Compulsory helmet wearing for children under 16 mooted.

[summerdays]

Kids aren't supposed to ride motorcycles but kids ... you know 3, 4, 5 year olds and on upwards do ride bikes. Go to an housing estate - the ones where you know you are more likely to see them not wearing seat belts than wearing a seat belt. And most kids won't have helmets on. If the adults won't bother with seat belts for them and their kids what makes you think that a less proven item that doesn't come with the bike will be used.

And they showed Hells Angels on the news riding without helmets to a funeral recently on TV so you are wrong there.

But my main point about compulsion is that a badly fitting helmet is useless (which all the pro and anti helmet wearers can agree on - ignore taking that arguement any further please). Compulsion will not ensure that they fit properly.

 

[very-near]

Kids aren't supposed to ride motorcycles but kids ... you know 3, 4, 5 year olds and on upwards do ride bikes. Go to an housing estate - the ones where you know you are more likely to see them not wearing seat belts than wearing a seat belt. And most kids won't have helmets on. If the adults won't bother with seat belts for them and their kids what makes you think that a less proven item that doesn't come with the bike will be used.

And they showed Hells Angels on the news riding without helmets to a funeral recently on TV so you are wrong there.

But my main point about compulsion is that a badly fitting helmet is useless (which all the pro and anti helmet wearers can agree on - ignore taking that arguement any further please). Compulsion will not ensure that they fit properly.

I agree on the final point 100%, but I think you will find the Hells Angels put their lids back on after the wake to ride home. Most funeral marches are not exactly 100mph to the cemetery affairs

 

[CotterPin]

Linf,

A couple of quick points...

I think there are a whole load of other issues around the enforcement of motor cycle helmets: You need to take a test to be able to ride a motorbike, the bike needs to be taxed, and it carries a registration plate.
These do not apply to cyclists, especially children, so enforcement would be exceptionally hard to achieve (if it were desirable - and there are differences of opinion on that matter here and elsewhere).

You comment that motorcycle helmet use varies in different US states, as a reflection of how well the law is enforced. How would you envisage a law requiring the mandatory wearing of cycle helmets amongst under sixteen years to be enforced, with this mind? Also, take in consideration, what you would like the police and pcsos to be doing less of to enforce this particular law.

My personal opinion is that the wearing of cycle helmets should be the personal choice of a responsible adult, taking into consideration the limited protection helmets do offer and other measures that can be taken to reduce risk whilst on the bicycle. For a child, the decision should be taken by their parent, again with due consideration of all the available facts.

 

[very-near]

Linf,

A couple of quick points...

I think there are a whole load of other issues around the enforcement of motor cycle helmets: You need to take a test to be able to ride a motorbike, the bike needs to be taxed, and it carries a registration plate.
These do not apply to cyclists, especially children, so enforcement would be exceptionally hard to achieve (if it were desirable - and there are differences of opinion on that matter here and elsewhere).

You comment that motorcycle helmet use varies in different US states, as a reflection of how well the law is enforced. How would you envisage a law requiring the mandatory wearing of cycle helmets amongst under sixteen years to be enforced, with this mind? Also, take in consideration, what you would like the police and pcsos to be doing less of to enforce this particular law.

My personal opinion is that the wearing of cycle helmets should be the personal choice of a responsible adult, taking into consideration the limited protection helmets do offer and other measures that can be taken to reduce risk whilst on the bicycle. For a child, the decision should be taken by their parent, again with due consideration of all the available facts.

This final argument doens't work when they take it off around the corner from their house. An adults decision is just that, but the law should be in place to prevent an action taken by wanton stupidity on the grounds of not looking cool.

I've got a cycle hat but don't always wear it myself. This is my decision and I weigh up the odds on whether I wear it depending on the journey I look to undertake so I do understand and accept both sides of the argument for adults. IMO Kids take much greater risks than adults without bothering to weigh up the benefits though.

 

[CotterPin]

This final argument doens't work when they take it off around the corner from their house. An adults decision is just that, but the law should be in place to prevent an action taken by wanton stupidity on the grounds of not looking cool.

I've got a cycle hat but don't always wear it myself. This is my decision and I weigh up the odds on whether I wear it depending on the journey I look to undertake so I do understand and accept both sides of the argument for adults. IMO Kids take much greater risks than adults without bothering to weigh up the benefits though.

In response to your first paragraph... do you really think that a priority for the police should be trying to enforce this particular law, bearing in mind all the other activities that we ask of them? Would it not be better for their priority be on enforcing existing traffic regulations which in my view would probably have a greater impact on saving lives than trying to get kids to wear skidlids?

Also, if you are trying to encourage your children to wear helmets, would it not be better for you to wear your own helmet?

 

[very-near]

In response to your first paragraph... do you really think that a priority for the police should be trying to enforce this particular law, bearing in mind all the other activities that we ask of them? Would it not be better for their priority be on enforcing existing traffic regulations which in my view would probably have a greater impact on saving lives than trying to get kids to wear skidlids?

Also, if you are trying to encourage your children to wear helmets, would it not be better for you to wear your own helmet?

Whether kids are being actively policed or not, most have enough respect for the law that they don't risk getting pulled for it.

When my kids were growing up, they always cycled with a hat. Neither cycle now (because cycling isn't cool apparently), but the eldest one rides a horse and always uses a hat even though she is aware she is not bound by law to do so as an adult as she fell off and landed on her head a couple of times as a youngster.

 

[summerdays]

Whether kids are being actively policed or not, most have enough respect for the law that they don't risk getting pulled for it.

Kids I think actively challenge boundaries (and therefore laws) - for example have you ever seen a teenager cycle on the pavement? or wearing their school uniform in such a way to flout the rules? or using their phones in school. If they will break a parents rule about wearing it once around the corner what makes you think they won't break the law.

