In a recent tragedy, twin toddlers drowned in their family’s backyard in-ground pool.
Two articles in a row in the Boston Herald mentioned that the authorities were investigating how the twins drowned despite the fact that the pool had a cover.
There seems to be a widespread misconception, which the Herald articles exacerbate, that pool covers are a safety device. In my letter in today’s Herald, I tried to set the record straight:
Safety hazard
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
A pool cover is not a safety device; it is intended to keep the pool clean, not prevent drownings. In fact, pool covers make pools less safe for children (“Police to study security tape in tots’ drowning,” July 19).
My heart goes out to the parents, but it disturbs me to see officials claiming they did everything right. If that had been the case, then it would have been impossible for the children to access the pool unsupervised. There is a reason why many insurance companies refuse to issue policies to homes with pools.
- Jonathan Kamens, Brighton
![[Digg]](http://blog.kamens.us/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/digg.png)
![[Facebook]](http://blog.kamens.us/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/facebook.png)
![[Email]](http://blog.kamens.us/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/email.png)
