Steady rider wrote:Could Cycling UK arrange a one day conference to discuss all aspects of children cycling and helmet requirements and the evidence behind their position paper on helmets? Schools could be given a discount price for attending.
Why would school representatives pay to attend something where they will be told something they won't listen to and don't want to be told?
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.” ― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom
A few may be more open minded than others and some may be considering imposing helmet requirements. If they are really interested in children's health and safety they should attend. Speakers for and against could be included, with an assessment of their evidence.
Mick F wrote:This is surely a joke? How can anyone dictate these things if they aren't law?
There's law and there's Law. For cycle training, for example, the Buck Stops at Local Authorities who can justify pretty much anything they want on the basis of risk assessments. LAs in turn point out that schools have effectively the same position themselves, and it's very difficult imposing anything much on a head teacher as long as the curriculum is being taught.
Pete.
Not on the roads. School/council/private property is different.
What happens if the children want to ride skakeboards to school, or in-line skates or even walk to school on stilts? They can do as they please - with parental consent of course - on their way to and from school. They can run, they can walk, they can use a bus. It matters nothing to the school HOW they get there and back. They could come by teleport if they had one.
Steady rider wrote:A few may be more open minded than others and some may be considering imposing helmet requirements. If they are really interested in children's health and safety they should attend. Speakers for and against could be included, with an assessment of their evidence.
I am sure they could find thousands of more productive ways to spend their time and taxpayers' money. It really shouldnt be a priority. I suspect they see this as a quick and easy way to score some "Brownie Points" any objections or time wasting from annoyed parents would be much more effective than reasoned arguments, I am sure it is something that they would much rather not waste any time on at all. Most parents will just acquiesce to the request for a simple life, which is rather what the school is relying on.
It is "thousands of better ways to spend their time and taxpayers' money" than attending a seminar on cycle helmets or even cycling altogether, there will be thousands of better ways within the realm of the health and safety of children. Then they should spend some time on actually educating the little things as well as wrapping them in cotton wool.
The helmet topic is interesting in quite a few ways. There is the science side to cycling. The risk from cycling and what causes the various types of risk. The science of impacts and duration that can act together to result in brain injury. The health aspects of imposing requirements intended to do go but can cause harm. The control of the media/publications to hinder full discussions. The control over research to give it a desired direction, e.g helmets may protect in the event of an impact - rather than how the accident rate may be affected by helmet use and how much more likely is a helmet head to impact compared to bare head. How people follow trends, e.g. school x say they should wear helmets and a, b and c soon follow. This is where a day conference could be handy to allow people to get a better grip on the whole topic. How good intentions and poor science can combine to cloud the picture.
Your basic problem here is your typical punter "knows" all about cycle safety, so will see no need to find any more out.
There are many otherwise smart, well meaning people who simply cannot grasp that helmets don't make a big difference. It'd be like explaining to a meeting of 18th century people that bleeding isn't a smart intervention in cases of fever: everyone knows that's what to do! Check out the comments on any internet story concerning helmets if you don't believe this.
meic wrote:It is "thousands of better ways to spend their time and taxpayers' money" than attending a seminar on cycle helmets or even cycling altogether, there will be thousands of better ways within the realm of the health and safety of children. Then they should spend some time on actually educating the little things as well as wrapping them in cotton wool.
It needs freedom of information type requests
How many head injuries were suffered by children in the schooling the last 3 years and what was the cause
According to the cohort studies they will be playground injuries that are the majority
Then you can ask why (as with most helmet zealots) they are ignoring the groups that are suffering preventable head injuries
Steady rider wrote:Could Cycling UK arrange a one day conference to discuss all aspects of children cycling and helmet requirements and the evidence behind their position paper on helmets? Schools could be given a discount price for attending.
Why would school representatives pay to attend something where they will be told something they won't listen to and don't want to be told?
Even if it were free I doubt they'd bother attending unless there was something significant in it for them (they'd still have travel costs, member of staff out for a day, etc. and all just for them to be told something they consider they already "know").
quite, 12 deaths due solely down to head injury of children when involved in a crash whilst being an occupant of a motorvehicle and that just in England and Wales, compare that to total child deaths whilst cycling, 6, that for the whole of the UK. I couldn't say how many were solely down to head injury but a cycle helmet could not prevent the deaths and yet children are forced to wear helmets only when on a bike and yet we already know that children are even more affected by risk homeostasis than adults are (well except the noddies in competition who crash/get injured and die with greater regularity post helmet rules).
I'm thinking this is bigger than helmets (may be it needs to come out of the ghetto?), possibly bigger than cycling. It's about how society in general, and the school system in particular, safeguards children by restricting their freedom. I'm fairly certain that the OFSTED "safeguarding" requirement is the driving force here.
Ideally the school would like to be handing over each child to an identified responsible adult at the end of the day. This is exactly what they do with the younger age groups, children are not allowed to leave until picked up by the designated adult. If another adult is to do the picking up this must be arranged in advance. Increasingly the systems fail to distinguish between four year olds and seventeen year olds, they are all "children" and letting them out on their own is seen as a serious failure of "safeguarding". These restrictions on cycling are likely just the first step and are aimed at preventing cycling to and from school, not making it safe.
The result, of course, is the "school run".
A suggestion for those who do have children at such a school and whose children would like to cycle: use your car to bring them their bikes. It won't cost you any more mileage than picking them up by car anyway.
The utility cyclist wrote:[...]compare that to total child deaths whilst cycling, 6, that for the whole of the UK. I couldn't say how many were solely down to head injury
Why not? Are the child deaths whilst cycling missing from bez's excellent "Beyond the Kerb Casebook" site?
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
