The chances of a child dying or
seriously hurting himself in a playground fall are infinitesimal.
A combination of government
regulations and free market innovation has created playgrounds that are incredibly
safe for kids... except if they die of boredom. All the fun stuff is gone, but
boy is what's left non-lethal!
The CDC reports that in the 10 years from 1990 to 2000, there were
just 31 deaths from playground falls, and 70 percent of these were at
playgrounds in someone's backyard. This means that on public playgrounds, there
was an average of about one death per year from falling. With about
40,000,000 kids in America under age 10, that means the chances of a child
dying or seriously hurting himself in a playground fall are infinitesimal.
Nevertheless, the American Society
for Testing and Materials (ASTM) has proposed new standards that would revamp
the surfacing materials on playgrounds. ASTM's stated mission is to prevent
concussions and head injuries. But with the chances of these accidents already
so low, you have to wonder about their true intentions.
The ASTM has established important
standards in a range of areas throughout its 100-year history. It is a private
organization, but local and state governments often require public areas to
meet ASTM standards. Through this process, the government essentially requires
submission to standards approved by non-government forces. The potential
conflicts of interest in the ASTM are glaringly apparent since it is mostly
made up of engineers and business owners, and that goes double when one
considers the opaque process by which new playground surfacing standards become
law.
Very soon—on or around April
1st—an electronic ballot will be opened to all committee members of what is
less-than-felicitously called the "F08 on Sports Equipment, Playing
Surfaces, and Facilities" task force, as well as "subcommittee F08.63
on Playground Surfacing Systems." Tim Gill, author of the blog Rethinking Childhood,
says that even after several conversations with committee members, he still
doesn't have a clear picture of what exactly the voting process entails and how
proposals are approved. The ASTM does not make committee membership public.
Likewise, committee papers and voting records are also hard to come by. And so,
says Gill:
“I don’t know for sure why the
[surfacing] standards are being pushed so hard. It is clear that some committee
members have a commercial interest in the topic (for instance, they have a
financial interest in a supplier of playground surfacing that would meet the
new standard, or in a surface-testing service). It may be that in some cases,
their company would benefit from the change. In the absence of membership
details, papers, voting records or public debate, it is hard to say too much
more.”
Even if all the members of the ASTM
have only the best interests of kids in mind, it is still hard to say that
these new standards would do anything to improve the safety of playgrounds. In
fact, the case can be made that this attempt to make playgrounds safer may
actually backfire and increase the risk of injury.
How's that? Consider the current
concerns about extremely safe football helmets. The fear is that they may
encourage adolescents and adults to lead with their heads when making a tackle,
increasing the risk of brain injuries. Jay Beckwith, a playground expert,
writes on his blog, “[Developmental physiologists] also are concerned that the
lack of consequences when falling may retard the child’s ability to form proper
assessments of their skill, i.e. reduce their judgment.”
David Ball at the Centre for
Decision Analysis and Risk Management just published a paper called “Observations on Impact Attenuation Criteria for
Playground Surfacing.” That's a mouthful, but basically
he wrote that even though the ASTM’s proposed changes seem rational on the
surface, there are potential negative ramifications that need to be taken more
seriously:
“There is concern that an
intervention of this nature might have significant and unintended consequences
for play provision with knock-on implications for overall child welfare,
because play is an essential constituent of growing up.”
In other words: Kids need to
play. If we have to shutter playgrounds because the local park district can't
afford new surfacing—or new surfacing inspectors—kids will sit at home getting
fat, depressed, and diabetic.
How much safer is that?
Paul Best is a 2014 summer intern at Reason.
Lenore Skenazy is host of the reality show “World’s Worst Mom” on the Discovery Life
Channel, starting Jan. 22. She is also a public
speaker and founder of the book and blog Free-Range
Kids.
Posters comment: Now this is a votable issue where you live
with your kids, at least to me.
No comments:
Post a Comment