Thankfully he did change the wording so we can move on.
Significantly Upgraded Chaperone Policy for 2026
- Thread starter sotomexx
- Start date
Thankfully he did change the wording so we can move on.
I saw the prior time-specific chaperone policy as transitional, given the awkward challenges with enforcement and my doubt that it really covered the age groups that were causing some of the most acute issues. It seemed pretty clear that it wouldn't become a forever institution in that form. But my question was: a transition to what?
If they are implementing a policy this strict, IMO leadership must not see any practical alternative at all. Can't say I saw that coming, but in a growing chaos-for-views era I suppose it becomes the least-bad among bad options.
For a couple of summers in high school I pulled together periodic weekend group day trips from western Maryland to BGW. I think we maxed out at about 18 people per trip, taking advantage of the group admission discount. Left home at 7am, returned at 3am, and took our chances with our provisional licenses after midnight. Not a single person on those trips was older than 16 or (eventually) 17. Some of them had never been to BGW before. I hold a lot of cherished memories from running those trips and enjoying the parks independently at that age, and I am sad to see that at some parks the younger generation won't be able to do the same.
I wonder if the disconnect between the website's stated policy and the social media follow-up isn't deliberate. I generally tend to blame incompetence as a first stop, but it is noteworthy to me that the official statement makes strict enforcement and ejections readily possible whenever an assigned chaperone is more than maybe 100 feet away, while the less-official follow up provides comfort and leeway to guests who bother to engage and ask for clarification (hence self-selecting as probably not the "show up and cause problems" crowd). The relaxed policy may be a 99% rule leaving open the option to banhammer truly bad eggs quickly, even when they have an assigned adult somewhere else in the park. Poor behavior no longer needs to clear any specific high bar for ejection. If you are a minor in the early stages of starting something and your adult isn't in the immediate area, you get tossed. Any appeal to the relaxed policy can be met with a simple explanation: "I don't know how accurate the information on socials was, and we can't catch everyone, but our official policy is clear and posted everywhere, and your antics drew our attention to you specifically. Out you go."
Of course no chaperone policy covers the case of bad chaperones, and adult antics are on the rise too. But an ejected chaperone means everyone with them gets tossed too, so the leverage is more substantial now...
If they are implementing a policy this strict, IMO leadership must not see any practical alternative at all. Can't say I saw that coming, but in a growing chaos-for-views era I suppose it becomes the least-bad among bad options.
For a couple of summers in high school I pulled together periodic weekend group day trips from western Maryland to BGW. I think we maxed out at about 18 people per trip, taking advantage of the group admission discount. Left home at 7am, returned at 3am, and took our chances with our provisional licenses after midnight. Not a single person on those trips was older than 16 or (eventually) 17. Some of them had never been to BGW before. I hold a lot of cherished memories from running those trips and enjoying the parks independently at that age, and I am sad to see that at some parks the younger generation won't be able to do the same.
I wonder if the disconnect between the website's stated policy and the social media follow-up isn't deliberate. I generally tend to blame incompetence as a first stop, but it is noteworthy to me that the official statement makes strict enforcement and ejections readily possible whenever an assigned chaperone is more than maybe 100 feet away, while the less-official follow up provides comfort and leeway to guests who bother to engage and ask for clarification (hence self-selecting as probably not the "show up and cause problems" crowd). The relaxed policy may be a 99% rule leaving open the option to banhammer truly bad eggs quickly, even when they have an assigned adult somewhere else in the park. Poor behavior no longer needs to clear any specific high bar for ejection. If you are a minor in the early stages of starting something and your adult isn't in the immediate area, you get tossed. Any appeal to the relaxed policy can be met with a simple explanation: "I don't know how accurate the information on socials was, and we can't catch everyone, but our official policy is clear and posted everywhere, and your antics drew our attention to you specifically. Out you go."
Of course no chaperone policy covers the case of bad chaperones, and adult antics are on the rise too. But an ejected chaperone means everyone with them gets tossed too, so the leverage is more substantial now...
I think the disconnect between official posted policy and guest relations is VERY intentional, and not a miscommunication. I think the policy gives them leverage to easily kick out unruly behavior, but in reality, they are not going to see a group of young students without an adult and approach them just for existing. Frustrating of course, but I think the policy and response are intentional, despite contradicting.
Honestly, I think the biggest and only real change is that rather than requiring a chaperone for entry after 4 pm as previous years, it is now at all times. Prior to this, change, it was more open-ended about when someone says they entered, and what's required of them, but now the timing portion of this policy is crystal clear.
I do think "reserves the right to implement it earlier" is hilarious when the policy now is already in effect AT ALL TIMES. Thinking about heading out to KD today? From the moment you wake up in your bed, you must be within compliance of chaperoning policy numbers, or Six Flags is coming for you!
