Pool Policy

To the Editors of The Crimson:

On July 3rd, a notice from the Department of Athletics was posted with new pool regulations. The first rule stated that baby strollers would no longer be allowed on the pool deck.

The issue is safety.

The best way to guarantee freedom from injury is to maintain the facility in perfect working order and then not allow anyone to use it. This is as true for the football field as for the pool. But given that utilization is explicitly the justification for the existence of these resources, there needs to be a way to accommodate both the community's access and assurance.

Family participation means just that, and many members of the Harvard community come swimming with babies in tow. The safest way to transport a baby is in a stroller. Back packs, "Snuglis," slings or in bare arms places both child and adults at risk for falls. Strapped in a stroller, the baby can easily be wheeled, look around, play with small toys or sleep. Someone could bump into the stroller, yes, and/or knock it into the pool. Therefore, children strapped in carriages should be kept away from poolside and be attended to by an adult at all times.

But there is a history. The Harvard athletic facilities are for use by students, staff, faculty and their families. For years, parents have brought their families. For years, parents have brought their babies, securely strapped into strollers, to wait by the pool while mom, dad and older siblings went swimming. In past years, a watchful eye was kept on the baby parked at the end of the lane. With both the baby boom and the increased number of people actively working to maintain their physical fitness, more and more people began bringing babies to the pool. Many strollers scattered around the pool's edge seemed not the safest nor most convenient way to swim.

Three years ago, a group of women who swam regularly at the same time each day recognized the need for a safe alternative and hired a baby sitter to sit with their children off to the side of the pool. Like many small ventures that emerge at the right time, the pool sitting service was so successful, the word started circulating (erroneously) that Harvard University was providing day care at the pool. Soon, too many people came with their babies, and a second sitter was hired. As an informal service, there were a few guidelines for the sitters, and some of the older toddlers, who had grown up next to the pool, were walking around the deck. Again, it was time to reassess the situation and make the necessary adaptations.

There was obviously a great need for adequate child care as well as a need to guarantee the safety of the small children and the general swimming population. At this point in time, Harvard hired one "safety expert" to look at the pool and make recommendations. Addressing only the issue of safety and only the most basic assessment of pool activities, he simply said, "No more strollers." And so it stands.

The issue of strollers on the pool deck is not a simple one. But if, as Harvard insists, it is not a question of liability, but of safety, are they implying that we, the parents, are not at least as concerned about the safety of our children as they? If safety is the issue, and not the exclusion of children/strollers, why can they not accept one of our many counter-proposals:

.A 3-1 ratio of strollers to babysitters; children must stay strapped into a locked stroller at all times.

.Strollers allowed on the deck only at certain hours.

.Use of available alternative space within the athletic facility for child care.

.Harvard, and not the individual parents, organize and provide babysitters adding a fee similar to the towel service arangement.

The diversity of the Harvard community demands a creative solution to the challenge of balancing risk and utilization. If risk is the only focus, as in this case, without addressing the needs of that community, how can the lines be drawn with equanimity? Also at risk are the blind, the differently abled, the aged, the novices, the pregnant women and the chemically dependent.

Surely Harvard University has some creative administrators able to devise a practical solution to the issue of pool safety and accessibility. Or at least, can we ask for a second opinion? Rozann Kraus