2 sides to every story

[Ample Prosecco]

https://www.staffordshire-live.co.uk/news/burton-news/girl-aged-8-heartbroken-after-7130638


I have no personal knowledge of the family or the stables but I hate this kind of media pile on. If the child really is ‘heart broken’ the family whipping themselves and everyone else into a frenzy over it is hardly going to help her feel better. Poor kid sounds like didn’t want to ride anymore anyway and might have really enjoyed grooming and bonding. I do Equine Assisted Therapy which is all from the ground and is brilliant for children who struggle emotionally.

I once got told I’d ruined a child’s life because our instructors all agreed it would be unsafe to let her onto the XC on one of our camps. We offered an arena based private lesson instead but she had ‘set her heart on XC’ and I had ‘broken her heart, destroyed her confidence and ruined her life’. Luckily they didn’t plaster me all over FB and the press though.

 

[Roxylola]

I've known a few folk especially children, over the years happy to come and pay for a "lesson" but each and every time develop back pain/stomach ache etc within minutes. Basically a confidence issue but not prepared to even try a bit. Eventually it becomes embarrassing to keep taking the money, even more so when a parent drops off and doesn't stay. Usually I've tried to speak to them but when they insist they do want to come and are adamant they enjoy it what do you do from there

 

[Ample Prosecco]

It’s really hard. Pushy parents are far more of a problem than the kids generally. We did finally peel this mother off the ceiling and helped her see we had her daughter’s interests at heart and she could still get loads of pleasure, confidence and a sense of achievement from camp. So she stayed and the kid herself was relieved i think not to be going out XC.

 

[millikins]

They sound like the customers from Hell. Their ponies, their welfare standards their right to have whoever they choose riding them.

 

[canteron]

Sounds like the mother from hell!!

 

[Wishfilly]

I've dealt (to some extent) with parents like this both working in a riding school and as a teacher. I think a lot of parents seem to forget that their child is not the only one being catered to- even if it's a private lesson, it's still distressing/distracting for other clients to see a really distressed child, and it doesn't look good to new clients. I think the suggestion of the stables that the child could come and groom the horses after being too frightened to get on is a good one, and I don't understand why it's been dismissed by the mother.

Running a riding school is incredibly difficult these days, without people making it even harder like this!

 

[cauda equina]

I guess the mother isn't at all horsey; a person who understood riding and confidence issues wouldn't dismiss the offer of grooming as being fobbed off

 

[stangs]

I really don't get what the parents are throwing a fuss about. They've been offered time on the ground - which is much nicer for a child who's scared of riding but still likes horses - and they've been offered private lessons. Some children are very difficult to manage in group lessons, for various reasons; it's unfair on everyone involved (the horses, the other children, the leader, the instructor, least of all the child) to keep them in such lessons.

 

[View]

Oh I am so glad I was not plastered all over the internet for one of my lessons. Honestly, Mum wanted the girl to ride, girl was terrified. She was passed through three instructors in the riding school before landing with me. Fortunately, the school owner was a very wise old lady and was happy to back me up. I had her for a one hour private lesson (way too long, but helpful because it took me 20 minutes to get her on), Mum was taken to the house for coffee so that I could work without parental interference. We then managed 30 minutes of games/activities while pony was at halt, and finally went for a 10 minute walk round a paddock.

Mum was livid and accused us of wasting her money.

A very kind pony and getting this girl out of the school sparked her interest. Mum killed it for good by insisting it was formal lessons or nothing. :-(

 

[Wishfilly]

I really don't get what the parents are throwing a fuss about. They've been offered time on the ground - which is much nicer for a child who's scared of riding but still like horses - and they've been offered private lessons. Some children are very difficult to manage in group lessons, for various reasons; it's unfair on everyone involved (the horses, the other children, the leader, the instructor, least of all the child) to keep them in such lessons.

I missed the bit where they said she was in group lessons. Group lessons aren't suitable for all children at all stages, and if one child is really distressed, and/or not getting on, it makes the experience negative for the other riders, and they are likely to get less attention from the instructor and get less value for money. The safety of the other riders also has to be considered, as a distressed child could spook the other riders.

I actually wouldn't be surprised if some of the other parents had complained to the riding school, or asked for their children not to be in the same group as this child. Which means the riding school becomes very much stuck between a rock and a hard place.

 

[Fjord]

I think they sound like a really nice riding school. A lesson where a kid is screaming is hardly relaxing for anyone, what do the parents expect them to do?

