I hate helmet threads but...

For discussions within the Cycle Training profession.
keepontriking
Posts: 472
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 9:40pm
Location: Hampshire
Contact:

I hate helmet threads but...

Postby keepontriking » 28 Sep 2008, 12:10pm

Yesterday I was running cycle training session with 40 children and parents.
One parent was also a teacher and ....

They have just banned cycle helmets for their Reception class (who use small trikes) due to so many being badly fitted! They have written this into their risk-assessment.

I couldn't believe what I was hearing.

Some common sense at last :D
 
The revolution begins.....

dan_b
Posts: 249
Joined: 12 Sep 2008, 2:46pm

Postby dan_b » 28 Sep 2008, 12:20pm

I fear the backlash. Or the back-backlash or whatever it is.

It only takes a local paper to get wind of a decision like that, and it could end someone's career

keepontriking
Posts: 472
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 9:40pm
Location: Hampshire
Contact:

Postby keepontriking » 28 Sep 2008, 12:27pm

dan_b wrote:I fear the backlash. Or the back-backlash or whatever it is.

It only takes a local paper to get wind of a decision like that, and it could end someone's career


I prefer to think positively :D

User avatar
Wildduck
Posts: 1161
Joined: 24 Oct 2007, 7:28pm
Location: Southampton

Postby Wildduck » 28 Sep 2008, 3:12pm

Babies, bathwater, all being thrown out together comes to mind!

One of the few groups helmets are valuable for!

Couldn't somebody just have a fiddle with the straps and sort the adjustment out?
Trice Q 2007 in inky blue (Quackers)
Bacchetta Corsa 26 ATT (The Mad Weeble)
Cube SL Team Cross (Rubberduckzilla)
Homebaked tourer (The Duck's Dream)
MTB mongrel (Harold the Flying Sheep)

keepontriking
Posts: 472
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 9:40pm
Location: Hampshire
Contact:

Postby keepontriking » 28 Sep 2008, 3:26pm

Wildduck wrote:One of the few groups helmets are valuable for!


Err... tricycles.
Don't think so really otherwise they may as well have them while sitting at their desks or when walking too.

User avatar
Si
Moderator
Posts: 15161
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 7:37pm

Postby Si » 28 Sep 2008, 4:52pm

When you say badly fitted do you mean way to big/small, or just that the straps weren't adjusted properly? If the latter then it does seem an over reaction when a quick bit of training could have sorted things.

keepontriking
Posts: 472
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 9:40pm
Location: Hampshire
Contact:

Postby keepontriking » 28 Sep 2008, 5:03pm

Si wrote:When you say badly fitted do you mean way to big/small, or just that the straps weren't adjusted properly? If the latter then it does seem an over reaction when a quick bit of training could have sorted things.


I've no idea. The teacher told me they had done their risk assessment and banned the use of helmets.

I cannot see why they should consider training when they have decided that the helmet has no benefit to their activity.

It sounds a very positive move away from the nannyism that is so prevalent today.

User avatar
Wildduck
Posts: 1161
Joined: 24 Oct 2007, 7:28pm
Location: Southampton

Postby Wildduck » 28 Sep 2008, 7:06pm

I meant valuable for children. At the speeds they travel and the obstacles their heads will hit, a helmet will actual do some good.

Tricycles do overturn, just ask a few (even the recumbent types - just ask Ben Lovejoy!).
Trice Q 2007 in inky blue (Quackers)
Bacchetta Corsa 26 ATT (The Mad Weeble)
Cube SL Team Cross (Rubberduckzilla)
Homebaked tourer (The Duck's Dream)
MTB mongrel (Harold the Flying Sheep)

keepontriking
Posts: 472
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 9:40pm
Location: Hampshire
Contact:

Postby keepontriking » 28 Sep 2008, 7:15pm

Wildduck wrote:I meant valuable for children. At the speeds they travel and the obstacles their heads will hit, a helmet will actual do some good.


Fair enough. Clearly you know better than those who are supervising the children and who have undertaken their risk assessment.
I suggest you now contact the LA - I can supply their details (PM me) and you can make your views known.

Tricycles do overturn, just ask a few (even the recumbent types - just ask Ben Lovejoy!)


You don't say.
Children fall off chairs too. I assume you lobby for helmets for them as well.

keepontriking
Posts: 472
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 9:40pm
Location: Hampshire
Contact:

Postby keepontriking » 6 Oct 2008, 4:39pm

keepontriking wrote:
Wildduck wrote:I meant valuable for children. At the speeds they travel and the obstacles their heads will hit, a helmet will actual do some good.


Fair enough.
I suggest you now contact the LA - I can supply their details (PM me) and you can make your views known.


BUMP

User avatar
bikely-challenged
Posts: 159
Joined: 16 Aug 2008, 12:46pm
Location: Argyll & Bute

Postby bikely-challenged » 6 Oct 2008, 6:21pm

Why does this subject cause so much ire?

Let those that want to wear helmets do so (and be told how to fit them properly - how long would that take?), and those that don't want to wear them, don't.

Or is that too simple-minded of me?
-----------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: The above constitutes my personal opinion only on any given subject. Other opinions are available.

kwackers
Posts: 15042
Joined: 4 Jun 2008, 9:29pm
Location: Warrington

Postby kwackers » 6 Oct 2008, 6:26pm

bikely-challenged wrote:Why does this subject cause so much ire?

Let those that want to wear helmets do so (and be told how to fit them properly - how long would that take?), and those that don't want to wear them, don't.

Or is that too simple-minded of me?


It causes ire because there's a contingent of people (with power) intent on taking that choice away.

They have a simplistic view that since it would be better to be wearing an helmet if you were to hit yourself on the head with an hammer, then it must be better to be wearing one if you're on a bike.

Facts and figures don't come into it, neither does the ability of you to make your own mind up.

keepontriking
Posts: 472
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 9:40pm
Location: Hampshire
Contact:

Postby keepontriking » 6 Oct 2008, 8:30pm

kwackers wrote:It causes ire because there's a contingent of people (with power) intent on taking that choice away.

They have a simplistic view that since it would be better to be wearing an helmet if you were to hit yourself on the head with an hammer, then it must be better to be wearing one if you're on a bike.


But this thread is about some teachers who have banned their use :D

Something wildduck disagreed with - but he seems to have gone quiet :wink:

User avatar
bikely-challenged
Posts: 159
Joined: 16 Aug 2008, 12:46pm
Location: Argyll & Bute

Postby bikely-challenged » 6 Oct 2008, 9:08pm

Thank you, Kwackers. I didn't know that and I Googled it and found some interesting reading. I never liked the look of Coulthard :evil:

Not sure I agree with banning helmets though. I suppose those that don't like it can vote with their feet.
-----------------------------------------------------------

DISCLAIMER: The above constitutes my personal opinion only on any given subject. Other opinions are available.

adinigel
Posts: 177
Joined: 21 Oct 2007, 1:07am
Location: Swindon - Home of the Magic Roundabout

Postby adinigel » 18 Oct 2008, 10:09pm

kwackers wrote:....It causes ire because there's a contingent of people (with power) intent on taking that choice away.....


Like a teacher who feels that because some helmets are badly fitted no-one should wear them!

Nigel
DSA registered Driving Instructor, RoSPA Diploma in Advanced Car Instruction, SAFED registered van trainer, National Standards Cycling Instructor