Honestly, I think the biggest and only real change is that rather than requiring a chaperone for entry after 4 pm as previous years, it is now at all times. Prior to this, change, it was more open-ended about when someone says they entered, and what's required of them, but now the timing portion of this policy is crystal clear.
I do think "reserves the right to implement it earlier" is hilarious when the policy now is already in effect AT ALL TIMES. Thinking about heading out to KD today? From the moment you wake up in your bed, you must be within compliance of chaperoning policy numbers, or Six Flags is coming for you!
It is not an intentional thing they are not planning on playing a bate and switch to throuw groups out. As for the wording it comes from a general Six Flags announcement and roll out and is the same wording used at parks that are already oprn annoucing the implementation in the future.I think the disconnect between official posted policy and guest relations is VERY intentional, and not a miscommunication. I think the policy gives them leverage to easily kick out unruly behavior, but in reality, they are not going to see a group of young students without an adult and approach them just for existing. Frustrating of course, but I think the policy and response are intentional, despite contradicting.
Honestly, I think the biggest and only real change is that rather than requiring a chaperone for entry after 4 pm as previous years, it is now at all times. Prior to this, change, it was more open-ended about when someone says they entered, and what's required of them, but now the timing portion of this policy is crystal clear.
I do think "reserves the right to implement it earlier" is hilarious when the policy now is already in effect AT ALL TIMES. Thinking about heading out to KD today? From the moment you wake up in your bed, you must be within compliance of chaperoning policy numbers, or Six Flags is coming for you!
That was a huge benefit to working in a park. I was 16 and that was my first real job. Now I would just start my first job somewhere else and not be growing as part of their team. In the years I worked in the park system, I worked every department except security, maintenance and the other behind the scenes teams.
Another issue at Carowinds and I imagine at KD as well is no matter your age you have to show your physical government ID and your season pass to enter. This slows down the entry process so greatly and is aggravating. Why don’t they have a processing station set up to go and show your ID and season pass and then the security team could flag your ID to say you are good. That would greatly speed up the process in my opinion and would make a lot more of your guests day start smoother. It all comes down to customer service no matter which park you go to.
I think my whole point was that they are not trying to get a "Gotcha" moment, just have the official write up giving them the means and opportunity to throw out poor behavior if necessary, but not actively trying to just randomly grab groups without adults, hence the guest relations response.
Last year security was IDing people before they even got into the line for security screening and the process was generally swift and simple. I never saw any noticeable backups from it even on busy haunt nights.
This was my experience at KD but I also experienced what @Mojosdad reported at Caro—even on a light Scarowinds night. No idea why Caro was so much less efficient.
I didn't even get carded on my way in to KD for Haunt last year, they just waved me through (guess I look old enough haha), but I did at Kings Island - they were doing the ID checks after the security scan but before the main entrance gates. Seemed efficient enough; if someone had issues they pulled them to the side and let the rest of the crowd go through.
I guess they'll just postpone the teen takeover. How about April 11? It sounds like a good day.
When do yall think they will update us what they are gonna do with the policy now that Spring Break is over? Wouldn't be surprised if they didn't tbh.
(Shamelessly quoting myself)
In the email they sent to me it said it was only going to be through the 5th, and I really hope the revert the policy. Not saying it's bad I just want to go to the park by myself during the summer.
I am really not sure how I feel about this policy. On one hand I love it as a father of 2 young kids. I've been there when there were some bad groups. On the other hand. I was once young and allowed to be at a park alone with a group of friends.
I personally just want to see better policies enforced within the park. Handle line cutting and other rude behavior properly. Deal with the bad groups properly.
I personally just want to see better policies enforced within the park. Handle line cutting and other rude behavior properly. Deal with the bad groups properly.
I land on two thoughts here:
On one hand I really think that most parks need to up their security game in park. It feels super rare to see someone in that position anymore, and would be great to see more of it out there. I think that parks sometimes overly rely on ride workers and cameras to police these actions and it doesn’t work. Of course that would be asking private equity to spend money on something with little financial benefit.
But on the other hand, I think doing as much as possible to prevent from the bad groups getting into the park to begin with is important. If it takes strict chaperone policies, then so be it. I think the hardest part that it takes with this is how do you police things that technically don’t break a state rule, but is also worthy of some sort of punishment?
I think more visible security is major missing part of the problem. Years ago you constantly saw security roaming all sections of the parks. Also, if you have an employee old enough to work in the park then they should have the right to enjoy the park when off work. Maybe they just get a wristband anytime they want to use the benefit. That would be a visible indicator to security that those individuals have a right to be in the park.