Boy Drowned On School Outing

[FAST]

Since the dead kid did not put a PFD on in the 1st place,...I guess this means that the kids were not properly supervised,...thus the charges.

 

[managee]

were the teachers aware that the boy took off his pfd?

To me the key is what did the teacher know?

I mean if a kid losses their eye in shop class because they werent wearing glasses the teacher i not automatically responsible because there are instances when a kid could remove glasses without the teachers knowledge.

Good point. For all we know they were aware he wasn't wearing his PFD.

 

[frankcastle]

Good point. For all we know they were aware he wasn't wearing his PFD.

Who knew of the failed swim tests?

Who knew the kid was not wearing his pfd?

How did the kid end up in the water without the pfd?

Those to me are the big questions.

You can expect a massive change in the tdsb..... i think one board cancelled all international field trips after a terror attack. Trips near water will be rare.

 

[spaman]

this makes me fucking angry
tests handed to the teacher (half fail)
teacher contacts the vice?
or makes decision on his/her own?
letters sent to parents informing those who failed can not attend?
what the fuck happened
why did those attend
FUCk me and say NO
are inability to say No to kids because we don't want to hurt their feelings got one of them killed

 

[managee]

this makes me fucking angry
tests handed to the teacher (half fail)
teacher contacts the vice?
or makes decision on his/her own?
letters sent to parents informing those who failed can not attend?
what the fuck happened
why did those attend
FUCk me and say NO
are inability to say No to kids because we don't want to hurt their feelings got one of them killed

Yea this strikes me as strange. It's a big risk for a responsible adult to take kids that can't swim on an activity that puts them at risk of a drowning. Why take the risk? I have to imagine at-least one of these teachers is getting fired, maybe worse, at-least for the issues related to the testing before the trip.

I wonder if the trip needed that magic number of 30 or 32 participants to run, otherwise it would be cancelled. Just a guess.

I'm still not convinced that a) a kid who didn't pass the test wouldn't have been allowed on the trip even if the teacher had taken the next steps as required by board policy and b) that non-swimmer parents were totally unaware of the risks inherent in sending your kid on a trip like this.

One hopes this isn't the end of these types of trips, but safety first...

 

[spaman]

Yea this strikes me as strange. It's a big risk for a responsible adult to take kids that can't swim on an activity that puts them at risk of a drowning. Why take the risk? I have to imagine at-least one of these teachers is getting fired, maybe worse, at-least for the issues related to the testing before the trip.

I wonder if the trip needed that magic number of 30 or 32 participants to run, otherwise it would be cancelled. Just a guess.

I'm still not convinced that a) a kid who didn't pass the test wouldn't have been allowed on the trip even if the teacher had taken the next steps as required by board policy and b) that non-swimmer parents were totally unaware of the risks inherent in sending your kid on a trip like this.

One hopes this isn't the end of these types of trips, but safety first...

I'll tell you were it ends.
trips are off
your kid my kids and all the others kids after will not get to participate because the TDSB in their idiotic and feeble attempt to not offend or exclude anybody has bit them squarely in the ass royally

 

[basketcase]

I'll tell you were it ends.
trips are off
your kid my kids and all the others kids after will not get to participate because the TDSB in their idiotic and feeble attempt to not offend or exclude anybody has bit them squarely in the ass royally

My guess is it has absolutely nothing to do with the board but simply the teachers rewrote the rule book because they thought it would be a good experience for those kids.

 

[spaman]

My guess is it has absolutely nothing to do with the board but simply the teachers rewrote the rule book because they thought it would be a good experience for those kids.

not sure if that would be worse

 

[basketcase]

not sure if that would be worse

Claims of some warped policy vs. well meaning teachers who fucked up royally?

 

[GPIDEAL]

If they failed, then life jackets should be mandatory before getting in the water or a boat, canoe, etc.

 

[tombrady12]

If they failed, then life jackets should be mandatory before getting in the water or a boat, canoe, etc.

If they failed, they shouldn't be allowed to go. End of story.

 

[spaman]

If they failed, they shouldn't be allowed to go. End of story.

This^
if your kid is no good they are no good. practise get better, get a coach, take lessons, just don't make it something it is not
you simply suck and may not attend

 

[sweetiepieexo]

not sure what point you are trying to make?

IF the parents were aware that the kids could not swim then they shouldn't have been allowed to go in the first place.. It is a safety concern. Also having your family on board a school trip is not normal. That just doesn't happen. I mean have u ever went on any school trips where you seen your teachers bring family???? Its sad that people are making excuses. This is a fifteen year old boy were talking about who was not properly supervised. Evenif he took off his PDF I'm sure someone would have seen it. At the end of the day I blame the teachers and parents ; They all knew 15 out of 30 couldn't swim and still allowed them on the trip. Therefore putting the teachers in a lawsuit ... if they decide to sue which I'm pretty sure they are right now.

The organizers, teachers and school board are the ones holding themselves out as the experts on this trip, the students and parents know little or nothing about canoe trips to northern Canada and were relying on the organizers expertise. Whoever overlooked the swimming test failures is screwed. Will be interesting to see if there were other tests like endurance and health with overlooked failures.

 

[dirkd101]

The eldest of my brood took an outdoor ed class in his last year of high school, which culminated in an Algonquin park canoe trip. Everyone had to pass a swim test to go...

