Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

School Bans 'Tag' 1000

GillBates0 writes "CNN is carrying a story about a school in Boston which has have banned kids from playing tag, touch football and any other unsupervised chase game during recess for fear they'll get hurt and hold the school liable. According to the article, some elementary schools in other states have similarly banned "unsupervised contact sports". A parent was quoted as saying that her son feels safer now and that she'd witnessed enough 'near collisions.'" See, it's not just dangerous virtual games that are harmful to children!
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

School Bans 'Tag'

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @11:51AM (#16486163)
    I've always said that we should just chain them up in a basement until they're 18. Avoids most of the hassles associated with kids.
    • by gr8whitesavage ( 942151 ) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @11:58AM (#16486385) Journal
      Or perhaps maybe we could lock them in some pink goo, wire them together and collect energy from them. We could keep these "children" entertained in a virtual world where computer programs will teach them everything.
    • by sinistre ( 59027 ) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @12:03PM (#16486531) Homepage
      And then we send them off to war.
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by ZoFreX ( 961960 )
      I believe Wolfgang Priklopil was the pioneer of that tecnique... never has a man been so misunderstood... ( http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/5280472.st m [bbc.co.uk] if you don't know what I'm on about)
    • Consider brightly-colord safety chains for kids:
      http://www.greatcompanions.com/images/GC1013_.JPG [greatcompanions.com]
    • by Catbeller ( 118204 ) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @12:44PM (#16487523) Homepage
      And after they're eighteen, they can pass through the body scanners, look into retinal pattern id readers, submit to body cavity searches, submit to endless background checks, drug checks, be pushed into first amendment zones, get checked on secret "terrorist" watch lists, have their email and IM's read, have their mail opened, packages scanned, DNA data catalogued, car monitored by GPS tracking devices, their phones tracked every second of their lives and by extention their own movements monitored until they die.

      Sweet freedom! And that's just the people who haven't done everything. Get convicted of something and you are a prisoner for the rest of your life, if not in bricks then in opportunities.

      And WHAT ARE THE ODDS of a terrorist attack hitting anyone? What are the odds of being killed by your car? Why aren't cars illegal, then? Why aren't there driver terror lists? Alchohol watch lists? Oh, why go on.

      We've given up what it means to be free because we're terrorized cowards incapable of rational risk analysis. No sense of human rights, no idea of history not promulated by Fox News or equivalent.

      So, what's a kid gonna look forward to after they release him from the school prison but the bigger prison that we all are sharing (unless we're rich -- whole different world for them, always).
    • by Pharmboy ( 216950 ) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @01:32PM (#16488467) Journal
      I've always said that we should just chain them up in a basement until they're 18.

      It puts the lotion on the skin, else it gets the hose again?
  • WTF? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Turn-X Alphonse ( 789240 ) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @11:52AM (#16486177) Journal
    Do these people seriously expect stopping kids touching each other is going to stop them getting hurt?

    Kids are very simple life forms, they don't have a firm grasp of logic and hence do stupid things which get them hurt. This is a basic fact of life and if you repress it you make adults who do the same because they never learnt any better.

    How the hell can any school know so little about children but have them for so long..
    • Re:WTF? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by pete6677 ( 681676 ) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @11:53AM (#16486235)
      These kids will turn into very fragile adults.
      • Re:WTF? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Glacial Wanderer ( 962045 ) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @12:35PM (#16487305) Homepage
        I think this will also increase the likelihood of these kids becoming very fat adults.

        A large portion of the physically fit people I know are physically fit because we like playing/competing in sports. I wonder how many of these kids who might otherwise get interested in a physical activity will shy away from them because their school tells them they are too dangerous? I wonder how many of these kids "saved from the dangers of physical activity" will end up dying from a heart attack? If there can be lawsuits against McDonalds for making kids fat, I think there can be lawsuits against a school for making kids fat. Maybe if there are enough of these lawsuits then kids will be able to have fun again.
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          I don't think it's a good argument that sports are a good way to encourage lifelong physical fitness. At some point in life you will need to start getting daily excersize on your own even when you're not able to compete or can't get a team together. That's usually where most people, myself included, start to have problems. If it's just you, and the team isn't depending on you...it's easy to slip. Independence has long been missing from education, but I think it's the source of at least two problem articles
      • by DG ( 989 ) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @12:51PM (#16487695) Homepage Journal
        This keeps coming back to the Col. Dave Grossman (On Killing, On Combat) Sheep, Wolf, Sheepdog analogy.

