CatherineM Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 In the last couple of months, there have been several men killed in avalanches from Alberta and BC who have left wives and many young children. They were all in Out of Bounds areas during time of extreme avalanche alerts. When showing people talking at the memorial, they all talked about what good husbands and fathers they were. I couldn't help thinking that if I was the only wage earner for a family of five, I wouldn't take a risk with my life for a recreation or hobby. I'm sure these guys never thought that anything would happen to them, but it did get me to thinking about what kinds of things we should avoid doing when responsible for a family. I wonder how many guys who have died on Everest or scuba diving in underwater caves, or BASE jumping have left behind widows and orphans. There are a lot of jobs that men and women do everyday that are dangerous, and police officers, fire fighters, soldiers, etc., do them willingly for the benefit of the rest of us. My dad gave up his dangerous job when he became responsible for a family. I suspect that my mother had a lot to do with that though. I was just wondering if any of you who are parents gave up anything dangerous when you got married or had kids? Or if any of your moms or dads did so. Is it unreasonable for a wife to ask her husband to refrain from dangerous hobbies? The most dangerous thing my husband does is water aerobics with me and several dozen elderly ladies, so this is just an intellectual curiosity on my part. I'll just be glad when spring finally comes. Our prayer list is getting so long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 It's not quite accurate to say that they were all out of bounds. Many were in the backcountry, not anywhere near ski resorts where there are marked dangerous areas. Obviously what they did had inherent risks, and with avalanches, even the best preparation isn't often enough... Just thought I'd point that out. [/argumentative] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatherineM Posted March 30, 2009 Author Share Posted March 30, 2009 [quote name='Nihil Obstat' post='1820279' date='Mar 30 2009, 12:20 AM']It's not quite accurate to say that they were all out of bounds. Many were in the backcountry, not anywhere near ski resorts where there are marked dangerous areas. Obviously what they did had inherent risks, and with avalanches, even the best preparation isn't often enough... Just thought I'd point that out. [/argumentative][/quote] Yeah, the ones this week were inbounds but under an extreme avalanche alert, but I started thinking about this after those 4 that died a month or two ago. They said they were trying to find virgin snow. A lot of people have said that at least they died doing something they loved. I think I'm just cranky today, and feeling old, and wondering why such nice guys have to die so young. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 [quote name='CatherineM' post='1820291' date='Mar 30 2009, 12:32 AM']Yeah, the ones this week were inbounds but under an extreme avalanche alert, but I started thinking about this after those 4 that died a month or two ago. They said they were trying to find virgin snow. A lot of people have said that at least they died doing something they loved. I think I'm just cranky today, and feeling old, and wondering why such nice guys have to die so young.[/quote] I think it's hard for us to understand it.. ...but we're good friends with someone who does a lot of backcountry snowmobiling. He was pretty shaken, because back when that whole group from Sparwood died (9 or something?), he knew a fair number of them, and everyone around knew at least one or two. They believe that there are inherent risks, but if they're taking all the necessary precautions and it's still not enough, then 'what's mean to be will be.' Know what I mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philothea Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 I have told my husband that he can only take up dangerous hobbies (and I consider things as tame as motorcycle riding dangerous) if he first gets a reaaaaaaaally big life insurance policy. In general I think anyone who has other people depend on them ought to do everything they reasonably can to remain alive, healthy, and useful. It's hard to make a blanket rule, though. If someone is going to be miserable and impossible to live with if they don't go sky-diving every weekend, probably better that they do their thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homeschoolmom Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 Yeah, I think it's wise for parents to ease back on the riskier hobbies. They are usually expensive as well-- another reason to hold off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Didacus Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 [quote name='CatherineM' post='1820274' date='Mar 30 2009, 12:14 AM']In the last couple of months, there have been several men killed in avalanches from Alberta and BC who have left wives and many young children. They were all in Out of Bounds areas during time of extreme avalanche alerts. When showing people talking at the memorial, they all talked about what good husbands and fathers they were. I couldn't help thinking that if I was the only wage earner for a family of five, I wouldn't take a risk with my life for a recreation or hobby. I'm sure these guys never thought that anything would happen to them, but it did get me to thinking about what kinds of things we should avoid doing when responsible for a family. I wonder how many guys who have died on Everest or scuba diving in underwater caves, or BASE jumping have left behind widows and orphans. There are a lot of jobs that men and women do everyday that are dangerous, and police officers, fire fighters, soldiers, etc., do them willingly for the benefit of the rest of us. My dad gave up his dangerous job when he became responsible for a family. I suspect that my mother had a lot to do with that though. I was just wondering if any of you who are parents gave up anything dangerous when you got married or had kids? Or if any of your moms or dads did so. Is it unreasonable for a wife to ask her husband to refrain from dangerous hobbies? The most dangerous thing my husband does is water aerobics with me and several dozen elderly ladies, so this is just an intellectual curiosity on my part. I'll just be glad when spring finally comes. Our prayer list is getting so long.