Reading improves:

• Vocabulary
• Comprehension
• The ability to articulate yourself
• Writing
• Your chances of surviving a plunge into the rapids above a 265 ft waterfall

Apparently though, it doesn't improve the ability to determine that you shouldn't go wading "a little bit" in rapids that are above a waterfall.

Reading is a wonderful thing

Haha. My thoughts exactly, Some Guy.

Underwater rocks are slimey and rushing water carries a lot of force, apparently father didn't issue any note of caution. I think children 50 yrs ago were smarter if not just more cautious of danger.

I was learning to ride a horse and had what could have been a bad fall - as I was falling, in that split second I remembered all the horse books I'd read, held on to the reins, tucked and rolled - and the first thing the instructor said was how I'd fallen like a professional! What you read does stick with you.... We don't even know about all the kids who DIDN'T get into trouble because they read some good survival instructions in the first place!

Kids 50 years ago were neither smarter nor more cautious. 50 years ago we did not have access to global information so we didn't know how many kids went over falls; ate all manner of poisonous stuff thinking it was a 'safe' berry, mushroom, parsnip, whatever; got shot messing about with guns; dove into too shallow water; got caught on a train trestle when a train came through; etc etc.

Kids are kids. It's too easy to do the shoulda',coulda', woulda'.

jkatze is right. After the 3 people in Yosemite went over the falls last year one of the local papers published the number of people known to go over these falls. The first was in 1924, the second in 1929 and people went over in the 40s, 60s and 70s. The difference is while it was published in the newspaper you didn't hear much about it after that unless you lived near Yosemite.

I'm going to amend my above post. 1924 was the first time since the park began keeping official records of deaths in the park in 1920.

I know it's scary when you hear scary news about your kids, but "You'll never take my kids to a river again!" is so cliche.

"Hey Dad, I'm going to go wade around in the river right above the giant waterfall over there."

"Ok Son, Have Fun!"

Yes - a little harsh for wifey to throw hubby under the bus to the national media - even if she had every right in the world to scold him in private. I guess she would prefer the kids stay home in the safety of the living room. Nice Monday morning quarterbacking.

My daughter and I love to hike, and I sometimes find myself worrying about her falling and getting hurt or worse, especially when she goes with friends (she is 21), but I just have to remind myself that we take risks in this life every day. Hiking is such a great way to get out and discover so much of what this world has to offer.

Thankfully this boy was smart about his situation and didn't panick! I'm so glad to read that he was OK, thanks to his own quick thinking and to the brave rescue team! We all make mistakes and he lived to learn what not to do next time!

Thankfully he survived but he is a lucky idiot, I don't care what he read. I have been there, it is treacherous to leave the trail to get to the water and several teens have already perished in the past.

It is not dangerous to either hike, or go wading. It's dangerous to not find out what is below you either hiking or wading, it's dangerous to wade out of the shallow eddies and into the swift water. When I was a kid I waded and swam in rivers many times, my parents kept an eye, but allowed enough experience with the moving current to let me feel the power of the water, the slipperiness of the rocks, and learn what the limits are. That's what needs learning in our world. Not "Stay away from the river" . That's the wrong answer.

The mothers reaction "we will never take him near water again"...what a looney, sure it was dangerous, what isn't...crossing the street is dangerous...he learned a valuable lesson...be aware and take care...my boys all went through traumatic/dangerous experiences thankfully they al made it. but they learned from their adventures...relax mom...let him be a boy..

In my experience, the mother's response was exactly what my ex(es) would have said. IMO, clearly a form of alienation. It is so common, yet tolerated...Anyway, I wonder if they are going to bankrupt this father for saving his son? Currently in America, everything is about money and I am sure that this rescue cost a lot. That is why we pay taxes. The elite tax rate keeps everything that benefits average people, untenable. I am waiting to read about the high "bill" that this father will be expected to pay for having his son rescued, Not much different from ransom, IMO.

I am making an observation, not seeking an argument.

They may have to rescue the dad from his wife when the two reunite.

Love it! As a wife and mother I was thinking the same thing. Not that I fault the Dad. He sounds like he was great for his son during this experience.

Bravo to the rescuers! The boy is right; you all are heroes, and he is alive because of you.

Now here's your 10 thousand dollar bill for the "service" kid...

Bravo to the father for taking his kids hiking!!!

brave?? how about stupid?

brave and stupid are not mutually exclusive

I think not stupid. Kids don't have the experience of adults. Adults who call kids stupid may know from experience that they are stupid themselves. Kids explore, kids are curious, kids have fun, kids learn. Aah you know what I mean.

