Sergio has presented a perfectly reasonable case for additional control measures in a situation where he clearly perceives a heightened risk. So why not recommend 30mA RCD protection across the board.
After all, he can take a lead from BS7671 itself. Without any detailed evidence, risk or cost benefit analysis, the doyens mandated the use of AFDDs in certain situations and even had the temerity to “recommend” the things in all other installations! 

Why 30mA - that value was decided based mostly on the physiology of 95% of adults - wouldn't say 10mA be more sensible precaution for a user population that dominated by children, if you really think there's additional unmitigated risk there and weren't bothered about the cost?

As for the BS 7671 example, what's that old phrase of two wrongs not making a right?

   - Andy.

lyledunn said:

So why not recommend 30mA RCD protection across the board.

I can see that ... in one way ... but in the reality of a school setting,  if a 30 mA RCD operates within the electrical installation (e.g. distribution board or consumer unit), who will reset it, or more to the point, investigate for a potential fault, and reset it?

And for distribution circuits or circuits supplied from industrial distribution boards, not all the devices are intended for operation by 'ordinary persons'.

Come on Lyle! You can’t expect people to know that your tongue is in your cheek when you reply to posts! Get a grip and use one of those emoji thingies! 

Come on Lyle! You can’t expect people to know that your tongue is in your cheek when you reply to posts! Get a grip and use one of those emoji thingies! 

lyledunn said:

You can’t expect people to know that your tongue is in your cheek when you reply to posts!

Many a true word is spoken in jest.