Cycling UK Forum

Read this.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... alone.html

I disagree. I wasn't allowed to walk to the shop alone til I was 7, never mind cycle on a road!

Its not helping a 5 year olds independence to let them cycle on a road.

5!

Which bit do you find daft?

The report doesn't say they cycle on a road. "The children’s route takes them along a pavement beside roads busy with traffic on the school run."

The school is covering itself, of course. Independence and self-confidence, much less long-term health benefits, aren't important when there is a chance of an accident the school could have prevented by reporting to the social services.

I hope the SS are more reasonable.

I was trying to remember at what age I walked home from school either alone or with a friend. Both my parents worked full time and although my Mum walked in with me, after school I went firstly to a playgroup and then to a friend's house (her Mum was a childminder). I can't have been more than 7 and although I normally had company, there must have been times when I was on my own. Nobody thought anything of it - most of the kids from my Primary School took themselves home on their own. And yes, I did cross a busy main road on the way (at a pedestrian crossing).

I'm not saying in this case its the correct thing - 5 I agree is far too young and I don't think the 8 year old should be responsible for her sibling. However, I think there's a bit more to this than meets the eye. They school they go to is a very expensive, very highly regarded private one, and Dulwich is a very nice area. Apparently its the other parents who have complained. I wouldn't mind guessing (I have absolutely no evidence, so it is just guesswork) that they're just the sort of parents who turn up at the school gate in a huge 4x4 because its "not safe" for their kids to get to school any other way. In which case, the parents of the youngsters in the article are indirectly challenging their own assumptions.

I think the fact they cycle is a bit of a red herring here - the article I read said they were on pavements all the way until they got to a busy road where there was a crossing patrol - its more that they are on their own that has apparently raised eyebrows.

Jan

By the age of 8 I was a street urchin riding bikes I'd built from parts scavenged from local 'tips', it was also about the time I realised that one could 'fix' TV's people had thrown on said tips (albeit my skills were simply swapping valves and poking at things with a screwdriver, any dry joints were fixed by heating up an old screwdriver on the gas stove and remelting the solder with a bit of flux from a tin the plumber left behind once).

TBH it didn't set me up well for a respectable job as a banker, and for that I'm eternally grateful.

With regards the OP, I'd say let the parents decide. The risks may well be higher, but they're still pretty small and the parents are the ones who know the children and what they're capable of.
I do find risk assessment an annoying fact of modern life, mostly it's a play on numbers by people with ulterior motives (usually interference).
"But it's twice as dangerous!" - well, perhaps. But twice nearly zero is still nearly zero.

kwackers wrote:With regards the OP, I'd say let the parents decide.

me too. although, on the way to school with my little one, (he's 5 and cycles on the path, whilst i walk) i often wonder what the risks are for many of the other children, who are growing up to believe that 400 meters is a car journey. they're going to grow up fat, unfit and dependant upon cars - this can't be better than what the couple in the article are exposing their kids to can it?

hubgearfreak wrote:

kwackers wrote:With regards the OP, I'd say let the parents decide.

me too. although, on the way to school with my little one, (he's 5 and cycles on the path, whilst i walk) i often wonder what the risks are for many of the other children, who are growing up to believe that 400 meters is a car journey. they're going to grow up fat, unfit and dependant upon cars - this can't be better than what the couple in the article are exposing their kids to can it?

Some obese kids have hip problems at 11. I have had to deal with them

8 was when I began riding on the road on my own. Admittedly there were fewer cars about in the 1960s but our street still joined onto a main road with all its perils.
A group of six of us rode a 54 mile round trip when I was still at junior school, with the youngest member on a pavement bike! It's still one of the most remarkable cycle journeys I can recall.

The RCGB stats say cyclists were much more at danger per km travelled in the 1960's than nowadays. Road casualties in all modalities peaked then and have been declining ever since, so all you oldies who remember unsupervised cycling at age 8 were at much greater risk (statistically) than the kids in this story. I guess what has changed is peoples perception and tolerance of risk. Good on Gillian Schonrock for challenging this inflated perception, she sounds sensible and well informed.