Glad the boy survived his ordeal. Hopefully, he and all the kids who read or hear his story will gain from his experience. Kudos to the rescue team. Thank goodness we have them.

davesdollars,

Nice comment smart guy. When was the last time you ever got off the couch.

Jersey- I agree with you to a point, but 13 year olds aren't 5 year olds and should have gained a little common sense. Of course we all did stupid things when we were kids. Most of us, though, didn't do things that required rescue teams.

Allielcea--Common sense isn't all that common these days. I've known several adults that have no common sense at all. It would be interesting to know if adults without common sense then have children with no common sense or if it could be taught else where.

Ortrillian, Common sense has NEVER been common; it is always learned through trial and error. Some adults never have the right experiences to learn it.

Allielcea, 13 year olds still believe they're immortal, still believe they can do anything, still have a lot to learn, and adults who call them stupid for doing things that can get them hurt ARE stupid.

The important thing is that the teen survived. Everything else is superfluous. (Though, I am glad that he learned something from reading. Sadly, most people don't read enough to learn anything.)

Everyone is all smiles - except the mother, apparently!

It wasn't exactly an accident. The boy's father was definitely irresponsible in letting his son go into the water in such a dangerous location. I am rather shocked to see so many negative comments about the mother's reaction. I think it was a perfectly natural one. In the immediate aftermath of such a ghastly "near miss" I'm sure I'd have said exactly the same thing.

Or bullying on the internet. Glad all came out well, and at least (possible)dad was interacting with his son out in the river/woods rather than online looking at the latest Facebook news. I go canoeing and yes, you do turn over, fall out, get wet. Was going down a river when it started to rain...learned how fast a river can rise. And no, rain was not predicted that day, it just came up. Knee deep in fast water is dangerous. Kid had a real life lesson. Remember their are college kids who think it's a good idea to take a boat out to a storm drain ditch during a tornado. This kid won't be doing that.

Squid, why are ignorant people proud of their ignorance?

"Never read a book and never have" - you just repeated yourself. You have never read a book, and you never have.

Look at her statement. "Their dad said" and "I told him he will never take my sons to a river again"...they aren't married. She's bitter and he's probably moved on to a better person. Of course, he could be horrible and she moved on, but judging from statements and the fact this dad took his kids camping, I'd bet on the former.

They could be married. Just not for long.

Well, my wife refers to me as "your Dad" when speaking to the kids, and sometimes as "their Dad" when speaking to others. She was clearly pissed and not in the mood to say "my loving husband said..." Who knows. Either way...I've kinda been there, if you know what I mean. I'm sympathetic (to the Dad...)

Eh, it tends to be a gut reaction as a mom - the whole "NOTHING will endanger my child again!" response. Most of us (I'd like to think) become rational again once the panic passes. I know my husband is one of the most safety conscious people I know, especially with our kids, and I could see myself saying that. And apologizing later for it!

I love that the mom's comment isn't "I was so relieved to hear he was safe and relatively unharmed" but instead "I told him he's never taking my sons to the river again." (Alright, Bitter Betty) However..... the dad WAITED UNTIL THE NEXT DAY to even let the mom know that her son was ever in danger??!! As a mom I would be furious that at no point in time did the father of my child think to let me know that kid is in danger.... maybe give me a heads up before I were to see it on the news, etc. And where was the dad when his 13 year old son decided to go wading? While it seems like the mom is more mad at the dad than happy her son escaped almost certain death, I can see why she might be a bit peeved.

Mitch and J. Mark- As a child of divorced parents, I was surprised when I re-read this and it DIDN'T explicitly mention that they were separated (or divorced). The language was very suggestive to me that they are not together. So much so that I thought it said it outright until reading it again. Just my two cents.

Peanut - I think it was mentioned that it was a late-night rescue, so it was likely"the next day" when they even had a chance to call.

I don't understand why it matters whether the parents are married or not. And just because the article quotes the mom as saying, "I told him he will never take my sons to a river again," doesn't mean that those are the very first words she uttered. And the dad waiting until the next day to inform the mom - did you ever consider they might have been out of cell phone reach? Why do people have to make all sorts of assumptions from reading a brief story?

cjc- you're right, it doesn't matter. I just find it interesting that some people automatically assumed they were married while others assumed they were divorced, based solely on the language. I didn't read the words then think "Gosh, I bet these people are divorced because she said this and he did that," I just automatically got that from the language. It's just an interesting little fragment. I'd like to know if those who assumed they are married come from unbroken homes/are not divorced and if those who assumed they were not together come from divorced parents or are divorced themselves. Just as a little social inquiry.

And where was the dad when his 13 year old son decided to go wading?

