The job of a lifeguard has decreased by 16% from 2000 to 2010. This is because learning to swim is becoming a requirement and there is less need for lifeguards. At some schools if you can’t swim you might fail the class in which you are asked to swim. Since the number of lifeguards has decreased so much there will be less jobs and more people without money. What if someone had a fear of water or if they were allergic to chlorine. As you can see, learning to swim should not be a requirement. Think about the average American. About 25% of Americans don’t have access to a pool (https://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2015/07/02/percentage-workers-labor-pool-falls-year-low/zfLQrKjCyhra95v8PJxWcI/story.html). If you can’t practice swimming when you go home than you can’t learn to swim. A pool costs a lot of time and money to take care of and if swimming was a requirement, people would have to use time and money. If you were forced to afford a pool would you be very happy? Some people can’t afford it and if they had to use money on a pool it would take money away from jobs and stuff that people want to do. This would not be a good decision for many reasons. …show more content…
Let 's say a person was allergic to chlorine. If a person was allergic to chlorine and they were forced to swim they would have an allergic reaction. Chlorine poisoning can cause hyperventilation. It can also cause other symptoms that lead to sickness or even death. A person who gets sick from chlorine poisoning that is forced to swim can sue the pool or even the government if they make the person swim. For these reasons, Americans should not be required to swim. It causes job opportunities to decrease. Pools cost a lot of money. Lastly, the requirement can be harmful to people allergic to chlorine. It is evident that learning to swim should not be a