[/quote] You are correct. Responsibility entails sacrifices, and avoiding unnecessary dangers is included in my opinion (although lets not go over board on all this of course, fathers can still be police officers for instance, or firemen). But one should always keep in mind that the responsibility of towards their sons and daugthers outway their personal hobbies. I feel guilty since I still smoke on occasion, and smoking places such a risk to my life that for the benefit of my children I should avoid - god have mercy on my so very weak soul. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sojourner Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 I totally think it's cool to ask your spouse to cut back or cut out dangerous hobbies, even if you don't have children. And frankly, if I were engaged in those types of activities myself I would cut back without being asked out of care for my husband. I know I could be killed at any point, but now there's someone very close to me who would miss me very much. I don't want to cause him pain, so I try hard to be safer when I drive or engage in activities. I think that's just part of assuming the responsibility of marriage. I have, in fact, asked my husband to curtail some things he did that I felt were unnecessarily risky, and he's respected my wishes. We do still do things that have an inherent danger, like ATV-ing or dogsledding, but even those things we're careful with. I would think that care would increase even more when there are children around. My husband has already told me that when we have children I'm not allowed to die until they are grown up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scardella Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 I think that men have an innate desire to push themselves. Sometimes this takes the form of dangerous pursuits, whether it be exploring, riding motorcycles, rock climbing, car racing, spelunking, etc. There's a fine line between stretching yourself and foolhardy pursuits. The difference is not always clear. Are these dangerous pursuits mutually exclusive from responsible manhood and fatherhood? No. Without them, man can become less manly. He can lose part of himself. That loss will be reflected in his role as husband and father. Do all men express themselves in these dangerous pursuits? No. Does that invalidate what I've already said? No. What, then, separates stretching yourself and foolhardiness or recklessness? In a word, prudence. In these examples, these men were out under the known high likelihood of an avalanche. That is foolhardy. However, without that likelihood, it would not have been. In general, I think that many people today are so danger averse that they seek to remove danger from every aspect of life. They seek it even to the point of insipidity. However, we see that when taken to the extreme, it drastically reduces the exercise of free will. As a side note which may provide some perspective: yesterday, I got into an auto accident because of a sudden bout of hail (ball bearings made of ice). Fishtailing at 65mph is scary stuff. I was saved from a 50+ foot drop by prudent driving and a well-placed guardrail. However, I don't for a moment want to suggest lowering speed limits, adding mandatory safety features, etc. In fact, I feel like my responses to the sudden loss of control was one of my manliest moments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sojourner Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 [quote name='scardella' post='1820501' date='Mar 30 2009, 01:41 PM']I think that men have an innate desire to push themselves. Sometimes this takes the form of dangerous pursuits, whether it be exploring, riding motorcycles, rock climbing, car racing, spelunking, etc. There's a fine line between stretching yourself and foolhardy pursuits. The difference is not always clear. Are these dangerous pursuits mutually exclusive from responsible manhood and fatherhood? No. Without them, man can become less manly. He can lose part of himself. That loss will be reflected in his role as husband and father. Do all men express themselves in these dangerous pursuits? No. Does that invalidate what I've already said? No. What, then, separates stretching yourself and foolhardiness or recklessness? In a word, prudence. In these examples, these men were out under the known high likelihood of an avalanche. That is foolhardy. However, without that likelihood, it would not have been. In general, I think that many people today are so danger averse that they seek to remove danger from every aspect of life. They seek it even to the point of insipidity. However, we see that when taken to the extreme, it drastically reduces the exercise of free will. As a side note which may provide some perspective: yesterday, I got into an auto accident because of a sudden bout of hail (ball bearings made of ice). Fishtailing at 65mph is scary stuff. I was saved from a 50+ foot drop by prudent driving and a well-placed guardrail. However, I don't for a moment want to suggest lowering speed limits, adding mandatory safety features, etc. In fact, I feel like my responses to the sudden loss of control was one of my manliest moments.