[ QUOTE ]
Would this be the time that landlords said, "No Blacks or Irish", or the time that teachers were allowed to cane small kids
[/ QUOTE ]
Yep that'll be the one.... it was the same time that you could leave your bike outside your house, and the next door neighbour would notice that your tyre was flat and pump it up instead of nicking it...... it wasn't that long ago.... I'm (just) the right side of forty...
FWIW I got caned for being cheeky to a teacher... it bloody hurt, and I wasn't cheeky to teachers after that...
I do however think that there is more common sense than some realise still around..... I know that teachers aren't supposed to do it, but my daughters teacher will definitely give her a cuddle if she falls over and grazes her knee.... she does it because we talk to her, she knows us, and she knows that we would approve...... she equally knows that we would approve of her giving her a clip round the ear if she deserved it.... its not all PC stupidity out there.....
I suspect a little bias and intolerance in your reply . You mention London -does that mean that Londoners are a superior blend. Suggest you have a good read of the History of Scotland
Would suggest
The Scottish Enlightenment - the Scots invention of the Modern World by Arthur Herman ISBN1 -84115-276-5
Unfortunately the environment that created them no longer exists
As did the environment tht created Smith , Rifkin, Cooke etc .
Its a case of the few spoiling it for everyone else. A few teachers abuse the use of the cane/slipper/smack/whatever and it is removed for all teachers. I was smacked as a pupil, it stung, it made me cry (I was in primary school! /forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif) ... I deserved it ... at a few years later I voluntarily joined in an out of school group run by the very teacher that smacked me. No lasting damage, but gave me a huge respect for a lady that knew how to control a class and teach at the same time - and she was a really nice person when you behaved properly!
These days a teacher can be sued/sacked/etc etc for any "harm" they caused to a child. What effect does this have? A child now knows their legal rights and will push things to the limit (just as all children have done for generations) and these limits are much further than when the parents were children... meaning that classes are often disrupted and all the pupils suffer for it.
Why have "we" allowed it to get this far?
Mind you a lot of the rot has come about because we have handed over the government of our country to Brussels. I taught for 22 years - never saw or knew of any misuse of the cane. At my first (secondary) school anyone was allowed to cane, it scarcely ever happened, it was not necessary merely because the right existed. Teachers took 'loco parentis' seriously. There were many tears when the kids left!
Obligatory use of goggles when playing conkers at school
Can't have snowball fights in case of injury - keep the kids indoors at break time.
Chop down fruit trees in streets in case somebody slips on the fruit
All real examples!!
Like it or not. These silly things have been introduced because the authorities are concerned that the parents of the little dears will sue if they have the slightest opportunity. It's worry about that, rather than the desire to protect the kids that's behind it!
But it's also over reaction. I'm glad to tell you that my kids (who both go to the local primary school) have, between them, done the following things in the last 18 months:
- gone hill walking and caving in Wales
- been sent out to play in the snow - under supervision - because there weren't enough kids and teachers in to justify running classes
- played conkers without goggles (conkers mostly taken from our horse chestnut, which supplies most of the kids in the neighbourhood so I'd better take out liability insurance).
- played lethal football in the playground
- been out on one of Southampton Oceanographic Institute's boats for a research trip
- and had a thoroughly good time.
The headteacher isn't careless, he just has a reasoned and sensible approach to risk and to taking reasonable precautions, in line with the guidelines issued by the L.E.A. The tendency to "gold plate" regulations because of a fear of litigation has resulted in an OTT reaction to risk, imho, that is out of line with reality and is needlessly denying kids a great deal of fun.
Of course, our kids are also exposed to a full-on mobo helming nutter who brings them into close proximity with large volumes of petrol at dangerous speeds on the water, but that's boating for you.............
Here at work I have a guy who works for me who squashed his finger between a trolley he was using and a computer rack resulting in a blackened finger nail. I have just learnt he is claiming damages.
My fist instincts was to go and see him and tell him what a complete tw@t he is but have been told not to say anything.
If he hasn't the neuromotor where with all to push a trolley he's genes need to be removed from the pool.
I'm hoping the Darwin theory exercises it's wisdom on him.
[/ QUOTE ] I'd be careful; he sounds like the type who would then do you for harassment. Annoyingly, your employer's liability insurers will probably cough up some kind of settlement for his poor, wounded finger, without admitting liability, because it's cheaper than going to court.
Just make sure he is top of the list next time you have a "business restructure". /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif