------



## WildDoula

As someone who has fallen into a pool at a young age, I definitely see the benefits of this type of swim program. I was always in the water and could swim very, very well, but the second I fell in, I forgot everything and panicked. I think it's important for children to know that if they fall in, it won't be gentle and it won't be expected. This type of teaching shows them that, and it teaches them how to react appropriately. It might seem harsh, but it is closer to reality than many programs.


----------



## chel

I unknowingly signed my toddler up for that type of class. The first class was very nerve racking, though all the other kids did very well. We lasted less that 6 lessons. I tried the activities once, but dd was very clear that she didn't want to do most of the activities. From then on I only gave gentle nudges.

Dd had just turned 2 and had loved the water, even rough beaches. No problem with taking showers and getting face wet. She was at the point that she no longer was content being held when in the water.

I think it could have gone better if I started dd at under 1yr. Overall it didn't set her back, but absolutely did not help.


----------



## Kaydove

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Adaline'sMama*
> 
> I think ISR (as in forcing them to figure out how to swim) is wrong and dangerous. However, I did start introducing DD to the pool at about 6 weeks by *gently swooping her under water and then bringing her back up*. We started jumping in the pool last summer, and she is just now starting to be able to float on her back and let go of me for a few moments without sinking.
> I agree with PP that thinks that ISR just doesnt jive with my parenting style. IMO, it's not very AP to force your child to do something without feeling safe and secure. But it does seem like most of the time people arent just throwing their kid in the water. It seems like the programs are designed to teach stuff step by step.


That's exactly what my DD's teacher does. On the 2nd lesson she gently, briefly swept her under water, and quickly brought her back up. DD didn't mind at all and loves her teacher. The teacher actually commented how they do things very gradual and not like other types that throw the baby in. I hadn't heard about ISR and harsh methods so I assumed it was similiar to my DD's swim classes. My DH gets in the water with DD and he loves the bonding time.


----------



## marsupial-mom

I asked members if they had tried this method. So far no one has responded saying they've done these classes.
No one here has even watched others do these classes. Where I live, they have them at local city pools so anyone can watch and see how it works.
Yet many here are jumping to conclusions and harsh judgment without ever having any direct knowledge of the method.
It is NOT "forcing" kids to learn to swim or "throwing them in the deep end alone." The instructor is there, teaching them to float, turn over, swim to the edge.
Not only are these criticisms unhelpful to me, they're ignorant.
I believe in attachment parenting but I also believe in education. Please do not attack something you know nothing about.


----------



## philomom

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marsupial-mom*
> 
> I asked members if they had tried this method. So far no one has responded saying they've done these classes.
> No one here has even watched others do these classes. Where I live, they have them at local city pools so anyone can watch and see how it works.
> Yet many here are jumping to conclusions and harsh judgment without ever having any direct knowledge of the method.
> It is NOT "forcing" kids to learn to swim or "throwing them in the deep end alone." The instructor is there, teaching them to float, turn over, swim to the edge.
> Not only are these criticisms unhelpful to me, they're ignorant.
> I believe in attachment parenting but I also believe in education. Please do not attack something you know nothing about.


Immersive techniques for infants I believe to be quite dangerous. Pool water is unhealthy to swallow. No way would I have subjected my children to those classes. The only way for children of any age to be completely safe around water is to be supervised at all times. I don't believe this technique could possibly fall into the realm of AP.


----------



## marsupial-mom

a) It's called "Infant Swim Resource" but the method is for kids ages 6 months to 6 years. As I said in my original post, my child is 2.5 years old. He is NOT an infant. I have talked to him about this and he understands what we will be doing. I have shown him videos of lessons. He's excited to learn how to swim well.

b) All infant swim lessons involve putting the infant's head under water. Most hold their breath and do not swallow a ton of water. It's basic reflex. most classes are designed just to be about fun and comfort. And that's fine at first. But if they're like my son, they can get to a point where they are overconfident in their swimming abilities and that puts them in danger.

c) This method empahsizes constant supervision and water safety. I'm also CPR and first aid certified and I know how to use a difibulator. Additionally, the pool in our community (HOA pool) has a fence that's over 6 feet tall and a locked gate as well as an emergency phone and rescue raft. It's very safe, there's little chance my son can get into that pool unsupervised even if I were a terrible mom and never watched him. This class is not a replacement for water safety like pool fencing and CPR classes. This is in addition to those things.

d) As I said before, I am a swimmer (not just a casual bather; I swam competitively as a teenager) so I know what I'm doing. I take this seriously. I'm not the kind of parent who is going to say "my son knows how to swim" when he clearly cannot get in and out of the water without assistance or move in the direction he wants. That's NOT swimming; that's playing. That's like saying he knows how to ride a bike when the reality is that he only knows how to "ride" a balance bike.

