Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Making Playgrounds a Little More Dangerous

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 275 posts

Re: Making Playgrounds a Little More Dangerous

#111

Post by lemming »

magicalhippo wrote: post #95
devchix wrote: post #9

A recent episode of 99% Invisible: Play Mountain looked at how the playground got to be safe and boring. "A two-year-old boy named Frank Nelson was climbing a 12-foot-tall slide in a Chicago park when he slipped through a railing and hit his head so hard that it caused permanent brain damage. The park system of Chicago was sued and had to pay out millions of dollars to Nelson’s family. At that time, in the late 70s,…

A friend of mine designs playgrounds for kids, and is very good at it (his designs win 90+% of the competitive bids he enters). He's also worked hard to put in place a playground safety inspector certification system over here. One of his core ideas is that there are two types of safety: subjective safety and objective safety. For example, kids quickly learn that falling from a height is painful, and experiences such…

That sounds really interesting. Does he have a website or something we could look at?

Re: Making Playgrounds a Little More Dangerous

#112

Post by solipsism »

magicalhippo wrote: post #95
devchix wrote: post #9

A recent episode of 99% Invisible: Play Mountain looked at how the playground got to be safe and boring. "A two-year-old boy named Frank Nelson was climbing a 12-foot-tall slide in a Chicago park when he slipped through a railing and hit his head so hard that it caused permanent brain damage. The park system of Chicago was sued and had to pay out millions of dollars to Nelson’s family. At that time, in the late 70s,…

A friend of mine designs playgrounds for kids, and is very good at it (his designs win 90+% of the competitive bids he enters). He's also worked hard to put in place a playground safety inspector certification system over here. One of his core ideas is that there are two types of safety: subjective safety and objective safety. For example, kids quickly learn that falling from a height is painful, and experiences such…

I like the dichotomy, but for me the names "subjective safety" and "objective safety" make no sense.

"Obvious dangers" vs "non-obvious dangers" seems like much clearer language, even if it's the case that there's a way to squint to make the terminology you used make sense. Kids will naturally explore the boundaries around obvious dangers.

Re: Making Playgrounds a Little More Dangerous

#113

Post by sasaf5 »

umvi wrote: post #21

You're right - anything that provokes fear or outrage gets instant attention. Everything else doesn't. North Korea imprisoning a single idiot American who crossed the border = national dialogue because it's outrageous School shooting where 3 people die = national dialogue on gun control because it's outrageous. DUI accident that kills a family of 5 = small blurb in local news because it's not outrageous (even if it s…

I felt that a similar thing happened with those thai kids stuck in that cave. An international effort was made to rescue them. What if this year one of them is dying because their parents can't afford healthcare? Would that create an international effort?

At the same time, I too felt compelled to help them when they were stuck...

Re: Making Playgrounds a Little More Dangerous

#114

Post by a1369209993 »

loup-vaillant wrote: post #67
dragontamer wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Your child could have slipped when getting off a train and permanently injured themselves, or in any other number of ways. But thanks to our laws, we don't have to worry about playground sets. Low probability / high impact events are a fact of life and are a valid cause for regulations. Worker safety laws in the early 1900s were such that people more regularly lost fingers or even limbs in heavy machinery. It still…

There's a difference between playgrounds and work environments: as far as I am aware, workers aren't any more miserable in safer work environment. Children in "safer" playgrounds, are . The value of life is not infinite. It is perfectly reasonable to sacrifice a few to improve the conditions of the many. Funnier, riskier playgrounds do exactly that. That said, the article stated the "safer" playground engendered more…

> The value of life is not infinite.

Technically it is[0], but they're going to die in a century or so (if that) anyway, so anything that reduces quality of life enough is morally equivalent to killing them earlier.

0: at least to within measurement error

Re: Making Playgrounds a Little More Dangerous

#115

Post by lutorm »

craftinator wrote: post #93
redff0000 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your child could have slipped when getting off a train and permanently injured themselves, or in any other number of ways. Low probability high severity events trigger a cognitive bias that makes people attempt to make things '100% safe'. There are two problems with that. 1: nothing can ever be made 100% safe so those low probability high impact events still happen from time to time. 2: making things safe hits a stee…

Another thought that adds to this viewpoint: slightly more dangerous playgrounds teach kids how to play more safely, and they grow into adults who also know how to play responsibly. Kids who never get a chance to develop good balance (with the immediate feedback of bruises and scrapes) will not be as good at avoiding falls and other physical dangers as those who have good balance. They also won't know their own physi…

That's exactly the point. It's not that playgrounds should be more dangerous for the heck of it, or just because kids think it's more fun that way. It's because learning to deal with danger is an essential life skill and we are now depriving our kids of it.

