To think this charity deserve prosecution for being so bloody stupid?

[Fucklechuck]

Just seen this in the news and went down a rabbit hole reading the whole story plus comments on their FB.

They took a bunch of young kids on a frozen lake (apparently without parental consent) and tried to justify it as a safety lesson despite clearly having no understanding themselves of the actual dangers. For example they're claiming the entire lake was frozen over with 2ft thick ice - no, it definitely wasn't, not in the south west of the UK, it's just not that cold in this country even in the recent cold snap. That's just impossible.

Their comments on their FB page are shockingly blasé and they've even been liking other people's comments saying that vaccines are a bigger danger to children than this was

Just can't believe anyone would be so stupid less than a week after the tragedy in Solihull and then to take to social media calling it a knee jerk overreaction to suspend their license until an investigation is complete shows a total lack of regard for the most basic H&S or risk assessment processes. I actually hope their registration to look after children is revoked by whoever has such powers!

I don't understand the thing about giving children the sensory experience of walking on safe ice anyway. In my experience, walking on safe ice feels like walking on slippery flat ground and there isn't really any sensory experience that you couldn't get on, say, an icy path. For it to be an experience worth having, you would have to show them what it is like to walk on unsafe ice, preferably with a demonstration of why it is unsafe. What parent is ever going to consent to that?

Ridiculous generalisation. I know plenty of people working in the charity sector in the UK who are very intelligent and anything but grifters. And it turns out that the organisation involved with this incident was not a charity anyway.

My father would take me out to show me exactly what they were trying to show the children that day.

This was in the 1978 after a prolonged duration of exceptional weather, the whole winter was freezing, not just a cold snap.

Our lake was a 10 min walk.

What I learnt was the sound of solid ice. The sound of thinner ice (in a controlled way). But most importantly, how dangerous it was to ever do this. I have a healthy respect for how dangerous this is from my lessons. Safe ice is 2-4 inches deep. You can see it if it's frozen clear.

In 1978 the ice was 4-6 inches thick and that's why my father took me. There were ice skaters out on the lake that day. I remember thinking they were quite mad watching them skating on the centre of the lake.

I think whoever was making the statement has their feet mixed up with inches. Although I fully doubt the ice was 2 inches thick and even if it was there is no way I'd be taking a group out on the lake.

The thickness needed for safety cannot be produced with the brief recent cold snap in the uk. And as previous posters have said all it's doing is encouraging children into the ice.

A big safeguarding no.

And "the children were in a compact group"? Didn't it occur to them that a lot of weight in the same place was a bad idea?

They do seem worryingly incompetent. That comment about if the ice had broken, the children could have waded out - there seems to have been an assumption that this supposedly 2ft thick ice would crack in the formation of a nice straight pathway to the shore. If it was that thick and cracked in a weak spot, the would have been no wading. The policeman who tried to crack the much thinner ice during the recent drowning tragedy had an implement to work with and still ended up unsuccessful, with hypothermia.

Even if that path had existed, they assume that there were enough leaders to ensure no one stumbled, went under the surface of the water on falling in and struggled to get up in the cold wearing winter clothes, sliding/sinking in mud that may be oozy and sucking, being slowed by shock on exposure to the freezing temperatures. They failed to consider how quickly their own capacity to help could be compromised by exposure to cold temperatures. Just standing up and wading out is absurd.

It's clear that they don't live in Norway, are clueless and shouldn't be trying to deliver learning objectives related to areas they don't have experience in.

The point about the being no need to know safe ice (if there is a way to "feel" such a thing, which is highly doubtful) is a very good thing. In this country we have hardly any safe ice. It is exponentially better to teach children not to go onto ice in this country at all. How many children would be put at risk testing it and finding out that it's not safe? The fact that this was a home Ed group with a higher than usual proportion of ND members makes it much, much worse, as does the news that parental consent hadn't been sought. This goes far beyond the usual home ed fare of baking bread over a bonfire and climbing trees like monkeys.

Whoever runs this business needs to take a long hard look at themselves. They thought it would be fun to go out on the ice. They wanted to do it. They indulged themselves. Educators can't be that selfish in a classroom let alone in a frozen lake.

I doubt they'll get their license back as I doubt their other practices will stand up to the scrutiny they've now invited.

I doubt they'll get their license back as I doubt their other practices will stand up to the scrutiny they've now invited.

