033 0202 0707 029 2038 8398

News

Education law specialist update - Is Rugby too risky for schools?

The BBC and other media outlets reported this week that Rugby tackling is arguably too dangerous for schools to promote. Education law specialist Mr Michael Charles will report on whether the time has come for schools to alter it's teaching methods to cut out physical contact sports like rugby due to the risks of negligence actions. A group of influential medics and other professionals reported this week that a different approach was needed perhaps prompting a need to promote touch tackling over physical contact tackling. But is this approach necessary due to the legal risks that the conventional approach carries? Of course rugby can be dangerous, and tragically history shows that serious injuries can follow not least due to perhaps the scrum which has caused in certain cases, where poor process is adopted serious and irreparable spinal damage. But does this mean Rugby should be banned in our schools. Mr Michael Charles education law specialist says " of course not". Mr Charles who happens also to be the CEO of Sinclairslaw and head of specialist Education Law department in both London and Cardiff states that the problem perhaps is more to do with whether schools can legally enforce a child to play rugby in circumstances where they might object due to fear of risk. "The law has long established that schools owe a duty of care to children within its charge. The statutory responsibility involves the duty to safeguard and promote the welfare of children. Arguably the words 'safeguard' imposes a higher level responsibility to avoid risk taking, and this might indeed mean that the conventional approaches of the game might need revision within schools. It might also mean that a school could arguably be prevented from forcing a child to play the game where parents might object or perhaps when a child themselves object. We have to remember that some children burdened by poor motor, planning and or organisation skills could be particularly at risk rendering a school liable to a cause of action if a child is harmed whilst playing a game that their difficulties might render more difficult for them to participate in." Mr Charles added. " in a hundred years from now one wonders whether the forcing of children to play a game that they are frightened of or would be placed under greater risk of injury by, may seem as medieval and archaic as did the 19th century approach of sending children to undertake paid but dangerous employment. I believe that the law already protects against these kind of risks today yet perhaps the situation is more often overlooked." This does not mean however that Mr Charles, who has been involved in scores of important high Court education law cases supports the proposition that Rugby should be banned from our schools. " I do not think that banning rugby is necessary to protect against claims. There are many risks in many things in life. The art is to adopt safeguards to protect against these kind of risks. This might mean that if rugby survives within schools the approaches advocated by these professionals to alter the physical tackling method replacing with touch tackling for example and perhaps even the alteration of approach in the scrum, are probably best not to be ignored " Some may argue that this view is protectionism gone mad and are pushing matters too far yet Mr Charles says that the views expressed do not necessarily reflect his own personal view but do reflect what he states is arguably the "requirements of the current law."