[/quote] I get where you're coming from. I think there is room for "stretching yourself" and engaging in pursuits that have an increased risk of danger. But, I think such risks should not be undertaken lightly, just for the sake of being "manly." A real man doesn't value personal growth and adrenaline highs over the well-being and safety of his family. A real man knows his own worth, and realizes that he has value not only for his own sake but also for the sake of his wife and family. That's not to say men (and women, for that matter) can't still engage in adventures, or in risky behaviors. But it does mean we show consideration and deference to those we love, and we subjugate our desires for those of the people we love when we need to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eagle_eye222001 Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 Chess is a very dangerous game ---------------- Listening to: [url="http://www.foxytunes.com/artist/skillet/track/comatose"]Skillet - Comatose[/url] via [url="http://www.foxytunes.com/signatunes/"]FoxyTunes[/url] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jesus_lol Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 something like motorcycling is a huge part of me, so i would not give it up. but i would probably tone it down. like if i was into pro motocross and had a family, i would stop pulling the super risky stuff, ride an easier race class, etc. or if i had a sport bike i would only ride it fast at the track, where the other cars arent a hazard, and be wearing ALL the gear. heck i would buy my kids minibikes and go trail riding with them if they wanted. give it up right out? cant see myself doing that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
txdinghysailor Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 [quote name='CatherineM' post='1820274' date='Mar 30 2009, 02:14 AM']In the last couple of months, there have been several men killed in avalanches from Alberta and BC who have left wives and many young children. They were all in Out of Bounds areas during time of extreme avalanche alerts. When showing people talking at the memorial, they all talked about what good husbands and fathers they were. I couldn't help thinking that if I was the only wage earner for a family of five, I wouldn't take a risk with my life for a recreation or hobby. I'm sure these guys never thought that anything would happen to them, but it did get me to thinking about what kinds of things we should avoid doing when responsible for a family. I wonder how many guys who have died on Everest or scuba diving in underwater caves, or BASE jumping have left behind widows and orphans. There are a lot of jobs that men and women do everyday that are dangerous, and police officers, fire fighters, soldiers, etc., do them willingly for the benefit of the rest of us. My dad gave up his dangerous job when he became responsible for a family. I suspect that my mother had a lot to do with that though. I was just wondering if any of you who are parents gave up anything dangerous when you got married or had kids? Or if any of your moms or dads did so. Is it unreasonable for a wife to ask her husband to refrain from dangerous hobbies? The most dangerous thing my husband does is water aerobics with me and several dozen elderly ladies, so this is just an intellectual curiosity on my part. I'll just be glad when spring finally comes. Our prayer list is getting so long.[/quote] I'm just going to take out a huge life insurance policy when I get married. And I figure that there's a danger in everything. Driving, walking, waking up every morning. I mean, you could day doing nothing that seems "dangerous". So why not do something dangerous that you enjoy? Everyone's gotta die sometime... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lilllabettt Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 Somewhere in the course of my formation in religious life, I was taught that taking extraordinary, unnecessary risks with one's life is a sin, regardless if one is married or not. It's breaking the fifth commandment. The gift of life is holy and its not okay to put it in a high risk situation just to have fun or try something new or crazy. The context was in reference to extreme sports and bungee jumping. I don't know certain kinds of skiing would fall into that ... I guess so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatherineM Posted March 31, 2009 Author Share Posted March 31, 2009 There have been two women who died skiing in Canada in the last month. Liam's wife was the second. The first was from Quebec. She and her husband were out here skiing, and after they checked out of their hotel on the last day of their stay they decided to make one last run. They weren't properly dressed for the weather (according to the ski patrol guys, not me, I have no idea what they were or should have been wearing), and only had a granola bar on them. The went skiing out of bounds, in an area clearly marked dangerous, and got lost. They stamped an SOS in the snow, a heli-skiing pilot saw it and reported it. That's a guy who flies skiers to the top of mountains too remote to have lifts and developed trails. The RCMP has trouble with people stamping fake SOS's, so they called around to the hotels to see if someone hadn't come back (they had already checked out) and to the ski rental people to see if all their rentals had come back (they had their own skis). A week or so later, the same pilot saw another SOS, and the RCMP finally sent out search parties. The husband was still alive, but his wife had died a few days before. I'm sure there will be some lawsuits over this, but at what point is someone a victim of circumstances beyond their control, or acting irresponsibly, or just not knowing enough about what they are doing? I realize that you can die walking across the street, believe me, I am a pedestrian here. I do however wait for the Walk sign. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now