You Must be 7 to Play on the Jungle Gym

What an insightful perspective. The world today does seemed warped in what we deem to be important and what we deem to be frivolous.

I’m glad your 4 year old is loving the monkey bars…..in his own time!

Wow I’m glad my daughter’s preschool wasn’t so picky about how the kids played on the playground. No monkey bars, but some good, adequately challenging equipment.

Also, shouldn’t day care be about the development of children? Not allowing them to do something for fear they will get hurt doesn’t allow them to learn. Unfortunately, I was a kid not allowed to fall. Today I am an adult who doesn’t know how not to get hurt.

But, getting back to day care…this shows that the priority is not our kids…it’s law-suit avoidance that is key in this policy.

Truly insane! Our kids go/went to a kindergarten where tree climbing is pretty well compulsory from the time they start, at around age three. The older ones have to teach at least one younger one how to do it safely. How’s that for a contrast?! I also have the rule that if they can do it themselves, they can do it. We have no walls on our trampoline, for example, but no steps either. If you can climb on to it, you’re good to go.

So why is there such a stark difference and why are we handicapping our kids so badly? Why do parents let this happen with nary a peep?

Is it because we have put the government in charge of too many things that government is not intended to do – such as provide and regulate child care, “physical education,” discipline, etc.?

It’s odd to me that people leap from a daycare to “faceless strangers” (@bmj2k) and government (@bmj2k, SKL). My son’s daycare is run by people known to me (who have faces!) and is private. I’d guess the author of this post, Terry Bartick’s may well be, also (there aren’t, after all, many public, i.e., government-run or funded daycares in the US).

That this is true (the daycare we use is private and run by ordinary people who are members of our community and known to us) doesn’t mean it has no unreasonable rules. I personally am pretty lucky in that regard (the lack of unreasonable rules), actually, but I’m also blessed with a community that offers a large number of good quality daycares, something that is far from certain in the U.S.

We are an extremely litigious society – we solve problems by suing someone. I think that’s why our society has become pathologically preoccupied with safety issues. To avoid a lawsuit, a product, person or organization must have expressly prohibited all potentially dangerous activities involving them, no matter how unlikely. It’s not that Americans are such wusses but rather we’re all terrified of being sued!

Surprised as I am that I’m able to recall this, my primary school got rid of the monkey bars on the playground too. It was a very small school (30-something kids?), but two kids broke their arms falling off them in a few-year period. Maybe monkey bars are dangerous?

I’m all for kids being allowed to hurt themselves, but that stops short of breaking a bone. Ideally we want the world to be safe enough that kids won’t suffer any major injuries,), but not so safe that the usual, manageable assortment of moderate gashes, cuts, scrapes, bruises, sprains etc. aren’t on the menu.

(I say this because breaking a bone in your youth means you’ll really pay for it once you get old. This is not a desirable scenario.)

Well, 6 is obviously way too young and 8 much too old, right? [eyeroll emoticon]

My children’s elementary school installed new playground equipment in September. Once it was ready, the staff discovered two pieces of equipment were too “dangerous” for the children to use — the tire swing (of the horizontal tire, 3 chain attachment variety — it swung “too high”) and the monkey bars (too far above the ground).
The children were forbidden to use them, and they were roped off with yellow tape.

I don’t think we can chalk it all up to the fear of being sued. They have insurance and incorporation to deal with the really crazy stuff. And if lawsuits were really the driving force, we wouldn’t need regulations at all, would we?

When my sister was 4 and I was her primary caregiver (college student with night classes), I used to take her to the playground all the time and she would so stuff on the jungle gyms that 12-year-olds were afraid to do. Height was definitely not an issue – she would sit on a high bar and swing/flip backwards and then grab onto the lower bars to climb down. She never got hurt during those times. The only time she hurt herself on the playground was in KG when she did something I’d told her not to do – swing forward in a spot where the next bar was too close. She slammed her cheek/saliva gland and it swelled up like a baseball. My comment was that she should have known better; she never did something dumb like that again (and nobody sued or yelled at her teacher). The only time my parents got involved with playground mishaps was when a boy (repeat offender / bully) was kicking my sister’s face in in 3rd grade. My dad didn’t like the explanation that “there’s nothing we can do.”