Parents can't keep kids within eyesight their entire lives, you know...13 is plenty old enough to be out in the woods with friends.

at CJC- I would assume that if they were able to contact rescuers, the father would have been able to contact the mother to let her know this was happening, and at one more voice, the rescue itself took 8 1/2 hours according to the article, so I would still gather that the father could have called or asked someone else to call for him. In the grand scheme it doesn't matter, the quick-thinking teenager is okay, but it was included in the story and it did strike me as odd.

Parents can't keep kids within eyesight their entire lives, you know...13 is plenty old enough to be out in the woods with friends.

Yes, but if you are the parent in charge of the safety of not only your child but others' children as well -- doing what can sometimes be considered a dangerous activity in an unknown environment -- common sense would dictate that you would keep an eye on the kids. Just my two cents...

the rescue itself took 8 1/2 hours according to the article, so I would still gather that the father could have called or asked someone else to call for him

True. Clearly he had a way to call for help, and there were likely some rescuers waiting for the boy to be pulled out. Chances are though, whenever the man did think of the boy's mother, he was probably not wanting to wake her up to tell her that their son's life was currently in danger and quite possibly get an earful of shrieking.

Ah-maze-ing. You just turned a story about a brave young man who used his power of logical thinking to survive while waiting for those brave rescue workers to bring him to safety into a scathing rant against the mother. Dang. Mitch, if you were a woman your name would begin with a B.

Sorry.

There's nothing worse than losing faith in your spouse.

I say his penitence should be joining the Scouts or a local trekking group and figuring out how to be a good outdoorsman.

for what it's worth, the full story in the Seattle Times goes on to say (I'm reading this from page A12 as I type):

"William Hickman has other plans. He hopes to return to the Snohomish County trail just to see where he went into the water.

This time, he says, he has no plans to wade."

It's been said that a Mother's job is to try to keep her children from climbing trees. It's a Father's job to catch them if they fall. From where I sit all's well in the Hickman family.

AC

Don't be too hard on the mother. If you have ever had a life or death situation with any of your children, I think you may understand more what the mother may be feeling. She almost lost her child. There are not many feelings worse than that. It's fear and anguish and anger and many other feelings all rolled up into one. She probably hadn't had time to compartmentalize what had happened before being jumped on by reporters. Give her a break. The article doesn't say that she is divorced, or that the husband has moved on to something better. That's just you guys being jerks.

Once again, just my two cents, but my parents are divorced. I had to re-read the part mentioning the mother in order to see that it didn't explicitly say that they aren't together. The language used by both the mother and the author (referring to her as the boy's mother and not "the wife") is strongly suggestive that they're not together. Of course, that's nowhere near the point of the article, but my mom would TOTALLY say those exact words to my dad (except "daughters" instead of "sons").

Don't see why the parents, either of them, have to be bashed. There are many parents that do not share in activities with their children. They're too busy on these boards bashing others.

Things happen, all the time. I'm glad the boy survived and the parents will surely survive this too. I'm glad we have people that want to train to become rescuers.

I can honestly say if this was my husband and son, I wuold not referring the him as "my husband". Having been in a situation that involved my husband, my son and an accident that alomst killed my son at the hands of "his father" I know exactly what this mother was thinking. "AS A FATHER YOU ALMOST KILLED MY SON". No need to mention marriage at all, it's the last thing on this mother's mind.

Guess you know what the idiot gene pool is all about.

You don't have to be an idiot to find yourself in a dangerous situation. Just recently, right here in Washington, we lost a City Councilman when he drowned while white-water rafting. Took all the precautions, had the experience, something just went wrong. I myself spent a lot of my youth wading in the shallows of fast moving streams and rivers with not one mishap to show for it. Probably not the best idea to wade during the Spring run off, but hey, folks! Idiots aren't the only people in the world who get hurt and/or killed. Maybe if they were we'd soon run out of idiots...

i agree - it bothers me that they have not apologized for even putting these rescuers in danger esp the one who was injured...if only they had read the signs and used common sense...watch...hope they are not the type of ppl who will sue the park b/c the kid fell in

Would you be ashamed and apologize for endangering the fire department if you carelessly failed to use common sense and your house burned up? I doubt it. You'd be proclaiming to anyone who would listen that you did EVERYTHING right and it just suddenly went up in flames.

The rescuers put themselves in danger. Nobody else did. Should anyone be sorry about interrupting their dinner with some little screw up? NO! We should be grateful that there are still people who care enough about strangers that instead of sitting back and judging them for their imperfections they reach out and help when somebody gets in over their head. It's one of those blessings that's WORTH counting.

And all that puffery about common sense? Common sense is only common after the dust settles and the view from the armchair gets nice and clear.

AC