        I'll paraphrase:

        Most people are Sheep - not in the pejurative sense, but rather in the sense that they are utterly incapable of doing violence to another human being. Most people will go through their entire adult lives without ever comitting - or even witnessing - an act of violence (not counting TV etc, which isn't "real" violence)

        Sadly, there are Wolves, who prey on Sheep. Wolves seek out sheep to fuck them up, because they know that sheep cannot protect themselves.

        Happily, there are also Sheepdogs; those who place themselves between the Sheep and the Wolves.

        But to a Sheep, a Sheepdog looks a lot like a Wolf - same shape, same teeth, same snarl. So sheep are very uncomfortable around sheepdogs, because sheepdogs trade in violence, and it is violence (not intent) that most upsets sheep.

        Sheep are always trying to make sheepdogs more like sheep, even when that is counter to their own long-term interests, because the ideal SheepWorld is a nice, safe, non-violent bubble where nothing bad ever happens to anybody.

        So Sheepdogs must remain vigilant and active - not only counter the Wolves, but also counter the Sheep. It falls to the Sheepdogs of the world to prevent the sheep from defanging their own protectors.

        As an aside, there's a local radio commercial here that just drives me absolutely insane - it's an ad for a jewelry chain, in which a soccer mom (with the most teeth-gratingly patronizing voice ever) congradulates her husband on his "evolution" - he packs lunches, he makes playdates, he cleans the house - but when it comes to buying gifts, he still sucks. So go to Jeweler X and don't screw it up this time. Oh, and don't forget to pick up the daughter and get her (irony alert!) to Tae Kwon Do by 5:00....

        This is a PRIME example of the sheep trying to sheep-ify the sheepdogs.

        But here's the real question: if you are a Sheepdog, what are YOU going to do about it?

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Ubergrendle ( 531719 )
          That was perhaps the worst possible analogy I've ever heard. My criticism would start with the premise that the analogy is self-serving, as the Colonel obviously has a vested interest in his power stemming from his military command.

          I think the fucking & assholes analogy from Team America: World Police is a more legitimate world view IMHO.

          For those of you who think sheepdogs are important, I ask you the following -- Quis custodiet ipsos custodes.
          • by aristotle-dude ( 626586 ) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @01:35PM (#16488521)
            What was that? All I hear was "Baah, Baah, Baah". You still do not get it do you? The Colonel was not just talking about military but also paramilitary forces such as police and fire departments. I see that you have been brainwashed quite throughly but did you ever stop to think why they are called public servants? They do the job that the average citizen is either unwilling or unable to do themselves.

            For those who think that sheepdogs are irrelevant, let me ask you, what would you do to protect yourself from the wolves?

          • by TnkMkr ( 666446 ) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @01:51PM (#16488893)
            I recommend reading the whole essay, it actually puts it much better than the summary stated in the GF post.
            See here:
            http://www.blackwaterusa.com/btw2004/articles/0726 sheep.html [blackwaterusa.com]

            The sheep dogs, by definition, must police themselves. Is it easy? Of course not, and that is why the world is in the state it currently is.

            Although to be fair, it is a statement of ideology and puts everything into a black and white (or sheepdog, wolf, and sheep) classification, which does not always hold up when you compare to the real worlds shades of grey.

            While I agree that the analogy from Team America is similar, I think it is a much more pessimistic view of the situation. Not to mention it goes out of its way to be as vulgar and offensive as possible. (but hey... that's funny)
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          What world are you living in man? Most people are sheep sure.. but backed into a corner they will bite.