I’ve talked to my daycare provider about some of their stupid rules, and at least here, 99% of them come from the state. The newest one, which was only a “recommendation” and they’re refusing to follow is that apparently they have artwork papers too close to each other on the wall. They were told to take them down so the place doesn’t go up like a matchbook in case of a fire. My response to her (which was hers as well), is that stuff like that can’t just spontaneously combust – it needs a fire source so it’s pretty much a non-issue unless somebody holds a match to the papers.

In any case, she refused to follow this because it would mean having stark, bare walls…in a preschool/daycare!

Does anyone think it might have something to do with “public health” policies? I mean, like vaccination requirements, they think they will have fewer parent sick days / free clinic visits if 3-year-olds wash their hands 90 times per day and stay within 6 inches of the ground?

I am seriously trying to understand why this is such an overriding public interest that states must make laws / regulations about these details.

This has been going on in lesser fortunate countries for decades. My father was only 11 when both his parents passed away, and on top of going to school and working (walking long distances to school and work with only beat up sandals), he took care of his brother and 2 sisters. Children has always been resilient, and just like humans (not adults or children, but humans as a species), we all learn to adapt. If the situation calls for learning to fend for yourself, you will. But if those situations never occur, or they are never taught, one never learns. This has always been the case and will always be. Such is our species way.

The difference, between North America and a place like Honduras, is that we are spoiled. We have learned to take things for granted. We’ve learned to capitalize on opportunities, like suing. Now some have mentioned this is more than just making a quick buck. And that is true, but the majority of it is making a quick buck. People just use their fears to justify their claims. Sure institutions and facilities have insurance for lawsuits due to mishap. But even then, these places aren’t in the clear. When they have to make a claim because of a law suite. They are still paying for it. Just like car insurance, you make claims, your premium goes up. The bigger the claim, the bigger the premium. And no place wants to be spending more money. Like I keep saying, many of the things heli-parents do to shelter their children, is mostly about them feeling good about themselves, than benefiting the child. If their mind was on the physical, mental and emotional well being of the their children, they wouldn’t be so paranoid and sheltering. It’s selfish.

Age 4 is when the kids most want to do the monkey bars. If you wait until age 7, they won’t want to do it because that is not where they are at, developmentally. I have seen this happen with my own kids and the kids at the large preschool that I worked at. Yes, some, especially boys, will still want to play on them, but the challenge of the mastery is not there at 7 like it is at 4. Their guidelines are not developmentally appropriate.

@ John Deer: true, that accidents do happen from time to time. It’s sad that had to happen. But I’m wondering, did the parents instruct the children how to safely play with the rope and slide. ie. letting them know what they should and shouldn’t do? Had they been informed of consequences, would this have happened in the first place? This isn’t to be insensitive to the tragedy, and it’s not saying they shouldn’t have been permitted to play with a rope on the slide. But had they known consequences, they could have been more alert and careful. That’s the thing with kids, they are always learning. And if they don’t know (such as consequences), they don’t feel the need to be cautious. Such are kids, if they don’t know, all they think of is play, play, play. Until something happens. It’s up to parents to educate their children. Empower them with knowledge. It’s still sad though.

The article didn’t mention how it happened. But I’m guessing the rope was tied at the top of the slide, so the kids can climb up (instead of using the ladder). But something like that wouldn’t have happened unless the rope was looped around the boys neck to begin with. Climbing a rope only involves hand over hand, well enough away from the head and neck.

@ Nicola: Well put.

@SKL I see no evidence that in this situation, the regulation is from the government as opposed to the daycare itself. It’s described as a rule of the “facility.” Its origin is unknown.

That said, to be honest I personally like the fact that (many) US childcare facilities are subject to government regulation. It’s part of how I chose my son’s first daycare — I limited my search to home-based five-star daycares, which means I both picked a type and a certain set of regulations I wanted them to adhere to. I also found a good one. And sure, some of the regulations they had to follow were dumb, but overall I felt they offered a good guarantee that a particular set of precautions and procedures would be followed.

