|
|
|
|
|
| should I take action?
Posted: 7/6/2009 7:56:03 AM |
In crass and simple terms, to me, while regrettable, it is worth the occasional death, be it infant or adult to allow for a wider range of experience in life. I would rather that than try to protect against everything.
If I had a child of my own which died, of course, I;d be devastated, but my convictions would not change one iota!
I hope and pray you never get to test out that theory... | |
|
HenXX
|
Joined: 6/16/2009
Msg: 77 | |
| should I take action?
Posted: 7/6/2009 8:07:16 AM | | TJ......they are addressing the best interest both for their own children and other children.Surely it is better to work on preventing what could easily become a death in the future?.......that is why we have health and safety rules.People died in the workplace because simple safety rules were not applied.......now we prevent most of them.......same with children.We cannot prevent every possible accident but we can certainly cut down a lot by just applying common sense,which includes under fives being watched over. | |
|
| should I take action?
Posted: 7/6/2009 8:28:13 AM | Should i have found myself in the same position as the OP i would definately have put in a written complaint!
Why? Because my child was left to play outside unsupervised
If my child had fallen of the apparatus and there was a teacher outside then i wouldnt have minded - after all children are going to have accidents; but my child having an accident & there was no adult supervision present?? Whio is to say that the accident couldnt have been prevented? the child may have been pushed by another child - if the children had been being observed then the adult may have notice trouble brewing on the apparatus and perhaps removed one of the children.
How good is that accident report/incident form going to look when written up:
"Child fell of playground equipment, accident not witnessed by staff as no children were playing unsupervised. Informed of accident by other child who came inside and informed staff..
Me reporting the incident and commencing further action wouldnt be about sueing anyone or attaining financial gain- it would be about ensuring the safety of my child and other children in this facilities care; at the end of the day when you leave your child in someone elses care - you are entrusting that your child will be well looked after & will be kept as safe as is reasonably possible.
I would also want to ensure that changes were made or new policies implemented in the places organisation to ensure that an incident like this never happened again!
It could have all ended so differently....
*Edit* I have since read that the member of staff who was supervising had to pop indoor momentarily to attend to another child who had a cut lip.... Ok, and she didnt think to call another member of staff to observe the childrens playtime whilst she did this? common sense....
Also, how many children were out at play? i ask because depending on how many children were out to play one member of staff would have been insufficien to supervise. Isnt there a ratio of staff to children - somethng like 1nursey nurse to :3/4 children? | |
|
Pud78
|
Joined: 4/23/2009
Msg: 79 | |
| should I take action?
Posted: 7/6/2009 8:44:59 AM |
A for instance would be back when i was a construction manager a man turn over a 29ton machine. Rather than be thrown off site for dangerous practices (it was his fault, he had been properly trained and it was him taking a shortcut) he was invited into the office for a debrief where the focus was on what he thought he could do to avoid a reoccurence. At first he had the attitude that 'mistakes happen' but after a while when he realised no one was 'out to get him' he oened up a little and walked out of the door quite happy and quite focused on never looking such a twonk again.
That is absolute rubbish and from someone who works in health and safety for construction that whole paragraph is absurd. Turning a 29 ton machine is quite an error that can have extreme repercussions from causing death if it landed on someone to repairs stretching into the thousands and though I don't know the ins and outs of it, incident reports would be required and investigations and these recorded. The problem your company would have if there was a repeat that all the action you took was you told him not to look a twonk would be seen as failing in due diligence and to have a complete disregard for health and safety. You said that he hadn't followed training that was provided, the minimum should of been suspension, retraining and a form of disciplinary and review of users that use that form of equipment. That isn't about being out to get someone or making them feel bad but protecting the employee's but also the employer about the claim culture that your, rightly, against. | |
|
Joe1uk
|
Joined: 6/10/2009
Msg: 80 | |
| should I take action?
Posted: 7/6/2009 8:49:47 AM | I think kids are growing up to be thugs because they are mollycoddled and not taught to take responsibility for their actions.