Certainly in Holland, where it's around half as risky to be a cyclist as here, it would be normal for an 8 year old to cycle unsupervised to primary school. Any thought of SS involvement would be quite laughable.

I have 8 year old twins and a 10 year old and live 1km from the school. The 10 year old I'm quite happy to let cycle on his own to school, but I think my twins are not yet ready. They don't have the maturity yet but many would at that age on the trip we have to make.

I was on a course with a widow who, by necessity had had her 6 year old walking to school on his own for some time. He crossed 2 busy roads with crossing patrols but was knocked down by a driver breaking his arm. There was the usual horrified response until she pointed out that the incident had occuired at the school gates due to another parent's carlessness in manoeuvreing their car in an area busy with children on foot.

I too walked to school and woe betide me if I misbehaved en route as the local community was cohesive (local shops, people walked a lot more etc) and I often said hello the the aging French spinster who was always in her garden on the way home - all providing a rapid message to my mother is anything was amiss, and also advising her not to bother coming out to meet me when a bit of bullying had seen me getting beaten up - as I had turned the tables and was duffing up the guys who had been getting at me on the way home - bush telegraph is wonderful - 2 neighbours called when an incident happened at my house recently and I was able to get the Police round to check things and have a running commentary from the neighbours.

I also went plane spotting on my own with others when between 9 and 11 years old at London Airport - and we knew well of the presence of the handful of men who went around exposing themselves, learning some useful responses to any who should appear - in short we learned how to look after ourselves. By 11 I was going up to London on my own on the Tube following my hobby of train spotting and within a few years I was going on rail tours by myself - and there were some funny blokes who popped up there too - but again the experience from our band of plane spotting mates had developed ways to deal with them, and recognise the 'regulars' - perhaps better than relying on others to lock them up or monitor them for us (because we've lost that ability).

At College I noted that it was the 'innocent' kids who had been protected by this cotton wool culture who were the ones more likely to flip (going overboard with decadent behaviour) or fall mightily due to their naievete (is that really how people get pregnant?). Most of those who had bashed and bruised their way through childhood were far better prepared to deal with the rigors of real life.

One detail as a corollary is that the kid who shows off and crashes on a bike learns that showing off on wheels is not clever, and that happens before that kid tries showing off with a faster and more dangereous motor vehicle.

dave holladay wrote:the incident had occuired at the school gates due to another parent's carlessness in manoeuvreing their car in an area busy with children on foot.

that's the real danger. once their kid's inside the gates, the roads become, well just roads. ie. paid for by the motorist and anything upto 30's fine, so long as we all keep out of their way mentality. no extra care, no watching out for vulnerable 5-8 year olds, just looning about without indicators as per usual. how one of them thinks it's OK to reverse a kingcab truck out of a sideroad when there's hundreds of little kids about amazes me
the sad thing is, i'm sure it's not unusual and that every school in the land has the same issues

I think it's daft that this has been reported to social services, it's really none of the school's business how the kids travel to school.

I walked to school alone and unsupervised from the age of 6, crossing 5 side roads and 1 main road, with no crossing patrol. My younger sister went to a different school and my mum couldn't take us both. My son cycled to playgroup, aged 2 and a 1/2 (on the pavement), though his mum was following behind with the pushchair containing his sister.

Is 5 to young to be allowed to ride to school unsupervised?

Would you have a girl of 8 babysitting a 5 year old?

We were fortunate newer to be forced into this position of having to make that choice.

Interesting about the Nanny sometimes supervising the children.

dave holladay wrote:I was on a course with a widow who, by necessity had had her 6 year old walking to school on his own for some time. He crossed 2 busy roads with crossing patrols but was knocked down by a driver breaking his arm. At College I noted that it was the 'innocent' kids who had been protected by this cotton wool culture who were the ones more likely to flip (going overboard with decadent behaviour) or fall mightily due to their naievete (is that really how people get pregnant?). Most of those who had bashed and bruised their way through childhood were far better prepared to deal with the rigors of real life.

One detail as a corollary is that the kid who shows off and crashes on a bike learns that showing off on wheels is not clever, and that happens before that kid tries showing off with a faster and more dangereous motor vehicle.

Lots of kids do that in their cars round here. Many only do it once and someone puts flowers on the roadside