Having aged out of that facility, my son is now in a (gasp!) unregulated preschool — it can be unregulated by virtue of the fact that it is part time (a regulation in my state of residence about the lack of regulation!). It happens to be true that the person who runs it has known me at least since I was as young as my son is now, so I happen to feel that even absent “regulation” I know enough about her values and approach to be comfortable leaving my son in her care.

But, sure, there are always going to be some dumb rules, whether created by the government regulators (if applicable) or the facility — at least, that’s my take on things. In looking for a preschool (regulated) to move my son to next year, of the two I liked best one doesn’t allow kids to bring in homemade baked goods to share and the other doesn’t allow them to have uncooked baby carrots in their (parent-provided) lunches. Both rules strike me as silly, but neither strikes me as something so aggravating that I can’t work it into our life. And neither originates with the government.

Talking about perplexing:
My 13-year-old daughter has been spending today at a Red cross babysitting course. I signed her up because it is a rite of passage and the CPR lesson is something she should do anyway. She’s already been babysitting since she was 12 and is used to managing quite a few things on her own, like the subway, making her own pizza and waiting for her dad and I to come home from the theatre.
Yesterday morning I got an e-mail from the people organizing the course where telling me the following:
“We must know whether your student has your permission to leave the building for any reason e.g. to buy lunch in the mall. If not they must bring their lunch/snacks with them and would be expected to remain in the classroom. We also need to know whether your student will be picked up or will be making their own way home. Please confirm these points with us via return email or in writing on the morning of the course.”

The idea that some would send kids they don’t consider mature enough to manage on their own to a babysitting course, was frankly beyond my imagination.
The idea of having to babysit adolescents with a fresh Babysitting-diploma is actually quite funny, sort of like “teaching a new teacher how to spell”.

Okay, I’m about to be rude here, so if don’t want to hear a tackless opinion just skip this. We don’t live in a society that babies our children due to lawsuits, government regulations, or faceless people’s neurocies, we live in a society that babies our children because we allow it. I’m so tired of people saying ‘they won’t let my kid walk/ride to school until they’re X years old’ or ‘my kid’s daycare requires X’….they’re OUR kids, and their power only extends as far as WE let it. Do you think the school is going to tell the 7 year old that just walked to school ‘go back home and make your mom drive you to school’? Or course not, they’ll send you a note ‘reminding’ you of school policy..and you send them a note stating your kid will continue to walk to school. Daycare doesn’t let them play on the monkey bars? Find another one. Or, here’s a thought, take care of/educate your kids yourself or place them in a private insitution that doesn’t rely upon government money and therefore isn’t subject to government oversight. They only reason our kids are dealing with obsurb governmental rules is because parents are giving their kids to the government to raise. Don’t want the government raising your kids with a bunch of stupid rules? Don’t place them under the governments pervue. Homeschool, or private school if you can afford to. Stay home with your small children, or choose a family member or in-home private daycare if you CAN’T avoid childcare. I love this blog because it let’s me see into the insanity of the ‘other’ side of parenting. But I will never understand why people allow their children to be made lab rats for the next over-coddling insane regulation someone comes up with when they don’t agree with it. For heaven’s sake, you don’t need their permission to be a parent!