e) Continuing with the bike analogy, my son must wear a helmet when he rides his balance bike but I do not hover over him and hold on every step of the way. Instead, I make sure the ground is flat where he rides and I supervise and offer guidance but I let him fall when he's going to fall. Learning to walk, learning to ride a bike, and learning to swim involve some discomfort for the child. As a parent we encourage them, supervise, provide a safe environment, and give them guidance. But we don't deny them the opportunities to learn from minor mistakes. Instead, we are there for hugs, kisses, and bandaids when needed.

f) I took my son to 3 other swimming classes and I was highly disappointed in the lack of knowledge of the teachers. They don't know early childhood development. Some aren't even very good swimmers themselves. They just follow the method they've been taught, which is a method that is not customized for each child and is a method that encourages water fun and exploration, not safety. Those classes are fine to start with but they are NOT swimming lessons. They're not even water safety lessons.


----------



## dejagerw

Here's an interesting read regarding swim classes and young children.

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/105/4/868.full

"Generally, children are not developmentally ready for swimming lessons until after their fourth birthday. Aquatic programs for infants and toddlers have not been shown to decrease the risk of drowning, and parents should not feel secure that their child is safe in water or safe from drowning after participating in such programs."


----------



## APToddlerMama

What is the point seriously? There is zero excuse for anything but the type of supervision of young children that would totally prevent anything like this from ever happening. I know someone who experienced these types of classes who remains terrified of water to this day..and unable to swim or learn to due to total panic around water. Also know a family whose toddler drown in a bucket of water. Supervise your kids proprerly around water and you won't have to worry about drowning nor will you have to worry that you're choosing a method of teaching them that has the potential to create fear and mistrust.


----------



## marsupial-mom

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dejagerw*
> 
> Here's an interesting read regarding swim classes and young children.
> 
> http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/105/4/868.full
> 
> "Generally, children are not developmentally ready for swimming lessons until after their fourth birthday. Aquatic programs for infants and toddlers have not been shown to decrease the risk of drowning, and parents should not feel secure that their child is safe in water or safe from drowning after participating in such programs."


Did you read the report???

It says:

"For any water safety or swimming class, children learn better if they are developmentally ready, properly motivated, positively reinforced, and if the experience is enjoyable. *When instruction attempts to optimize learning by reducing fear of water, children may unwittingly be encouraged to enter the water without supervision*."

"The optimum time to master more complex skills of swimming has not been thoroughly researched and has not been determined."

"The effects of training on the acquisition of water survival skills in young children have been studied by Asher et al16 In a population of children averaging 34 months of age, *water survival skills were enhanced after a training program*."

If you go to footnote 16 and read that study, it says:

"*Swimming ability and safety skills of young preschool children can be improved through training*. Such programs may offer some protection for children at risk of drowning and there was *no indication that this program increased the risk of drowning*. However, pool fencing, other barriers around water, and parental supervision still remain the most important prevention strategies to reduce drowning in young children."


----------



## dejagerw

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marsupial-mom*
> 
> Did you read the report???


Yes, I read the report. The point of the report is, you need to be careful when you sign your children up for these swim classes. It doesn't make them statistically safer in the water, it just makes parents feel better, and thus can potentially cause the child to be at greater risk.

The OP also stated that she wanted her son to swim correctly. It also talks about when kids learn appropriate stroke techniques, and that "having children begin swimming lessons at an earlier age does not translate to a more rapid mastery of aquatic skills or a higher level of swimming proficiency compared with those taking lessons at a later age*."*


----------



## marsupial-mom

Also, that report was from the year 2000. The updated one from 2010 says this:

"In the new policy, the AAP reinforces its existing recommendation that most children age 4 and older should learn to swim, but the AAP is now more open toward classes for younger children. In the past, the AAP advised against swimming lessons for children ages 1 to 3 because there was little evidence that lessons prevented drowning or resulted in better swim skills, and there was a concern parents would become less vigilant about supervising a child who had learned some swimming skills.

But new evidence shows that children ages 1 to 4 may be less likely to drown if they have had formal swimming instruction. The studies are small, and they don't define what type of lessons work best, so the AAP is not recommending mandatory swim lessons for all children ages 1 to 4 at this time. Instead, the new guidance recommends that parents should decide whether to enroll an individual child in swim lessons based on the child's frequency of exposure to water, emotional development, physical abilities, and certain health concerns related to pool water infections and pool chemicals."

link: http://www.aap.org/en-us/about-the-aap/aap-press-room/pages/AAP-Gives-Updated-Advice-on-Drowning-Prevention.aspx


----------



## BeeandOwlsMum

You might try a search for ISR or Infant Swim here on MDC. There have been a lot of threads about it. That might help you get some more insight into it. As I recall the general consensus was usually that they weren't a good idea.


