...........................

System

Lip_Stick wrote: »

Of course, parents should take precautions and make an environment as safe as possible, but I'd argue that a child could brush against a hot kettle and the shock of it make them suddenly jerk. They could knock the kettle over with a leg as they tried to move away. Anyway, an empty kettle could still remain hot on the outside for a while.

Why is the leg up there as well!

marleyboy

Lip_Stick wrote: »

Of course, parents should take precautions and make an environment as safe as possible, but I'd argue that a child could brush against a hot kettle and the shock of it make them suddenly jerk. They could knock the kettle over with a leg as they tried to move away. Anyway, an empty kettle could still remain hot on the outside for a while.

It could be argued that a child SHOULD NOT be able to brush against a hot or cold kettle, particularly if left in such a place a child's leg could knock it over. Its no different to putting a hot cup of coffee, precariously at the edge of a table or in a place a child can easily grab it.

I would not put a cold drink on my childs stool or in a place he could brush past it and knock it over with his leg. I would be even more careful where I put a hot drink.

Lip_Stick

Cos they're climbing. Speaking from experience when I found my five year old kneeling on the work tops helping himself to sweets from the cupboard. He was nowhere near the kettle though and did get told off of course.

Lip_Stick

marleyboy wrote: »

It could be argued that a child SHOULD NOT be able to brush against a hot or cold kettle, particularly if left in such a place a child's leg could knock it over. Its no different to putting a hot cup of coffee, precariously at the edge of a table or in a place a child can easily grab it.

I would not put a cold drink on my childs stool or in a place he could brush past it and knock it over with his leg. I would be even more careful where I put a hot drink.

Do you actually think people place kettles on stools or on the floor for a child to brush past it? Is that what you think I meant? I'm talking about when a child has climbed on the work surface, it happens.

Just for the record, my son hasn't had any accidents in the home, other than one that he inflicted on himself when he ran too fast and ended up hitting a door frame. Oh and I do have a metal kettle so know about keeping it out of reach etc, but certainly wouldn't laugh at someone wanting a cool touch one... just in case!

marleyboy

Am reminded of when OH let our Son play with a book (we have a library of books), I mentioned I always took books off him to discourage him, but she argued it was an old book so it was ok. This was fair enough, up until he got a hold of one of her best books and promptly tore it to shreds for her.

She could not tell him off as she did unwittingly encouraged him that it was ok to grab books from the shelf, he is too young to know which books are fair game and which are no-no's.

The lesson she learned was it is safer to discourage at all times, than to occasionally allow them to take risks in no go areas which will only confuse them as to when it is ok.

Azari

marleyboy wrote: »

It could be argued that a child SHOULD NOT be able to brush against a hot or cold kettle, particularly if left in such a place a child's leg could knock it over. Its no different to putting a hot cup of coffee, precariously at the edge of a table or in a place a child can easily grab it.

I would not put a cold drink on my childs stool or in a place he could brush past it and knock it over with his leg. I would be even more careful where I put a hot drink.

Why are people having such a hard time understanding such a simple concept?

Yes, there are other precautions you can and should take to protect your child.

But that does not mean that it's sensible or responsible to ignore further layers of protection.

Cool touch kettle are not particularly expensive and work as well as others so it is perfectly reasonable to use them.

It's not a big deal but why some people seem to want to make post after post dismissing the idea that it's just one extra line of safety is something of a mystery.

marleyboy

Lip_Stick wrote: »

Do you actually think people place kettles on stools or on the floor for a child to brush past it? Is that what you think I meant? I'm talking about when a child has climbed on the work surface, it happens.

I would hope not, but as it is precisely what you said.....

I don't allow my child to climb kitchen surfaces where he can brush against kettles, so ITS NEVER HAPPENED. When it comes to the Kitchen, he cannot simply walk in there and go climbing whenever he feels he can.

A Kitchen is no safe place for any child (or adult for that matter), its certainly not acceptable for him to climb kitchen cupboards and moreso if there is a heating element within reach.

They say a deep fat fryer is far safer than a chip pan, but it does not mean it is safe if it gets knocked over. A kitchen is the one place I would consider as not an area a child can play, climb or run around. Much like any Kitchen in a restaurant where such an activity could have them shut down.

marleyboy

Azari wrote: »

Why are people having such a hard time understanding such a simple concept?

Yes, there are other precautions you can and should take to protect your child.

But that does not mean that it's sensible or responsible to ignore further layers of protection.

Cool touch kettle are not particularly expensive and work as well as others so it is perfectly reasonable to use them.

It's not a big deal but why some people seem to want to make post after post dismissing the idea that it's just one extra line of safety is something of a mystery.

Agreed its no big deal, and any extra safety precautions like a cold touch kettle can only be applauded. I have never once said its pointless using them.

I dont have a cool touch kettle, that is not ignorance to the fact a kettle can be dangerous, a knife can be dangerous, even the gas fire has its perils, yet my knife drawer has no padlock on it, my fireplace is not hanging from the ceiling and not all of my plug sockets have child protectors plugged into them.

I dont see how me buying a cold touch kettle will make any difference to the safety precautions I already have in place. My Mother has a cold touch kettle, but it has more to do with her being blind than the risk in her grandson grabbing hold of it. I don't scald her about buying such an item, just as she does not scald me for NOT buying such an item.

Hot touch kettle are not particularly expensive and work as well as others so it is perfectly reasonable to use them too.

Lip_Stick

marleyboy wrote: »

I would hope not, but as it is precisely what you said.....

I don't allow my child to climb kitchen surfaces where he can brush against kettles, so ITS NEVER HAPPENED. When it comes to the Kitchen, he cannot simply walk in there and go climbing whenever he feels he can.

A Kitchen is no safe place for any child (or adult for that matter), its certainly not acceptable for him to climb kitchen cupboards and moreso if there is a heating element within reach.

They say a deep fat fryer is far safer than a chip pan, but it does not mean it is safe if it gets knocked over. A kitchen is the one place I would consider as not an area a child can play, climb or run around. Much like any Kitchen in a restaurant where such an activity could have them shut down.

Well only an idiot would allow a child to play in the kitchen on their own. As I said, I have a five year old so I'm just starting to teach about proper cooking, and not just the run-of-the-mill kiddy baking. I show him how to do things the safe way. Of course it's only when he's with me, he knows it's off limits to mess with cookers etc, so he's yet to rustle up a gourmet meal for me.

But, you said your child is 3? There's going to be one time when he's thinking he's all grown up and can get some sweets from the cupboard, or something along those lines.

JimmyTheWig

Azari wrote: »

That is an intellectually bankrupt philosophy.

What you are saying is that because a more dangerous outcome is possible there is no point in taking all sensible precautions for any less dangerous outcomes.

That's not quite what they are saying. I think they are saying

Scenario 1, standard kettle:
"Ohh, haven't I done well climbing up here today. Oh look, there's that thing that Mummy uses to make a drink. Let me have a look. Ouch! It's hot. I won't do that again."

Scenario 2, cool-touch kettle:
"Ohh, haven't I done well climbing up here today. Oh look, there's that thing that Mummy uses to make a drink. Let me have a look. Feels alright. Now, what is it that Mummy does with it? Something like this? AHHHH!"

In scenario 1 they get hurt a little and learn from it. In scenario 2 they don't learn anything until they are hurt a lot.

I'm not saying that this means scenario 1 is right, but I wouldn't call it intellectually bankrupt - I think it is valid reasoning.