[darth_skywalker]

Sure, some playgrounds may be mind-numbingly dull, but those are a well-intentioned response to older playgrounds that posed serious physical dangers. You can argue that getting a little bit scraped up once in a while isn't bad for children; it may teach them lessons about how to avoid such future mistakes - but plenty of children have sustained more serious injuries on playgrounds that allowed them to climb much higher than they could on, say, a tree in nature (speaking from my life experience). I think the article conflates the issue of modern over parenting with safer playground design - which if done right, can only be a good thing.

[hashkb]

I've fallen from trees higher than any playground. Only serious injury I ever had was on (and because of) AstroTurf.

[catalogia]

Ditto, I grew up in the woods so climbing on trees was an everyday activity for me, more frequent than playing on playgrounds. I used to climb trees as far as the tree would support, then climb it further until it collapsed. I fell out of more trees doing that than I can count.

Thankfully, helicopter parents cannot hope to regulate trees.

[watwut]

Ok and I know ine guy (kid) who spent weeks in hospital due to fall from tree and two other people who broke limb (adults). That is on top of head incidents close to me.

I don't prevent my kids to climb trees, but accidents do happen.

[ip26]

A big part of the complaint is that injury rates & severity has stayed about the same. It seems the safer we make the playground, the more risks the kids take. It's called risk compensation.

[lazyasciiart]

I've seen that asserted but never backed up.