Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Swimming pools and drowning

Swimming pools and drowning EDITORIALS individual pediatricians, the local community-based pro-fencing organisation known as ‘FENCE’, and the Child Accident Prevention Foundation of Aust ralia. Swimming pool drowning or near-drowning has been Fencing for private pools again became an agenda identified as a public health issue affecting toddler- item following the election of a Labor Government in aged children for the past 18 years at least. The long 1991. The arguments and public: debate remained lead time from identification of the problem to adop- the same as they had been almost two decades before. tion of an effective intervention is not uncommon in The proposals contained the same elements, namely public safety legislation. Control of lead in paint, fencing the pool rather than the property and doing which took over 20 years to implement in Queens- so retrospectively. land and longer in other states, and the provision of Why did the legislative approach then succeed? safe load lines on ships, which took more than 80 The legislation was to be statewide, although many years to implenwnt, are two among many examples of local government areas had fencing ordinances, the slowness to adopt of safety legislation. some of which were more stringent than the Aus- The New South Wales experience with pool fenc- tralian Stantlards requirement. An anti-pool-fencing ing legislation discussed in this issue by Carey et al. lobby, POOL, was formed. This pup was active in (25-32) shows also the tenuous nature of safety legis- opposing the legislation through public meetings, lation. Repeal of laws about the wearing of motor political lobbying, letters to the press and personal cycle helmets in many of the United States led appearances and debate on television. directly to a higher rate of fatalities among motor cyc- The State Health Department ran a public edu- lists, who had fought to protect their civil liberties. cation campaign, ‘Operation Waterwise’, which The repeal of the swimming pool fencing legislation, addressed the need for pool fencing, teaching water however, affects children who neither participated in safety to children, training in cardiopulmonary the debate nor were able to vote. resuscitation, and parental supervision, as a compre- Carey et al. have identified lessons for public hensive program for protecting toddlers from health practitioners in the management of advocacy drowning in pools. This campaign used the talents and change. Legislation for public health measures and public profile of Laurie Lawrence to take the inevitably produces tension between promoting pub- comprehensive safety message across the state. lic benefit and protecting individual liberties. A period of public comment and objection Pool fencing ordinances had been in existence in suggested that there was support for new pools being some shires of Queensland at the time the problem of fenced. Public acceptance of the need to fence (even toddler drowning was recognised in Brisbane. The among pool owners) was polled at over 90 per cent. Brisbane City Council, which covers almost 30 per Misinformation aside, there remained practical diffi- cent of the population of the state, had no require- culties for many existing pool owners. The Depart- ments about fencing until 1977 when a problem was ment of Local Government addressed these identified and the Council introduced a pool fencing difficulties by producing guidelines for inspectors to ordinance. This ordinance required fencing of all accept alternative solutions. domestic pools (rather than backyards), and was to This compromise for existing pools was an import- apply retrospectively. ant element in carrying the legislation forward in Public opposition was mobilised mainly through Queensland. The regulations were drafted by build- the efforts of the Opposition in the Brisbane City ing inspectors and public health officials. Dr Rob Pitt Council. The arguments expressed through the news of the Injury Surveillance Unit coordinated advice media, letters to the editor and public meetings were from public health, surveillance data and the many similar to those described by Carey et al. Cost of a community based organisations with an interest in fence, invasion of civil liberties, parental supervision injury prevention and water safety. According to and retrospectivity were common themes. Such was Carey’s analysis, there was no such willingness to the vehemence of the opposition to the retro- cornpromise among the New South Wales spectivity and the costs to pool owners that the Lord negotiators. Mayor was physically jostled at one public meeting at The introduction and subsequent repeal of fencing which he spoke in favour of the proposals. legislation in New South Wales (and of other safety A National-Liberal coalition government shelved legslation elsewhere), suggests that public health the City Council proposal in 1978 and for only the practitioners should not be complacent when safety second time in Queensland history exercised the legslation is introduced, especially as it affects less power of veto over local government ordinances. The powerful groups within the community. National Party held no Brisbane seats in Parliament, Movement towards protecting children from harm and was reported in the press to favour the proposal. and exploitation is relatively recent. The challenge The Brisbane-based Liberal members of Cabinet for the future is to keep the momentum for change were reported to have opposed the regulations on alive as children continue to be hurt in a world the grounds of cost to the pool owners and inspec- designed, built and financed by adults. tion by Council officers being an invasion of privacy. James Nixon For several years following the rejection of the Depadment of Child Health retrospective isolation fence ordinance, surveillance University of Queensland and advocacy were continued on an ad hoc basis by Brisbane AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH 1994 VOL. 18 NO. 1 3 http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health Wiley

Swimming pools and drowning

Download PDF
1 page

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wiley/swimming-pools-and-drowning-JNbJioKE36

References (0)

