Boy Left Stranded In Tree Because of Health and Safety Policy 73
School employees left a 5-year-old boy stranded in a tree because it is against health and safety policies in the UK to help him down. Instead they went inside to "observe from a distance" so the boy would not get "distracted and fall." The incident reached an even more ridiculous level when passer-by Kim Barrett had the audacity to actually help the child down. Officials promptly called the police and tried to have her charged with trespassing. From the article: "Mrs Martin confirmed that the school's policy prevents staff going to the aid of children who have climbed trees. She said: 'The safety of our pupils is our priority and we would like to make it clear that this child was being observed at all times during this very short incident. Like other schools whose premises include wooded areas, our policy when a child climbs a tree, is for staff to observe the situation from a distance so the child does not get distracted and fall. We would strongly urge members of the public not to climb over a padlocked gate to approach children as their motives are not clear to staff.'"
This is the essence of Lawful Stupid. (Score:4, Interesting)
I had a teacher like this once. Later in life, when I was reading up on Asperger, I realized she was a textbook case; the world is unpredictable and besides the most shallow emotions people are inscrutable black boxes, so just follow the rules and no one will blame you. I also realized this was basically how I had functioned up to my mid-teens.
Re:Sounds good. (Score:2, Interesting)
Forbid that common sense would prevail over bureaucracy.
That is such an ignorant statement. A human infant's morphology is designed so that it can withstand an impact from a fall much better than an adult elementary school teacher can. If an uninvited intruder wouldn't have trespassed on school grounds to rescue the infant, then the toddler would have eventually just fallen out of the tree on its own accord. Problem solved.
With adults getting involved, things become much more complicated. Laws were broken, and school and taxpayer liability were at stake. Britains are already over-taxed, we don't want to have to pay yet more money if a teacher would have broken her neck falling off of a tree. Children, on the other hand are more dispensable. Lose a teacher and you not only lose an investment of years of education, but you have to deal with the teachers union and the Labour Party. People need to stop thinking about their own morals and start thinking more about keeping Britain sheltered from responsability of thought and action. We have laws to protect children. We also need laws to protect adults from themselves. Playing the part of a good Samaritan is such a self-centered egotistical role that flies in the face of the Nanny State. You sir, obviously have no idea of how our beloved bureaucracy works.