At least they are banned why ban conkers and on what grounds??? The likelihood of an average child suffering from nut allergy and associate it with conkers is extremely rare! Why cannot teachers be taught in how to deal with pupils with such an allergy and treat anaphylaxis if the need arises? To prevent enjoyment by all for the benefit of 1 or 2 people is bonkers conkers to say the least in my view! http://www.anaphylaxis.org.uk/information/faq.aspx

Teachers have not been allowed to treat any childrens illnesses for a number of years. I had to travel 20 miles to give my son eye drops even after getting a note from the Dr that stated that there wouldn't be any ill effects if they put more than the prescribed dosage in. When I was at junior school they banned 40 years ago bull dog was banned, one because we got hurt, which didn't seem to bother us, we continued playing once the tears were dry and also because our clothes were getting ruined and parents complained. Football was banned because we though it was more fun kicking the ball into a group of girls and all 25 of us running into them to get it. It would be better if they left H&S out of it and simply said we banned it because we can't be bothered supervising or putting up with parents complaints once their child has been hurt.

http://www.atl.org.uk/me...tish-bulldog-conkers.asp I wonder if they will actually release this research paper?? As 1 head teacher explains... I'm not afraid of litigation but concerned that I'm held responsible..... Isn't that part of a head teachers employment contract or should junior staff be shoved all the responsibilities?

That's a bit spooky....cause I said that this morning. You got me bugged????

Must be two great minds.....

I just had a thought!!!! Is it the same group of people banning children from playing games in school playgrounds who missed the fact that a scrap yard was cutting up car and other vehicles under the M1?????

The swimming goggle one is a good example of where H&S gets mixed up with other issues. The Association of Swimming Teachers (Can't remember their exact title) recommends banning goggles in school lessons. This is partly for H&S reason ie Children pulling goggles off and pinging them in their face or doing the same to others but is mainly because it is much easier to teach swimming when you aren't dealing with loads of children playing with goggles and having to help loads of children put goggles on and wait while they rescue them from the bottom of the pool when they've let them go etc etc etc.

This is a fairly old story and as as usual, reported out of context by the media. Let us not castigate the school without having some facts. For details and BAAPLE Position statement in the use of goggles in swimming, please refer to;- http://www.crickladetri....AALPE_use_of_goggles.pdf

Sorry everyone, I am compelled to get serious and give a bit of a "sermon" here. Anaphylaxis can be fatal - very quickly. There is a perception that as long as you give the victim a quick jab of adrenaline, they will be fine in no time. It is not that simple. When you’re doing a risk assessment, the first thing you look at is eliminating the hazard. In the case of nut allergy, that hazard is potentially life-threatening – therefore to use “training the teacher in how to treat the anaphylaxis” as the only control measure, would be very risky. I have no idea whether there is any truth in the conkers story, and I fully understand, that it doesn’t seem fair to prevent everyone else’s enjoyment for the benefit of one child. Just to give you the view from the other side, as the parent of a seven year old nut-allergic child - I have seen with my own eyes, the speed with which the allergic reaction takes effect – literally within seconds - and it is very scary. If it were your child, believe me, you would do anything to prevent ever having to use that Epipen.

Yes this is true. We also lived in a world where we sent children up chimneys and women down mines and built factories specificily for children to work in. It was not that long ago that if you were injured at work far from recieving compensation you lost your job!! But I digress, lets bring back the good old days of beating children with sticks/canes and leather straps, or if these are not at hand we can always bounce the blackboard eraser off their heads from a distance or get up close and personal by physically picking them up by the ears!! And why not, it never did us any harm!! But why stop at children, lets get back to the good old days of Jeremy Clarkson's dreams where employees do as their told for a pittance, no job security and if they get injured or killed it's their own fault and the employer cannot be held responsible for their incompetence. Lets start by taking away the access to the civil courts which these shifty time wasters are exploiting, and get back to the courts real business of looking after the rich and powerful. After all, we all know that H&S is just 'common sense' and there really is no need for any legislation or H&S officers. If your child goes off to school today and gets injured I am sure none of the people on this forum would want to know how or why it happened, or feel that anyone should be held accountable. Likewise if your spouse gets a message later today saying you have been seriously injured at work they will say "ah well injuries and accidents are a fact of life".

'times have changed' - which is my point exactly!! what was the norm 20, 30, 40, 50 years ago is no longer acceptable, is that a bad thing? Should our approach be, as you seemed to suggest, that "there will always be an example of a tragic case where someone got seriously injured or worse, because that unfortunately is the facts of life". I have always taken a pragmatic, practical, approach to H&S long before it was chosen as the 'buzz word' by the HSE. Unfortunately it is my view that the phrase 'sensible risk management' has been hijacked by those who would prefer that there was no risk management. This can be evidenced by the call to exclude certain workers from H&S Law, such as the emergency services, or SME's so that they can become more competitive in these tough economic times??? The improvements that we have witnessed in workplace H&S and in society as a whole (equality, employment protection, care for the needy, access to education etc) over the last 5 decades did not come about by chance, they had to be fought for and won. Lets not throw it all away to satisfy the Daily Mail readers.

Times certainly have changed, not convinced it is always for the better.

Kids these days play Black Ops on PlayStation and X box, the game is for over 18's but parents buy it for their kids, so why not let them engage in sport activities during play time at school, enough said