Facts are that even if this equipment was supervised he would probably still have fallen.
The only purpose for supervision is to ensure equipment isn't used incorrectly and I 'm not sure how a child can misuse a climbing frame.
Yes supervision is desirable to stop misuse of equipment and stop bullying that puts children in danger whilst using equipment. I agree they should have at least one person in an outdoor area if its in use, and you should find out why they didn't but this accident would probably still have happened. Play equipment has to be approved for the age range of children using it, it will probably be stated whether supervision is needed. Also play equipment should have a soft surface under it, concrete shouldn't be any where near it. | |
|
| should I take action?
Posted: 7/6/2009 9:13:17 AM |
That is absolute rubbish and from someone who works in health and safety for construction that whole paragraph is absurd. Turning a 29 ton machine is quite an error that can have extreme repercussions from causing death if it landed on someone to repairs stretching into the thousands and though I don't know the ins and outs of it, incident reports would be required and investigations and these recorded. The problem your company would have if there was a repeat that all the action you took was you told him not to look a twonk would be seen as failing in due diligence and to have a complete disregard for health and safety. You said that he hadn't followed training that was provided, the minimum should of been suspension, retraining and a form of disciplinary and review of users that use that form of equipment. That isn't about being out to get someone or making them feel bad but protecting the employee's but also the employer about the claim culture that your, rightly, against.
Strangely enough, since I run an entire region of construction in the company........I not only know the law, but also the seriousness of the accident. As mentioned, knowing the law, it was reported.
Perhaps you didn't bother to read that part.
What I ACTUALLY said was, it was a legal requirement to report it, so I did, but that were it left to my own discretion I would not have because if people on site feel they will have to go through such a proceedure, they are far less likely TO report near misses and incidents. When they do report them, or are seen, they are more likely to try to cover their own backs rather than be open and honest and focus on the REAL issue of making sure if doesn't happen again.
Ever had to deal with the HSE? I have, they do not encourage a sense of partnership, in fact they come across as quite heavy handed, and this with a company such as ours which does not tolerate deliberate health and safety breaches.
I'd LOVE to know YOUR qualification which allows you to give ME advice though!
I only have a degree, an apprenticeship, several other qualifications and 26 years in the industry you see and I really do need your help.
Do you really think suspending a man is the best way forward? or do you perhaps think that getting him on side with safe practices is the beter way to go?
If it had been deliberate as opposed to a pure accident caused by him trying to do the job quicker, I might agree. But it wasn't. As you rightly say, you really don't know the ins and outs.
Our lads go home safe. Every day.
Oh. The reason there was no danger of a crush as you proposed is that proper exclusion zones were enforced. As they should be.
Anything else I can help you with? | |
|
| should I take action?
Posted: 7/6/2009 9:17:17 AM | In crass and simple terms, to me, while regrettable, it is worth the occasional death, be it infant or adult to allow for a wider range of experience in life. I would rather that than try to protect against everything.
If I had a child of my own which died, of course, I;d be devastated, but my convictions would not change one iota!
Yeah, course you would.
TJ, you work in safety so the term 'reasonably practicable' should ring bells with you.
Defined as the actions of a reasonable person.
It is reasonable to expect toddlers to be adaquately supervised when playing.
It is reasonable to expect parents to be upset when they find their children have been placed in danger because of unreasonable actions.
It is reasonable to protect against death and injury in the workplace, the school yard, the classroom, in fact wherever we as humans are.
It is reasonable to teach your own children about safe conduct
It is reasonable not to expect a 3/4 year old to have grasped that lesson.
No one's life should be forfeit in order to allow a wider experience of life, in the event of it happening, it is not unreasonable to take steps against it happening again.
It is however, your life, so do as you so choose, don't forget, most of the HSE laws are there not because of those of us with a little common sense but to protect the numpties who insist on attempting to remove themselves from the gene pool through sheer stupidity.
It's even possible that our children today have to be confined by so many safety rules due to the actions of the more reckless and stupid of those who take pride in having spent their summers in A&E.