 

[Velcrobum]

Sounds like this riding school knows what it is doing especially with children with emotional difficulties. IMHO the mother sounds like a parent from hell.

 

[Sossigpoker]

:So after 11 months of you taking our money to teach our daughter how to ride, after 11 months of you never raising an issue with her 'emotions', after 11 months of your understanding the difficulties she faces and what she is being diagnosed with, you all of a sudden decided she isn’t a good fit for your school any more. It is embarrassing for you to have a child there with additional needs"

1. This is a riding school. Not a camp for special needs kids. They are there to teach kids to ride, not to manage their emotions. Harsh maybe , but true.
2. They've clearly tried for 11 months and have now reached a point where it's not fair on the ponies or the other kids. I suspect the other parents have complained.
3. This woman sounds like a customer from hell. And the so-called additional needs might well be a case of being a brat.

 

[Wishfilly]

The riding school do have a legal duty to make reasonable adjustments for people with disabilities. Offering grooming or private lessons would probably be reasonable, and it doesn't override horse welfare, but riding schools (like all businesses) do have a duty to try to accommodate needs where possible.

 

[throwawayaccount]

No wonder riding schools struggle to keep going. :/

 

[poiuytrewq]

Fair play to the RS.

 

[maya2008]

I think that a standard riding school is probably not the place for an anxious child with additional needs. RDA might be better suited to help her. I have a child with anxiety (as a condition, not related to horses specifically), but as a horsey parent I have been able to cater to her needs. She was beyond desperate to ride at 3 years old so I popped her on the Shetland, made sure nothing ever went wrong, and slowly coaxed her into more and more until she was flying around the countryside on the lead rein attached to my mare, asking to go faster. It took years though, and coming off the lead took a very special pony. That pony was so perfect I could take her out hacking knowing that come what may, the pony would follow me home, child attached.

So why persevere? We did because she loves horses, and more importantly because riding helps her regulate her emotions. She now values her pony beyond all else because even on her very worst days, she knows she can climb on board, go for a hack and come home feeling ok again. For a child where anxiety can otherwise rule her world - eating, interacting with others, doing her schoolwork, even getting dressed in the morning, riding provides her with a way to dial the anxiety down, and for that she is beyond grateful.

And yes I have taken her out crying buckets and barely holding the reins because she’s not coping and that’s all she’s done all day - only to find my happy, smiling child again half way through the ride. I owe those ponies the world, they give me back a child who can function, who smiles and laughs and copes. A child who made an error of judgment today, cried for a few minutes, owned her mistake and never once blamed the pony. A child who every pony in my field knows is different and seeks to protect, always ensuring one of them is with her when we’re working in the field. A child who was the only human our feral youngster tolerated at first, when no one else could get near her.

Horses are her escape, but there is no way we could be on a yard or she could have taken lessons in a riding school. 1:1 privately is ok, but she learns more from listening to her brother’s lessons when the pressure is not on her!

 

[scats]

Urgh, the mother sounds like a horror.
No-one has the right to ride a horse. The animal belongs to the riding school and if they feel it’s welfare is being compromised by the child riding it then they are well within their rights to refuse her to ride until she can control her anxieties/emotions. I think they have been more than fair offering her to come and groom the ponies and spend time with them. It doesn’t sound like she particularly enjoys riding so I’m not sure why they are so bent out of shape about it.
I wonder how much this child’s additional needs are over-indulged brat syndrome…

 

[Peglo]

So the riding school didn’t feel they could appropriately deal with the child kicking off, the horse was suffering and chose not to take anymore money off the parents when they couldn’t fulfil a proper lesson to their child. Abysmal behaviour from that riding school taking into account the needs of horse and riders!

the mother saying everything was fine for 11 months is annoying too. Or everyone suffered for 11 months and nothing was approving and they decided they could no longer do it.

I respect the riding schools decision. But I’m also not a fan of kids so that maybe skews my views.

 

[teapot]

The riding school do have a legal duty to make reasonable adjustments for people with disabilities. Offering grooming or private lessons would probably be reasonable, and it doesn't override horse welfare, but riding schools (like all businesses) do have a duty to try to accommodate needs where possible.

IF those needs are able to be accomodated.

Good on the riding school here - they've offered grooming sessions which are a pain staffing and practicality wise, and they've offered privates, what else can they do? They may well have a duty towards those who have needs accomodating, but they also have a duty to keep the other five kids in the group safe, and allow the coach to teach a fair decent lesson.

I had to say that to a parent once (child who used to scream the place down, demand coach's full attention, suddenly demand to get off or just jump off etc) and I'd say it again in a heartbeat (if I was in the industry).

