Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

School Bans 'Tag'

Posted by CmdrTaco on Wed Oct 18, 2006 11:49 AM
from the sorry-fun-has-been-cancelled dept.
GillBates0 writes "CNN is carrying a story about a school in Boston which has have banned kids from playing tag, touch football and any other unsupervised chase game during recess for fear they'll get hurt and hold the school liable. According to the article, some elementary schools in other states have similarly banned "unsupervised contact sports". A parent was quoted as saying that her son feels safer now and that she'd witnessed enough 'near collisions.'" See, it's not just dangerous virtual games that are harmful to children!
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 18 2006, @11:51AM (#16486163)
    I've always said that we should just chain them up in a basement until they're 18. Avoids most of the hassles associated with kids.
  • WTF? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Turn-X Alphonse (789240) on Wednesday October 18 2006, @11:52AM (#16486177) Journal
    Do these people seriously expect stopping kids touching each other is going to stop them getting hurt?

    Kids are very simple life forms, they don't have a firm grasp of logic and hence do stupid things which get them hurt. This is a basic fact of life and if you repress it you make adults who do the same because they never learnt any better.

    How the hell can any school know so little about children but have them for so long..
    • Re:WTF? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by pete6677 (681676) on Wednesday October 18 2006, @11:53AM (#16486235)
      These kids will turn into very fragile adults.
    • Re:WTF? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by rbf2000 (862211) on Wednesday October 18 2006, @12:00PM (#16486425) Homepage
      You can tell a kid not to touch a hot stove as much as you'd like, but they're not going to actually learn it themselves until they touch the hot stove and burn themselves. It's going to be painful, but it's a message they are going to remember.

      If a child goes through life placidly believing what their parents tell them, as good as the advice may be, that child is going to grow up to be a worker bee, not challenging authority, just following orders. Kids need to learn to push boundaries, that is the only way they are going to get ahead.
    • Re:WTF? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by rwven (663186) on Wednesday October 18 2006, @12:03PM (#16486513) Homepage
      All this is going to do is leave the kids with more energy after recess which in turn makes them more disruptive. Their discipline problems will probably increase...
    • Re:WTF? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by buswolley (591500) on Wednesday October 18 2006, @12:05PM (#16486575) Journal
      Getting hurt is a valuable experience to children. While I do not support a quota system be enforced, I do believe that if a child is never allowed to discover the pain associated with life, to be over-protected ninnies, then how can we trust them to make hard decisions in the future? Kids need to play. They need to skin their knees, break their finger, because it tells them in a strong way that actions have consequences.
  • Hmm. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 18 2006, @11:52AM (#16486201)
    I would think the number of teachers in the U.S. molesting school children would be a bigger priority than protecting them from a game of tag.
  • by jbrader (697703) <jbrader@gmail.com> on Wednesday October 18 2006, @11:53AM (#16486203)
    When I was in elemetary schoo in the late 80's they wouldn't let us play touch footbal at recess. But then during P.E. they would make us play dodgeball.
  • by bwalling (195998) on Wednesday October 18 2006, @11:53AM (#16486207) Homepage
    We call this a free country, but lawsuits have scared everyone into ridiculous rules and restrictions. We shouldn't be allowed to talk about freedom when we are imprisoning ourselves even in the areas the government isn't. I'm tired of all the reasonable things I'm not allowed to do because some organization's insurance company doesn't like or some fool sued someone. Maybe I just didn't notice this stuff when I was younger, but it seems ridiculous anymore.
  • Oh gods.... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Kenja (541830) on Wednesday October 18 2006, @11:54AM (#16486241)
    I was going to write up a witty retort to all of this, but I think its far simpler just to call these people fucking idiots and get back to work.
  • by el_gordo101 (643167) on Wednesday October 18 2006, @11:54AM (#16486249)
    Attleboro, MA is not in Boston as the posting states, it is a small city south of Boston.
  • by ScentCone (795499) on Wednesday October 18 2006, @11:54AM (#16486273)
    ... but we can't, because that would involve taking the stairs, and someone might get hurt.
  • by courtarro (786894) on Wednesday October 18 2006, @11:56AM (#16486315) Homepage
    They're talking about the spray [consideryo...warned.com]. Haven't you seen the commericals? The guy practically gets pummeled by women. It's really dangerous and I hope they put a stop to it. Think of the single adults!
  • by jvagner (104817) on Wednesday October 18 2006, @11:58AM (#16486377)
    ..generalizations, I do. But I have a 2.75 yo son and I take him to the playground 3-4 days per week (his mom, the rest of the time). There's a fairly significant divide between how men and women treat their children at the playground. Dads tend to hang back, contributing support and help as kids need them (and to be sure, too many fathers hang on the park bench the whole time and can't be bothered to participate at all). Mom's hover, ensuring the kid never suffers a risky moment.

