I hate helmet threads but...

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

Postby keepontriking » 18 Oct 2008, 10:17pm

adinigel wrote:
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


Nope - in this case like a group of teachers who were unable to spend their whole lessons adjusting badly fitting/broken helmets that fell to the back of heads or over eyes that they decided the helmets would cause more dangers than were acceptable.

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

Postby adinigel » 18 Oct 2008, 10:55pm

Oh come on! Why would they need to spend the whole lesson adjusting? Once the kids are at school why would they need to keep the helmets on?

Surely the responsibility should be left to the parents on how helmets are worn? What do the risk assessors hope to gain by this dictatorial action?

At the end of the day I am fairly neutral on the issue of helmet wearing and can see positives on both sides but I think the school has interfered in something that really isn't their business! What the kids wear to and from school is down to the parents NOT the teachers.

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

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

Postby keepontriking » 18 Oct 2008, 11:37pm

adinigel wrote:Oh come on! Why would they need to spend the whole lesson adjusting? Once the kids are at school why would they need to keep the helmets on?

Surely the responsibility should be left to the parents on how helmets are worn? What do the risk assessors hope to gain by this dictatorial action?

At the end of the day I am fairly neutral on the issue of helmet wearing and can see positives on both sides but I think the school has interfered in something that really isn't their business! What the kids wear to and from school is down to the parents NOT the teachers.

Nigel


Firstly, it might be an idea if you read the first post :roll:
These are Reception Class using 'toy' tricycles.

This is nothing to do with travel to and from school, which of course IS parental responsibility and is not being questioned. However, while at school and undertaking school activities, the safety and care of the children is under the responsibility of the teachers, not the parents.

The teachers have assessed the situation they have to deal with and their risk assessment shows no benefit to using helmets and in some cases can increase risks.

It is excellent that they have thought about it themselves and made their own measured decision rather than follow the usual dogma.
I find that very positive.

Perhaps you don't.

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

Postby dan_b » 19 Oct 2008, 12:00am

[removed]
Last edited by dan_b on 19 Oct 2008, 12:09pm, edited 1 time in total.

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

Postby adinigel » 19 Oct 2008, 8:36am

keepontriking wrote:Firstly, it might be an idea if you read the first post :roll:p


Actually, I did! If I misunderstood what you posted then I apologise,

keepontriking wrote:These are Reception Class using 'toy' tricycles.

This is nothing to do with travel to and from school, which of course IS parental responsibility and is not being questioned. However, while at school and undertaking school activities, the safety and care of the children is under the responsibility of the teachers, not the parents.

Absolutely, I wouldn't suggest otherwise.

keepontriking wrote:The teachers have assessed the situation they have to deal with and their risk assessment shows no benefit to using helmets and in some cases can increase risks.


I would be interested in hear how a cycle helmet can actually increase risks! I would suggest that there are more benefits in favour of wearing a helmet than there are against. Sounds a bit like the old seat belt argument. :wink:



keepontriking wrote:It is excellent that they have thought about it themselves and made their own measured decision rather than follow the usual dogma.
I find that very positive.

Perhaps you don't.


Since we don't know the reasoning it is very difficult to say whether they are right or wrong in their conclusion.

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

User avatar
Cunobelin
Posts: 10795
Joined: 6 Feb 2007, 7:22pm

Postby Cunobelin » 19 Oct 2008, 9:25am

I would be interested in hear how a cycle helmet can actually increase risks! I would suggest that there are more benefits in favour of wearing a helmet than there are against. Sounds a bit like the old seat belt argument. Wink


Is Death good enough?

There is a lot of evidence that helmets should be won by children of this age, not just for cycling, but also for many of the activities such as running, climbing frames etc

Unfortunately in the States there have been incidents with helmets causing strangulation when they get caught on equipment.

Oh come on! Why would they need to spend the whole lesson adjusting? Once the kids are at school why would they need to keep the helmets on?



Of course we could perhaps widen the debate as to why these teachers are irresponsibly not using helmets in other activities, given that head injuries in children are more common in these situations than cycling.

The Thudguard for instancewith it's endorsements would be ideal for in classroom head injuries and playground activities where snagging is not a problem.

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

Postby keepontriking » 19 Oct 2008, 2:12pm

adinigel wrote:If I misunderstood what you posted then I apologise,

I thought it was clear, but apology accepted.
adinigel wrote:I would be interested in hear how a cycle helmet can actually increase risks!

Remember the location first - we are not talking road, but play areas fenced for Under 5s and with lots of climbing frames and other equipment.
For starters - Getting caught on other play equipment; tripping up over them when left around; falling over eyes and restricting sight; falling to back of head and strangling, making youngsters 'head mass' greater; headbutting their mates...
Oh of course they may also fall off their tricycles, but probably less likely than falling of a chair or a play frame.
adinigel wrote:I would suggest that there are more benefits in favour of wearing a helmet than there are against.

Others might suggest otherwise.
I assume you think they should wear one for all their other activities too?
adinigel wrote:Since we don't know the reasoning it is very difficult to say whether they are right or wrong in their conclusion.

I repeat - I am pleased they have considered it for their specific activity and location rather than simply following the usual 'helmets save lives' mantra.
They have made a choice. The pro-helmeteers will disagree with it, those who support choice will accept their decision.