SENSIBLE RISK ASSESSMENT

Are we suffering from a case of the mollycoddles, over-enthusiasm or bad management?

The modern trend towards risk aversion and the fear of litigation are threatening the development of our children, argues Jerome Mayhew. In his article written in 2007 he explains how a generous dose of well-managed risk and adventure can benefit everyone, and his concluding statement succinctly identified the answer and his views on the problems. Sadly nothing has changed.

 Risk assessment and management skills are a social good that can only be taught by exposure to well-managed risk. By creating adventure and encouraging others to live life more adventurously, we do our bit to provide the building blocks for a more balanced, more active, more healthy, and more aware society, where risk is acknowledged and managed – not avoided at all costs.

In my view, we are living at a time when our society is beginning to show the first signs of the damage caused by the effects of a structural aversion to all risk. This damaging attitude has to be tackled head on, for the good of us all. This involves addressing all aspects of society: the law, the regulating bodies, the media, and the general public. Our response should be to argue the case in our own industries and support the wider activities of the Campaign for Adventure.

The idea of sensible risk assessment within a risk management structure appears difficult to achieve on the basis that it is the misguided belief that all risk, no matter how minor, must be assessed. Classics are regularly provided by HSE’s Myth of the Month: http://www.hse.gov.uk/myth/jun10.htm  

The argument that “there is too much bureaucracy in teaching” is only being supported by those who risk assesses for the sake of it rather than having a managed programme.

 Sensible risk assessment is about identifying those areas within a school which present real risk and then setting out a programme for managing those areas through risk assessment and the provision from the assessment of safe working procedures. Invariably in schools no one is co-ordinating such a programme. Imagine if this approach was taken with the curriculum, no timetable, and no structure or monitoring of progress.

 Mayhew also stated that: the failure to provide access to the experience of risk in a controlled environment will stunt development of risk assessment skills or, worse still, lead to the exploration of risk in wholly uncontrolled environments. This problem was highlighted in the following extract from ‘Managing Risk in Play Provision: A position statement’ from the Play Safety Forum, an organisation whose members include the HSE, the Local Government Association, and RoSPA  “All children both need and want to take risks in order to explore limits, venture into new experiences and develop their capacities, from a very young age and from their earliest play experiences. Children would never learn to walk, climb stairs, or ride a bicycle unless they were strongly motivated to respond to challenges involving a risk of injury. Children with disabilities have an equal – if not greater – need for opportunities to take risks, since they may be denied the freedom of choice enjoyed by their non-disabled peers.

If such a programme of management is in place, providing a managed programme of risk assessment based upon real risk then not only are we managing those visitors to the place of work: students and parents, but also those who work in schools: teachers and support staff.

 For an example of what could constitute a program of risk assessments go to:

http://www.schoolshealthandsafety.co.uk/CYPD/html/planning_sheets.htm