SKL, so the SAHM a couple blocks over who charges $2.50 an hour to watch kids in her home is subject to the same government oversite as is the ‘professional’ daycare that is ‘accredited’? I find that exceptionally hard to believe, not to mention it would be functionally impossible to inforce. Which state do you live in that has enough $ and police time to chase down every mom who hangs a shingle as a daycare provider? And if that IS the case, I suppose somewhere in the union might have been so overrun with the nanny state mentality that may be the case…there are 49 other ones. There might not be an easy fix for a state that is THAT far gone, but that’s why each state has it’s own laws and consitution. You better believe that if the state I’m currently in passed some law that made homeschooling functionally illegal (as it is in some states, not technically illegal but functionally so after all the hoops and regulations one must pass through) my family would rather move than sacrifice our children to the alter of pointless liberal insanity that is the public school system. It’s not easy to move, but no one said raising kids right was easy. I know of families from Germany and other EU countries that have fled to America just so the govermental nanny state won’t be forcibly impressed upon their children. I guarentee if every parent upset over daycare regulations or public school mandates simply pulled their kids out, things would change. You can’t teach to an empty classroom (or make money from an empty center) and those in charge would have the choice between changing regulations or finding a new job. But as long as the overwelming number of parents stick to grumbling non-action the powers that be will know they can go right on doing as they please. After all, what are the parents going to do about it? Society says they have free reign because not even a substanial minority (which is all it would take) won’t take it seriously enough to ‘vote with their feet’ as the saying goes. And before someone says ‘well that’s just not plausible unless you’re rich’, of course it is. There is a difference between ‘dont want to’ and ‘cant’. Most families can manage on one income (so mom or dad can take care of/educate their kids themselves), they just don’t want to because it will change their standard of living. Or can manage to afford a decent private school if both parents work.
The real problem, IMO seems more to be this mentality that children exsist as some sort of accessory to enhance the parent’s life, as opposed to parents exsisting to give a stable and proper home to the next generation, sacrificing their fullfillment, wants, and wishes for the few short years our children need our undivided, or at least primary, attention. If we as parents see our job to bring up properly raised children we’ll be willing to sacrifice our jobs, careers, social standing, etc, anything we need to in other to do so. But if we have children to be parents so we may be fullfilled adults, they we won’t be willing to give up the other things that fulfill us, like careers, nice houses, and social standing. Unfortunately when I look around I see a whole lot of the 2nd and only a handful of the 1st.

Jespren, I am raising my daughters to be adults and I hope they will be happy and fulfilled as well as responsible adults. Therefore I am modeling for them the idea that mothers’ needs should not be the lowest priority on this planet.

Aside from the fact that my little accessories only have one parent, so your “single income” speech is irrelevant to me.

As for gov’t regulation, I am not lying and I live in a state where the politics are halfway between liberal and conservative. State regulation has been a factor here since I was a kid at least (a LONG time ago). I would not be surprised to find that more than a handful of US states regulate non-public child care and schools. Actually, I would be surprised to find otherwise.

I agree that citizens have been too complacent but this is now where we find ourselves. I think it is worth discussing what to do about it (other than moving). That said, I don’t think it’s bad enough for me to move yet, though it bugs me (and more than that, the trend disturbs me). On balance, my kids are better off for their daycare/preschool, but that doesn’t mean there isn’t room for improvement.

When I was in elementary school, the school was forced to take down the playground equipment because a parent threatened to sue! Why? Because they thought the equipment was to dangerous and a child could be hurt. Thanks for ruining my elementary-school experience!

That’s very sad. Is there someplace we can donate vitamins and such to those poor kids?

As a kid, I broke my leg falling down steps off from a deck, and broke my arm falling off a horse. My father broke his arm falling out of a tree as a kid. If you stop kids from doing anything that might lead to broken bones, there would be no ice-rinks, no skiing, no bikes, and definitely no horse-riding. I’m all for helmets to prevent head-injuries, but limbs heal.

Regarding monkey-bars, my daughters’ summer camp had them removed after a kid broke her arm. I complained, and they told me that didn’t want to remove them, but had no choice because their insurance company insisted they had to go. So this was nothing to do with gov regs, or even their fear of being sued, but rather the insurance company’s fear of having to pay out. By contrast, my kids’ public schools have monkey bars, as do all the local town-owned playgrounds. So in this case the private sector is more wimpy than gov.

On a similar note, my workplace summer party used to include a bouncy castle for kids of employees. To save costs we thought we’d get our own bouncy castle, rather than pay an outside company (for which they supplied a person to staff the bouncy castle). But then our insurance company told us they would not cover the party if it included a bouncy castle…so end of that fun.

Insurance companies (and hence the willingness to sue) have a lot to answer for.

Also, having gone through 2 incidents THAT DID NOT INCLUDE A LAWSUIT with those insurers, I can tell you that the root of the problem is with the insurer’s fear of litigation not so much the litigation itself.

LIberty Dad, is that a capital L capital I as in Long Island? Hope so. LI needs free-rangers. Down with SUV-chauffeured organized sports! Up with using expansive lawns for playing! Bring back the glory days of suburbs as children’s paradise!