    Those kids tend to have less certain notions of what's possible, what isn't, and what's just plain stupid. Some of those kids certainly got it in the nature-equation - meaning those parents may, in fact, have some reason to be fearful. Plenty of other kids are developing much shallower skills with respect to falling and not falling.

    So, to wrap up with another generalization, it's more likely a mother would feel relieved at this ridiculous development than a father.
  • by Orange Crush (934731) on Wednesday October 18 2006, @12:00PM (#16486417)

    Not only is this a brilliant idea from a liability standpoint, preventing children from engaging in these sorts of dangerous games can reduce bruising and other possible damage during their critical growth period.

    I propose that schoolchildren not be allowed to move at all. They should be hung via sturdy cloth from the ceiling, thus immobilized, and fed heartily whilst at school. I have been assured by a very knowing gentleman of my acquaintance in Boston, that a young healthy schoolchild well-fed is at elementary school age a most delicious, nourishing, and wholesome food, whether stewed, roasted, baked, or boiled . . .

  • by TubeSteak (669689) on Wednesday October 18 2006, @12:02PM (#16486489) Journal
    And no, I'm not referring to the ONE school in Boston.

    I'm talking about the millions of people who will view the acts of a few schools around the country as the downfall of American society.

    The problem these schools are seeking to resolve is this: They have all the responsibility for what happens to your little angel/monster but none of the parental immunity that comes with it.

    Little Susie gets hurt playing a neighborhood game of tag. Nobody sues her parents. If little Susie gets hurt playing a school yard game of tag. The parents can sue the school.

    The parents might not win, but who wants to be sued for something that can be avoided?

    P.S. The difference between PE & recess is that you usually have to sign a waiver f liability for athletics.
  • by cowscows (103644) on Wednesday October 18 2006, @12:02PM (#16486507) Journal
    It seems that we hear about two kinds of parents now-a-days. Ones who neglect their children so completely that the kids lose all sense of perspective and discipline and then go out and hurt innocent people. On the other hand there's a bunch of ridiculously over-protective parents who try to coddle their children every step of their lives, freaking out if the most minor of misfortune comes across their precious future.

    As is often the case, the majority of average, decent, middle of the road parents/children are dealing with the consequences of vocal extremes. On one hand, we have unsupervised kids causing all sorts of problems, and resulting zero-tolerence policies in schools where even a minor, accidental infraction can cause a serious interruption in the education even of a model student. On the other hand, we have over-supervised kids whos parents live in so much fear for their child that neither that kid nor their classmates can act like children are supposed to act.

    A normal child with decent parents will take some bumps and bruises as he/she grows up, and will end up stronger for it. While getting hurt is not pleasant, it's often an excellent learning experience. You learn that not only will certain things result in pain, but also that bad things are going to happen in your life, and you need to learn to cope with it. Denying a child the chance to learn such things is not good parenting.
  • Homeschool ..... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Russ Nelson (33911) on Wednesday October 18 2006, @12:03PM (#16486519) Homepage
    Homeschool .... it's the only way to get an education these days.