4 ms·

So what assessment is made to ensure that any given 18,19,20+ year old " has the skills to handle himself outside of a protected environment"? That's right, no

So what assessment is made to ensure that any given 18,19,20+ year old " has the skills to handle himself outside of a protected environment"? That's right, none, but the arbitrary assumption that they are "old enough". It's just as arbitrary assuming THIS 13-year old is "not capable".

allenp 17y ago
There is the difference in legal responsibility of the university. I think this is probably the biggest stumbling block here - even with parental consent there is risk to the school. Imagine facing the newspaper headline "UConn loses 13-year-old prodigy in South Africa" . . .
- roboneal 17y ago
  Per the article, his mother offered to chaperon him at her own expense...makes your point kind of moot.
  - allenp 17y ago
    How so? He is still participating within the school's program. Just because his mom signs the field trip slip (or tags along herself) doesn't absolve the school from any and all responsibility for his well being. What sort of insurance policy do you think a school needs to fly a 13 year old from Connecticut to South Africa for a week? How about a 13 year old prodigy? I'm all for Colin being able to have this experience - I absolutely would have been thrilled to participate in something like this at any age. I don't think the school has any obligation to allow him to participate in this activity however.
    - roboneal 17y ago
      If they allowed him to enroll in this field of study but are now limiting his access to the curriculum, they should have just refused his tuition. That's the legal obligation. Did you read the article? She offered to sign an explicit legal waiver and accompany him on the trip at her own expense? It appears they family is willing to go to extraordinary lengths to compromise. If the university would look to "solve" the problem vs. outright denial - the family would probably pay cost of any "additional insurance" rider.

allenp 17y ago

There is the difference in legal responsibility of the university. I think this is probably the biggest stumbling block here - even with parental consent there is risk to the school. Imagine facing the newspaper headline "UConn loses 13-year-old prodigy in South Africa" . . .

roboneal 17y ago
Per the article, his mother offered to chaperon him at her own expense...makes your point kind of moot.
- allenp 17y ago
  How so? He is still participating within the school's program. Just because his mom signs the field trip slip (or tags along herself) doesn't absolve the school from any and all responsibility for his well being. What sort of insurance policy do you think a school needs to fly a 13 year old from Connecticut to South Africa for a week? How about a 13 year old prodigy? I'm all for Colin being able to have this experience - I absolutely would have been thrilled to participate in something like this at any age. I don't think the school has any obligation to allow him to participate in this activity however.
  - roboneal 17y ago
    If they allowed him to enroll in this field of study but are now limiting his access to the curriculum, they should have just refused his tuition. That's the legal obligation. Did you read the article? She offered to sign an explicit legal waiver and accompany him on the trip at her own expense? It appears they family is willing to go to extraordinary lengths to compromise. If the university would look to "solve" the problem vs. outright denial - the family would probably pay cost of any "additional insurance" rider.