----------



## Adaline'sMama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *APToddlerMama*
> 
> What is the point seriously? There is zero excuse for anything but the type of supervision of young children that would totally prevent anything like this from ever happening. I know someone who experienced these types of classes who remains terrified of water to this day..and unable to swim or learn to due to total panic around water. Also know a family whose toddler drown in a bucket of water. Supervise your kids proprerly around water and you won't have to worry about drowning nor will you have to worry that you're choosing a method of teaching them that has the potential to create fear and mistrust.


Careful, there are a couple of MDC mom's who have lost kids because of drowning. While I agree that proper supervision is necessary, I think it is unfair to assume that people can always supervise their kids. For example, a few months ago in the rural area where I live a little boy wandered off from a game of hide and seek and was found three days later 2 miles away sitting on a rock in the middle of a creek. For people who live around water, or who are around water often is it really important that they learn to swim. Often times mom's can't keep their eyes in 6 places at once.


----------



## marsupial-mom

Well, we did a lesson already. No crying, no whining, no fussing, no screaming, no begging... my son was just total giggles most of the time. And yes, she took him under water about 9 times. Nothing came by surprise, she explained every step (told him to close his mouth, etc). I think this is going to fit our family just fine. Remember, every child is different. Individual temperments will handle various styles of teaching differently.

That said, I can see how some people would not be comfortable with it. Letting children go under water is really scary for some people. And the firm, no-nonsense tone of the lessons as well as the short duration could easily be a turn-off. I'm not sure I would want to do it with a tiny infant who doesn't understand language and can't follow directions. The cost is prohibitive for many people. And I really don't think this method is the best way to introduce pools and swimming.

To dejagerw: when I said I want my son to swim correctly, I meant that I want him to swim, not float around with floaties. I don't care exactly how he swims (dog paddling is fine) and I don't care how far he can do it. I don't expect him to do the crawl or breaststroke perfetly at 2.5 years old. But I'm also well aware that kids can learn to swim at young ages. I learned so young that I can't remember ever not knowing how to swim. My son is old enough to learn to swim a few feet and grab a wall. So that's what he's going to learn to do.


----------



## APToddlerMama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Adaline'sMama*
> 
> Careful, there are a couple of MDC mom's who have lost kids because of drowning. While I agree that proper supervision is necessary, I think it is unfair to assume that people can always supervise their kids. For example, a few months ago in the rural area where I live a little boy wandered off from a game of hide and seek and was found three days later 2 miles away sitting on a rock in the middle of a creek. For people who live around water, or who are around water often is it really important that they learn to swim. Often times mom's can't keep their eyes in 6 places at once.


We are talking about infants. There is no substitution for proper supervision of a child that young near water so I cannot see the point in putting a child through that.


----------



## Maedze

Because sometimes accidents happen and "he should have been properly supervised" is a completely idiotic response and useless to the parents when they do.

I've never done ISR because we don't live by water or visit anyone with pools. It's not a regular occurrence in my kids' lives. If we had a river running through our property, or owned a pool, or lived on the ocean? You bet your right buttock I'd drown-proof my kids. Because humans make mistakes and I'm not quite so arrogant as to believe that I'm perfect.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *APToddlerMama*
> 
> We are talking about infants. There is no substitution for proper supervision of a child that young near water so I cannot see the point in putting a child through that.


----------



## hildare

we live on a river and i have been thinking about those classes. by now, though, dd is, i think, developmentally capable of actually learning to swim and not needing the infant classes.

people who have the "lack of supervision" mindset about how childhood accidents occur, i really hope nothing ever happens to disprove your self-righteous point of view, and your kids must be on the mellow and subdued end of the personality trait scale. yesterday my dd took a stool from one room and moved it into the laundry room and pulled out everything on top while her dad was changing the other baby's diaper. she's figured out the locks on the doors and is in and out constantly. a whole village of people couldn't properly supervise her enough to keep her out of trouble. or are you suggesting we use a leash?


----------



## Imakcerka

I honestly do not understand how teaching your toddler to swim and be comfortable in water turned into abuse. Ridiculous! I taught both my girls how to swim by 2. I stayed by their side the whole time and helped them overcome the fear of getting stuck and helped them find their way to the wall. While I would never let them swim alone even now, I feel comfortable that if one of them fell in they would be able to get out and the oldest is learning to swim while holding onto someone else. Again something I've taught her. The little one will start to learn how to do that as well as soon as she's comfortable with it but for now she just likes her sister holding her and swimming from side to side in the pool.