 

[EventingMum]

As an RS owner, I applaud the way this school has handled the situation, our ponies are amazing, resilient animals and it's up to us to advocate for them and ensure their well being.

Sadly, I have seen similar cases, albeit not plastered all over the internet. I think many parents of children with additional needs are so used to fighting for their children to have opportunities they automatically seem to be in attack mode and fail to take time to take a balanced view of the situation. I have experienced it with RDA when children have screamed so much they upset the horses or other children, physically hurt the volunteers assisting them (I have been kicked, punched, poked in the eye and had my hair pulled by riders) and yet the parents can't see beyond the fact they want their child to ride. The other scenario that often gets an adverse reaction is when the child grows and becomes too heavy for the horses or too unbalanced to ride safely. One parent couldn't understand why the side walkers couldn't physically support the large teenager on a 16.2hh when he couldn't balance when it had been possible when he was 5 on a 12hh pony.

 

[Wishfilly]

IF those needs are able to be accomodated.

Good on the riding school here - they've offered grooming sessions which are a pain staffing and practicality wise, and they've offered privates, what else can they do? They may well have a duty towards those who have needs accomodating, but they also have a duty to keep the other five kids in the group safe, and allow the coach to teach a fair decent lesson.

I had to say that to a parent once (child who used to scream the place down, demand coach's full attention, suddenly demand to get off or just jump off etc) and I'd say it again in a heartbeat (if I was in the industry).

I think you've misinterpreted my post a bit- it was in response to a few people saying/implying that riding schools should/could refuse to teach clients simply because they have additional needs, which obviously they can't.

"Reasonable" adjustments doesn't mean allowing a child to compromise the safety of others, or the welfare of horses, and how far they can be accommodated depends on a lot of factors.

To be clear, I'm fully on the side of the riding school here, but it's not as simple as saying that every child with additional needs should go to an RDA stables- and equally if her behaviour is, or has become, very extreme around horses, then even they may not be able to accommodate her, particularly in a group setting.

 

[Wishfilly]

As an RS owner, I applaud the way this school has handled the situation, our ponies are amazing, resilient animals and it's up to us to advocate for them and ensure their well being.

Sadly, I have seen similar cases, albeit not plastered all over the internet. I think many parents of children with additional needs are so used to fighting for their children to have opportunities they automatically seem to be in attack mode and fail to take time to take a balanced view of the situation. I have experienced it with RDA when children have screamed so much they upset the horses or other children, physically hurt the volunteers assisting them (I have been kicked, punched, poked in the eye and had my hair pulled by riders) and yet the parents can't see beyond the fact they want their child to ride. The other scenario that often gets an adverse reaction is when the child grows and becomes too heavy for the horses or too unbalanced to ride safely. One parent couldn't understand why the side walkers couldn't physically support the large teenager on a 16.2hh when he couldn't balance when it had been possible when he was 5 on a 12hh pony.

Yes, I agree with this. You see it in schools as well, where the expectation from some parents is that teachers will cater the lesson entirely to their child. The problem is, there may be 4 or 5 children in the class with additional needs (never mind the other students) who may all need to be catered to in different ways- and so, sometimes, things can't be exactly as their child needs them.

I think the issue of children growing too tall/heavy for the available horses is an incredibly tricky one for riding schools also, and is even worse when there are additional needs etc involved. I know a riding instructor who was hurt quite seriously helping a larger adult with disabilities dismount- and obviously there's equally a duty of care to staff.

 

[Caol Ila]

Slow news day in Staffordshire....

 

[teapot]

I think you've misinterpreted my post a bit- it was in response to a few people saying/implying that riding schools should/could refuse to teach clients simply because they have additional needs, which obviously they can't.

Actually they can if they feel unable to provide the best or safest thing for the rider. Ie some riding schools won't take riders with certain disabilities or required adjustments because of horse power, teaching experience of coaches, facilities, or indeed what their insurance allows them to do or not do.

 

[Wishfilly]

Actually they can if they feel unable to provide the best or safest thing for the rider. Ie some riding schools won't take disabled riders because of horse power, teaching experiences of coaches etc, or indeed what their insurance allows them to do or not do.

Are you talking about individual prospective clients, or as a blanket policy?

Regardless of whether some riding schools do this or not, to have a blanket policy barring everyone with a disability regardless of what that disability is, or how it affects them, would be very, very open to legal challenge.

