The problem is that adherence to standards should protect against lawsuits. Something went wrong. And I suspect that the costs associated with the standards are not justified by the benefits. Look at the horrendous costs to deal with lead paint when the risks are much more imagined than real. Yes, too much lead is harmful. So is too much water.

except of course that any injury lawyer worth his commission on the millions of income from lawsuits will be able to argue that ANY injury under ANY circumstances is conclusive evidence that “reasonable steps” were not taken.

“Are there trees on the playground? I sure hope not – a kid could jump or fall out of one. ”

Worse, something could fall out of it and injure a kid. Can’t have that, so have to cut down all trees.

Western society has become so risk averse we’re stupified and incapable of doing anything.
We’re basking in our past successes, telling ourselves we’ve achieved so much, while at the same time reducing ourselves to nothing.
That is the way of the dodo, the path to extinction, and we’re willingly embarking on it under the banner of “health and safety”.

As the train was running on the day I saw it (third Saturday in July, 1996) there was no climbing on it. I don’t know what happens or what is allowed the rest of the month.

Hey, maybe the NRPA can train the trees how to grow so they will be safe but challenging.

Our job or the issue is to eliminate these know safety issues not to take away risk or challenge in a child’s evironment but to provide a well thought out and maintained environment that will allow kids ot be kids without restricting their ability to explore and challenge their individual abilities and to better understand personal accountability for poor choices.

The NRPA has trained over 40,000 participants in their playground safety program in hipes the participants will apply this new knowledge and effectively use the tools now available to them to provide a safe yet challenging play environment for all children.

What I have learned over the past twenty or so years is there are many who have a responsiblity to do just that but they have not taken the time to learn what their responsiblities are and act appropriately. There are still many jurisdictions that continue to stick their heads in the sand and ignor industry standards or “best practices within the industry”. These safety recommendations can do a lot to eliminate some of this perceived liability. Sure I would like to see a lot of this litigation go away but I would also would like to see a requirement that before any entity recieves a permit or grant to build a public playground that they show documentation for having a trained CPSI on their staff who will work to maintain these safe havens for the benefit of all who use them. Without an ongoing commitment to the maintenance of these spaces throughout the life of the playground (which is required in the ASTM F1487 standard) we should not be building it in the first place.

Richard: There is no way to tell from the short article if Superman jumped 2 feet or 20. We only know that the school acknowledged the surface was not safe.

There is no law anywhere that says a playground must be idiot-proof. The standard is whether reasonable steps were taken under the circumstances, and the school seems to indicate (albeit in a very short article that leaves both of wanting more info) that they didn’t do what they knew had to be done.