G2SS a suicide pill?

[elitts 464]

18 hours ago, yknot said:

I'm not exactly sure what you are stating because I'm not sure what your "not true" relates to. I think we're agreeing that the decline in child death rates due to accidents has declined dramatically since 1970? Far fewer kids overall are dying today than in 1970 despite the youth population being essential static during that time frame. 

 

Your assertion was that the number of accidental deaths among children due to injury has decreased "exponentially" due to safety restrictions that have been imposed over the years, thus justifying the ongoing trend of restricting and curtailing childhood activities and equipment.

I'm saying your assertion is incorrect on its face because the number of children dying from accidental injuries has not decreased by an amount that could be considered "exponential" in any sense and further that most of the reduction in accidental deaths that does exist is attributed to a single source, seat belts in cars. (and probably child seats)  So if you remove automobile accident deaths from the "Accidental Injury" category, the number of deaths hasn't really been impacted much at all by all of the limitations being imposed in the name of "safety for kids".

[yknot 1338]

8 hours ago, elitts said:

Your assertion was that the number of accidental deaths among children due to injury has decreased "exponentially" due to safety restrictions that have been imposed over the years, thus justifying the ongoing trend of restricting and curtailing childhood activities and equipment.

I'm saying your assertion is incorrect on its face because the number of children dying from accidental injuries has not decreased by an amount that could be considered "exponential" in any sense and further that most of the reduction in accidental deaths that does exist is attributed to a single source, seat belts in cars. (and probably child seats)  So if you remove automobile accident deaths from the "Accidental Injury" category, the number of deaths hasn't really been impacted much at all by all of the limitations being imposed in the name of "safety for kids".

For the past several decades, witha few dips up or down, the US child population has remained relatively constant. During that same time period the child death rate overall has decreased dramatically. It's not just a percentage drop, it's an actual numerical drop. So fewer children die today vs. say 1970 or 1990. During that same time period, while it has also declined, death by MVA has remained the leading cause of childhood deaths, even with seatbelts. It still remains a significant cause of death. Deaths from other kinds of unintentional accidents have declined and become less significant. If you parse out infant deaths, which includes such things as premature delivery, crib death, congenital causes that are not relevant to active childhood activity, it becomes even more significant. The American Academy of Pediatrics has been focusing on unintentional childhood deaths for decades -- since the 1950s -- and has a lot of supporting data. You can also dive deeper into statistics on particular activities. Bicycle deaths among children are lower in those states that have pediatric helmet laws. Youth sports have addressed some injury concerns surrounding concussions. I don't hear anyone in youth sports bemoaning the fact that safety requirements are cutting down on youth concussions. This is a very odd perspective to me in scouting. 

[skeptic 992]

19 minutes ago, yknot said:

For the past several decades, witha few dips up or down, the US child population has remained relatively constant. During that same time period the child death rate overall has decreased dramatically. It's not just a percentage drop, it's an actual numerical drop. So fewer children die today vs. say 1970 or 1990. During that same time period, while it has also declined, death by MVA has remained the leading cause of childhood deaths, even with seatbelts. It still remains a significant cause of death. Deaths from other kinds of unintentional accidents have declined and become less significant. If you parse out infant deaths, which includes such things as premature delivery, crib death, congenital causes that are not relevant to active childhood activity, it becomes even more significant. The American Academy of Pediatrics has been focusing on unintentional childhood deaths for decades -- since the 1950s -- and has a lot of supporting data. You can also dive deeper into statistics on particular activities. Bicycle deaths among children are lower in those states that have pediatric helmet laws. Youth sports have addressed some injury concerns surrounding concussions. I don't hear anyone in youth sports bemoaning the fact that safety requirements are cutting down on youth concussions. This is a very odd perspective to me in scouting. 

This is a very odd perspective to me in scouting. 

Not sure what you mean by this.  I do not see a program or council wide concern regarding safety rules, other than the foolishness relating to basic tool use and age, especially if properly suprevised.  I know of no Scouters that have serious issues with helmets, knee and arm guards, proper foot wear, eye protection, shooting safety rules, and so on.  Now restrictions on certain games is another story, as it is so vague.  Again, we do also have the concerns with litigation that rise up regularly.  So, for example, the old king of the mountain, or dog pile is frowned upon and basically banned.  Overprotection can be a disservice to youth when it does not allow them to test themselves.  I may be missing something, or maybe my age perspective is showing?

 

[yknot 1338]

1 hour ago, skeptic said:

This is a very odd perspective to me in scouting. 

Not sure what you mean by this.  I do not see a program or council wide concern regarding safety rules, other than the foolishness relating to basic tool use and age, especially if properly suprevised.  I know of no Scouters that have serious issues with helmets, knee and arm guards, proper foot wear, eye protection, shooting safety rules, and so on.  Now restrictions on certain games is another story, as it is so vague.  Again, we do also have the concerns with litigation that rise up regularly.  So, for example, the old king of the mountain, or dog pile is frowned upon and basically banned.  Overprotection can be a disservice to youth when it does not allow them to test themselves.  I may be missing something, or maybe my age perspective is showing?

 

I was referring to a couple specific posts on this thread, but that is not exactly a novel perspective in scouting. I've heard it before and seen it elsewhere.