Do you believe this guy even after his comments about the "complexion" and the "atmosphere" of the club?
I don't. I think this is disgraceful and disgusting. I am totally appalled that this happened in 2009!
Answer by sweet-a-kins at 2:42 PM on Jul. 12, 2009
Answer by Anonymous at 12:17 AM on Jul. 12, 2009
Answer by etsmom at 5:11 AM on Jul. 12, 2009
Answer by Tristana at 8:42 AM on Jul. 12, 2009
I was willing to wait for the other side of the story, but I think they are having a hard time coming up with anything that sounds legitimate. If the camp signed up 60 temporary memberships and they accepted the money, the safety excuse suddenly is off the table. If they didn't have the amount of staff (lifeguards I am guessing is what they are saying?) for the amount of membership they signed, then they are negligent. If it's only a certain number of kids that could swim at once, they could have worked out a schedule with the campers of half the group swimming while the other half does another activity.
I wouldn't want to be a part of a club that excludes members like they do. It's a private club, so I guess they can make their own rules, but they should be prepared to go down with the ship when the sh*t hits the fan.
Answer by QuinnMae at 11:07 AM on Jul. 12, 2009
Honestly, I think it is a mixture of both. I'm not in any way supporting what the club did, but I can see the safety issue thing. Especially if there were so many kids that were not very good swimmers (one of the articles I read stated that as a concern). We go to a neighborhood pool and not a private, exclusive club, but the lifeguards there are very strict with parents of kids who are not strong swimmers. The parent must be within arms length at all times. With a day camp that is not possible since there is not one adult for each child. So I can sort of see the safety issue thing... HOWEVER, I really think there is more to it than just a safety thing in this case.
Answer by Anonymous at 11:59 AM on Jul. 12, 2009