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

Learning the ropes: why Germany is building risk into its playgrounds (2021)

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 162 posts

Re: Learning the ropes: why Germany is building risk into its playgrounds (2021)

#141

Post by magicalhippo »

wnevets wrote: post #136
dragonwriter wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Playgrounds for children are a relative new invention, especially for the unwashed masses. The notion that children require a dangerous feeling playground to become well rounded and mentally tough adults is silly. Prior to playgrounds, children climbed trees and did all kinds of other edge-pushing play. Modern urban/suburban (and even in many cases rural) environments provide less opportunity for that.

I know that climate change is getting bad but trees still exist and kids still climb in them.

At least here, most if not all of the trees are cut down on a property when a kindergarten or school is built. My friend tried hard to prevent this on the projects he was involved with.

There's also the issue with who enjoys climbing trees. I can't recall specifically about trees, but I do know girls prefer different activities to boys, another thing my acquaintance focused on when designing playgrounds.

Anyway, my point wasn't that kids need playgrounds to develop properly. Rather, given that kids are forced to spend large parts of their day in areas where the playground is the main source of physical challenges, the design of the playground has an impact on the kids.

Re: Learning the ropes: why Germany is building risk into its playgrounds (2021)

#142

Post by magicalhippo »

wnevets wrote: post #130
magicalhippo wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But you didn't, your post is play vs no play. Perhaps I failed to emphasize, but the last bit was important to my point. Studies have shown motor skills are important for kids and can affect later academic performance, and good playgrounds help kids develop motor skills. > Playgrounds for children are a relative new invention, especially for the unwashed masses. Indeed... yet somehow you don't think they play any r…

> good playgrounds help kids develop motor skills. Once again, your link doesn't show that. Your link only claims physical play is important, it doesn't mention the type of playgrounds. Yes we all agree a sedentary lifestyle is bad for kids and adults. If you can't provide a scientific source for your claim that the type ("safe" vs dangerous) of playgrounds matter then just say that.

From the article I linked:

Several programs emphasize the selection of certain types of motor play equipment, based on previous observational studies of children’s outdoor play (Martin, 2000; McCall & Craft, 2004). These authors argue that equipment should be chosen to carry out specific activities that meet motor learning goals. Too often, they suggest, movement activities are planned around expensive pieces of playground equipment that pose few challenges, fail to capture children’s interests, and do not promote the acquisition of important skills.

My link was not meant to be exhaustive, just to show there's research on this. Here's another source[1]:

Even though research on risky play and young children’s risk-taking is a relatively new research area, researchers have, during the last decades, been interested in the possible benefits of risky play to children’s development and learning. This research indicates that risky play can lead to increased physical activity, improved motor/physical competence (Brussoni et al. 2015; Fjørtoft 2000), higher ability to assess risks and handle risk situations in an appropriate way (Ball 2002; Boyesen 1997; Lavrysen et al. 2015) and positive psychological outcomes (Brussoni et al. 2015; Sandseter and Kennair 2011) and general health (Brussoni et al. 2015).

[1]: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10643-020-01074-0

Re: Learning the ropes: why Germany is building risk into its playgrounds (2021)

#143

Post by d1sxeyes »

mschuster91 wrote: post #19
janmarsal wrote: post #9

I remember when I was a teen I started noticing how the nanny state had managed to remove all the old swings I used to play with and replaced them with some tiny and safe swings that no one even uses anymore. Children even started wearing yellow safety vests to school all of a sudden. I'm glad there's at least some backlash to this nonsense.

> Children even started wearing yellow safety vests to school all of a sudden. Given how many accidents happen on the way to school ("Schulwegunfälle", yes we have a dedicated word for it), it's absolutely necessary. 62k accidents in 2021, and 16 dead kids [1]. A large part of the cause is how absurdly car-centric our cities are - and yet, we're harmless compared to the US. [1] https://www.dguv.de/de/zahlen-fakten/sc…

'Dedicated word' in German is a bit of a tricky concept:

'Schulwegunfälle' => schul + weg + un + fall = 'school' + 'way' + 'bad' + 'happening'.

Technically it's a single word, but composed of separate, composable parts which make logical sense when combined together.

