pjclinch wrote:But write to Scout Towers and have a moan: if people don't then the assumption is it's okay. Point out, for example, Tim Gill's well thought of, evidence based, child-centred "Cycling and Children and Young People" (free download at
http://www.ncb.org.uk/media/443203/cyclingreport_2005.pdf which concludes
the case has not yet been convincingly made
for the compulsory use or promotion of cycle helmets, and the latest revision of the Sustrans helmet policy (
We support the individual’s freedom of choice whether to wear a cycle helmet or not, and for parents to make that choice for their children.
Helmet wearing isn't a legal requirement in the UK, and the evidence is inconclusive as to whether it makes cycling safer.)
Great link - thanks. I might just print it out and post it through my neighbour's door!
But she'd know it was from me ...
To be clear - I think the Scouts are a wonderful organisation - I love seeing how the Cubs mature and grow in confidence during the time they are in my pack, and get to do things that many of them would not otherwise get the opportunity to do on today's tech world - their favourite is always the annual camp. But Scouting is (IMHO) a little too risk averse these days (there's a good chance they would recommend wearing high-viz for a game of hide and seek), not least because the parents expect it. I can understand why Cub Scout leaders wouldn't have the enthusiasm for a protracted debate with parents who are convinced of the efficacy of helmets, particularly as many of those Cub Scout leaders are also parents with the same views.
