Re: Broads Tragedies; was Re: Dangers to children


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Previous # Next ] [ Start New Thread ] [ TarBoard ]

Posted by Alex Forbes on October 25, 2003 at 19:53:37 from 165.247.219.187 user Pitsligo.

In Reply to: Re: Broads Tragedies; was Re: Dangers to children posted by Peter Hyland on October 25, 2003 at 18:49:09:

I'm currently working for a high school with a wilderness program as a grduation requirement: 25 days hiking in either Death Valley or Yosemite National Parks. The safety measures we take are pretty serious, and all worthwhile, but we all know that the most looming threat of all is the Lawyer. Many things we'd like to offer the kids, we just can't, not because they're dangerous, but because they appear dangerous to someone who doesn't understand the situation. Even the rock climbing sections of the program have been called into question because they appear dangerous to people who don't know rock climbing. (We've kept the climbing, though.)

I personally think we overprotect our kids. Of course it's easy for me to say that, seeing as I have no kids of my own and survived my own wild childhood with only a few scars and narrow squeaks. But having worked this wilderness course seven times in the last 14 years, I have seen a distinct decrease in kids' durability in regards to emotional or physical stresses. I'm no psych, but I tend to attribute this to the way we shelter them.

Alex



Follow Ups:



Post a Followup

Name:
Eel-Mail:

Existing subject (please edit appropriately) :

Comments:

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:

post direct to TarBoard test post first

Before posting it is necessary to be a registered user.


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ TarBoard ]

Courtesy of Environmental Science, Lancaster

space