Is it abuse to allow a 9 yr old to learn how to pull someone drowning from the pool?


----------



## laohaire

Can't... help... myself... must... add.... two... cents...

I doubt anyone disagrees that supervision is Number One at All Times. Total agreement!!!

Part of good parenting, in addition to supervision, is planning for contingencies. So even if you supervise your children properly, you put the matches away and all that good stuff. Because even the best parents know that sometimes stuff happens. Kids run off, are out of sight for two seconds, distractions major and minor occur, children are under the supervision of other adults (grandparents, friend's parents, teachers, babysitters, etc.), and so on. Taking steps to ensure the safety of your child goes beyond simply saying "well, I'll supervise him/her, every waking and sleeping moment of the day, without break or handing off to other caregivers, and I'll also never have a second child for fear my attention might be divided."

I'm not going to throw stones at every parent who doesn't have their six month old in a drown proofing program, but the attitude that it's ridiculous because all drowning is prevented by proper supervision is... well, it's unrealistic.

Most drownings do indeed happen under poor (as opposed to no) supervision. But not all. There but the grace of god go all of us.

Suggest another method if you don't like this one. But for crying out loud, stuff the attitude that all parents who lost their child to drowning are at fault, and that it couldn't possibly happen to you.


----------



## APToddlerMama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Maedze*
> 
> Because sometimes accidents happen and "he should have been properly supervised" is a completely idiotic response and useless to the parents when they do.
> 
> I've never done ISR because we don't live by water or visit anyone with pools. It's not a regular occurrence in my kids' lives. If we had a river running through our property, or owned a pool, or lived on the ocean? You bet your right buttock I'd drown-proof my kids. Because humans make mistakes and I'm not quite so arrogant as to believe that I'm perfect.


I've seen zero research that this has saved any infants lives. Point me towards that and maybe you'll make a believer out of me. I've seen videos of ISR and I really cannot imagine a scenario in which this could be helpful. If there is proof it has saved a life, maybe I could buy into that. Otherwise I think it's a really terrible substitute for supervision. If you're relying on ISR to keep your kid safe, your kid isn't going to BE safe.


----------



## laohaire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *APToddlerMama*
> 
> I've seen zero research that this has saved any infants lives. Point me towards that and maybe you'll make a believer out of me. I've seen videos of ISR and I really cannot imagine a scenario in which this could be helpful. If there is proof it has saved a life, maybe I could buy into that. Otherwise I think it's a really terrible substitute for supervision. If you're relying on ISR to keep your kid safe, your kid isn't going to BE safe.


NOBODY AND I MEAN NOBODY SUGGESTED THIS AS A SUBSTITUTE FOR SUPERVISION.

NOBODY.


----------



## Imakcerka

You wouldn't rely on it to keep your kids safe. It's a tool a tool to help your child in a situation that could happen.


----------



## laohaire

You know what? I was totally wrong.

The official recommendation is to put your infant into a self rescue course, then rely on it.

It will be the best time and money you ever spent! Once your infant has completed the course, you are free to drop him or her off at the pool, lake or ocean and hit the bars! This is your first (and only!) recourse against drowning! Infants who successfully complete the course no longer need supervision! People who take water safety seriously enough to enroll their children in such programs know that they don't need to do anything further!

Or, wait... did that sound too ridiculous?

Why is this even a point of discussion?


----------



## APToddlerMama

I guess I'm more worried about getting in a car accident on my way to an ISR class than I am of my 7 month old finding himself in a situation in which he could drown but would save himself thanks to his newly learned ISR skills. Statistically that seems more probable. To each their own.


----------



## childsplay

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *APToddlerMama*
> 
> What is the point seriously? There is zero excuse for anything but the type of supervision of young children that would totally prevent anything like this from ever happening. I know someone who experienced these types of classes who remains terrified of water to this day..and unable to swim or learn to due to total panic around water. Also know a family whose toddler drown in a bucket of water. Supervise your kids proprerly around water and you won't have to worry about drowning nor will you have to worry that you're choosing a method of teaching them that has the potential to create fear and mistrust.


 This doesn't sit well with me, while I have mixed feelings about ISR, I also know from experience that you can be eagle eying your toddler near the water and still have near fatal (or fatal ) mishaps.

When my DS was 2 we were sailing, he had his lifevest on (the kids lived in those things) and was about a foot away from me, just out of sheer happenstance he put his little feet on the jib sheet (the line attatched to the sail) and we hit a gust, sail billowed out, sheet rose, and over he went. I had his foot for a second because his lifevest buckle snagged in our protective netting, but he slipped out of my grasp as the boat pitched on the waves. Within 10 seconds he was almost out of sight.

