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

Why Safe Kids Are Becoming Fat Kids

online.wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 52 posts

Re: Why Safe Kids Are Becoming Fat Kids

#11

Post by anamax »

thedob wrote: post #3

Let's say that a township little league wants to put its foot down and take the stance that there's no way they'll ban sliding into bases, as that's not baseball, and as a result it just isn't American. The insurance company says that for the little league to get insurance it's going to cost twice as much if they allow sliding. Hence the little league has no choice but the pass on the cost of participation to the par…

If you want an insurance company to charge less to insure an activity, make that activity cheaper.

If you think that insurance companies are overstating risk, put your money up and price that risk "correctly". If you're correct, you'll get rich and they'll either adopt your methods or go out of biz.

Re: Why Safe Kids Are Becoming Fat Kids

#12

Post by dfranke »

anamax wrote: post #11
thedob wrote: post #3

Let's say that a township little league wants to put its foot down and take the stance that there's no way they'll ban sliding into bases, as that's not baseball, and as a result it just isn't American. The insurance company says that for the little league to get insurance it's going to cost twice as much if they allow sliding. Hence the little league has no choice but the pass on the cost of participation to the par…

If you want an insurance company to charge less to insure an activity, make that activity cheaper. If you think that insurance companies are overstating risk, put your money up and price that risk "correctly". If you're correct, you'll get rich and they'll either adopt your methods or go out of biz.

We're talking about liability insurance, not health insurance. The root problem here is tort law, not accident statistics.

Re: Why Safe Kids Are Becoming Fat Kids

#13

Post by malkia »

I grew up in Bulgaria. We now live in USA, and have a baby.

Well, I'm just wondering where the hell, he's going to play.

When I was a kid, we were playing soccer on the street, or in between the blocks, throwing stones at other kids, fighting with plastic/wood swords, driving self-mad woodcars, and everyday I was with a scratch, or I dunno what else.

Even earlier when I was 4, me and my cousing, just an year older than me, somehow decided that we need one of our toys that was left in the other part of the city, so we just took off (I'm not sure what's the distance - but it was in the 5km-10km range) and started walking... Everybody got scared, family, etc. But it was fun story anyway...

This all was up till 8th grade, when I started programming, once that started, I kind of lost interrest in playing outside, it was just the Apple ][, my friend's Oric, and my other's friend PC.

Well I certainly want my kid to play for free, hopefully there are some parks around, but the whole society is a bit too much afraid. Yes, I know - sexual predators, kidnappers, yada, yada - it's a little 1984 that we us parents create though, for our own safety (so our mind is always safe).

Re: Why Safe Kids Are Becoming Fat Kids

#14

Post by menloparkbum »

thedob wrote: post #3

Let's say that a township little league wants to put its foot down and take the stance that there's no way they'll ban sliding into bases, as that's not baseball, and as a result it just isn't American. The insurance company says that for the little league to get insurance it's going to cost twice as much if they allow sliding. Hence the little league has no choice but the pass on the cost of participation to the par…

This isn't true at all - little leagues don't buy insurance, they have the parents sign a piece of paper that says that the league isn't liable for any injuries. The banning of base sliding is the result of aggressive safety obsessed parents, like the one in the article who complained about hot rubber playground mats.

Re: Why Safe Kids Are Becoming Fat Kids

#15

Post by dfranke »

It always pleases me when I read articles like this one. The mere fact that the problem is being talked about with any regularity means that the pendulum is likely to start swinging back toward sanity. (By the way, I grew up in Broward County and attended the elementary school that pioneered banning running during recess.)

Re: Why Safe Kids Are Becoming Fat Kids

#16

Post by menloparkbum »

The premise of the article is a bit far fetched. Kids aren't fat because our culture is safety obsessed. They are fat because Grand Theft Auto is more fun than little league or hanging from monkey bars. The riskier playground equipment of yesteryear does not stand a chance against thousands of computer games designed specifically to hold kids' attentions for long periods of time.

Re: Why Safe Kids Are Becoming Fat Kids

#17

Post by dfranke »

malkia wrote: post #13

I grew up in Bulgaria. We now live in USA, and have a baby. Well, I'm just wondering where the hell, he's going to play. When I was a kid, we were playing soccer on the street, or in between the blocks, throwing stones at other kids, fighting with plastic/wood swords, driving self-mad woodcars, and everyday I was with a scratch, or I dunno what else. Even earlier when I was 4, me and my cousing, just an year older th…

Get a house with a decent-sized yard. Make your own playground. Get your kid and the neighbors' kids involved in helping build it. A seesaw is a one-by-eight, a triangular block, and a pair of hinges. A swing is a tire and a rope or a plank and two ropes.

Re: Why Safe Kids Are Becoming Fat Kids

#18

Post by sown »

dfranke wrote: post #17
malkia wrote: post #13

I grew up in Bulgaria. We now live in USA, and have a baby. Well, I'm just wondering where the hell, he's going to play. When I was a kid, we were playing soccer on the street, or in between the blocks, throwing stones at other kids, fighting with plastic/wood swords, driving self-mad woodcars, and everyday I was with a scratch, or I dunno what else. Even earlier when I was 4, me and my cousing, just an year older th…

Get a house with a decent-sized yard. Make your own playground. Get your kid and the neighbors' kids involved in helping build it. A seesaw is a one-by-eight, a triangular block, and a pair of hinges. A swing is a tire and a rope or a plank and two ropes.

So he can get sued by the other parents when something happens?

Re: Why Safe Kids Are Becoming Fat Kids

#19

Post by dfranke »

sown wrote: post #18
dfranke wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Get a house with a decent-sized yard. Make your own playground. Get your kid and the neighbors' kids involved in helping build it. A seesaw is a one-by-eight, a triangular block, and a pair of hinges. A swing is a tire and a rope or a plank and two ropes.

So he can get sued by the other parents when something happens?

This is the most depressing comment I've ever read on this site. Where do I even begin?

1. Anybody can sue anybody over damn near anything. This has always been so. It is not a recent development.

2. Getting sued does not mean the apocalypse. Judges have three-figure IQs. They know a frivilous lawsuit when they see one and will award attorney's fees to the defendant.

3. The risk of serious injury is minimal. Little Johnny's parents aren't going to sue because he scraped his knee. The worst injury with any probability high enough to be worth expending any gray matter on considering it is a broken bone. Bones heal.

Re: Why Safe Kids Are Becoming Fat Kids

#20

Post by davidw »

dfranke wrote: post #19
sown wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So he can get sued by the other parents when something happens?

This is the most depressing comment I've ever read on this site. Where do I even begin? 1. Anybody can sue anybody over damn near anything. This has always been so. It is not a recent development. 2. Getting sued does not mean the apocalypse. Judges have three-figure IQs. They know a frivilous lawsuit when they see one and will award attorney's fees to the defendant. 3. The risk of serious injury is minimal. Little J…

Looks like an 'attractive nuisance' situation to me, if you're not careful about it (such as limiting access), but I'm not a lawyer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attractive_nuisance

Post reply on HN