My DH took DD 4.5yrs to school on his motorbike yesterday (on his way to work). My first reaction was outrage, but he defended himself with the following:
- It's 300 yards down the straight road and he doesn't reach more than 20 mph.
- She has a proper helmet and her feet touch the pedals, which apparently are the only legal requirements.
- She is capable of holding on. (She did)
- The pavement to school is exceptionally narrow(only space for one, can't hold hands), bumpy and on a camber. Kids scoot on it, run on it etc etc and my heart is always in my mouth whenever we walk as I am worried she (or other children) could fall in to the busy road. So, he believes it's safer than this.
4, He is also says she could fall off a swing, off a scooter etc and will not have head protection to the quality she has on the motorbike.
- Another vehicle causing an accident is as likely to do so on the crap pavement as on the road.
I sort of agree with his points and my only come back is that none of the other things are done at 20mph.
I am now trying to work out whether I think he's being unreasonable just because I haven't ever seen it before, or whether he genuinely is.
So, is he being unreasonable to do this?