It's not their license to operate that they've lost, just the license to use one specific site. They appear to still be running sessions elsewhere, from what it says on their FB! I'm really surprised they're able to carry on but I don't know anything about how this works or who would be responsible for oversight of their fitness to care for children. Presumably if complaints have been made then the wheels are just slow getting into motion after the Christmas break? Judging by the comments on their FB, most of the parents were quite happy about the activity so will still be sending their children along. I think of myself as fairly relaxed and I let my DC climb trees and use knives and light fires (under supervision of course as they are still primary aged) but this would have been a deal-breaker for me.

The organisers have just accused someone who made a fairly sensible comment of being a "hater" and jumping on the "fear bandwagon" FFS. The way they are handling it is almost worse than the fact they let it happen to start with!

It's a pity they're not professional enough to take direction and adapt. This seems highly likely to be picked up by the DM so some safeguarding, charitable or educational body might provide some oversight eventually.

I'm all for evaluating risk but you need to be with adults who are competent to demonstrate it.

I've just read the incredibly long post on Facebook - it seems like there was more to the story.

The camp leader took the children near the lake for a second time without her colleague. She told the children they could not go into the ice (as presumably it was not within her ability to keep everyone 'safe' on the ice with no other staff present). Some children ignored her and went on the ice anyway. It was this sighting that was noticed and reported by a shocked member of the public. At this point the staff member was not even sanctioning the children being on the ice. She simply couldn't keep control and maintain a safe environment.

These children learned nothing about risk and taking precautions. They learnt they could go on the ice and subsequently did so even when advised it was no longer permitted. These children have shown that they are more likely to ignore warnings and go on ice in the future.

Reading that Facebook post reminds me very much of a not for profit I used to be involved in and am no longer as I realised the person running it had a god complex and never ever took any responsibility for anything.

Their response to the complaints and challenges show that they're absolutely the wrong people to be running projects like this because they place their personal agenda above children's safety.

They were very very lucky they didn't have a tragedy on that day.

I used to go dibing in a quarry in North wales.
All year roudn the water was very very cold, due to the depth of the lake.

As you waded in (fully kitted up in wetsuit in midsummer), your body went into a sort of shock at the coldness of the water, you hyperventilated for a few minutes, couldn't breathe properly and couldn't move, you had to go about waist deep and then stand and wait for your body to acclimatise. Once your wetsuit had warmed up you continued carefully.

If you fell into this water, 2 things would happen. 1. you would be badly shocked by the cold water and not be able to function. 2. Apparently that hyper ventilating sensation causes you to breathe in water into your lungs
Cold water is very dangerous and should be treated with care, when people fall of boats/through ice, they die from cold not drowning.

Ice thickness on a body of water can vary in thickness if a steam runs through a lake, or springs are present. This ice looks different. No children should be on the ice in the UK. It’s reckless and feckless.

dibing =diving

Good grief, if they couldn't exert sufficient control over the children to stop them doing something actively dangerous, they shouldn't be in charge of children at all. What happens the next time they take out a group of children who decide they want to play chicken on a busy road, or that it would be fun to play with matches?

The organisers have just accused someone who made a fairly sensible comment of being a "hater"

God, they sound like they're twelve years old themselves.

I think they probably play with fire already - this is an openly and enthusiastically 'controversial' group that is now running a high profile campaign to 'save' the project.

The whole tone of the post is oddly unprofessional. Their ideas about what would happen if the ice cracked is just bonkers but they don't seem to realise.

It's just a pity that they have encouraged a group of vulnerable children to think frozen lakes can be walked on. Apparently they're insured so it's ok. I'm sure insurance can't bring back a child and I doubt they are insured to do this.

I let my DC climb trees and use knives and light fires (under supervision of course as they are still primary aged) but this would have been a deal-breaker for me.

This. I'm a relaxed parent and DD has a scar or two to prove it. Because even with supervision, and instruction, and a fairly sensible child, accidents do happen. And I'd rather the accidents were the sort to need run under a cold tap or some germolene, rather than death. Because icy water accidents can be tragic.

Same here.

Yep. It was their completely bizarre and unprofessional response that sucked me into reading their entire FB post and all the comments etc. I thought the media must have been misquoting them! I don't think I've ever seen anything quite like it, a lesson in "what not to do" I suspect as surely their funders and OFSTED or whoever will be all over this now? Or at least I'd hope so. A shame as it does look like they do some great work but I can't see how they can be allowed to continue looking after children!

