Active Living and Community Access to Schools: A Policy Perspective

Purpose

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), since the mid-1970's, the number of obese and overweight adults and children in the U.S. has increased sharply from 15% to nearly 33%, resulting in a higher risk of numerous health ailments. Central to active living and obesity prevention efforts in the United States is the creation or enhancement of supportive environments for physical activity. One strategy in line with this goal, as recommended by the Task Force on Community Preventive Services, is the creation or enhancement of access to places for physical activity (MMWR, 2001). Indoor and outdoor facilities on public school grounds such as tracks, gymnasiums, fields, playgrounds, and courts provide opportunities for physical activity by members of the community outside of regular school hours in a familiar environment. Traditional tort law specifies that landowners have a responsibility to not expose people using their land to an unreasonable risk of harm. Engaging in physical activity contains a risk of injury for participants, and a fear of being sued often serves as a constraint to schools and school districts allowing community members the use of their facilities. Tort immunity statutes relevant to physical activity and recreation exist in all 50 states. Commonly referred to as recreational user statutes, these statutes serve to encourage landowners to offer physical activity and recreational opportunities to the public by limiting liability. The applicability of these statutes varies state to state in a number of areas, including the applicable land covered. The purpose of this study was to analyze the applicability of these statutes to public school land and facilities.

Methods

An analysis of statutory law was conducted after a comprehensive Lexis-Nexis and Westlaw database search.

Analysis/Results

Results of the statutory analysis indicated that 17 states expressly allow applicability to public land and that an examination of case law reflects applicability in 19 other states. Five states do not allow applicability to public land.

Conclusions

This presentation identifies and clarifies legal issues concerning recreational user statutes and public school land and facilities, presents relevant case law, and discusses strategies aimed at encouraging schools to open their premises for community leisure-time physical activity.