To ask my DDs to wear helmets when they go out on their bikes?

[LackingInspiration]

Because I'm starting to feel like an overprotective mother (and I so am not one of those!). All the other children in the street don't wear helmets, and my DDs are so good at keeping theirs on, but I know it annoys them.

The thing is that, unlike most of the decisions DH and I have made about parenting, we've just swallowed the standard advice about helments, without researching the ins and outs of them. So what's the deal?

Am I being overprotective? Or haven't I read enough research and arguments to make an informed decision?

This gives a good description of the various reasons that cycling is much safer in Holland from the strict liability I mentioned to the cycle only routes. Much more thought is given to cyclists and they are prioritised over motorists.

We have a no helmet/no bike rule here.

Have had way too many badly cracked helmets for both myself/DH and DS to even consider not wearing one.

My ds split his head open 2 weeks ago because we thought making kids wear helmets was over-protective. (We were in the middle of nowhere, I had no plasters or even tissues and it took 2 hours to get him to A&E. Felt like a fabulous mother ).

A lesson learned.

Shabba, I'm so sorry for your loss .

I also think Tokyo is completely out of order, and hope it is because perhaps she didn't read your story.

Wow! Sorry for not getting back to the thread for so long!

To those of you who have actually taken my OP seriously and helped me make an informed decision - thank you.

To those of you quoting anecdotes, I really am truly sorry for the awful things you've seen and/or experienced, but it doesn't really help me decide. I know people who've been injured badly by all sorts of things - falling of climbing frames (we still have one); cutting their feet seriously on glass (still let mine go barefoot) etc. Although I understand why you feel so strongly about helmet use, and why you are so desperate to ensure others wear helmetns, anecdotal evidence isn't really helpful for me trying to make an informed choice, though.

I don't think Riven's analogy with her DD is erroneous, but totally accurate. And thanks for linking me to that thread, Shiney - I'm going to spend a couple of hours reading it now!

FWIW, I think that I'm leaning closer to persuading them to wear them - and to the person who said IWBU to ask them, rather than make them, I'm afraid I take the view that their bodies belong to them, not me and they are not stupid and can make rational decisions as long as they have all the facts...I can now offer them all the facts and they will hopefully (IMO) decide to continue wearing them.

But I also want to teach them to make decisions based on evidence, not just stories they've heard. So I'm glad I've got some now!

'I'm afraid I take the view that their bodies belong to them, not me and they are not stupid and can make rational decisions as long as they have all the facts...'

But they are children and you are supposed to be the responsible adult. And the responsible thing would be to tell them they either wear a helmet when on their bikes, or they don't go on their bikes. End Of. Working on the same principle, would it be ok if they decided they didn't want to wear a seatbelt?

Helmets not only save lives but help prevent serious injury.

Is it really worth taking the risk?

'I'm afraid I take the view that their bodies belong to them, not me and they are not stupid and can make rational decisions as long as they have all the facts...'

Yes, because the young are always so good at judging risk, fully understanding the consequences of their actions and realising that bad things don't just happen to other people.

Shabs I am really sorry about the pompous pseudo-intellectual tosser on this thread, who wants to put point scoring in a AIBU thread above being a human being.

Mumsnet at its blinking mind boggling worse.

I undertand statistics. I understand the argument that reducing one risk may increase another aross a population.

Most people here however are mothers, not policy makers - and can mitigate unintended consequences for their specific child. And most human beings are irrational. Irrationality is a huge driver of beheaviour.

Shabs dreading her grandson riding a bike may not be rational, but given the circumstances, it is entirely bloody reasonble.

The principle thing that baffles me, is that in a forum where the raison d'etre is supposedly to provide peer support to other mothers - a poster would dare to make such a disgusting remarks to a bereaved mother.

I didn't tie together the account of a death with the later posting. Which was utterly inexcusable.

To those of you quoting anecdotes, I really am truly sorry for the awful things you've seen and/or experienced, but it doesn't really help me decide. I know people who've been injured badly by all sorts of things - falling of climbing frames (we still have one); cutting their feet seriously on glass (still let mine go barefoot) etc. Although I understand why you feel so strongly about helmet use, and why you are so desperate to ensure others wear helmetns, anecdotal evidence isn't really helpful for me trying to make an informed choice, though.