          People who protect the sheep arn't sheepdogs, they're just sheep willing to bite.

          Wolves are.. well wolves. Theres always assholes but they can be assholes for multipule reasons..
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by kfg ( 145172 )
      Do these people seriously expect stopping kids touching each other is going to stop them getting hurt?

      Do they still get transported to school in motor vehicles?

      Kids are very simple life forms, they don't have a firm grasp of logic and hence do stupid things which get them hurt.

      In other words, they take after their parents.
    • Re:WTF? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by rbf2000 ( 862211 ) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @12:00PM (#16486425) Homepage
      You can tell a kid not to touch a hot stove as much as you'd like, but they're not going to actually learn it themselves until they touch the hot stove and burn themselves. It's going to be painful, but it's a message they are going to remember.

      If a child goes through life placidly believing what their parents tell them, as good as the advice may be, that child is going to grow up to be a worker bee, not challenging authority, just following orders. Kids need to learn to push boundaries, that is the only way they are going to get ahead.
      • Re:WTF? (Score:4, Insightful)

        by JabberWokky ( 19442 ) <slashdot.com@timewarp.org> on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @12:26PM (#16487067) Homepage Journal
        I was at a steam powered festival this past weekend (Rough and Tumble near Lancaster, PA). There was a father or grandfather walking through with his children or grandchildren looking at all the neat steam powered devices. We were in a barn full of smaller engines, all whirring and puffing steam. Steam equipment generally needs to be oiled continually so there were gravity fed glass vials of oil all over the machine -- one of which was leaking slightly. The kid put out a finger to touch the trail of oil leaking down the side of the machine, and the adult said "You don't want to touch that, but if you feel you have to, go ahead and do it". The child paused and tapped the oil... and the very hot metal behind it. Minor burn and a major lesson.

        Tiny lessons like this throughout childhood is what makes for responsible adults with common sense. Good to see that the schools have officially stated that they have no plans to teach responsibility, common sense, social skills or empathy, all lessions learned on the playground.


      • Re:WTF? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by thatguywhoiam ( 524290 ) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @12:28PM (#16487133)
        If a child goes through life placidly believing what their parents tell them, as good as the advice may be, that child is going to grow up to be a worker bee, not challenging authority, just following orders.

        Near as I can tell, this is a design goal of the current school system. See: Dickens.

        • Re:WTF? (Score:5, Informative)

          by steveo777 ( 183629 ) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @12:43PM (#16487495) Homepage Journal
          Are you referring to Hard Times [schooltales.com]? Dickens was a magnificent author, and was horrified that the government was allowing the schools to take away the ability of a student to make an error. Stuff like the article is what he was writing about. Let kids be kids. Just make sure they know there are consequences to be paid if they intentionally do something that they shouldn't. None of this, "Timmy, if you don't stop pulling your sister's hair I'll count to three and give you a time out." shit.. If the kid knows what he/she is doing is wrong, then he/she can be punished.

              By and far Dickens is my favorite author.

      • Re:WTF? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by WillyPete ( 940630 ) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @12:36PM (#16487343)
        Of course you're correct, but that not what this is about. The root problem is the adults, and the reflex to ligitigation that has swamped the U.S. legal system. If courts stopped handing over millions of school (tax) dollars to parents of every kid with a bee sting, they wouldn't have to cover their hindquarters this way.

        Yet here we are, the intelligentsia of the present, blaming the school for something it shouldn't have to worry about in the first place.

        The best solution I can imagine would be a "loser pays" system, whether only those truly liable would be punished through the legal process. At present, both sides are financially penalized, and a wealthy litigant (or one with political support) can run a public school into the ground. In these circumstances, the school is perfectly understandable in it's efforts to prevent behavior that creates complaints and lawsuits.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Shotgun ( 30919 )
        You have never spoken truer words.

        I can still remember it. I must have been 6 or so at the time. I wanted to see if a burner on the stove was hot. Have no idea why, but I wanted to know. So I laid my hand on it. It was hot. I have been much more circumspect ever since.