Fortunately he was a kid who'd been in the ocean since infancy, he lay on his back and let the waves carry him rather than fight them. (which did nothing to reassure me at the time) The thing is, stuff happens, right in front of you sometimes. I don't know a whole lot about ISR, but I do think some sort of water prep should happen with little ones. If my DS had have struggled against the waves he probably wouldnt be here today, they were just too big for such a little kid, even with the lifevest.

And bottom line is, I was supervising him, sitting a foot away as he babbled on about the big bridge we were coming up on, so yes, supervision is awesome, but on that day, if it were only supervision in play and not DS's ingrained knowledge, or response to the situation, or habit (which is probably more likely ) I think my life would be a whole lot different right now, and not in a good way.


----------



## Maedze

Nobody said anything about substitution. Reading comprehension is your friend, particularly if you intend to be vilely insensitive to those who have lost children.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *APToddlerMama*
> 
> I've seen zero research that this has saved any infants lives. Point me towards that and maybe you'll make a believer out of me. I've seen videos of ISR and I really cannot imagine a scenario in which this could be helpful. If there is proof it has saved a life, maybe I could buy into that. Otherwise I think it's a really terrible substitute for supervision. If you're relying on ISR to keep your kid safe, your kid isn't going to BE safe.


----------



## Amyla

There seems to be a lot of mis-information on this thread on how ISR classes are performed so I thought I would post my experience of the classes that my son took. My son was 2.5 years old when I signed him up for the lessons. We live in Florida so are around water about 95% of our time. Practically everyone has a pool, we go to the beach all the time. I felt it was very important that my son knew how to swim. I tried the classes at the YMCA and through the local parks & rec which did diddily squat for my son. I then tried ISR because my friend had enrolled her son in the classes.

The classes were 10 minutes a day, Monday through Friday for 6 or 7 weeks. The schedule was kind of tedious and it was very expensive but I am very glad I did it. His instructor did dunk him under water but always held him while doing it, warned him and made it into a game so he was always willing to do it. She taught him how to hold his breath and she called it "fishface" so he knew when she said it that he would have to hold his breath. Once he got the hang of going under water and holding his breath, they started practicing going under and grabbing on to the wall to pull up. She stood very close to the wall. After they practiced kicking and arm movements she would slowly move farther away from the wall so he would have to start swimming towards it. He did this instinctively. He practiced floating on his back and was taught not to move his legs or arms while floating to rest. Now up to this point he didn't get upset doing the lessons but he did not like the floating at first. I think it was the water getting in his ears but after a few floating lessons and after he got the hang of it he was no longer upset. She showed him how to do the transitions from swimming under water to floating on his back and floating to swimming. She taught him to swim for a few seconds and then flip to his back to rest, flip to swim again, etc. until he could get to a wall to hold on to. He loved it once everything started coming together. About half way through the classes he did start to cry BUT ONLY BECAUSE THE LESSONS WERE OVER and he wanted to practice for more than 10 minutes. The very last week of lessons is when the child is put in the water in different positions to similate falling in. They do not practice this until the child is very ready. Then they do it with clothes on and finally with a coat and shoes on. I can't speak for other people's children but my son loved being flipped in to the pool. He was so proud when he "graduated" and got a trophy. He is now 5 years old and has been swimming like a fish ever since.

I can say that these lessons are not for everybody. If your child is timid or does not trust other people easily I probably wouldn't suggest it. I probably wouldn't do it for children under 2 years old either.

Never did I rely on the fact that my son knew how to swim. I'm not sure why people assume that if your child goes through these lessons that you are no longer going to supervise them. That is absurd. It is the same reason that you put locks on the toilet seats or buffers on the doors so no little fingers are hurt. It is just another safeguard to protect your child.


----------



## coffeegirl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *APToddlerMama*
> 
> I guess I'm more worried about getting in a car accident on my way to an ISR class than I am of my 7 month old finding himself in a situation in which he could drown but would save himself thanks to his newly learned ISR skills. Statistically that seems more probable. To each their own.


What? I don't understand your point here. First of all, it's really not accurate to imply that proper supervision would have made ALLLL of those accidents not happen. Freak accidents, sadly, do happen sometimes. Secondly? I'm concerned about car accidents AND I'm concerned about the the fact that other kinds of tragic accidents DO happen sometimes (the newspapers are full of them, sadly). So what? Is this a contest? Is it not possible to be concerned about both things?

And why is the car thing relevant to this conversation?


