Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to think the lollipop lady shoildn't tell my son that he shouldn't ride his bike standing up?

137 replies

adamadamum · 01/10/2010 23:16

My son is six,and after having a bike for a while, I am letting him ride it to school (on the pavement, very carefully, with a helmet, and he has great manners anyway so no bumping into people!)

Anyway, after seeing Mighty Mites on CBeebies, he has learnt a new skill, to ride standing up, all part of BMX training stuff. (And I will happy to get him a BMX bike in the future, finances/circumstances permitting)

Yesterday, coming out of school my son was upset. He said the lollipop lady had said to him that he shouldn't ride his bike standing up - a skill he had learnt on Cbeebies! When he does this, it's only for thirty seconds or so! We were a few yards up the road when he explained why he was upset, so I suggested we return and politely explain why he was upset, for HIS closure...so we went back and very politely got the lollipop lady's attention. My son said he was upset, I told her that i had given my son permission to ride standing up

OP posts:
Bumblingbovine · 03/10/2010 10:42

So a 6 year old can be is perfectly capable of riding on a road (and the road to ds's school is VERY busy) but no 6 year old can be capable of riding standing up for a few seconds. MN makes me speechless sometimes!

I think it is fine to ride a bike on the pavement if you are 6 years old and the local roads make that a sensible option.

I do however think the OP did overeact a bit. I can see that her ds was upset butas the adult who gave him permission to ride I would have taken responsibility for that. He was upset because one adult (his parent) had allowed him to do something and another in authority had said he shouldnt. Quite reasonably, he didn't want to be told off for something he wasn't aware was a problem.

In the Op's situation I would have said someything like. "Well the lolliop lady must think what you are doing is dangerous" Then I might have thought about it and decided if she was right and modified my instructions to ds accordingly.

I have in the past said ds can do something and then decided on reflection that maybe it wasn't safe after all. Sometimes we make mistakes we aren't perfect. Or if I still felt I was right I would explain that to ds and say he shouldn't ride standing up near the gate as I thought it was safe as long as I was there but the lollipo lady didn't and she was responsible for safety outside the school gates.

omnishambles · 03/10/2010 10:43

Apologies for spelling btw - am on a very strange keyboard.

MadameCastafiore · 03/10/2010 10:46

Don't you think it is nice that someone else was concerned about your son's safety? Whole bloddy country is lacking social responsibility and others caring about people around them - you will be one of those mothers in some suzzy magazine at this rate defending your ASBO son!

crumpet · 03/10/2010 10:47

adamadamum did you really go back to the lollipop lady???

That is very funny. And yes, you are unreasonable - the woman was doing her job.

LIZS · 03/10/2010 10:52

yabu. She is responsible for the safety of not only your ds but other pedestrians and road users in the vicinity too so is doing the right thing. If he was told off out of your hearing presumably you don't supervise him the whole way. Frankly you should n't be encouraging him to ride on the pavement during the school run, he may be "careful" and "polite" but you'd soon complain if another child doing the same took him out.

snoozathon · 03/10/2010 10:52

Poor lollipop lady, being told off for looking out for a child's safety!

And what kind of a lesson are you teaching your son? What if she reprimands him for something more serious in the future? Will your darling DS ignore her or tell her he'll set his mummy on her?

I agree with the posters who said this child will be a nightmare to teach! I can't wait for future threads about teachers who tell him off for things you disagree with and you stomping up to the school to give your son closure Grin

omnishambles · 03/10/2010 10:57

How many accidents personally have you seen recently where pedestrians have been knocked over by cyclists? Not seen tragic cases in the news but actually seen because in the last 6 months alone I have seen 2 cyclists knocked off their bikes in and around my local area at mini roundabouts and suchlike.

Your ire should be aimed at drivers who make it unsafe for cyclists and councils who turn a blind eye rather than 6 year old who have just taken their stabilisers off and are wobbling along at a much slower speed than a 3 year old on a scooter.

salizchap · 03/10/2010 11:20

YABU to make such a big deal about it. If your DS is generally considerate to pedestrians, and the road is unsafe I don´t have a problem with him riding on the pavement. But it is the lollipop lady´s responsibility to correct your DS if he is doing something that could be dangerous. OK, maybe it wasn´t dangerous for him this time, but if she lets him do this, other kids will expect they can too, and at some point an accident will happen. And then she would get the blame.

I am totally with the other posters about the whole ´closure´ thing! What a ridiculous thing to say. OH my god, I was told off by an adult when I was six, I am emotionally scarred for life! FFS!

diddl · 03/10/2010 11:29

""YANBU it's normal for a child to ride standing up""

"It's normal for children who feel confident to try it and be completely successful, yes Diddl"

What I meant was that I don´t think that children mostly ride standing up, not that they have never tried it or do it on occasion.

violethill · 03/10/2010 12:05

Lol at all the people now trying to justify cycling on pavements!