        So I get old and have my own son. We move into a house with a wood burning, fireplace insert type stove. BIG chunk of very hot steel sitting at one side of the room. I still remember the pain from that hot stove, and I could imagine Ro
    • Re:WTF? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by rwven ( 663186 ) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @12:03PM (#16486513)
      All this is going to do is leave the kids with more energy after recess which in turn makes them more disruptive. Their discipline problems will probably increase...
    • Re:WTF? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by buswolley ( 591500 ) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @12:05PM (#16486575) Journal
      Getting hurt is a valuable experience to children. While I do not support a quota system be enforced, I do believe that if a child is never allowed to discover the pain associated with life, to be over-protected ninnies, then how can we trust them to make hard decisions in the future? Kids need to play. They need to skin their knees, break their finger, because it tells them in a strong way that actions have consequences.
    • Re:WTF? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by rabbitfood ( 586031 ) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @12:06PM (#16486599)
      How the hell can any school know so little about children but have them for so long..

      It's much the same in the UK, and I'll bet there's the dank and clammy hand of the insurance industry behind this. To be fair, schools are probably wistfully nostalgic of the days when they could spend money on books and stuff, rather than having to shell out for lawyers every time some chancer with a bruised kid hires a shyster. This sort of initiative is probabably a desperate attempt to reclaim those halcyon days, regardless of how ridiculous it looks. They'll lose, naturally, but democracy seems to involve letting insurance companies dictate the rules of acceptable behaviour. In theory, this should be left to legislators, but they've got less money and don't seem able to hire the talent.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Chris Burke ( 6130 )
        They'll lose, naturally, but democracy seems to involve letting insurance companies dictate the rules of acceptable behaviour.

        Naw, naw, democracy is where you let politicians pandering for votes in the run up to an election dictate the rules of acceptable behavior.

        Capitalism is where insurance companies get to dictate what you do. I know that capitalistic and democratic ideas are strongly tied together in the West, but anyone who follows capitalism and allows insurance companies to dictate terms will exper
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      My high-school's superintendent was a "Doctor of Child Psychology" yet his decisions never actually reflected an understanding of a child/adolescent's mind. I can recall several times where he has lied about the motives of a move in school policy to the student body, thinking we weren't smart enough to see through it. These kids will be able to see though this school's stupidity; if not now then very soon. I always find it funny when the same people who praise a classes brains go and do something assumi
    • Re:WTF? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by lymond01 ( 314120 ) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @12:16PM (#16486847)
      Newsflash: The schools aren't worried about the kids. Teachers have been around long enough to know that kids bounce when they fall and heal quickly if they get hurt. Schools are afraid of the parents and the great American lawsuit.
    • by mcrbids ( 148650 ) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @12:27PM (#16487095) Journal
      Home schooling and other alternative education programs (EG: charter schools, distance education, etc) are growing at exponential rates, approaching 50% per year in many areas.

      With absurdities like this, is it any wonder why?

      Take a look at the new Los Angeles Unified Director - he wants to "crack down" on children, make them all wear "regulation uniforms", adopt a "zero tolerance" set of rules, etc. None of which encourage anything like creativity, individuality, or happiness. And so the march of students into alternative programs grows ever stronger every year.

      In my own home town of Chico, CA, there's a newspaper piece a few times per year, something like "Where are all the kids?". The census demographics indicate that Chico has a young population, inclined to produce lots of children. So for years, they've braced for this tidal wave of kids, that never came. Enrollments are lower than ever, and they're dealing with some fairly serious budget shortfalls.

      So, they closed down the most remote school - a small school with like 50-60 kids - with the idea of bussing the children to a larger school closer in to save operating costs. Guess what happened? The parents of the school that closed down got a charter and opened up their own alternative education program in the same building as the old school. And *that* school now has almost 100 students! Closing the school actually *cost* the district money since now they no longer get the funding from either the kids they already had, nor the additional kids now enrolled in the new educational program!

