Re: Child Protection 'Training'
- From: "fred" <r123456789b@xxxxxxx>
- Date: 7 Mar 2007 01:04:29 -0800
1. First Aid (and only if the child allows the contact - unless they
might die!)
2. Comfort (age appropriate)
3. Immediate Harm (i.e. if the child will die in the next second if
you don't stop them)
Did your friend raise these objections at the time? If so what did
they say? This sounds very much to me like a policy which was worked
out in a meeting by people setting up the course with no experience of
real activities.
A quick check of scoutbase shows only the yellow card which we all
know about.
If I had been on a course where I was told this then I would be
writing to the DC and CC explaining which Scout activities would be
canceled because of 3. If I were to do a risk assesment for most
adventurous activities with this in mind then my conclusion would be
that implementing this put scouts and leaders at un-acceptable risk.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Child Protection 'Training'
- From: Ewan Scott
- Re: Child Protection 'Training'
- References:
- Child Protection 'Training'
- From: Eddie Langdown
- Child Protection 'Training'
- Prev by Date: Re: Child Protection 'Training'
- Next by Date: Re: Child Protection 'Training'
- Previous by thread: Re: Child Protection 'Training'
- Next by thread: Re: Child Protection 'Training'
- Index(es):