If you ever have a child of your own TJ, please do come and post and lets us know whether you still believe he or she is available as collateral damage in the pursuit of freedom or whether you believe him or her to be the most precious creation of the universe whom you wish to protect utterly while making your self stand back, fist in mouth and ready to run to catch them, as you allow them to spread their wings.
EDIT: VVVV
The lack of supervision was unlikely to have caused it.
Something we will never know as there wasn't any supervision and therefore no adult able to report the actual circumstances of the accident.
Even if the accident would have happened anyway (and nobody is disputing that possibility), there is the matter that there are no reliable witnesses to it, who can say not only how he fell but how he landed, whether he was knocked out or not, how long for, how long did he lay there before anyone took notice? Children should be supervised because they are not capable of making safety decisions.
Simple as. | |
|
Joe1uk
|
Joined: 6/10/2009
Msg: 83 | |
| should I take action?
Posted: 7/6/2009 9:19:01 AM |
Do you really think suspending a man is the best way forward?
HSE will want to know that you're suspending him with safety harness and fall arrest equipment all tested and installed by suitably qualified people. make sure you cordon off the area below just in case he falls and lands on some poor sod eating his sandwich in the middle of that over grown flower bed. Barriers cones and flashing lights area must. Make sure he wears a hard hat and yellow jacket just in case he encounters someone falling slower on the way down so that they can see him and get out the way.
Its reasonable to assume that a child will fall from a climbing frame whether supervised or not. Insisting that they are supervised will only reduce that risk marginally. What they have done isn't exactly dangerous like you are all making out. The lack of supervision was unlikely to have caused it. | |
|
| should I take action?
Posted: 7/6/2009 9:30:05 AM |
No one's life should be forfeit in order to allow a wider experience of life, in the event of it happening, it is not unreasonable to take steps against it happening again.
To you it's reasonable. To me, the level of it in our society is stiffling.
It is however, your life, so do as you so choose, don't forget, most of the HSE laws are there not because of those of us with a little common sense but to protect the numpties who insist on attempting to remove themselves from the gene pool through sheer stupidity.
Exactly what I said earlier, you are allowing a genration of nancys to outlive their natural lifespan.
It's even possible that our children today have to be confined by so many safety rules due to the actions of the more reckless and stupid of those who take pride in having spent their summers in A&E.
A couple of my friends were injured seriously as a kid, recovered....but scarred. But we were all toughened up and pretty much able to deal with any situation as adults.
If you ever have a child of your own TJ, please do come and post and lets us know whether you still believe he or she is available as collateral damage in the pursuit of freedom or whether you believe him or her to be the most precious creation of the universe whom you wish to protect utterly while making your self stand back, fist in mouth and ready to run to catch them, as you allow them to spread their wings.
I am not known among my friends for having a conviction then not upholding it when it applies to me. It's called integrity. | |
|
Pud78
|
Joined: 4/23/2009
Msg: 85 | |
| should I take action?
Posted: 7/6/2009 9:50:02 AM |
Perhaps you didn't bother to read that part.
Actually I didn't, it wasn't within that post and I thought after that paragraph anything that you had to say wasn't worth reading but have gone back and yes in a latter post you do state.
HAD to make a report to the HSE about the incident on site as it is a legal requirement.
but also
Had it been left to my own discretion I would not have.
I dislike the culture of blame.
which was my point that you can't use your discretion and you have to take this action to avoid the blame culture and show that your serious about health and safety and not just accept that accidents happen but to find a reason and try and avoid a repeat.
As you say this guy had a complete disregard for health and safety with a piece of dangerous machinery and was using in a twonkish manner and you felt a ticking off is appropriate??
if people on site feel they will have to go through such a proceedure, they are far less likely TO report near misses and incidents. When they do report them, or are seen, they are more likely to try to cover their own backs rather than be open and honest and focus on the REAL issue of making sure if doesn't happen again.