      It's choice in action - I wonder how long it will be until they get a clue and start competing?
  • by SengirV ( 203400 ) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @11:52AM (#16486191)
    ... of the pussification of America.
  • Hmm. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @11:52AM (#16486201)
    I would think the number of teachers in the U.S. molesting school children would be a bigger priority than protecting them from a game of tag.
  • by jbrader ( 697703 ) <stillnotpynchon@gmail.com> on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @11:53AM (#16486203)
    When I was in elemetary schoo in the late 80's they wouldn't let us play touch footbal at recess. But then during P.E. they would make us play dodgeball.
  • by bwalling ( 195998 ) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @11:53AM (#16486207) Homepage
    We call this a free country, but lawsuits have scared everyone into ridiculous rules and restrictions. We shouldn't be allowed to talk about freedom when we are imprisoning ourselves even in the areas the government isn't. I'm tired of all the reasonable things I'm not allowed to do because some organization's insurance company doesn't like or some fool sued someone. Maybe I just didn't notice this stuff when I was younger, but it seems ridiculous anymore.
  • Oh gods.... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Kenja ( 541830 ) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @11:54AM (#16486241)
    I was going to write up a witty retort to all of this, but I think its far simpler just to call these people fucking idiots and get back to work.
  • by el_gordo101 ( 643167 ) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @11:54AM (#16486249)
    Attleboro, MA is not in Boston as the posting states, it is a small city south of Boston.
  • by ScentCone ( 795499 ) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @11:54AM (#16486273)
    ... but we can't, because that would involve taking the stairs, and someone might get hurt.
  • Well, it is funny.. *checking my calender to see if its april 1st*

    Come on, the classic game of tag has been played in various forms, seemingly, for ever. With few to almost none getting hurt. My goodness, we are are rasing a bunch of whiny little snots who can't even take a little bruse. What, I wonder will they do, be when they grow up. (best friends with lawyers or a lawyer themselves I suspect, where NOTHING is ever their fault).

    Sheez.. stuff like this gets me sick.
  • by courtarro ( 786894 ) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @11:56AM (#16486315) Homepage
    They're talking about the spray [consideryo...warned.com]. Haven't you seen the commericals? The guy practically gets pummeled by women. It's really dangerous and I hope they put a stop to it. Think of the single adults!
  • by geemon ( 513231 ) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @11:57AM (#16486339)
    After being inundated with all of those 'TAG' body spray commercials that show various teenage boys getting mobbed by teenage girls and being hit on my the teenage girs' moms, my first thought after reading the title was "Wow, that stuff must really work if they are having to ban it from schools!"

    And then I read the article summary and find it is just the schoolyard game. Too bad - I was hoping for some interesting reading describing just how well that stuff worked.
  • by jvagner ( 104817 ) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @11:58AM (#16486377)
    ..generalizations, I do. But I have a 2.75 yo son and I take him to the playground 3-4 days per week (his mom, the rest of the time). There's a fairly significant divide between how men and women treat their children at the playground. Dads tend to hang back, contributing support and help as kids need them (and to be sure, too many fathers hang on the park bench the whole time and can't be bothered to participate at all). Mom's hover, ensuring the kid never suffers a risky moment.

    Those kids tend to have less certain notions of what's possible, what isn't, and what's just plain stupid. Some of those kids certainly got it in the nature-equation - meaning those parents may, in fact, have some reason to be fearful. Plenty of other kids are developing much shallower skills with respect to falling and not falling.

    So, to wrap up with another generalization, it's more likely a mother would feel relieved at this ridiculous development than a father.
  • Fat Kids & ADD (Score:4, Insightful)

    by businessnerd ( 1009815 ) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @11:59AM (#16486393)
    And you wonder why the United States has an obesity problem that seems to be getting worse with the younger generations. They keep banning everything that gives them any excercise. The reason tag is so great is because it is so simple and meets an immediate need for hyperactive kids (read "all kids") to release all of that energy being balled up while they are sitting still in class and also starts them off young with a good perception of excercise. No wonder so many kids are "diagnosed" with ADD and put in special classes these days. In my day (born in '83) when a kid couldn't sit still in class, they would have him/her do some laps around the playground instead of pumping him full of drugs. After a couple laps the kid was more than happy to sit still and listen. Playing tag on the playground was the only thing keeping those kids attentive. Now they are told that all running and chasing activities are too dangerous, so therefore sports and excercise must be too dangerous, therefore, I should sit inside and simulate it on an xbox or ps[#] eating candy to occupy my time.

