
How should our kids play at recess? Alameda schools offer lessons - JamilD
http://www.sfchronicle.com/education/article/How-should-our-kids-play-at-recess-Alameda-10995385.php
======
rl3
When I was a kid, both the local park and elementary school playgrounds had
climbable constructs made out of widely-spaced wooden logs, with many sections
partially hollowed out. That meant you'd have bees, hornets and wasps nesting
in there frequently. Add to that the risk of splinters.

To make matters even more interesting, these things were tall. Probably 20ft
at the very top. If you fell, you'd either fall from that height into the
stones and probably be fine, or you'd get unlucky and break your fall on
protruding wood from the equipment on the way down. There were no rules
governing how you could or couldn't play on the stuff, just common sense.

Of course, it was fairly easy to see how something like a bee sting, splinter
or just plain bad luck could have resulted in a kid losing their balance,
falling from a decent height, and ending up paralyzed (or worse) in the
process. I knew of no serious incidents, but in the mid 90s all of that
equipment was replaced with un-fun plastic stuff that was maybe a third of the
height and impossible to fall from. I can only imagine how the earlier
equipment would be received today.

~~~
Nition
Everything here got replaced with super safe stuff in the late 90s/early
2000s, but recently the _new_ new stuff going in seems to be getting more
dangerous again!

A park just went in nearby and it's got a bridge of swinging pendulum things
that you could easily fall off, all suspended about 2m off the ground. There's
bark underneath but still, you could easily break your arm falling off it and
it's prety much designed to tip you off. 15 years ago I feel like they'd be
30cm off the ground max.

~~~
Faaak
Well, if you break your arm, what's the big deal ?

No, seriously ? Yes, you did break your arm, but I'm sure you can learn plenty
of things in the process.

~~~
sanderjd
Generally I agree, but one problem is that most families can't easily absorb
the cost of a trip to the emergency, X-RAYs, and a cast. It may be a good
lesson, but it's also an expensive one.

~~~
khedoros1
That sounds like a healthcare problem, not a playground problem.

~~~
sanderjd
I agree, but the healthcare system is the reality we live in.

------
wersplectior
Parents don't want their kids to die so they place some reasonable
restrictions on activities in order to reduce risk. After all, they only have
1 or 2 kids so they can't afford to lose one. Historically families had many
more children and it was perfectly normal to lose 1 or 2 (usually to
infectious disease).

With school bureaucrats the story is different. They place _unhealthily_
stringent limits on risk. They can't afford to lose a single child even though
they have 200,000 of them. Because they might get sued or have their careers
damaged.

~~~
typetypetype
I'm trying to imagine all the fortunes that schools are giving up by keeping
kids safe.

~~~
wersplectior
I don't understand what you mean. Explain?

------
chrismealy
Don't have citations handy, but the first generation of playground equipment
actually was incredibly lethal (1930-1940s).

