Friday, February 08, 2013
Boerne teen crushed by stage prop; school says it won't pay
kens5.com San Antonio: Many people in the audience at Boerne High School on Nov. 15 described it as the worst thing they had ever witnessed.
During opening night for the school's production of "Grease," a 16-year-old stagehand named Zach Bickford ran on stage to flip the page of a 12-foot-tall wooden yearbook. The structure, more than twice Zach's height with an estimated weight of 500 pounds, fell and crushed him.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
I could imagine having different beliefs if I attended that school and knew the people personally, but from an objective standpoint, the administration at that school is at fault. Here's how it plays out. If you want to hire a 25 year old to be the head of the theatre department in a high school, and they are only in their second year of doing this, then go ahead, do that. But, when that teacher wants to build a 500 pound set piece that is manually operated, it shouldn't have been allowed to have happened. My school had a theatre director (who was a bit crazy and would be one to have created a 500 pound set moved manually), but we had a theatre manager hired by the district who would enforce theatrical safety rules in our productions and was the go between with our director and the school administration. Schools that have a budget large enough for large sets that have the ability to fall and paralyze someone should have enough money to hire a manager or IN THE LEAST bother to educate the young and inexperienced director about theatrical safety rules. I find those in charge who didn't see a problem with a poorly built and unsafe set structure at fault here. They should be sued for negligence to observe what was being built and the application it appeared to be having (ex. the turning of the pages).
I agree with Kelly, this school is at fault in particularly the Teacher who put her name down as this piece being safe. Now we dont know who was all in part of designing and constructing the piece but the only person who has been listed so far is the teacher who was hired to be in charge of the theatre productions and therefore that teacher gave the final go ahead to use the 500 pound structure that as the incident proves was not secured properly.
I completely agree that the school is at fault here, nothing would have happened to that boy if the school's theatre had taken the proper precautions and it is the school administrators job to make sure that was happening. I remember our vice principle stoping by to check on us periodically to make sure everything was safe and well. Its so sad to hear about a boy who's life was so negatively changed doing something he loved because of someone else's over site. When you go to school, and when you send your child to school you trust for them to keep them safe, and they need to take responsibility for not following through.
In light of our recent production of Angels in America, whose entire set was one gigantic heavy human flyswatter, let's chat about this. Yes, there should have been safety oversight, and any average drama teacher is not qualified to provide it. But should the unit have been cut entirely? I find it hard to believe that even a manually operated heavy prop couldn't be made safe enough for the stage. The school should have some fault as the designers and engineers of the prop, and though certainly there should be investigation into whether the technician did their job correctly, the Texas letter specifically notes that government employees have protection EXCEPT in case of negligence. This family had better start the negligence argument now.
I bring up Angels in America because Carnegie Scenic engineered out every possible error they could and could think of, but the effect was still dangerous and uncontrolled for a short period of time. We had experienced professors looking over the drawings and the construction, but a freak accident COULD have occurred, and there's no way to absolutely correct for all possible error. I don't believe due diligence was done in this situation, which fundamentally sets it apart, but there's a judgement call that goes in there whether what remains is still fit for the stage. For CMU, it was worth it, so perhaps it was for the school as well. This is why the case needs to go to court.
It is sad to see something like this happen, especially when situations like this have the potential to occur quite frequently in schools across the country. Well meaning teachers and parents without the proper knowledge or experience try to help out with student productions, and in turn unknowingly and unintentionally create extremely dangerous circumstances. I went to a high school where we were cautious in our theatre program, making sure to design sets that we could definitely build and operate safely. It isn't that hard to do, as long as someone has oversight as to what is biting off more than the school can chew.
I just can't believe how the school is claiming immunity to this. Even if I was representing the school district and they were in fact in the right I would still make every effort I could to help the student. I understand everyones' stance on the 25 year old teacher but in all honestly my theatre did not have an official budget. We fundraised ALL of our money for productions so something like a safety manager was not an option. We even raised money or the Mountain Education Foundation raised the money for my theatre teacher's salary. So while this is an unfortunate event I can see how it could slip by in governmental regulations.
In response to Brian, I think that a comparison with Angels isn't really as close as it may seem. Beyond the fact that Carnegie Scenic designed out as many of the possible dangers as they could, it was still specifically designed to do something dangerous, which was fall. The crew, the actors, and everyone involved knew that it was designed to fall when certain actions were taken, so certain safety precautions were followed. In the case of this production of Grease, the book was not designed to fall in any way, and if the school did not have the resources or the knowledge to ensure that it could be secured to the deck so that it could not fail, this scenic piece should absolutely have been cut or redesigned so it was not so heavy. The student may have been following all of the safety precautions that everyone had agreed upon, and I think that it was absolutely the fault of the school, and it feels like they're hiding behind the fact that they are government employees because it's a public school to justify denying responsibility.
This brings up the tricky situation that all of us find ourselves in to some extent now: we're not employees of the school and so are not technically covered under workers' comp, and yet all of us work in this theatre building using some pretty dangerous tools and materials. I think that the SOD has some provision for this, but I'm not sure what it is...
This story is rather shocking to me. This article do sent say much about how all of this happened, weather it was a user error or a manufacturing error. either way this shouldn't have happened. The school should have had trained people building the set, and i agree with everyone saying that the school is at fault. And should definetyl be helping pay for the dameges done to the boy.
I agree with Brian. The school should have some fault, but the designers and engineers for the production should also take much of the blame. Since it was a high school production, I would not be surprised if the teacher was the designer / engineer and the students helped build it. With such a heavy object, the school should have recognized that this is not an ordinary scenic element in a high school production. Instead, they should have asked for guidance from a professional or hired one. There should have been a supervisor that checked the safety of the set before performances. And from what it sounds like, the yearbook was to stay on stage and the crew members flipped pages. Obviously the piece was either not bolted down or hinged properly. Again the fault lies with the engineer and the school for hiring an unqualified teacher. Safety always comes first in theatre, no matter what the cost.
Really? Really?! From my experience in high school, you are under the supervision of the instructor and if anything happens to a child in any situation is your responsibility. How can a school say that a huge set piece that was supposed to be supervised by the teacher and having it fall on a child be deemed not their fault? That's ridiculous! Of course it's your fault. They go to your school, they fill out forms to be under your supervision and care for their time at the school so why would that change because something legitimately harmful happens to a kid? I cut my finger with a pair of scissors and i'm taken care of, yet someone is crushed and sent to the hospital to be in surgery for 13 hours and it is suddenly not the schools problem? False.
It is all well and good to be ambitious for school productions. its the best way to grow. if we always play it safe then we never stretch ourselves and reach new levels of performance. But deciding not to play it safe doesnt mean utterly throwing safety out the window!! The school district is ABSOLUTELY responsible for his injuries on the basis of negligence as has been said previously. it was that teachers responsibility to make sure the set was safe to be operated by UNTRAINED TEENAGERS, and the school needs to take responsibility for its own teachers, sack up, and pay for this kid's medical treatment.
Post a Comment