I've also talked with teenagers about riding on the pavement and they reckon they would just ride off if the police came along and escape.

My kids know that I'm more anti riding with it on the handlebars because it can get caught than because its not on their heads.

 

[babs01]

Hoping for a resolution . . .

Please forgive the tunnel vision, but I work in a brain injury rehabilitation unit. It's sad to me that the issue of wearing helmets when cycling has turned into a debate about age, parenting, free choice, legal imposition and degree of safety provided by said helmet.

I work with people with acquired brain injury. Yes, as one poster said, it's depressing (and hopeful), in comparing the comments made about a friend who'd been in a brain injury trauma ward (to a cancer ward). Yes, people can die from tripping over a rock, falling off a horse or slipping down the stairs.

For me, helmet = prevention. For those who say a helmet offers limited protection, I'd like to say that 'little bit of protection' can make all the difference.

This helmet issue is similar to the wide difference in opinion on Sports-related brain injuries from Concussion and Second Impact Syndrome. How and why a brain injury can be prevented is being debated in a variety of arenas - and there seems to be so much difference of opinion, as evidenced in the variety of opions here in this forum.

Again, I may be seeing things from a unique perspective, but can only say that I believe that wearing a helmet does not hurt anyone; it can only help prevent a head trauma or traumatic brain injury.

 

[skrx]

I believe that wearing a helmet does not hurt anyone; it can only help prevent a head trauma or traumatic brain injury.

Some research suggests people with helmets are more likely to have accidents, or have worse ones -- e.g. because car drivers pass closer if they cyclist looks "protected".

It's sad to me that the issue of wearing helmets when cycling has turned into a debate about age, parenting, free choice, legal imposition and degree of safety provided by said helmet.

The issue isn't "wearing helmets". It's "being legally required to wear helmets", which is quite different.

 

[dellzeqq]

For me, helmet = prevention. For those who say a helmet offers limited protection, I'd like to say that 'little bit of protection' can make all the difference.

it might. I've come off sideways, and put a seven inch crack in my pelvis and a seven inch crack in my helmet but...............

Again, I may be seeing things from a unique perspective, but can only say that I believe that wearing a helmet does not hurt anyone; it can only help prevent a head trauma or traumatic brain injury.

there's nothing unique about ignorance, babs. Helmets can reduce awareness, and given the pattern of death and injury in my part of the country, don't do much for the safety of cyclists. So, while you may choose to put a helmet on your kid, others, some with more cycling experience, may not.

When you're addressing a bunch of people who know stuff it's always better to start with a question. There's some here that wear helmets, and some that don't (I used to, but gave up) and you might just have taken the trouble to find out about what has been a pretty spirited (I'm putting it mildly) and well informed debate before coming in with your size 12s

 

[snorri]

For me, helmet = prevention. For those who say a helmet offers limited protection, I'd like to say that 'little bit of protection' can make all the difference.

A helmet certainly does not offer prevention, only a little bit of protection in a very small number of incidents.
What about the exposure to other health problems due to people stopping taking healthy exercise because a a plastic hat is not available or considered uncomfortable or impractical?
What about rotational injuries? What about risk compensation?

 

[4F]

I don't wear a helmet and accordingly will not tell my children that they have to wear one. They have helmets purchased by their grandparents and it is their choice as to whether they wear it or not. Sometimes they do, sometimes they don't.

I would perceive the danger of them climbing a 30 foot tree to be far more dangerous than cycling and would not make them wear a helmet for that.

I think we have to stop trying to wrap them up in cotton wool and let kids be kids.

 

[MacB]

I don't wear a helmet and accordingly will not tell my children that they have to wear one. They have helmets purchased by their grandparents and it is their choice as to whether they wear it or not. Sometimes they do, sometimes they don't.

I would perceive the danger of them climbing a 30 foot tree to be far more dangerous than cycling and would not make them wear a helmet for that.

I think we have to stop trying to wrap them up in cotton wool and let kids be kids.

well said Big T

 

[ufkacbln]

Please forgive the tunnel vision, but I work in a brain injury rehabilitation unit. It's sad to me that the issue of wearing helmets when cycling has turned into a debate about age, parenting, free choice, legal imposition and degree of safety provided by said helmet.

I work with people with acquired brain injury. Yes, as one poster said, it's depressing (and hopeful), in comparing the comments made about a friend who'd been in a brain injury trauma ward (to a cancer ward). Yes, people can die from tripping over a rock, falling off a horse or slipping down the stairs.

For me, helmet = prevention. For those who say a helmet offers limited protection, I'd like to say that 'little bit of protection' can make all the difference.

This helmet issue is similar to the wide difference in opinion on Sports-related brain injuries from Concussion and Second Impact Syndrome. How and why a brain injury can be prevented is being debated in a variety of arenas - and there seems to be so much difference of opinion, as evidenced in the variety of opions here in this forum.

Again, I may be seeing things from a unique perspective, but can only say that I believe that wearing a helmet does not hurt anyone; it can only help prevent a head trauma or traumatic brain injury.

As always :

1. Are cyclists the largest single group you see with these head injuries?
2. Do you not agree that all these statements apply equally to pedestrians and car drivers(if not - why not)?

It is all a ed herring!

If we are serious about reducing the incidence of head injury , and minimising the effects both on the individual and their relatives, cyclists are one of the groups where there will be the least effect!

 

[Davidc]

I think summerdays is right.

My children when teenagers (some years back) would rather not have ridden bikes than wear helmets.

The health benefits need to be balanced against the added risks from not wearing a helmet.

Helmets should be compulsory in cars though. Might encourage a few to walk or cycle as well as protect against the (higher?) risk of head injury while in them.