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Wiley
Copyright
"Copyright © 1994 Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company"
ISSN
1326-0200
eISSN
1753-6405
DOI
10.1111/j.1753-6405.1994.tb00183.x
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

EDITORIALS individual pediatricians, the local community-based pro-fencing organisation known as ‘FENCE’, and the Child Accident Prevention Foundation of Aust ralia. Swimming pool drowning or near-drowning has been Fencing for private pools again became an agenda identified as a public health issue affecting toddler- item following the election of a Labor Government in aged children for the past 18 years at least. The long 1991. The arguments and public: debate remained lead time from identification of the problem to adop- the same as they had been almost two decades before. tion of an effective intervention is not uncommon in The proposals contained the same elements, namely public safety legislation. Control of lead in paint, fencing the pool rather than the property and doing which took over 20 years to implement in Queens- so retrospectively. land and longer in other states, and the provision of Why did the legislative approach then succeed? safe load lines on ships, which took more than 80 The legislation was to be statewide, although many years to implenwnt, are two among many examples of local government areas had fencing ordinances, the slowness to adopt of safety legislation. some of which were more stringent than the Aus- The New South Wales experience with pool fenc- tralian Stantlards requirement. An anti-pool-fencing ing legislation discussed in this issue by Carey et al. lobby, POOL, was formed. This pup was active in (25-32) shows also the tenuous nature of safety legis- opposing the legislation through public meetings, lation. Repeal of laws about the wearing of motor political lobbying, letters to the press and personal cycle helmets in many of the United States led appearances and debate on television. directly to a higher rate of fatalities among motor cyc- The State Health Department ran a public edu- lists, who had fought to protect their civil liberties. cation campaign, ‘Operation Waterwise’, which The repeal of the swimming pool fencing legislation, addressed the need for pool fencing, teaching water however, affects children who neither participated in safety to children, training in cardiopulmonary the debate nor were able to vote. resuscitation, and parental supervision, as a compre- Carey et al. have identified lessons for public hensive program for protecting toddlers from health practitioners in the management of advocacy drowning in pools. This campaign used the talents and change. Legislation for public health measures and public profile of Laurie Lawrence to take the inevitably produces tension between promoting pub- comprehensive safety message across the state. lic benefit and protecting individual liberties. A period of public comment and objection Pool fencing ordinances had been in existence in suggested that there was support for new pools being some shires of Queensland at the time the problem of fenced. Public acceptance of the need to fence (even toddler drowning was recognised in Brisbane. The among pool owners) was polled at over 90 per cent. Brisbane City Council, which covers almost 30 per Misinformation aside, there remained practical diffi- cent of the population of the state, had no require- culties for many existing pool owners. The Depart- ments about fencing until 1977 when a problem was ment of Local Government addressed these identified and the Council introduced a pool fencing difficulties by producing guidelines for inspectors to ordinance. This ordinance required fencing of all accept alternative solutions. domestic pools (rather than backyards), and was to This compromise for existing pools was an import- apply retrospectively. ant element in carrying the legislation forward in Public opposition was mobilised mainly through Queensland. The regulations were drafted by build- the efforts of the Opposition in the Brisbane City ing inspectors and public health officials. Dr Rob Pitt Council. The arguments expressed through the news of the Injury Surveillance Unit coordinated advice media, letters to the editor and public meetings were from public health, surveillance data and the many similar to those described by Carey et al. Cost of a community based organisations with an interest in fence, invasion of civil liberties, parental supervision injury prevention and water safety. According to and retrospectivity were common themes. Such was Carey’s analysis, there was no such willingness to the vehemence of the opposition to the retro- cornpromise among the New South Wales spectivity and the costs to pool owners that the Lord negotiators. Mayor was physically jostled at one public meeting at The introduction and subsequent repeal of fencing which he spoke in favour of the proposals. legislation in New South Wales (and of other safety A National-Liberal coalition government shelved legslation elsewhere), suggests that public health the City Council proposal in 1978 and for only the practitioners should not be complacent when safety second time in Queensland history exercised the legslation is introduced, especially as it affects less power of veto over local government ordinances. The powerful groups within the community. National Party held no Brisbane seats in Parliament, Movement towards protecting children from harm and was reported in the press to favour the proposal. and exploitation is relatively recent. The challenge The Brisbane-based Liberal members of Cabinet for the future is to keep the momentum for change were reported to have opposed the regulations on alive as children continue to be hurt in a world the grounds of cost to the pool owners and inspec- designed, built and financed by adults. tion by Council officers being an invasion of privacy. James Nixon For several years following the rejection of the Depadment of Child Health retrospective isolation fence ordinance, surveillance University of Queensland and advocacy were continued on an ad hoc basis by Brisbane AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH 1994 VOL. 18 NO. 1 3

Journal

Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health – Wiley

Published: Mar 1, 1994

There are no references for this article.