I agree that if the OPs son got knocked off by some other cyclist, she'd no doubt be fuming. God think how much closure he'd need then

omnishambles · 03/10/2010 13:04

What do you suggest we do then violethill?

a) not go to cycling club - ironic as we need it more than everyone else as we dont drive and therefore ds needs to learn how to cycle properly.
b)walk the bike all the way to school for half an hour - ds will have to do this as I am pushing a buggy.
c)ride in the really dangerous road even though ds has only just learnt to ride a bike and will endanger himself and other road users who have to swerve to avoid him.

Its not a matter of justifying pavement use, its being sensible.

Again, how often have you seen a dangerous collision on a pavement involving a bike?Lets talk actual outcomes rather than kneejerk risk and.

Mumi · 03/10/2010 13:28

haven't read every post but have searched and don't think anyone has brought up that while standing up, if your DS had to brake suddenly, he could go right over the handlebars.

tyler80 · 03/10/2010 13:34

mumi - people sitting down and braking suddenly (and incorrectly) can also go over the handlebars so that's neither here nor there.

Nellykats · 03/10/2010 13:37

omnishambles, I see a lot of young kids riding fast on pavements and it scares me as I have to protect my own DS and myself.

Pavements are for pedestrians and buggies and wheelchairs, not other vehicles.

If one wants their child to ride to school, either let them do it on their own, or get a bike and join them, on the road. If they can't do it, then they're too young.

violethill · 03/10/2010 14:09

Hear hear nellykats!

omnishambles · 03/10/2010 14:10

Ok I will tell ds never to ride his bike unless in the back garden until he's ready to ride it on the road - am sure he will have had enough practice with obstacles and other people and all sorts by then or maybe we could teleport it to school for his cycling club.

Mumi · 03/10/2010 14:11

tyler80 : there is an increased risk when standing - due to the higher centre of gravity - as I have unfortunately seen myself first hand.

violethill · 03/10/2010 14:20

Any cycling profiency club worth it's salt teaches children not to ride on pavements. I think it was in the first lesson when my kids went!

Nellykats · 03/10/2010 14:20

violethill :)

omni, ofcourse you want your son to learn to cycle properly, my dad use to take me to quiet roads and run by me, poor man.

omnishambles · 03/10/2010 14:25

Really violethill at 6 years old? If I did that most of MN would be up in arms - he is tiny, and wobbly.

I dont think any parent would let their 6 year old on the roads in London - thats why you see so many tagalongs etc.

diddl · 03/10/2010 14:26

Did OP ever come back?

tyler80 · 03/10/2010 14:29

This is what was said when the fixed penalty law for cycling on pavements was first introduced

"[].. is not aimed at responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of traffic and who show consideration to other pavement users when doing so. Chief police officers, who are responsible for enforcement, acknowledge that many cyclists, particularly children and young people, are afraid to cycle on the road, sensitivity and careful use of police discretion is required."

I think if it's the choice between riding on the pavement or not riding at all because the alternative is too busy/dangerous then as long as a cyclist is considerate to other users then it's not a problem. The above seems to state that the law agrees with me on this issue.

Nellykats · 03/10/2010 14:32

great, lets have more kids riding on pavements, coming for where you can't see them because the law is on your side tyler80.

Ideally, they won't crash on to you, so everybody will be happy.

omnishambles · 03/10/2010 14:36

They dont generally crash into you though nellykats, have some very dull stats:

The figures show that, in London during the period 2001-05:

"There were 101 times as many reported pedestrian injuries due to collisions with motor vehicles than with pedal cycles (there were 34,791 pedestrian injuries involving motor vehicles, compared with 331 involving cycles).

Motor vehicles were involved in 126 times as many fatal and serious pedestrian injuries as cycles (there were 7,447 fatal and serious injuries involving motor vehicles compared with 59 involving cycles).

534 pedestrians were killed in collisions with motor vehicles, compared with just one killed in collision with a cycle. That one fatal collision with a cycle occurred neither on a pavement nor a pedestrian crossing point.

Even on the pavement, there were 2,197 reported pedestrian injuries arising from collisions with motor vehicles, including 17 fatalities. These injuries outnumbered those involving cycles by a factor of 42 to 1.

The total number of reported pedestrian injuries in London due to collisions with cyclists on pavements was just 65 in the year 2001, and 69 in 2005. In the meantime, the figure went down, up and back down again, showing no clear overall trend. This was despite a 72% increase in cycle use over the period.

On average just under 18% of cyclists ran red lights, whereas over a third of motorists encroached into cyclists? ?Advance Stop Lines? (cycle boxes at traffic lights). "

www.ctc.org.uk/resources/Pres..._the_Road1.doc