Unfortunately they are still doubling down on this and making it all about everyone being risk adverse with children. Supported within a small echo chamber and a strong belief of the rights of the project. The project definitely see itself as selling a type of lifestyle along with the actual activities they do, which is fine, but you can not out right misinform to support your agenda.
Having asked a relative in the industry, liability insurance to cover activities on iced water bodies is non existent except as a specific underwritten risk which would be way beyond the resources of this organisation and he said he didn't think you could even pay to get it with groups of children. If you could it would involve proper ice thickness testing. 7 fairly cold days not the test needed.
So they have brought up they are insured but it is highly likely they were not. Now insurance is in everyone's mind.
They need to get proper advice and stop feeling hard done by and playing the victim. They have actually got off pretty OK from their stupid actions so far, as in everyone is safe.

This was a home ed thing wasn’t it? Correct me if I am wrong, but I think I read it was.

Disclaimer: I am not against home education! I home educated my eldest from the get go until he was 11.

But I met a lot of people in home we circles who would have been all for this. Ds was invited to participate in some things similar which I said absolutely fucking not you nut cases no thank you to.

They used to defend shit like this to the death too. Gave the rest of us normal home educating families a bad name.

It is odd that they are choosing to shoot themselves in the foot by ignoring basic scientific facts. Surely they are presenting landowners with a cast-iron reason for refusing them access to land, and I can't see funders wanting to continue to be associated with an organisation which seems to be a tragic accident waiting to happen.

It's a shame because they seem to have lots going on that is positive. But the ego seems to have taken over in this instance. They have enough knowledge to spout buzz words (like 'dynamic risk assessment') but not enough humility and professionalism to rethink how safe this really was. They're saying that some of their crafts are much more risky than this. They need some oversight.

They must be living virtually off grid as they hadn't even heard about the Solihull tragedy.

I liked the sound of the project overall but the tone of their FB posts and subsequent comments are deeply unprofessional.

They call the lake "a large puddle" and are commenting weird political statements about devolution of power and decentralisation.
Someone suggested the ice walk was setting a bad example to other children who might have seen them and they commented "it was a school day. There wasn't anyone else" as if there's no such thing as toddlers, holiday-makers, or homeschooled kids that don't attend their project.
They have absolutely no self-awareness whatsoever.

The statement from Forestry England quoted in the article says they have suspended the work of the Rewild Project /until/ an investigation has been completed but the FB post is actively encouraging people to complain because they say no investigation has been done and implying none will be done and they've just been kicked out.

They would have done well to keep their mouths shut, issue a vague "Due to concerns regarding our license with FE we must cease our activities at the sheds for the foreseeable future" and leave it at that. Instead, they've made themselves look like loons.

One of the concerns I had from their Facebook posts was someone asked if the parents had signed permission slips for the activity and they said they don't give permissions slips incase the parents disagree with what they are going to do with the children

They seem to be planning to update the permission slips to cover unplanned activities in general so parents who don't like their approach can be filtered out. They say they didn't get permission from parents for the frozen lake walk because they hadn't planned it (!!!) so carried out 'a dynamic risk assessment' at the time. So they did just decide to do it on the spur of the moment. Then they reiterate that risky supervised play is great because children will not go on to take inappropriate risks by themselves despite the incident following the ice walk (children deliberately disobeyed orders not to go on despite it being explained that this was unsafe with only one staff member). In the Facebook post, the organiser adds that the children only went on the edge of the ice at this stage - which sounds straight out of the mouth of an eleven year old.

There was then support for a poster making the point that parents today have double standards because they are willing to vaccinate their children but unwilling to allow them to engage in activities like this.

Clearly you can't prevent children being brought up in eccentric homes but children here are missing vaccinations and engaging in risky behaviors without so much, quite possibly, as a tetanus shot. They're not attending school (fine) but are learning to cut up dead animals instead.

It sounds quite cultish and I straight out don't believe some of the claims, such as the ice being two feet deep throughout, and the claim that this activity was insured.

The forestry commission was quite right to suspend their license immediately to prevent further safeguarding issues pending an investigation but they interpret this as nothing more than unfair and suspect a conspiracy.

It sounds like a narcissist's dream to be honest. Their attitude to children just seems lacking.