Whoever said that they probably need "x" number of students, as a minimum, to go is probably right. This being a canoe trip, you need a minimum of two per canoe and groupings for camp sites and the corresponding meal plans, etc. This is an expensive trip and the teachers going don't want to lose this, as I am sure they have a love for the outdoors. On this style of trip, the oversight by teachers/chaperones is a bit loose, so there are times when kids are really on their own, usually after they have been checked on at their night camp location, after dinner. The camp sites being what they are, cannot accommodate every person on such a trip. This is obviously when the tragedy took place and to question why a kid wasn't wearing a pfd when his swimming skills are weak, is to not remember being a kid. Wanting to be like the others, bravado, peer pressure, embarrassment and that teenage feeling of invincibility are all factors that have to be accounted for.

Someone is going to ultimately take the blame for this and rightly so. Canoe trips are no place for non-swimmers. The weather could just as easily turned and flipped the canoe and this kid could have died that way, if there were lax rules regarding pfds. I would bet that this very same program has been suspended in that school system and that other boards have suspended it also. The ripple effect will be there. It's a shame a kid has to die in order to find out that someone in a position that could have prevented this, allowed the kid to go. That fucker should rot in jail for this, but I would assume that this won't be the case and that they will just get probation or something along those lines.

 

[SkyRider]

Wonder if the teacher supervisors were familiar with Big Trout Lake? (Ok, ok, I was just kidding about giant killer fishes. Thought that was obvious.)

 

[managee]

The eldest of my brood took an outdoor ed class in his last year of high school, which culminated in an Algonquin park canoe trip. Everyone had to pass a swim test to go...

Whoever said that they probably need "x" number of students, as a minimum, to go is probably right. This being a canoe trip, you need a minimum of two per canoe and groupings for camp sites and the corresponding meal plans, etc. This is an expensive trip and the teachers going don't want to lose this, as I am sure they have a love for the outdoors. On this style of trip, the oversight by teachers/chaperones is a bit loose, so there are times when kids are really on their own, usually after they have been checked on at their night camp location, after dinner. The camp sites being what they are, cannot accommodate every person on such a trip. This is obviously when the tragedy took place and to question why a kid wasn't wearing a pfd when his swimming skills are weak, is to not remember being a kid. Wanting to be like the others, bravado, peer pressure, embarrassment and that teenage feeling of invincibility are all factors that have to be accounted for.

Someone is going to ultimately take the blame for this and rightly so. Canoe trips are no place for non-swimmers. The weather could just as easily turned and flipped the canoe and this kid could have died that way, if there were lax rules regarding pfds. I would bet that this very same program has been suspended in that school system and that other boards have suspended it also. The ripple effect will be there. It's a shame a kid has to die in order to find out that someone in a position that could have prevented this, allowed the kid to go. That fucker should rot in jail for this, but I would assume that this won't be the case and that they will just get probation or something along those lines.

I know I mentioned minimum number of students, but I imagine others did as-well.

We don't have a lot of details, but I kind of imagine 32 teenagers and 6 adults finishing a long, hot day on the water and getting permission to go for a dip. Those who could swim were probably allowed to go in without a PFD, those who weren't were inevitably told at some point to wear them. When were they told/reminded? Who knows, based on the information that has come out. Beyond that, loosely supervised would probably be an apt description. After beaching the canoes, my memories of these moments are organized chaos, when 32 (or however many) all strip their gear and make a break for the water at-once.

If you could swim - Great times. Nothing like a cool dip after a hot afternoon on the water.

Were either teachers the designated lifeguards? We don't know. For all we know this is a single outdoor ed teacher's class, with 5 volunteers (one of which is a teacher volunteer) who had never met these 32 kids before the trip. I'm certain it would take me longer than a day on the water to learn all of their names, let alone differentiate who can/can't swim. Especially once their trip gear is stripped and now they're in bathing gear.

After dinner time was almost universally chill out time. Rarely was there interest in getting wet again, because you wanted everything dry for the next day on the water. One of my favourite parts of these trips was that almost without exception, after hiking or canoeing/portaging all day, bed times didn't need to be enforced, since most kids were zombies by the time they finished cleaning up after dinner.

At 13 I was Bronze Medallion qualified and by 15 I had my lifeguard quals. I was leading groups of Scouts on trips like this at 15 years old with other 15 and 16 year olds as the 'responsible adults', or I was a CIT for 10-year olds during the summer, also supervising trips like this. I doubt anyone on those trips was 18.

So admittedly, I never actually supervised a group of 15 year olds.

More importantly, I never supervised a person in this kind of water who was a non-swimmer.

--

If we were mature enough to take on that kind of responsibility at 15, I don't see why a 15-year old wouldn't be responsible to listen to instructions and wear a PFD.

If this teenager got crushed on a trip somewhere in Toronto when he j-walked without looking both ways, is the teacher responsible? If this same sitatuon (drowning) happened outside of school and he was therefore under the care of mom and dad, would they be held criminally responsible?

As of July 9, 54 people have drowned this year in Ontario.

Depending on their crime, we hold youth under 15 years old responsible for their actions when they act as criminals, albeit under the YCJA. Omar Khadr was 15 when he was arrested by coalition forces. We let 16 year olds drive and legally emancipate themselves from their parents...

Different story if Perry was never told to wear one, but I feel this is incredibly unlikely.

Regardless, this teacher or these teachers are going down. I doubt criminally, unless nobody was supervising or they told the victim not to bother with his PFD.