I was sickened how society prevents children from growing up or learning how to cope with life. That is until I read about Lenore Skenazy http://freerangekids.wordpress.com/ and Tim Gill http://rethinkingchildhood.com/
It looks like this will turn around. It may take a generation or 2 to do so. However, society is starting to figure out that the current idea is harmful to children. On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 11:44 AM, <darkro...@aol.com> wrote: > Part of the problem seems to be that society is getting to a point where > what ever happens there must be someone to blame. People just can't accept > that stuff happens, get over it. It is true that if a child is over > protected then they cannot learn how to effectively handle situations they > face as they grow up. And with society looking for someone to blame for > EVERYTHING that happens to them is proof that they have not learned the > same thing. A child falls and skins a knee, the parents call the school > and chew out the teacher for not watching their child. The sad thing is > those of authority are too afraid of bad press of law suits that they may > discipline the teacher. > > I don't know of any cases in the US where sundials are banned from schools > but I have not looked either. It never crossed my mind that it would be a > problem. > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Donald Christensen <dchristensen...@gmail.com> > To: sundial <sundial@uni-koeln.de> > Sent: Sun, May 27, 2012 8:29 pm > Subject: Re: Why are schools, across the world, 'banning' analemmatic > sundials ? > > I found an excellent book on the matter > > It shows how we are making the world more dangerous for children. Society > protects them so much that we prevent them from learning how to cope in the > stressful world. Children grow old. We can't prevent that. However we can > prevent them from growing up. > “Beautifully written [...] lays out very simply how we are absolutely > screwing the development of children, given our complete paranoid fear of > the world we live in.”* > Tanya > Byron<http://thebrowser.com/interviews/tanya-byron-on-child-psychology-and-mental-health>in > the Browser. > * > *No Fear: Growing up in a risk averse society* argues that childhood is > being undermined by the growth of risk aversion. This restricts children’s > play, limits their freedom of movement, corrodes their relationships with > adults and constrains their exploration of physical, social and virtual > worlds. > http://rethinkingchildhood.com/no-fear/ > > > > On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 10:19 PM, Martina Addiscott < > martina.addisc...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> In message <20120517002755.K4ADT.56582.root@nschwwebs03p> >> John Pickard <john.pick...@bigpond.com> wrote: >> >> > Good morning Martina, >> > >> > I've been following the various replies, and I agree wholeheartedly >> with the sentiments expressed about stupid attempts to reduce risk to zero. >> > >> > We all have our favourite stories, but I think that these examples will >> top the list. I understand that one of the largest mining companies in the >> world (Rio Tinto Australia) is so concerned about risk that it has banned >> the use of scissors and electric staplers. I have never seen an electric >> stapler where you could hurt yourself unless you really wanted to. And as >> for scissors ...! >> > >> > But I fail to see how a painted or other analemmatic dial poses any >> sort of risk, even in the Australian sun. All primary schools here require >> kids to wear hats when in the playground, and I support this. After all, >> Australia is the skin cancer capital of the world, and hats make a big >> difference (I know from having numerous non-malignant growths removed from >> my face, ears and neck after decades of field work in deserts etc.) But >> analemmatic dials ...? >> > >> > I despair of the direction all this is headed. >> > >> > Cheers, John >> > >> >> >> >> Following-on from previous correspondence, I was recently sent >> the attached newspaper article. George Marshall (in Australia) >> was 'too shy' to send it direct to the "Sundial Mailing List", >> and so this had been sent to me privately for my consideration. >> >> However, if anybody wants to respond to George (who is located >> in the Brisbane area) - his E-mail is: geo...@exemail.com.au >> >> >> At least there is now a 'ray of hope' that the world might just >> be reverting to a more reasonable attitude - rather than being >> ruled by the "Health & Safety" brigade, or Lawyers/Accountants. >> >> >> As other people have said, the main problem seems to be one of >> possible 'litigation', and/or 'compensation' - if a child were >> to be injured by anything (no matter how harmless it appears). >> >> I am certainly no legal expert - but apparently this is caused >> by a mix of "Due Diligence", plus "Contributory Negligence". >> >> >> Certainly here in the UK, we must conduct a 'Risk Assessment' >> of anything new for a school - and especially if the children >> might be physically interacting with this, in whatever ways. >> >> Unfortunately, the current thinking seems to be that (if any >> child were to be hurt), then SOMEBODY must be "to blame" - but >> it cannot be the child, since obviously somebody else has not >> fully conducted that preliminary 'Risk Assessment' properly ! >> >> In other words - somebody, somewhere, will be held as (partly) >> guilty of whatever happened, due to 'Contributory Negligence', >> but it will be for the Lawyers to fight over and profit from. >> >> >> Apart from schools, I even heard about a sundial designer (in >> Croatia), who was not permitted to put a metal 'analemmatic' >> layout into a public area - because the metal might get too >> hot in the sun, burn people's feet, so give rise to claims for >> compensation plus also potentially harming the tourist trade ! >> >> As a person on this 'List' said - "the world has gone crazy". >> >> >> Sincerely, >> >> Martina Addiscott. >> >> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------- >> https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial >> >> >> > > > -- > Cheers > Donald > 0423 102 090 > > > This e-mail is privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended > recipient please delete the message and notify the sender. Un-authorizeduse > of this email is subject to penalty of law. > So there! > > ---------------------------------------------------https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial > > -- Cheers Donald 0423 102 090 This e-mail is privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient please delete the message and notify the sender. Un-authorizeduse of this email is subject to penalty of law. So there!
--------------------------------------------------- https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial
