We need your thoughts for a discussion with Talk 107 radio station in Edinburgh on....

Complete nonsense!! The main problem seems to be interpretation. I am pregnant and have just bought a travel system for my baby as I know that 'umbrella fold' buggies are no suitable for new borns. It may look like a pram but it has a top 'car seat' section which comes off and can be placed on mums knee, and the wheeled section folds flat and can be placed on the luggage rack, but friends have told me some drivers are refusing to even stop to find out!

Most mums are not talking about trying to get a coach built silver cross type pram on the bus, we are talking about travel systems that take up less room that half a dozen bags of shopping! Traffic in Edinburgh is bad enough without forcing everyone with a young family off the bus and back into cars.

I think this piece of nonsense was thought up by a random office body who either doesn't have any children or is on a salary that can allow for the expense of a car to run around in!

Jim jams your making a cake out a a muffin here. I'm making a pedantic point about the meaning of the social model: Yes, ti has loads of potential avenues. That's the point - making the point, not trying to wrap them up

Whoah - all of a sudden, Edinburgh chat!

It's the "trams and prams" thread!

And more than one Embra-related topic on the wan thread - it's like buses you wait ages then 2 interesting topics come along at once!

Never mind Talk 107, Leith FM is where it's at - charmingly car-crash radio if ever there was.

A poster wondered why 22s are single deck - might be wrong but isn't there a low bridge on the route they take - the bit at the bottom of Lothian Road where they turn right to get to the Western Approach Road?

There won't be any conflict between the 22 and the trams - from what I've heard, any LRT route which conflicts with trams means that route goes - ie the tram will replace the 22.

Whatever you think of the trams, you can't deny the solidarity the anti-tram movement has brought out in traders on Leith Walk with the "Tramworks Edinburgh - Ripping The Heart Out Of Local Business" posters which have sprung up.

What I want to see is a display in Harburn Hobbies' window featuring a shiny new model tram going down a diorama of a post-apocalyptic Leith Walk (a la Terminator 2)

Also, there needs to be a bespoke poster in the window of adult shop "Private Lines" reading - "Tramworks Edinburgh - Ripping The Heart Out Of The Local Smut Trade - Grumble Mag Sales Down 20%"

Anyways, hello to all Embra/Leith MNers

No, Upwind, they are only strapped in securely if you strap them in securely. You often see babies (and older toddlers for that matter) not strapped in to folding buggies. And often in those folding buggies the straps go nowhere near holding a small baby securely because they're simply in the wrong place. So make the rule that babies/children cannot travel unsecured, if that really is the issue. Not some random half-hearted attempt to solve the problem. (Which I suspect is ill-defined anyway...)

AllBuggiedOut - they are unique to prams. If I bring my baby on a bus in a sling, they are secured to me. If they are in a light fold up buggy (some are fine from birth, like the silvercross pop or the maclaren techno) they are strapped in securely and will have some degree of protection in the event of an accident. Even if their buggy has been folded and they are held in a carer's arms they are safer than lying unsecured in a giant pram, which is itself unsecured.

But I tend to think that jimjams is right. The rule has probably been introduced because some clowns people imagine that they have no obligation to move for a disabled person. On the thread about this on the Edinburgh local site somebody has tried to make the argument that the space on buses should be on a first-come first-served basis, with disabled people giving way to massive prams that get there first.

All my pals with cars did like to drive me around, though, cuz they got to use my badge whilst transporting me .

About the only thing I can post right now is that jimjams pretty much summed up all my thoughts on this.

My child's SN does not signficantly impair her mobility, but there was a time when I had to use a blue badge for myself, and sticks, a walking frame, big,heavy brace on my leg. Thankfully it was temporary, but I didn't have a car at the time and man, let me tell you, it was a life-changing experience!

Let's see, a big pram and a wheelchair or walking aids - a very silly comparison, mostly because it isn't one.

"And as for chopice - if they had the choice, they would be driving." But that's not true. Lots of people choose to use buses over cars. I do for many journeys.

I had a massive 3 wheeler pushchair for many years. When traveling by bus and/or tube (which I did a lot) I used a cheapo umbrella folding buggy or a sling.

I think it's pretty crass to suggest that the social model of disability should be applied to people who choose to push a ridiculously oversized pram.

I suspect this sort of comparison is exactly the reason that the rule has ended up being introduced. Look at the people on here who think they need a princess parent and baby parking space as much as a blue badge holder needs a disabled parking space. I strongly suspect that the reason the rule as been introduced is because people have refused to move. If pram owners and wheelchair users were co-existing peacefully side by side then there would be no need for a rule.