I actually disagree with this. If you want to influence people's behaviour, anedocotes work best. What would have most impact on you - being told X people die because they don't wear a seatbelt and an interview with a statistician, for example - or a docu-soap following the family of a victim that actually gave you some insight into what it was like to eperience the tragedy?

A thousand deaths is a statistic - one is a tragedy. Human beings are very bad at judging risk - particuarly very low probability, high risk events.

ok - tokyonambu I thought you had. In which case, I apologise too.

Shabba so desperately sorry for you and your loss. I cannot believe anyone would so easily dismiss your tragic story.
Some people are so bloody crass.

And letting a child make their own mind up about something so important is crackers.
My ds would love to jump off walls, stand on our glass coffee table, run into the road, jump into a river, but I never let him.

YANBU to ask your dds to keep wearing them, though I'd avoid pointy ended ones given the research on twisting injuries. Glad I read this thread as I wasn't aware of that before.

As an aside, ChippingIn your guesses and beliefs regarding Shabba's sons injuries seem like something you really ought to have kept to yourself. I'd hazard a guess that you meant well but I really do believe you were way over the line to try telling her what she ought or ought not to be worrying about with respect to her son's death.

"If you want to influence people's behaviour, anedocotes work best. What would have most impact on you - being told X people die because they don't wear a seatbelt and an interview with a statistician, for example - or a docu-soap following the family of a victim that actually gave you some insight into what it was like to eperience the tragedy?"

Because that worked so well with MMR.

I am not persuaded by anecdote. It might spark an interest for me to investigate further if I am concerned, but I only accept evidence at what I am satisfied is a reasonably objective (non-emotional) level.

well lets hope Shabbas story sparked a bloody interest then.
Nice way to refer to the death of a child.

I suppose that is the end of debate then.

It sparked enough interest for me to read Tokyo's link. I am quite satisfied now.

I think making your own decisions on a purely statistical level is ok but surely we all decide on things every day based on our emotional reactions and instinct . And to completely disregard a persons experience as being overly emotional is just bloody rude quite frankly .

I know how hard it must have been for Shabs to have written and read what she did and to see it in black and white like that is a painful thing .

I am not saying Shabs is over-emotional. She has an absolutely valid personal reason for her stance.

I am just saying I am an exception to Sassysusan's assertion that people are persuaded by anecdote rather than statistics. Of course no one is a robot to only believe statistics. People do refer to statistics and lies ... Just that I would rarely change behaviour based on pure anecdote - I would want to investigate a more objective basis.

". Human beings are very bad at judging risk - particuarly very low probability, high risk events."

You're right, but I think probably in the opposite direction to your intent. Low probability, high impact (I assume that's what you mean) events are over compensated for. That's why railway accidents are huge news stories, and in the aftermath rates of car usage (and therefore deaths) rise, while car accidents are not news. That's why anecdote is so mis-leading: people avoid the thing the anecdote is about, without assessing the wider risk.

I am not persuaded by anecdote. It might spark an interest for me to investigate further if I am concerned, but I only accept evidence at what I am satisfied is a reasonably objective (non-emotional) level.

Blueshoes I think you have rather missed the point. Shabs is not claiming to be providing evidence about the likelihood of a child death/serious injury - she is providing you with some of the best information available about IMPACT.

Most people haven't got a clue what losing a child is like - thank God. She is trying to help your tiny brain grasp that it really won't matter to you that there is only a 1 in 100,00 chance of your child's skull being crushed, if it is your child that dies. And it will hurt like hell, and you will never get over it - ever.

When a poster comes in and shares something painful like that, mostly for the benefit of others, it is polite to listen, rather than waffling a lot of stupid nonsense about objective information. Speaking as someone who has written a thesis on the construction of knowledge, I can pretty much guarantee that you will have NEVER made any decision in your entire life without considering subjective information.

If you want to be bloody rude - please dont' let me stand in your way.... but please, please, don't hide your appalling lack of manners and your shocking disrespect for other human beings behind some sort of appeal to rationalty and objectivity.

It's not smart, and it's not clever. Do grow up.