I fully understand that some riding schools can't accommodate some disabilities, or may have restrictions on certain activities, but to have a blanket policy of this kind is almost certainly not complying with the equality act, and they'd be open to a discrimination claim.

Disability in law includes (or can include) things like being HIV+ with no symptoms, having severe facial scarring, depression which affects your normal daily activities, type 1 diabetes etc. But all of those people could be catered to in a riding lesson with no adjustments being made.

 

[ester]

I think the RS did a superb job in their response including making suggestions for reasonable adjustments. Mum a bit warrior mum and as a result not really seeing the situation.

 

[teapot]

Are you talking about individual prospective clients, or as a blanket policy?

Regardless of whether some riding schools do this or not, to have a blanket policy barring everyone with a disability regardless of what that disability is, or how it affects them, would be very, very open to legal challenge.

I fully understand that some riding schools can't accommodate some disabilities, or may have restrictions on certain activities, but to have a blanket policy of this kind is almost certainly not complying with the equality act, and they'd be open to a discrimination claim.

Disability in law includes (or can include) things like being HIV+ with no symptoms, having severe facial scarring, depression which affects your normal daily activities, type 1 diabetes etc. But all of those people could be catered to in a riding lesson with no adjustments being made.

Individual clients - no one in the right mind would have a blanket policy. Though I am aware of places that do say cannot cater for disabled riders... I'm not sure how you'd prove a rs was discriminating against everyone who had a disability/needed a reasonable adjustment unless someone started a mystery shopping type experience of trying to get twenty riders different adjustments riding at the same yard.

I'm well aware of what's included in the Equality Act and if a centre was decent, you WOULD actually be looking at what reasonable adjustments for those with depression may need in case they were needed eg coaching plans, mental health training. For Type 1 Diabetes you'd be making sure they were riding with a more experienced coach who knew how to handle it, had maybe more specific first aid training. I know we certainly did.

As I say though, that's the difference between a decent centre and an average one... and sometimes places simply can't do it, rightly or wrongly. I say this as someone who was involved with RDA for eight years. Some of the things I saw in the name of equality were downright dangerous

 

[Sossigpoker]

Are you talking about individual prospective clients, or as a blanket policy?

Regardless of whether some riding schools do this or not, to have a blanket policy barring everyone with a disability regardless of what that disability is, or how it affects them, would be very, very open to legal challenge.

I fully understand that some riding schools can't accommodate some disabilities, or may have restrictions on certain activities, but to have a blanket policy of this kind is almost certainly not complying with the equality act, and they'd be open to a discrimination claim.

Disability in law includes (or can include) things like being HIV+ with no symptoms, having severe facial scarring, depression which affects your normal daily activities, type 1 diabetes etc. But all of those people could be catered to in a riding lesson with no adjustments being made.

It's called reasonable adjustments. The word reasonable being key here. They offered individual lessons and some grooming time but the mother refused these. So RS has actually gone over and above.

 

[Wishfilly]

Individual clients - no one in the right mind would have a blanket policy. Though I am aware of places that do say cannot cater for disabled riders...

I'm well aware of what's included in the Equality Act and if a centre was decent, you WOULD actually be looking at what reasonable adjustments for those with depression may need in case they were needed eg coaching plans, mental health training. For Type 1 Diabetes you'd be making sure they were riding with a more experienced coach who knew how to handle it, had maybe more specific first aid training. I know we certainly did.

As I say though, that's the difference between a decent centre and an average one... and sometimes places simply can't do it, rightly or wrongly.

It's not acceptable in law for a centre to say they "simply can't do it". In some individual cases, yes, but not openly saying they can't cater for any disabilities, or saying that to prospective clients.

I do get what you're saying, although I'd hope anyone teaching a lesson unsupervised would have enough first aid training to look after a Type 1 Diabetic in an emergency (because equally, what if a rider fainted on a hot day? what if they had another type of medical emergency?).

And I do get how difficult it is to run a small riding centre, and that they are not able to cater to everyone, but equally, I've seen people make small riding centres really inclusive environments, and I think it can be done- and saying "it's too difficult, let's not bother" is definitely the wrong attitude to have.

For the avoidance of doubt, I'm not suggesting that's the attitude of this riding school at all- it seems like they have tried really hard to make things work, but it's not good enough for the mother.

It's called reasonable adjustments. The word reasonable being key here. They offered individual lessons and some grooming time but the mother refused these. So RS has actually gone over and above.

Yes, what they've offered in this case would seem to be reasonable, and I'm not suggesting they've done anything wrong. But it's not legal for any riding school to have blanket policies, which is what I was talking about in that post.