01/09/2026
𝐃𝐨𝐧’𝐭 𝐃𝐫𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐅𝐞𝐚𝐫 𝐈𝐧𝐭𝐨 𝐎𝐮𝐫 𝐒𝐜𝐡𝐨𝐨𝐥𝐬
𝐁𝐲 𝐀𝐧𝐠𝐞𝐥𝐚 𝐓. 𝐄𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐥𝐥𝐨𝐫𝐞
If a drill is meant to teach children that they are safe, why must it first make them feel unsafe?
Schools must prepare for violence—there is no doubt about this. That's what the recent shooting incident at Ateneo de Zambonaga University, which left two people dead, including the 14-year-old shooter, taught us.
However, preparing children for a shooting should not require them to experience one—even as a simulation. And the Department of Education was set to ask students nationwide to do just that with their planned nationwide Simultaneous School Safety Drill for Active Attack Incidents. Unlike conventional earthquake drills, this exercise involves a human-induced threat to “immerse and prepare” schools for active attack and active shooter incidents.
The drill was originally scheduled for August 25 but was postponed to the first week of September because of inclement weather and canceled in-person classes in some locations.
This postponement gives DepEd the time to reevaluate its approach to addressing the recent school shooting incidents – and to confront the harder question: Do students really need to experience a simulated attack at all?
Such reevaluation is also what the Philippine Psychiatric Association and the Philippine Society for Child and Adolescent Psychiatry are calling for. They have expressed serious concerns regarding the effectiveness of the drill, particularly because of previous research indicating that the drill can cause psychological stress to children. They cited the American Academy of Pediatrics and reminded DepEd that a child might be subjected to a traumatic experience, emotional distress, and fear from the high-intensity simulations.
If these active shooter drills risk doing more harm than good to a child, there is little reason to subject them to psychological distress. Before teaching children how to survive gun violence, perhaps the State should first ask why children are being asked to prepare for it at all.
The lessons learned from the recent school shooting incidents in Tacloban and Zamboanga should not be taught to the child hiding under a desk. They should first be taught to the institutions responsible for keeping the gun out of the classroom.
Why is the State, in the first place, asking a child to prepare for a failure that the State has a responsibility to prevent?
The burden of prevention should not fall on the child. It belongs first to the State, to the institutions entrusted with their safety, and to the adults who have the power to keep fi****ms and violence away from them. Do not rehearse violence; reinforce what prevents it: secure boundaries, monitored access, reliable security systems, trained personnel, and effective communication.
The purpose of school safety drills is for a child to be safe and feel safe in their environment. And ultimately, to ensure that schools are prepared and have a safety net to fall back on when prevention fails; not a source of trauma for students.
Do not re-enact the tragedy with children. Prevent it before they ever have to live it.
References
1. Philippine News Agency. (2026, June 24). Raps filed vs. minor in Tacloban school shooting. Philippine News Agency. https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1277948
2. Basina, C. R. (2026, August 23). Zamboanga school shooting raises concerns over gun security, online influence. GMA News Online. https://www.gmanetwork.com/news/topstories/nation/999469/zamboanga-school-shooting-raises-concerns-over-gun-security-online-influence/story/
3. Inquirer.net. (2026, August 22). Psychiatrist orgs seek deferral of DepEd’s live-shooter drills. INQUIRER.net. https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/2290386/psychiatrist-orgs-seek-deferral-of-depeds-live-shooter-drills
4. Department of Education – Schools Division Office of Dasmariñas City. (2026, August 24). DM No. 644, s. 2026: Conduct of the nationwide simultaneous school safety drill for active attack and active shooter incidents.