Those 2 things might well be problems, Upwind, but they're not unique to prams, so why ban prams? Because it seemed like an "easy" answer I expect

Surely there are two problems here, first, and most importantly these big prams are not safe for use on public transport. The baby is not secured and there is that story about a baby in England who broke both legs in a big pram when a bus driver had to brake suddenly.

Secondly, they are awkward things to take on buses. Both for the person in charge of the pram, and more importantly for other passengers. I live in Edinburgh and take buses regularly, there are so many elderly people who are reliant on the buses. I think it is silly to pretend that a person pushing an enormous pram is disabled to the extent of an elderly man with two walking sticks, or a person in a wheelchair.

Even given a lack of money a big pram is a choice. You might be given an unsuitable one, but so what? Would anyone defend the idea of us using the unsuitable car seat from the 1970s that my mother has kindly offered because a suitable one costs money?

Jim Jams, put your handbag down

I certainlty do not mean in any physical or emotional sense but in an access to public utility sense.

And as for chopice - if they had the choice, they would be driving. A lot of people buy secodn had what they can afford.

sorry, don't think i agree with you there MT.

i think using a big, non folding pram is essentially a choice.

"parents with prams come under the same model of disability as people in wheelchairs. This might not be written in the 'model' but logically they are exactly the same with regards to public transport. "

Please tell me you are joking.

You can't seriously think that being a parent with a pram is equivalent to being a wheelchair user.

I think it is fine tbh. Where I lived in Edin the buses had no pram spot anyway so it was sling fold up or walk 2 miles into town.

I had a graco city sport for longer outings and a sling for shorter ones.

My patented {grin] technique was:

1. assess other people at bus stop for baby holding capabilities. If fine hand over baby fold buggy, take baby back. You can do the buggy one handed if needs be. You will normally get either your buggy or the baby carried on for you.

If not hand baby to passenger/bus driver and lug buggy on. The citysport unfolds with one hand so getting off is fine and again most folks are nice and helpful.

If I hadn't done this I would have got no where. Big prams on buses should be binned.

parents with prams come under the same model of disability as people in wheelchairs. This might not be written in the 'model' but logically they are exactly the same with regards to public transport.

What happens is people with prams and those in wheelchairs (who very often just don;t choose to go on public transport, the total hassle it is) compete with each other for the spaces, as well as people with prams per se. I've been on buses when parents have passivly refused to move their prams or buggies so to allow another buggie on board and the driver has not insisted they do.

I'm only just dropping in on this convo and haven';t read it all though, so I', not sure if people are discussing the issue from such a perspective.

If LOthian buses have also decided to ban wheelchairs from busy buses also then some equality in policy has at least been reached. If not (and i can't see how they could in law) then the women disabled (which is what a pram effectivly renders you with regard to public transport) with a large pram is being directl discriminated agiainst.

It's a fine line I appreciate. But the problem is in the design and/or the frequency of buses. This desicion activly discrimnates against poor people with young children. The social model of disabilty doesn't activly mention women with prams, but if you read it they unarguabley coem under its juristinction.

MN HQ there is a whole thread on the Edinburgh local site about this

No, it's an example of lazy thinking. You end up banning something that could be accommodated 99% of the time simply to deal with the 1% (or, I'd wager, an even smaller percentage than that). Why is it better to inconvenience pram users most of the time like this when they actually only need to be inconvenienced a tiny fraction of the time by being asked to get off?

sorry MT i don't understand how it contravenes the 'social model' either. what were your thoughts on that?

also, i think even if all these big pram pushers were gladly getting off for chair users i don't think that's a great solution either(inconvenient for pram users, probably also makes chair user feel awkward too). much better to ban the big prams and ask parents to use fold up buggies. there's limited space on busses so i think it is entirely reasonable that decisions are made about how that space is used

it doesn't contravene the social model of disability if the reason it's been introduced is because people with big prams have refused to get off the bus (which is the most sensible reason I can imagine for it being introduced, and given past threads on here where people have had the right hump at being asked to move for a disabled person is something I can certainly believe happens).

not "on a crowed space", should be "on a crowded bus".

I don't know what the exact legal situation is, but in London there are notices up saying that the driver can refuse to let unfolded prams on the bus if there isn't enough space. He can also drive past single people in their 20's if there isn't enough space. It is however more likely that there will be a space for a single person in their 20's than a pram on a crowed space.

I think you also have to ask how often people are refused access to a bus and at what times of day. If it is only in the rush hour then thats not a huge problem. If people living in rural areas are not able to access public transport that is a problem.

on a very basic level, this cotravienes the 'social model of disablioty' which is the current PC thinking on the politics.

Thank you Aitch.

Yes i think so too ABO.