The HoCo Conservancy and the HoCo Dept of Recreation and Parks cosponsored a talk by Richard Louv, author of a book called LAST CHILD IN THE WOODS , about what he calls “Nature Deficit Disorder” on February 4.
Basically Mr. Louv talked about “how the healthy development of today’s children is hampered by limited exposure to nature,” designing more natural playgrounds and play areas in urban areas, and encouraging today’s crop of young parents, who may not have been exposed to the outdoors as children either, to get out – get moving – and interact with nature. If you missed the presentation – check it out in reruns on the HoCo Government Channel (if you can find it).
The really interesting thing came in the question period. A woman was trying to make a point about parental fears and inexperience with nature interfering with kids getting exposure to available opportunities, like scout camping opportunities – particularly in bad weather. She then began a mini rant about the “efforts to fence in Lake Elkhorn” and how appalling the entire concept was.
[For the record --- the problem with Lake Elhorn and fencing is not the anti-nature, overzealous, no personal responsibility movement this woman and others like to get hyperplectic about.
It is a question of whether a community that decides to build a playground to attract very small children on the banks of a body of water should also make reasonable provisions to secure the area designated for the small children. I think the proposal was to fence in the play area ---- not necessarily the lake. But hey, if it gets people overheated to focus on the extreme .... have a ball. ]
Mr. Louv – in a most impressive display of thoughtfulness and insight (imho) latched on to what I consider the more important theme —- the “myth” of an overly litigious society which fuels decision making in the name of fear of litigation instead of sound risk management.
Mr. Louv suggested that choosing not to do certain things using fears of exposure to litigation is often a baseless excuse.
I think he is right. Not just when it comes to fences and playgrounds, but school and education issues — you name it. It is soooo easy to say, “oh, we shouldn’t try that, we might get sued….”
Heaven forbid we take a good look at the proposal, weigh the pros and cons, calculate the costs and the risks and make every effort to be reasonably cautious while living a full life.
People don’t really sue willy nilly over every little thing —- and those who try get the boot out of court pretty quickly. “Baseless claims” being baseless, and all.
Using the Lake Elkhorn example again — instead of taking a reasonable look at the particular playground, in light of the “true fact” that a child did, in fact, wander away and drown (even though all other applicable rules and laws were being followed) …. and come to a reasonable conclusion about how to address this particular site and particular circumstances — analysis paralysis set in.
The hand wringers worrying about the “message” or the “precedent” putting a fence around the tot lot “might” set got it in their heads that if one fence went up hundreds of fences would have to be put up, and eventually we’d have to bubble wrap all kids… at tax payer expense.
Not just ridiculous — but a good example of the myth of an overly litigious society fueling namby pamby decisions and policies. Yes, I said namby pamby.
Cindy Vaillancourt