You have to report near misses too so that statement is a contradiction in it self, but also how are you ensuring reoccurence by just having a chat with the individual and how would you show a court that you take Health and Safety seriously by not taking disciplinary action against by someone not following set guidelines? You have noble intentions but that isn't enough.
Ever had to deal with the HSE? I have, they do not encourage a sense of partnership, in fact they come across as quite heavy handed.
Yes I have had to deal with HSE on a few occasions and have had to give a PACE interview but it has never gone anywhere as I have always been able to display due diligence. I agree that they are heavy handed though.
and this with a company such as ours which does not tolerate deliberate health and safety breaches.
Yes, it does...sends them off with a don't look a twonk again, but least you are open and honest with him hat he looked a twonk.
I'd LOVE to know YOUR qualification which allows you to give ME advice though!
I gave advice based purely on the post I read and if you feel that you were 100% right in that post no matter what my experience is I am not sure you would listen. I am surprised by your general attitude to health and safety from someone in your position as they are normally very anal about H&S as they understand the repercussions of accidents, especially those that result in death where yours comes across as quite relaxed and that of you can trust the employees to follow the rules and then accidents wont happen. I would suggest that you need a reality check.
Our lads go home safe. Every day.
Oh. The reason there was no danger of a crush as you proposed is that proper exclusion zones were enforced. As they should be.
Anything else I can help you with?
long may it continue and I am sure that you do know what your talking about and it is hard to get every point across in a post and may of misinterpreted what your saying and will highlight any inaccuracy in what I see you or anyone puts as I am sure you will with me. | |
|
| should I take action?
Posted: 7/6/2009 10:08:14 AM | which was my point that you can't use your discretion and you have to take this action
Which is no point at all really considering I had already said that I could not use my discretion.
You have to report near misses too so that statement is a contradiction in it self
No, you do not have to report all near misses, only those quoted here:
http://www.hse.gov.uk/riddor/guidance.htm
Further, it is NO contradiction to say that a person will not come forward and report a near miss to my site manager (he can't be everywhere) if that person thinks they will be subjected to an interrogation. At least TRY to keep up.
Yes I have had to deal with HSE on a few occasions and have had to give a PACE interview but it has never gone anywhere as I have always been able to display due diligence. I agree that they are heavy handed though.
We are audited by our client company on a regular basis, and a single breach of our due diligence is treated with the utmost seriousness. That can mean a single missing peice of paper. any machine on site is logged, has a certificate of thourough eamination, a daily and weekly checklist and the operator's tickets stapled to their signed, site and task specific method statement.......EVERY time. And it isn't just a paperwork excercise......the method is discussed. And STILL the HSE treat you with suspicion!!!
Yes, it does...sends them off with a don't look a twonk again, but least you are open and honest with him hat he looked a twonk.
No, it doesn't...as quite CLEARLY stated, the incident was reported, as it happens the chap was a direct employee of a company subcontracted to us, and as such itis a requirement that it was his company which filed the report, not ours. Look up the rules matey.
That said, you were not in the office.......for almost 3 hours doing the de brief and talk through of the method statements, so it was hardly treated lightly. And nowhere was he CALLED a twonk, he just happens to BE one.
I gave advice based purely on the post I read and if you feel that you were 100% right in that post no matter what my experience is I am not sure you would listen.
No, you commented without reading ALL the posts. as you stated above.
Lastly, surprised as you may be at my 'attitude' toward health and safety, I'd not have the job if I were not performing my duties properly. I work in an EXTREMELY competetive environment for a VERY demanding client.
I take it VERY seriously because I am paid to.
Certian parts of it I fully agree with, for instance, the exclusion zone I mentioned makes perfect sense.
I do not agree with all of it though. I got into this industry because it allowed choice. That choice is being eroded.
moreover, I LOVE construction, yet on any given day over 50% of my time is devited to making sure correct paperwork is in place, and NOT constructing anything.