----------



## Kaydove

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coffeegirl*
> 
> What? I don't understand your point here. First of all, it's really not accurate to imply that proper supervision would have made ALLLL of those accidents not happen. Freak accidents, sadly, do happen sometimes. Secondly? I'm concerned about car accidents AND I'm concerned about the the fact that other kinds of tragic accidents DO happen sometimes (the newspapers are full of them, sadly). So what? Is this a contest? Is it not possible to be concerned about both things?
> 
> And why is the car thing relevant to this conversation?


She's saying, if you read her previous post, that there's no rivers, lakes, ocean, stream, pools, other body of water near her, so the likelihood of her child drowing is not something for her to be concerned about. She doesn't live near water and doesn't go to a pool.


----------



## Adaline'sMama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *APToddlerMama*
> 
> We are talking about infants. There is no substitution for proper supervision of a child that young near water so I cannot see the point in putting a child through that.


And also, we aren't talking about infants. The OP has a 2.5 year old and the classes generally teach ages 6 months- 6 years old. And while I don't think it's safe for toddlers or 6 year olds to not be eagle-eyed while in the water, it does happen.


----------



## marsupial-mom

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *APToddlerMama*
> 
> I guess I'm more worried about getting in a car accident on my way to an ISR class than I am of my 7 month old finding himself in a situation in which he could drown but would save himself thanks to his newly learned ISR skills. Statistically that seems more probable. To each their own.


Actually, I started this thread and I asked if anyone had used this program which is designed for ages 6 months to 6 years. I said my son is 2.5 years old.

This is NOT just about infants. That's just in the name of the program.

And also, many instructors will come to your home and do the class in your pool. So your point about car accidents is moot in that situation.

Lastly, regardless of your feelings about ISR, implying that a mother who lost her child due to drowning is a bad mom is cold and heartless. Accidents do happen. No one is perfect. Maybe the mom wasn't even in charge at the time (babysitter, father, grandparent, etc).

I agree that constant supervision is crucial. But that's not the issue at hand in this thread.


----------



## Linda on the move

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marsupial-mom*
> 
> Actually, I started this thread and I asked if anyone had used this program which is designed for ages 6 months to 6 years. I said my son is 2.5 years old.


I'm glad swim lessons are going well for your little one. One of my DD started swim lessons about the same age (different program) and loved them and swims like fish. My other DD didn't start until she was a big older, and ended up with all sorts of issues with the water. With hindsight, I wonder if things would have gone differently for her if we had done something sooner.

Although it sounds great to supervise children every second, every seasoned mom knows this isn't actually possible. We've never had an accident near water, but at a family gathering, I wasn't watching my toddler (I was helping with dishes) and she pulled over a table that had a huge, full coffee urn on it. She ended up with scold burns over 40% of her little body. It was horrific. One of the many things I wept about was that the staff at the burn center would judge me as a horrible mother because I had failed to watch my child every minute. I happened while I was washing some dishes.

Any mother who feels that we be able to keep both eyes on every child we have for every minute is a fool.

I hope that you are your kids stay safe and happy, and the the swim lessons only come to be helpful when he is old enough to be on swim team.


----------



## coffeegirl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kaydove*
> 
> She's saying, if you read her previous post, that there's no rivers, lakes, ocean, stream, pools, other body of water near her, so the likelihood of her child drowing is not something for her to be concerned about. She doesn't live near water and doesn't go to a pool.


Where is this place where there are no rivers, oceans, lakes, beaches, streams, ponds, public and/or private pools etc. anywhere in the vicinity of where you could live?


----------



## Kaydove

You know, I can't find the originial post where she says there's no water near her...no clue where such a place would be, just what I understood what the poster was saying.

I'm doing swim lessons with my DD (4 months) because no matter how close you watch your child, accidents happen. They just happen, unfortunately. My mindset is better safe than sorry. *And no one said that swim lessons are a replacement for watching your child.*

Also, OP's child is 2.5 years which is a big difference than an infant so if you object to infant swim lessons, keep in mind the difference in cognitive and phyiscal abilities between an infant and a 2 year old.


----------



## leighi123

I really really LOVED the ISR classes for my ds. We have a pool and it was 100% worth it.


----------



## leighi123

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AdinaL*
> 
> You might try a search for ISR or Infant Swim here on MDC. There have been a lot of threads about it. That might help you get some more insight into it. As I recall the general consensus was usually that they weren't a good idea.


The only people that I've seen on here that said they were no good, were also people that have never actually put their kids in the classes, and many don't understand exactly how they work.

I looked into becoming an ISR instructor, its $10K, and months of training + ongoing training, its NOT "watch this 20min video at the YMCA, and yay now you can teach swimming lessons" (which I did when I was in high school).

People seem to think its not a good idea b/c baby cries durring it:

1. only some cry

2. you'd let baby cry in the carseat, why b/c its a safety concern, I feel the same way about teaching them to swim.