    Seriously I think my head is going to explode
  • by Orange Crush ( 934731 ) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @12:00PM (#16486417)

    Not only is this a brilliant idea from a liability standpoint, preventing children from engaging in these sorts of dangerous games can reduce bruising and other possible damage during their critical growth period.

    I propose that schoolchildren not be allowed to move at all. They should be hung via sturdy cloth from the ceiling, thus immobilized, and fed heartily whilst at school. I have been assured by a very knowing gentleman of my acquaintance in Boston, that a young healthy schoolchild well-fed is at elementary school age a most delicious, nourishing, and wholesome food, whether stewed, roasted, baked, or boiled . . .

  • by davidwr ( 791652 ) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @12:01PM (#16486463) Homepage Journal
    I've never been in a school that had unsupervised playground time. An adult was ALWAYS watching.

    Now, if they are banning kid-organized tag games, that's just plain silly and harmful to their mental, emotional, physical, and social development.
  • by TubeSteak ( 669689 ) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @12:02PM (#16486489) Journal
    And no, I'm not referring to the ONE school in Boston.

    I'm talking about the millions of people who will view the acts of a few schools around the country as the downfall of American society.

    The problem these schools are seeking to resolve is this: They have all the responsibility for what happens to your little angel/monster but none of the parental immunity that comes with it.

    Little Susie gets hurt playing a neighborhood game of tag. Nobody sues her parents. If little Susie gets hurt playing a school yard game of tag. The parents can sue the school.

    The parents might not win, but who wants to be sued for something that can be avoided?

    P.S. The difference between PE & recess is that you usually have to sign a waiver f liability for athletics.
  • by cowscows ( 103644 ) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @12:02PM (#16486507) Journal
    It seems that we hear about two kinds of parents now-a-days. Ones who neglect their children so completely that the kids lose all sense of perspective and discipline and then go out and hurt innocent people. On the other hand there's a bunch of ridiculously over-protective parents who try to coddle their children every step of their lives, freaking out if the most minor of misfortune comes across their precious future.

    As is often the case, the majority of average, decent, middle of the road parents/children are dealing with the consequences of vocal extremes. On one hand, we have unsupervised kids causing all sorts of problems, and resulting zero-tolerence policies in schools where even a minor, accidental infraction can cause a serious interruption in the education even of a model student. On the other hand, we have over-supervised kids whos parents live in so much fear for their child that neither that kid nor their classmates can act like children are supposed to act.

    A normal child with decent parents will take some bumps and bruises as he/she grows up, and will end up stronger for it. While getting hurt is not pleasant, it's often an excellent learning experience. You learn that not only will certain things result in pain, but also that bad things are going to happen in your life, and you need to learn to cope with it. Denying a child the chance to learn such things is not good parenting.
  • Homeschool ..... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Russ Nelson ( 33911 ) <slashdot@russnelson.com> on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @12:03PM (#16486519) Homepage
    Homeschool .... it's the only way to get an education these days.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by dr_dank ( 472072 )
      I can see homeschool working for parents who dedicate themselves to teaching as best they can, providing a reasonable structure, exposing the kids to a wide variety of subjects and experiences, as well as socializing them with other kids.

      Too many parents use homeschool as a means to get their kids away from the "godless liberals and queers" in public school and teach them that Adam and Eve rode dinosaurs to church and little else outside of religious dogma.
    • We gave up on the east coast and "moved to america" three years ago. The kids here don't have a sense of entitlement, and don't feel like everything is somebody else's fault. The adults think the same way. The government leaves people alone, in general, and the people don't go running to the government or courts for redress when they fall down and skin their knee.