A for instance:
on a site with a lead groundworking subcontractor, we require they keep full paperwork for all machinery, plant, toolbox talks and a host of other paperwork. Fair enough, but then my manager has to take copies of THEIR paperwork, to which he adds his own for our file. Now, you tell me, where exactly is the point of that. Why can I not just have him make sure THEIR paperwork is in order?
It's getting ridiculous. I dislike this aspect to it intensely. and yet, for all the time I was a site manager, despite my dislike for this arrse covering, I never had a single reportable injury on a site I ran. | |
|
| should I take action?
Posted: 7/6/2009 10:08:32 AM |
I think kids are growing up to be thugs because they are mollycoddled and not taught to take responsibility for their actions.
What has that got to do with unsupervised 3 year olds at a nursery?
Facts are that even if this equipment was supervised he would probably still have fallen.
The only purpose for supervision is to ensure equipment isn't used incorrectly and I 'm not sure how a child can misuse a climbing frame.
The OP does state that even if someone had been present he would probably still have fallen. However, the child hurt his neck, the only witnesses were toddlers who couldn't tell how far he had fallen, how he had landed, whether he had lost conciousness, whether he had hit anything on the way down. All this information is asked for by paramedics and doctors and makes diagnosing and treating much quicker if it can be supplied.
What gets me is everyone banging on about mollycoddling children and saying they are wrapped up in cotton wool but the OP is talking about a 3 yr old, not a 10 yr old. For the record, when I take my kids to the local play park, which is completely fenced off and is staffed I don't constantly follow my 3 yr old about, she runs about with her big sister and lots of others. If she wants to do the monkey bars she knows she has to come and get me though | |
|
Pud78
|
Joined: 4/23/2009
Msg: 88 | |
| should I take action?
Posted: 7/6/2009 11:03:16 AM | tjslater....
which was my point that you can't use your discretion and you have to take this action
Which is no point at all really considering I had already said that I could not use my discretion.
Which I had not read when I wrote that as I explained so can you please keep up!
You have to report near misses too so that statement is a contradiction in it self
No, you do not have to report all near misses, only those quoted here:
http://www.hse.gov.uk/riddor/guidance.htm
Further, it is NO contradiction to say that a person will not come forward and report a near miss to my site manager (he can't be everywhere) if that person thinks they will be subjected to an interrogation. At least TRY to keep up.
Thank you I am fully aware or riddor and the regulations and mentioned earlier in this thread, keep up. Thank you for linking them for me though! My comment was was referring to the near miss that you had and that most near misses that could have resulted in a reportable injury. I agreed about having an open and honest working environment and believe I said it was noble. I just believe that employees need to have consequence for not following health and safety and that cutting corners and not following H&S should be punishable. We want the same outcome but from different methods.
Yes, it does...sends them off with a don't look a twonk again, but least you are open and honest with him hat he looked a twonk.
No, it doesn't...
I was being deliberately flippant and was responding to the initial post that was put and that was pretty much said that using your discretion that was your action, I accept that you clarified taht isn't the case and you clearly know what your talking about.
I gave advice based purely on the post I read and if you feel that you were 100% right in that post no matter what my experience is I am not sure you would listen.
No, you commented without reading ALL the posts. as you stated above.
I didn't realise that I had to read more than one post to get the gist and just read that as a one off post and my statement is accurate the my post in response at that time, retrospectively - again keep up!
Lastly, surprised as you may be at my 'attitude' toward health and safety
I don't doubt your knowledge, passion, or qualifications and your clearly working in a very competitive industry at the moment it just it comes across to me at least that mistakes shouldn't be punishable, accidents happen and should just be accepted and the Health and safety act is something to be placated rather than applied. | |
|
| should I take action?
Posted: 7/6/2009 11:16:17 AM |
Which I had not read when I wrote that as I explained so can you please keep up!
That being the case, I would point you toward the delete key found on the top right of your keyboard. Typing can magically be erased with it.
I just believe that employees need to have consequence for not following health and safety and that cutting corners and not following H&S should be punishable.