3. its not a "I'm scared or hurt" cry, its a "holy crap this is a lot of work" cry (i.e. the way you feel in an exercise class when its just not fun, but worth it!)

And there are a lot of misconceptions - baby is not force into anything, thrown in the water, or anything awful. They are VERY carefully monitored for signs of discomfort/distress/swallowing any water or air, body temperature, change in disposition, etc. To have your kid in the class, you literally track every thing they eat/drink, when they last ate/slept/pooped/peed, medications, behavior, weather or not they went to sleep after the previous class, etc. They are very very strict in making sure baby is safe to take the class each day.

Its also 10min or less per day.

My ds fell in the pool an arms length away from me, he was 15months old, fully dressed and 2 weeks into his ISR class. I got to him in maybe 3 seconds, and in that time he had flipped to his back and was smiling. This kid SCREAMED every ISR class for 6 weeks. But after that, he loved the pool, he is an amazing swimmer, and is very confident. He just turned 5 and will be on the swim team when school starts, he swims very well and still remembers his ISR training when he gets tired in the pool or tumbled in the ocean.


----------



## leighi123

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *APToddlerMama*
> 
> I guess I'm more worried about getting in a car accident on my way to an ISR class than I am of my 7 month old finding himself in a situation in which he could drown but would save himself thanks to his newly learned ISR skills. Statistically that seems more probable. To each their own.


In florida, drowning is the #1 cause of death, car accidents are number 2. True in 1 other state as well, but in all states drowning and car accidents are in the top 2. Thats why ds rode in his properly installed, rearfacing carseat to all of his ISR lessons (and he has a carseat tech for a mommy!)


----------



## marsupial-mom

Well, we've been going for almost three weeks now. My son still enjoys his lessons. He giggles and plays a lot!

The ISR instructor uses his playfulness to "bribe" him to do the activities he doesn't enjoy as much. For example, if he floats on his back then she will let him play with a water toy for a minute.

Ive noticed that some other kids cry during lessons, the younger kids. But the type of crying is not that panicked screaming cry, it's more of a whine or whimper. So no doubt the method makes some kids uncomfortable and thus some parents uncomfortable. But from everything I've seen, it's very safe and gentle.


----------



## shocked

Infant Swim Self Rescue - Be careful.

I have twice witnessed an "Infant Swim Self Rescue" teacher submerge a screaming infant several times during these "self rescue" sessions. This was not the cry of "wow this is hard" but the scream of a child in distress. I do know the difference.

I can understand how mothers who have put their children through this program are wanting to defend it. Not defending it implies that you made a poor choice. I also saw two mothers sit beside the pool and watch their infants - under one year old - scream and cry while being ruthlessly submerged by a completely heartless man. I believe they think they are doing the right thing. If you had a good instructor, I am glad for you. What I have seen has not been good at all. It is cruel.

Would you hit your child? Some people believe that hitting a child is OK if it teaches them something important. I do not think it is ever OK to hit a child.

Would you ask a stranger to pick up your child from the curb and then beat them, to teach them not to get into cars with strangers? No, that would be absurd, cruel, immoral, and negligent. Still some mothers will sit beside a pool and watch a stranger put their infant in distress, and then put the infant's head and body under water WHILE the child is crying. This is child abuse pure and simple.

No one has yet explained to me what value there might be in submerging a distressed infant. The only response I have gotten, is that this is the man's technique. The technique makes me ill. Speak up mothers, if you see your infant being abused in this way, it is your right to step into the pool and say enough is enough! Do not let it go too far.

If you want to teach your child to swim, great. I brought my son to swimming lessons from 9 months of age, and I am always very careful with him in water. I am always an arms length away from him, even now at 4 years of age. I see too many mothers blithely thinking their children under 6 can "swim" just because they haven't yet drowned. Children do not have the motor control to deal with any unusual situation that might occur in water. If they haven't drowned, it is pure luck. Even the Infant Swim Self Rescue site says, there is no substitute for good supervision.

Please protect and nurture your kids. Thats all I can say. Don't let the assumed authority of a swim instructor confuse your mothering instincts to protect and nurture your child. Speak up when enough is enough.


----------



## marsupial-mom

Still no crying or screaming. He's having a good time learning swimming survival skills.


