I grew up in a different century ("no blood no foul"), so for me the english question "Are you OK?" should normally be answered with "yes" unless there are significant quantities of blood or bones are broken. (I guess a more explicit equivalent would be "are you in need of medical assistance?")

Is this still the protocol among anglophone children, or has it changed during the intervening decades?

> Are you OK?

Don't worry, all the damage is mental and won't manifest itself until I'm middle aged.

Admittedly there is a resurgence of understanding the benefits of risk taking, but to demonstrate the status quo, a school outing to a museum requires a risk assessment to be made, weight the benefits of, well, a school trip, against risks of walking on streets etc.

I'm glad to be living where I do, then: here school kids are absolutely expected to be walking on the streets —up until they get bikes, anyway— four times per day.

See, I don't care about the society here, just my own n=2 sample. There is an optimal policy with regards to risk taking, it surely involves taking more risks than socially acceptable, but how much? Is my question.