As stated, I would agree IF the person were willfully breaching health and safety regs. But doing it through enthusiasm??? No way, they respond better to education. ( having worked for both BLL and LOR NW, I can tell you for CERTAIN that LOR is far more respected by it's employees for it's policy of sending an 'offender' on a safety training morning where they are served coffee, sandwiches and a safety lecture, rather than BLL's policy of scapegoatism.)
I don't doubt your knowledge, passion, or qualifications and your clearly working in a very competitive industry at the moment
I have always worked in competetive environments, that is why i have a good job.
it just it comes across to me at least that mistakes shouldn't be punishable, accidents happen and should just be accepted and the Health and safety act is something to be placated rather than applied.
Because you're reading the bits you choose to read.
Oh, re the 'keeping up'
Try catching up. At your age I had my own company and was winding it down, this is my second career in the industry and I control a large budget and run a region. You've a way to go ;) | |
|
Pud78
|
Joined: 4/23/2009
Msg: 90 | |
| should I take action?
Posted: 7/6/2009 11:42:51 AM |
Oh, re the 'keeping up'
Try catching up. At your age I had my own company and was winding it down, this is my second career in the industry and I control a large budget and run a region. You've a way to go ;)
Why where you winding it down? did you fail? Had to change for the security of corporate life and being a corporate man being stifled by regulations! yeah I got some catching up to do, such a failure me??? | |
|
| should I take action?
Posted: 7/6/2009 11:46:15 AM |
Oh, re the 'keeping up'
Try catching up. At your age I had my own company and was winding it down, this is my second career in the industry and I control a large budget and run a region. You've a way to go ;)
If you wish to score points of another poster, aim the attack at the post and not the posters achievements in life...
This thread has gone way off topic... The subject here is a 3 year old nursery pupil who was unsupervised on a piece of playground equipment and who subsequently fell from a significant height and injured themselves sufficiently to require hospital treatment...
The Op asks if she should take action... She does not ask for a break down of H&S rulings in building sites, nor the effects of mollycoddling young children in their later years, nor how it might affect the school... She asked a simple question...
If you want to discuss other aspects of H&S and the apparently idiotic rules they enforce... Go thread search for one, or start one up...
For me, the OP handled the situation extremely calmly and sensibly, the child has not been withdrawn from the nursery, the OP has not demanded the equipment be removed, she has not employed a lawyer or started litigation proceedings, in fact, she's been pretty damned easy going about the whole incident...
IMO.. | |
|
Pud78
|
Joined: 4/23/2009
Msg: 92 | |
| should I take action?
Posted: 7/6/2009 11:52:01 AM | Pants your right and consider myself rightly told off and agree entirely that namethatchoon did exactly the right thing in the right fashion and with the incident being left there I will leave this the thread there.
Sorry for hijacking! | |
|
| should I take action?
Posted: 7/6/2009 11:52:52 AM | TJ whateveryournameis!I don't think that your supposedly health and safety regulations and oh so sanctamonious statements has an iota of in any shape or form to do with my original post!
My son is a small,learning,developing child not one of your poor employees working with 29 ton machinery!
You have completely gone off topic..and to tell the truth I do think you only like the sound of your own opinions!
and as for your sick statement about it being one of lifes experiences losing a child or adult(or something along those rediculous lines!)I really do believe that you are either deluded or just plain stupid!
Right well my son's ok and I have sorted things out with the school!
So now go back to the rock from which you crawled under! End of! | |
|
| should I take action?
Posted: 7/6/2009 1:49:36 PM | Firstly I would question the accessibility of a 6ft climbing frame in a nursery environment, certain health and safety measures have to be adhered to (cushioned surfaces below play equipment etc), but is the equipment age-specific ?
Small children are still learning about cause and effect, I am not sure we want them to learn that falling from a great height (to a three year old) hurts quite a lot from a practical perspective.
Protecting a child in the early years doesn't instill wussdom, you have to address the situations when the child is of an age to understand the pro's and con's of said situations IMO .
OP. report your concerns to the governing body, for the benefit of all concerned and NOT because you want to sue the pants off them as some may think. | |
|
| should I take action?