----------



## Amyla

@Shocked, Seeing One bad instructor does not make the entire program bad. You say the only reason people are defending the program is to prove that they did not make a bad decision. I assure you that I am not defending this program ultimately to defend my decision. I believe that my son's instructor did a wonderful job teaching him to swim. No other program worked for him. Albeit, he was 2.5 years old at the time so I cannot comment on how it would have been had he been an infant. (The OP's child was also 2.5 yrs old.) Not once did he act like he was in distress. In fact, he loved the swim lessons so much that he cried WHEN THE LESSONS WERE OVER. They are so short, only 10 minutes. He just wanted to keep on going. On top of that, he has been swimming like a fish ever since. It did not traumatize him in any way, shape or form. Of my friends that have used the program with kids that cried in the beginning, they were happy & smiling by mid-way through the program. The youngest child was 18 months. By the end they were fine and I assure you none of them have been traumatized.


----------



## shocked

Amyla, I am glad that you are so present for your child and clearly taking the issue seriously. You don't have to defend this program or your instructor. If your instructor and your experience is good, I am glad.

The Infant Swim Self Rescue organization, however, uses every tactic in the book to manipulate people into believing that what they do is right, and they have their staunchest defenders among mothers who have put their children through the program. Even a superficial search into their online presence proves this. All of their sites say the very same thing, baseless claims about saving kids from drowning. They use what is called a "Google bomb" to control the information that people can access about the program. They use proven psychological techniques to manipulate and control what people believe about the program.

I do not suggest that every class with every instructor is bad. Nor do I think that you have done anything wrong in placing your 2.5 year old in lessons with a good teacher. But what I have seen this bad instructor do to infants in the pool, on two separate occasions, is clearly child abuse. And he has control of the mothers of these children. He has them believing that they are doing something good for their babies, to the point where they even video tape the screaming child in swimming lessons. He grins when he puts a crying child under water. He feels a sense of power in the shock and the manipulation that is involved in this darkest aspect of this particular type of swim training.

The ends do not justify the means. If someone thinks that submerging a screaming child is justified by the hope that this process will teach the child how to save himself or herself in the water, they are seriously mistaken. Especially in the case of infants who cannot walk or talk. It is ludicrous to think we would expect them to save themselves in the water. I say this more for the mothers who need to wake up, than for you, Amyla.

Our society doesn't allow water boarding of suspected terrorists, and yet some people think it is OK to submerge a crying child. I don't believe you would ever want to see this in a pool. I'm still shaking when I think about it.

I repeat: There is no scientific proof that this technique saves any children's lives.


----------



## marsupial-mom

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *shocked*
> 
> There is no scientific proof that this technique saves any children's lives.


Acually, there is proof that swim lessons reduce the risk of drowning.

The CDC specifically says:

*"Formal swimming lessons can reduce the risk of drowning by as much as 88% among young children aged 1 to 4 years, who are at greatest risk of drowning."*

link: http://www.cdc.gov/features/drowningprevention/


----------



## shocked

Marsupial mom, of course swimming lessons reduce the risk of drowning.

There is no evidence that submerging crying infants reduces the risk of drowning. There is no evidence that the Infant Swim Self Rescue approach is any better at reducing the risk of drowning than regular swimming lessons.

When an instructor tells you not to get upset when you see your child crying in the water, he is preparing you to accept that he will do something terrible to your child so that you won't stop him from doing it. He knows that he has the power in that situation and that you won't say anything about it. What is in it for him? A parlour trick, a chance to impress you and win your praise with the illusion that he has done something profound for your child, when in fact, all he has done is manipulate you into giving your most precious baby over to him to abuse. The more shocking the behaviour, the greater the praise, the more power he feels. He is gratified by the fact that he can convince mothers that the shocking reality of putting their crying baby under water will in the end win him praise. And the basis for that praise is a false illusion of saving the infant from some future possibility of drowning... The founder of the Infant Swim Self Rescue organization has a PhD in Fundamental Psychology. This is a branch of psychology that studies how to manipulate people into believing things that seem unbelievable and doing things they would never ordinarily do. He is not a paediatrician, he is a trickster, and he has abused the purpose of that field of study by using it to manipulate people instead of using that knowledge to educate people in how not to be manipulated.

All I am suggesting is that you examine the situations in which you find yourself with your baby and think critically about what is going on. If you are in any way uncomfortable with the idea of putting your child in distress and then placing them under water, politely and respectfully decline the swimming lesson. Forewarned is forearmed.

I've said everything I need to say on this issue. Keep your wits about you, mothers.


----------



## marsupial-mom

I don't know how many times I'll have to remind people in this thread that my son who is taking these lessons is nearly 3. He is NOT a baby.

It's great that some people come to this thread with information and advice, but it would be nice if they actually read some of our conversation before chiming in. For the nth time, it's called "Infant Swim Self Rescue" but it's for ages 6 months to 6 years. I'm guessing that the majority of students in these classes are toddlers, not babies. Maybe a moderator could edit the thread title to say ISSR instead of "Infant Swim Self Rescue" so that people can see that we're talking mostly about toddlers, not infants.


----------