      My 8 year old is on an organized football team. Aside from the comic relief provided by a 64 pound (in full gear) defensive end, there are no

  • by RingDev ( 879105 ) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @12:07PM (#16486649) Homepage Journal
    Someone call child services. I play "chase" with my 2 1/2 year old son. We bounce on the couch. We jump on the bed. We have tickle fights.

    In the last week my son has earned him self probably 5 new bruises, a stubbed toe, a face plant on the coffee table, and too many trips, flops, crashes, bangs, ouchies, and other bumps to mention. Mom and Dad are right there, we intervien if he gets into a dangerous situation (ie: playing in the kitchen when we're cooking, climbing the back of the couch/chairs, playing with other heavy/electrified/hot objects, etc...) but for the most part, we let him develop his strengths and learn and challange his limitations.

    It's not much unlike my own childhood. In fact, I would challange any one of those board members to imagine their own childhood with out such games. I would also challange them to present any statistically meaningful data that would indicate a link between tag and childhood death or long term disability.

  • This is just scary (Score:3, Insightful)

    by GweeDo ( 127172 ) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @12:17PM (#16486885) Homepage
    I can't believe crap like this actually happens. I have an 8 (almost 9) month old that is pulling herself up on everything now. She has lost her balance more than once and taken a tumble. Should I remove my coffe table/fireplace/couch/ect just so she won't hurt herself? No. She needs to pull herself up so she can learn to walk. She also needs to learn that letting go can be a bad idea from time to time. I'm not going to let her really hurt herself, but a little tumble now and again isn't bad for any kid.
  • Erm... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by pr0nbot ( 313417 ) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @12:19PM (#16486921)
    You ban "unsupervised contact sports". By definition, no one is supervising. So how do you enforce the ban?
    • Re:Erm... (Score:4, Informative)

      by Stripsurge ( 162174 ) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @04:05PM (#16491275) Homepage
      In my elementary school we had 1 or 2 volunteer parents to walk during our breaks to "watch out for our safety". While we played our game of tackle football we'd always have to keep one eye looking for the parent coming around the corner. The first person to see her would yell something to the effect of "WOW! This sure is a fun game of TOUCH football. Yup. Nothing beats playing TOUCH football on a lovely day like this." There was often one idiot that didn't quite clue in and made a huge tackle in the presence of the parent. Bye-bye football! Fscking D.K. I still hate her to this day. Luckily our principle was cool and would always give the football back at the end of the day. Admitidly there were a lot of injuries, especially to one kid. Just about every day he ended up in a puddle of tears. Playing tackle football at lunch time is one of my best memories from elementary school.

      If a kid gets caught playing tag or some other "violent" game what's the worst that could happen? If I got a call from my kids' school saying little Billy was in trouble for playing games I would reward him for not caving to stupid rules. Yes. That's right. I'd teach my child not to follow the laws. He very well could grow up and become that guy you always see J-Walking. Who knows what other new-fangled laws will come into act by the time he grows up.
  • by Petersko ( 564140 ) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @12:36PM (#16487333)
    ...raising them in a goddamned bubble.
  • by frenchbedroom ( 936100 ) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @12:59PM (#16487851)
    Recommended reading :

    "The Underground History Of American Education" by John Taylor Gatto [johntaylorgatto.com]

    If you're thinking about homeschooling your children, go read it. The entire book is there, online, for free. (just try not to slashdot it !)

  • by joss ( 1346 ) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @01:11PM (#16488077) Homepage
    This nambification has been going on for ages. When I was at school
    everyone used to play British Bulldogs [on tarmac], but that was banned
    (and this was decades ago) since it caused too many injuries
    [about one broken nose or equivalent per day].
    Bloody fun game though - a bit like rugby, but not nearly as
    safe http://web.ukonline.co.uk/conker/games/sept.htm#bu lldog [ukonline.co.uk]

"Well, social relevance is a schtick, like mysteries, social relevance, science fiction..." -- Art Spiegelman