Posted: 7/6/2009 2:15:57 PM | They did have an ofsted inspection earlier this year and I presume it must have been classed as safe equipment for the age range at the nursery?But I also presume that at the time of the inspection it was adequately supervised.
I am going to contact ofsted and tell them what happened with my son so hopefully they will do a visit without first informing the nursery of this.
The more I think it about it i'm not sure if the head telling me that this will never happen again is enough!She told me that the teachers had had several meetings about what had happened but i'm not sure if it was to just get their story straight because I have had several different renditions of what happened from the day after it happened up until today!
I'm just not sure who is are the best people to approach about this though? | |
|
Pud78
|
Joined: 4/23/2009
Msg: 96 | |
| should I take action?
Posted: 7/6/2009 2:39:27 PM | Complaints about a lack of health and safety in school
If you have a complaint about health, safety or security at your child's school, contact the headteacher. If you’re still not happy, follow the school's complaints procedure and write to the chairperson of the school's governing body. If your child goes to a community or voluntary controlled school, you could also write to your local authority
taken from the Government website, there is also a link available on the site...
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Parents/Schoolslearninganddevelopment/YourChildsWelfareAtSchool/DG_4016097 | |
|
Joe1uk
|
Joined: 6/10/2009
Msg: 97 | |
| should I take action?
Posted: 7/6/2009 3:15:37 PM |
I think kids are growing up to be thugs because they are mollycoddled and not taught to take responsibility for their actions. What has that got to do with unsupervised 3 year olds at a nursery? Facts are that even if this equipment was supervised he would probably still have fallen.
The only purpose for supervision is to ensure equipment isn't used incorrectly and I 'm not sure how a child can misuse a climbing frame. The OP does state that even if someone had been present he would probably still have fallen. However, the child hurt his neck, the only witnesses were toddlers who couldn't tell how far he had fallen, how he had landed, whether he had lost conciousness, whether he had hit anything on the way down. All this information is asked for by paramedics and doctors and makes diagnosing and treating much quicker if it can be supplied. What gets me is everyone banging on about mollycoddling children and saying they are wrapped up in cotton wool but the OP is talking about a 3 yr old, not a 10 yr old. For the record, when I take my kids to the local play park, which is completely fenced off and is staffed I don't constantly follow my 3 yr old about, she runs about with her big sister and lots of others. If she wants to do the monkey bars she knows she has to come and get me though
No idea, someone said amongst all this off topic twaddle that not mollycodling kids enough was turning them into thugs so there was actually nothing wrong in doing so.
If someone had been supervising they still wouldn't know how far he landed, whether he lost conciousness or hit anything on the way down unless the supervisor was fixed on the one child on the one piece of equipment. It takes a split second for a child to do something and fall. There are three classes and numerous other pieces of equipment to watch. They'd have no more clue unless they actually seen the fall than if they weren't supervised. They'd have no more clue than the teacher that did get there if the child went unconscious briefly. How long do you think it took the children to get teacher. They're 3, they aren't thick, If a child falls they get help, instantly.
If you take your child to the local play park why don't you watch every move. Its not only the monkey bars where they can have an accident.
Its just unrealistic and too protective to watch a childs every move.
Yes they should be supervised but still I don't see how it would have changed anything in the slightest. | |
|
HenXX
|
Joined: 6/16/2009
Msg: 98 | |
| should I take action?
Posted: 7/6/2009 3:19:06 PM | Normally checkups by higher authority does consist of them informing of the visit(nurseries i have no knowledge of but do hospitals)....or the word gets around.....I think they have had a bit of a shock,so probably will be ok now.Would not do any harm in you arriving a bit early to see for yourself that everything is in order,every once in a while to put your mind at ease.
Joe.....you are out of your depth here sweetheart,you have to understand that kids reach certain stages of development at certain ages.It is our job to develop these skills I.e balance,co-ordination etc in a safe place.To put it in a mans understanding,you would never leave an apprentice totally on his own to do a job he was not totally trained up on doing would you?.......You may not stand over him but you would be on hand.I have personally as a mum been able to stand by and watch,foreseen what was going to happen and stepped in to break their fall.So yes,with supervision it may have been prevented,luckily the kid was ok. | |
|
| should I take action?
