I started diving off of starting blocks when I was eight years old. I am now 51, and train at the Y, almost always alone, as there is no Masters program in the county where I live, or in any of the immediately adjacent counties. (There are several age group programs.) I want to work on my starts, but none of the Y's where I swim will let me use the blocks - saying that a national Y policy prohibits anyone from using the blocks unless a team/club coach is on the deck.
I have never heard of anyone suing a YMCA because of an accident on a starting block.
Yes, perhaps a coach would be valuable to me in this regard, but I'm not looking for a coach - I need and want a cooperative facility. The age groups' program schedules are not conducive to my schedule, and besides, the age group coaches already have enough on their hands during those times with lanes full of kids working their programs. I also am not excited about having to dodge those kids to do the work I need to do.
Anyone find a way to conquer this litigation-fear-induced insanity yet? Thank you.
Parents
Former Member
Originally posted by Bob McAdams
I don't see how McDonald's coffee is part of this argument, which is about competitive swimmers being allowed to use the starting blocks to practice their starts.
A more relevant question is whether cars should be allowed to turn at intersections.
Left turns should clearly never be allowed, because a car that is turning left could be hit by a car that is travelling the other way going straight. Of course, the car that is turning left could watch for cars going the other way and wait until there's nothing coming. But what if a car comes zooming through at the last minute and the driver doesn't see it?
And right turns are not really safe either, since a car that is turning right has to slow down to turn. What if a car that is going straight doesn't see that he's slowing down and rams him? Or what if he hits a pedestrian who is crossing at the intersection?
The fact is that everything I've just said is perfectly true and valid. The only thing it ignores is the fact that people need to turn. But if you even consider that fact, you are admitting that rules and regulations should take into account what people need and not just safety.
All of which brings us back to the topic:
A pool has a clearly posted policy that says: "Starting blocks may only be used in otherwise vacant lanes by certified swimmers." Only 4 of the 6 lanes are in use. Swimmer #5, who has a certification badge on his suit, informs the lifeguard that he is going to be practicing starts in one of the empty lanes. Why shouldn't this be allowed?
because on an off chance something goes wrong, someone will most likely get sued, or at least they're afraid that they might, and some facility may end up losing it's insurance and having to close doors... so rather than risking that, they tighten the rules.
This is where the generalized impression that there are too many sue happy people out there spoils it for everyone.
Sort of borderlines to the zero tolerance policies that are getting more and more popular... again, lack of common sense and generalized fear of something happening and someone being held responsible for something they couldn't predict happening.
Originally posted by Bob McAdams
I don't see how McDonald's coffee is part of this argument, which is about competitive swimmers being allowed to use the starting blocks to practice their starts.
A more relevant question is whether cars should be allowed to turn at intersections.
Left turns should clearly never be allowed, because a car that is turning left could be hit by a car that is travelling the other way going straight. Of course, the car that is turning left could watch for cars going the other way and wait until there's nothing coming. But what if a car comes zooming through at the last minute and the driver doesn't see it?
And right turns are not really safe either, since a car that is turning right has to slow down to turn. What if a car that is going straight doesn't see that he's slowing down and rams him? Or what if he hits a pedestrian who is crossing at the intersection?
The fact is that everything I've just said is perfectly true and valid. The only thing it ignores is the fact that people need to turn. But if you even consider that fact, you are admitting that rules and regulations should take into account what people need and not just safety.
All of which brings us back to the topic:
A pool has a clearly posted policy that says: "Starting blocks may only be used in otherwise vacant lanes by certified swimmers." Only 4 of the 6 lanes are in use. Swimmer #5, who has a certification badge on his suit, informs the lifeguard that he is going to be practicing starts in one of the empty lanes. Why shouldn't this be allowed?
because on an off chance something goes wrong, someone will most likely get sued, or at least they're afraid that they might, and some facility may end up losing it's insurance and having to close doors... so rather than risking that, they tighten the rules.
This is where the generalized impression that there are too many sue happy people out there spoils it for everyone.
Sort of borderlines to the zero tolerance policies that are getting more and more popular... again, lack of common sense and generalized fear of something happening and someone being held responsible for something they couldn't predict happening.