Re: Learning the ropes: why Germany is building risk into its playgrounds (2021)

#144

Post by fnomnom »

mschuster91 wrote: post #22

To add to the submission: I think there is one huge part why this is possible in the first place compared to the US, and the article just barely scrapes onto it: insurance. Like, when a kid gets injured here in Germany, mandatory healthcare insurance picks up the cost, and even if the maintainer can be held liable it's a few thousand euros in damages ("Schmerzensgeld") at most. In contrast, in the US healthcare insur…

>and even if the maintainer can be held liable

and thats a big IF. i dont think i ever heard of something like this happening in my circle

Re: Learning the ropes: why Germany is building risk into its playgrounds (2021)

#145

Post by TurboHaskal »

LeanderK wrote: post #27
mschuster91 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Children even started wearing yellow safety vests to school all of a sudden. Given how many accidents happen on the way to school ("Schulwegunfälle", yes we have a dedicated word for it), it's absolutely necessary. 62k accidents in 2021, and 16 dead kids [1]. A large part of the cause is how absurdly car-centric our cities are - and yet, we're harmless compared to the US. [1] https://www.dguv.de/de/zahlen-fakten/sc…

> 16 dead kids of course every preventable death is too much and we should be aiming at zero...but 16 doesn't seem that much? I would have guessed more for sure.

16 is sad and very unfortunate.

There is a massive outcry and countries passing anti-constitutional laws aimed to protect women that are victims of domestic violence with similar casualty rates.

Maybe we should let kids vote so politicians pay some attention to them.

Re: Learning the ropes: why Germany is building risk into its playgrounds (2021)

#146

Post by marton78 »

qwertox wrote: post #106
gammarator wrote: post #94

I saw some of this German company’s equipment in Memphis, Tennessee—very cool, and quite different from most U.S. playgrounds: https://www.richter-spielgeraete.de/en/playground-equipment/...

Crazy, this is one of their main playgrounds they are responsible for: https://www.garten-landschaft.de/guenter-beltzig-nachruf/ The page is an obituary because the designer died in December. The video is in English.

Really interesting. However, the Black Forest is not in the Bavarian Alps.

Re: Learning the ropes: why Germany is building risk into its playgrounds (2021)

#147

Post by im3w1l »

People speak as if risk is a positive. It isn't. It's intrinsically bad. The issue isn't risk avoidance, but excessive risk-avoidance. The issue is paying too high of a price to avoid risks. A top level comment mentioned climbing trees. This is an example of a somewhat risky activity that is well worth continuing.

Why is that? The big benefit as I see it is that it is natural free-form play. That's freedom. It's also a play as old as time, letting them connect with our ancestors. It teaches them to interact with an environment that doesn't care about them one way or another, it isn't designed to be safe, it isn't designed to be fun or engaging. Trees are just out there for their own reasons. Exploring that, playing with that and respecting that, it seems like it should be very healthy and teach the right lessons and intuitions and prepare them for the rest of the world.

Re: Learning the ropes: why Germany is building risk into its playgrounds (2021)

#148

Post by LeanderK »

burnished wrote: post #82
LeanderK wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 16 dead kids of course every preventable death is too much and we should be aiming at zero...but 16 doesn't seem that much? I would have guessed more for sure.

It does seem a little hypocritical to follow up 'should aim for zero children dead from being ran over by vehicles' with 'but 16 is fine'

I don't think so. I would have said the same about other statistics. In the end it defies my intuition, which is interesting given that the possibility of getting run over is pretty present in every day life of many children. You have to keep in mind that zero is pretty much impossible because the risk is present all long as we drive, so we should aim for zero but won't get to zero.

Re: Learning the ropes: why Germany is building risk into its playgrounds (2021)

#149

Post by red-iron-pine »

mpweiher wrote: post #3

"... it’s the strict policing of standards that enables a risk-accepting culture in the first place." Doesn't just apply to playgrounds.

Where what and how much risk matters.

A kid falling off of a playground -- kids are small, falls don't hurt them as much -- has a lot less risk than changing a traffic pattern and having an F-150 slam into another vehicle. Or having banks get greedy and collapse the economy.

Risks also require safety nets. Otherwise you're just screwing your people over.

Re: Learning the ropes: why Germany is building risk into its playgrounds (2021)

#150

Post by chopin »

mschuster91 wrote: post #22

To add to the submission: I think there is one huge part why this is possible in the first place compared to the US, and the article just barely scrapes onto it: insurance. Like, when a kid gets injured here in Germany, mandatory healthcare insurance picks up the cost, and even if the maintainer can be held liable it's a few thousand euros in damages ("Schmerzensgeld") at most. In contrast, in the US healthcare insur…

>Like, when a kid gets injured here in Germany, mandatory healthcare insurance picks up the cost, and even if the maintainer can be held liable it's a few thousand euros in damages ("Schmerzensgeld") at most.

I am not so sure about this. It's true that the health insurers come up for the cost. But at least in cases where injury is due to a fight, they come after you for the money ("Durchgriffshaftung"). I would assume that if the maintainer failed its duties in a negligent manner, they (indirectly) would be held liable.

Post reply on HN