I was touring Oregon Caves National Monument recently when I witnessed an interesting scene between a ranger and a guest – one which makes me wonder about the parameters of ranger authority.
Near the end of the tour is an optional side trip from the Ghost Room, up a swaying set of 92 steps, to the small but famous Paradise Lost formation of flowstones, which rise tier on tier toward the cave dome. A teen-age girl, apparently worried by the stairs, said she did not want to make the climb.
“You have to,” her mother said.
“No she does not,” the ranger said.
“I’m her mother, and I say she does,” the woman said.
“No she does not,” the ranger said, standing between the girl and her mother.
The ranger and the mother eyed each other for a moment, and then the mother headed up the steps without her daughter, who stayed below in the company of the ranger.
The incident raises interesting questions. Should a ranger countermand the authority of a parent? I think most of us would say “yes” if the parent were asking her child to do something illegal or patently dangerous. But the stair was not an out-and-out danger, just a fear that the parent may have wanted her child to face and master.
On the other hand, I think many of us can also sympathize with the ranger. The trip to Paradise Lost is clearly called optional, and the stairs can be intimidating. Certainly the ranger did not want to have to rescue the child, frozen by fear halfway up the steps.
I’d like to read what the readers think – if not about this incident specifically, then about the position of rangers in general when it comes to parents and children. Maybe some others of you have witnessed similar incidents where the commands of one authority have come into conflict with the other.
Comments
As a park ranger myself, I can say that the ranger in your story was probably oversteping his/her bounds by the information provided. By taking control of the situation in that manner the ranger also took responsibility for any adverse outcomes. If the child had done something that caused any sort of injury or harm while the parent was away, the Rager would have a major legal issue to deal with; as would the ranger's employer. The proper response would have been to leave this up to the parent, and then if the disagreement between the two resulted in a public disturbance the family should have been asked to leave the area and resolve it's problems elsewhere. Unless the ranger witnessed some sort of abuse, in which case there may have been some intervention with possible legal ramifications. But in most real world situations, the ranger might have tried to find a way to settle the issue with a more creative and visitor friendly solution, like just offering the parent the options of having the ranger attend the minor while the parent climbed the feature, or maybe evening finding out why the kid didn't want to go and try to explain the attraction to get the kid past any fear or other issues so he or she could enjoy the climb and not miss out on it.
It was a judgement call. The ranger made it. It is assumed he was acting within the scope of his responsibility and authority. Had the girl panicked and been injured or caused others to be injured the question would then be why didn't the ranger prevent the accident when he had reason to believe the girl was frightened by the ascent.
Why are so many strangers second guessing the judgement of the ranger who was there then. And every one substituting their own experiences for what the teen/parent/ranger MUST have been thinking/doing/misdoing. Abuse, heavy hand, timid, lazy, and on and on. Even to the point of some calling the ranger he and some she, when the original article almost carefully avoided mentioning gender.
Project much?
I believe like so many here that the Ranger made a good judgment call. Park Rangers have to look after the safety of all the people there. If this teenager, whether rebellious or scared had gotten half way up the stairs and then had a problem, this could potentially be a hazard to others around her. The mother's behavior rings more of a bully then a mother caring about her child, because when faced with a strong opposition she backed down and walked away. We aren't privy to why mom acted this way and wanted to force the issue, but as a Mom myself, I would never turn and walk away from my child. I don't care how rebellious they became, and I especially wouldn't leave my teenage daughter with a man I didn't know, Ranger or not. I believe that the Ranger was acting in the best interest of the Park and the child. My children are now grown and my daughter has had a fear of heights since she was very small. Others have tried to force her to face the fear of heights, but to face your fears you need to be ready to face them....and not have it forced upon you!
you mean instead of just turning a walking away? Hmmm wonder if the Mom knew she was wrong to potentially endanger the child and others around her.
I think the ranger was right in this situation. I have never been to this cave, but it seems that having someone on the steps that does not want to be there, or does not have their mind on what they are doing, could cause a problem for someone else on the steps. This sounds like a situation where everyone involved needs to be somewhat careful, so if you don't think you can be in control of yourself, it is best to realize your limitations so you do not cause problems or delays for the rest of the group.
If teenagers are are old enough to fight in Iraq - they are old enough to be able to judge their comfort factor.
Fear is often a good thing. Especially when it occurs in the National Parks. It is often foolish bravado that causes accidents and death.
And if I listened to my parents I would never have experienced the National Parks or backcountry. Thank god I broke out and away of the mold they cast for me.
KUDOS to the ranger!!!
I think we need to get the whole story before choosing who was in the right. I am sure there is a lot more to the story then we were given. I believe if the ranger was in the right he could have found an appropriate way to have the mother leave the child with him then to undermind her authority the way he did in front of the child. But then again we do not have the whole story.