Posted: 7/6/2009 3:26:29 PM | """If it had been deliberate as opposed to a pure accident caused by him trying to do the job quicker""""
trying to do the job quicker,doesnt that entail cutting corners,not following safety practises? isn't that then kinda deliberate??
sorry,but anyone who doesn't operate machinery like that safely and how they were trained [i presume your guys are trained by mentor trainers or there equivalent?] and who cut corners to try to do a job quicker than the safety rules would allow should be having at the very least their licenses taken off them
i had to respond as a first aider to an accident involving a reach truck that had run over a colleague and it was one of the worst things i have ever witnessed let alone have to respond to as a first aider and for someone like you who says they are responsible for the health and safety to say it is ok cos it wasnt deliberate bla bla bla absolutely disgusts me | |
|
Joe1uk
|
Joined: 6/10/2009
Msg: 100 | |
| should I take action?
Posted: 7/6/2009 5:19:43 PM |
Normally checkups by higher authority does consist of them informing of the visit(nurseries i have no knowledge of but do hospitals)....or the word gets around.....I think they have had a bit of a shock,so probably will be ok now.Would not do any harm in you arriving a bit early to see for yourself that everything is in order,every once in a while to put your mind at ease.
Joe.....you are out of your depth here sweetheart,you have to understand that kids reach certain stages of development at certain ages.It is our job to develop these skills I.e balance,co-ordination etc in a safe place.To put it in a mans understanding,you would never leave an apprentice totally on his own to do a job he was not totally trained up on doing would you?.......You may not stand over him but you would be on hand.I have personally as a mum been able to stand by and watch,foreseen what was going to happen and stepped in to break their fall.So yes,with supervision it may have been prevented,luckily the kid was ok.
Hen I'm flattered that I'm now your sweatheart, However I'm not thick, I understand perfectly. I've already said that it would be wise to have at least one person outside to make sure that pushing and bullying doesnt cause falls. Iv'e already said we have to being doing things to learn the risks involved. It's okay saying we develop these skills, however its a childs job to learn those skills, if we stop them and supervise them too much they won't learn them cos they'll never get to do them and never learn their own limits. We can't tell a child its own limits, we can only advise.
Being on hand is all very well and its great on the off chance that you can forsee or catch them but realistically if a supervisor is watching a class on several pieces of equipment then its unlikely they'd see this happening. A climbing frame is a climbing frame, kids climb on it, how can you forsee they're going to fall. There may have been five other children on there, are you gonna stand with your arms out in case one slips.
It's just unrealistic.
It was an accident and its unlikely a supervisor would have been able to forsee it happening or prevent the fall.
However a supervisor should be out there to prevent dangerous situations developing. Other equipment whilst being safer if used correctly may be subject to misuse a lot easier than a climbing frame. I recently saw children innocently jumping a space between a wall they were running along, about 3ft high, 3ft gap.One did it one foot first, other followed, if hed slipped he'd have fell to the floor, however his sister insisted in jumping forward both feet together , if she'd jumped short shed have landed straight on the wall with her chin. Could I stop it even though I was watching on the opposite side of the road... no of course not, by the time I realised shed done it.
I've chatted to a few people about this now that dont come on here, I love to get outsiders views on things and they say... should be supervised, its right for kids to learn, make mistakes, however they can't remember there being a climbing frame at nursery and as its high and there's bars down it to climb up its dangerous as a child could fall and hit those bars. At that age the head is too delicate to take that therefore its unsuitable.
I seem to remember having one but being barred from using it.
Please don't stiffle your kids from playing, joining in learning, or make them outcasts by kicking up a fuss. No kid wants mum fussing round them saying they cant do things their mates can. | |
|
|
| Page 4 of 5
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5 |
|
Home
login 