Re: Making Playgrounds a Little More Dangerous

#116

Post by megous »

Well, why not. It's a lot of fun to be playing with, climbing over and exploring garbage like what is shown on the photos.

I'd just not kid myself. It will come with more injuries, hopefully not debilitating.

I got several unpleasant injuries by playing freely with anything available. I threw a metal rod through my feet. Jumped on a 4" nail while running, securing my shoe to my feet, quite well, cut half my thumb off with my favorite knife. :) All these things and more I can see kids be able to achieve in such an environment.

I suspect that had my parents have to do more than just drive me to the emergency, they'd be more involved in ensuring I don't do these things again.

I wonder if free public healthcare like in many EU countries vs whatever is in the US has an effect on what parents let their children do.

Re: Making Playgrounds a Little More Dangerous

#117

Post by fjsolwmv »

craftinator wrote: post #93
redff0000 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your child could have slipped when getting off a train and permanently injured themselves, or in any other number of ways. Low probability high severity events trigger a cognitive bias that makes people attempt to make things '100% safe'. There are two problems with that. 1: nothing can ever be made 100% safe so those low probability high impact events still happen from time to time. 2: making things safe hits a stee…

Another thought that adds to this viewpoint: slightly more dangerous playgrounds teach kids how to play more safely, and they grow into adults who also know how to play responsibly. Kids who never get a chance to develop good balance (with the immediate feedback of bruises and scrapes) will not be as good at avoiding falls and other physical dangers as those who have good balance. They also won't know their own physi…

The discussion is about quadriplegia, not scrapes and bruises.

Re: Making Playgrounds a Little More Dangerous

#118

Post by leetrout »

ausbah wrote: post #98

I am frankly appalled how some people in this thread appear so nonchalant about willing to accept the deaths of children in the name of letting a majority of kids "have the right kind of fun".

I don’t get that vibe. I’m not sure of your age or if you’re a parent but there’s some recent writing in “Coddling of the American Mind” where they speak about making the road for the child instead of the child for the road and how that’s influenced adolescents today and their lack of maturity in college and beyond.

It’s terrifying to think about something happening to my daughter but I know if I don’t give her the opportunity to learn about responsibility and safety on her own I’m not doing my job as a father. Having a playground or similar option (hiking trails, rustic camping, etc) to explore this is a plus and IMO part of what we need in society and less safetyism.

Re: Making Playgrounds a Little More Dangerous

#119

Post by fjsolwmv »

ken wrote: post #51
maxxxxx wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s a really tricky balance. On the one hand we should have rules that don’t allow building unnecessarily dangerous stuff (eg covering toys with lead coating) but on the other hand we shouldn’t expect 100% safety because the only really safe thing is something that doesn’t exist. It’s really difficult.

I would say there's a significant difference between the chemical/biological danger from touching a material which appears basically identical to other safe materials and causes toxic exposure over time, and the physical danger from falling or being cut. I want kids to learn that concrete is hard, and the harder you hit it, the more it will hurt. It's an easy lesson to learn, by trial-and-error, and transferable to m…

I don't want my daughter to learn about diving into the concrete floor of a pool, or smashing her head into a concrete play structure, by trial and error.

Re: Making Playgrounds a Little More Dangerous

#120

Post by fjsolwmv »

mherdeg wrote: post #97

I was watching some kids in our local playground climb pretty high in some of our local trees and wondering whether this a good idea, and came across this writeup on risky play: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/freedom-learn/201404... Modern parents who keep up to date on the parenting zeitgeist will have been exposed to the complementary idea to risky play that instead of saying "Be careful!" to a kid, you ca…

Kids feel safe when they don't know what the dangers are. My kid would feel safe sticking his hand in a pan of boiling oil
Post reply on HN