Why do people drive their kids to school??

[brightonbaker]

Every day My oldest DD 11 walks to school, she is at secondary school and it is about 8minutes walk away. There is one road to cross. I walk my younger DD 8 to school, her school is the same distance. I then get home and go to work, I'm lucky I can start at 9:30.
I think it is good for them to walk to school as it is a good start to the day, exercise, fresh air etc.
I have two neighbours with older DDs about 13 and 14 who I am quite sure have never walked to school, ever. So they leave about the same time as us and get back about the same time as its only 8 minutes walk and by the time they have found somewhere to park** illegally it takes the same amount of time. So why? Why are they doing this? one of the parents does not work so no need to rush and I'm not sure what the other one does.
Really gets on my nerves so thought I'd see if there are some legitimate reasons why people drive to a very local school ?

purplegreen that's a very sensible suggestion for those who do drive - thank you.

I only drive when I'm dropping off DD at school but my CM normally does that and they walk.
However, I can imagine someone with more children, especially smaller ones, who choses to drive because it's easier than managing let's say a toddler or a baby in a car than trying to get to school in time.
Some people are lazy but some do that to save themselves the hassle.

Wax its like that down my road too. I deliberately avoid it between 1500-1530"for the same reason.

@woodhill, nah I think "fuck them" :o

I'm perfectly entitled to drive into my own street and come home when I want. One of these days someone is going to come flying into me - it might damage my car but probably not injure the hulking teenagers I have in my car - can't say the same about them or any of the poor DC trying to walk through the culdesac to get home.

I just can't bear the aggro. One man was really threatening.

That's not on. He was threatening you for trying to drive into your own street?

Oh, I have that sometimes, as I live a few houses away from a private school - one that attracts those with a lot of money and attitude. This year's car (yes, there is a different one every year) is one of those Big Minis. (Why are they still called Minis? They are anything but.) Last year everyone had a new-style Freelander and the year before it was the Porsche Cayenne.

Anyway, sometimes I get sworn at for trying to exit/enter my drive. Only last week I was trying to get out and asked the woman to move, and she point blank said, "No." Just like that. Nothing else, just a "No." I was But I honked the horn and she grudgingly inched back so by squeezing against my hedge and taking it half with me I was able to get out.

And again I think that's your London-centric opinion talking. There are a great many places - one I am going to tomorrow that don't have stations!

again, I am not london centred, I was 18 years old before I ever even got up close to a train! I live in London now! But I haven't always, and my family home is still very rurl. I have always chosen homes/jobs/schools/holidays on the basis of having no car. It is perfectly possible to live without a car, many millions of people do, for moral, financial, logistical or health reasons. No one NEEDS a car, just a lot of people have grown up so accustomed to the luxury, and now feel entitled.

There are very few things that people actually need to survive but there are things that give people a reasonable quality of life. I think you should remember that some people face challenges in their lives that you don't.

Well today DD moaned for the first time about walking and wishing she could go in a car, but it is 2 degrees (by windchill, 6 actually) and raining and still a bit dark so not exactly the most pleasant walk and I'm not relishing my half hour bike ride to work either but its life - if DD only walked to school on the nice days she'd hardly ever walk to school!

again, I am not london centred, I was 18 years old before I ever even got up close to a train! I live in London now! But I haven't always, and my family home is still very rurl. I have always chosen homes/jobs/schools/holidays on the basis of having no car. It is perfectly possible to live without a car, many millions of people do, for moral, financial, logistical or health reasons. No one NEEDS a car, just a lot of people have grown up so accustomed to the luxury, and now feel entitled

And many people have a car so they can ensure they get to work in the mornings and can get back as quickly as possible so they can spend the maximum amount of time with their family.

I walk whenever I can but yes sometimes I need a car, and we live in a town (albeit one with rubbish public transport)

Two weeks ago Ds had an appointment at 9am, that was in walking distance so I pushed him up in his chair. Got home from the appointment at 10. His next appointment was at 11 at a a hospital 30 minutes drive away - no problem got there with 15 mins to spare.

To get to that hospital on public transport would have taken over 2 hours - mission impossible unless you can be in two places at once!

I think Silver has explained that, despite living in London, she does have experience of rural life.

To be fair I think so much of life is now organised around the assumption that everyone drives, which makes it very difficult to be car free. I do own a car and use it more than I'd like. Every so often I do a car-free month but I find it difficult, even with good public transport, to fit in everything and not feel quite frazzled by the experience.

It is much easier as my children get older and have their own keys and can be in the house on their own, but I've noticed that lots of my friends and neighbours never seem to get out of the driving habits they had when their children were small. For example I must know at least 15 people who work in local schools as teaching or admin assistants and have children in secondary or beyond, and I can only think of 1 who walks the half mile or so to work. I am not sure why - ingrained habits maybe, or just don't care or don't know about the consequences?

I appreciate there are people for whom getting around is more difficult, whether that's because of health issues, lack or transport, difficult working hours, etc. But the OP's point was about people who drive to school even though it would be quicker and less hassle to walk. There are lots of people like that, and persuading them to leave their cars at home would at least have some impact on emissions and air quality, but I really don't know what it would take to open people's eyes or encourage them

No one NEEDS a car, just a lot of people have grown up so accustomed to the luxury

Actually incorrect. I walked to school every day of my life without question.

I used public transport to travel to university (hour trip each way) every day of the 2nd/3rd years of my degree.

I commuted via public transport to work until I gave up to have my daughter.

Now I NEED a vehicle. DD couldn't get to school without one. I couldn't continue to work as I do without one.

As I said previously giving up a non-essential activity is in no way comparable to making wholesale changes to your whole working life.

I didn't have a car till 9 years ago when I needed to get my son to hospital appointments and later on to school ( he has never had the luxury of being able to go to a local school).

And many people have a car so they can ensure they get to work in the mornings and can get back as quickly as possible so they can spend the maximum amount of time with their family.

Sayyouwill that's understandable - we all do things sometimes that has a negative impact on other people, for our own convenience. But every person who has chosen to arrange their lives so that they have to constantly use a car needs to also accept their responsibility that they are also causing material harm to the health and wellbeing of other people's children and families.

But every person who has chosen to arrange their lives so that they have to constantly use a car needs to also accept their responsibility that they are also causing material harm to the health and wellbeing of other people's children and families.

Don't be ridiculous. Most people don't have a choice to arrange their lives in any way. For a lot of people they don't deliberately choose a job to be the most inconvenient they can or choose to live as far away from their existing employment. For example, I was made redundant and when I managed to get another job it was an hours drive away. I chose to move my entire family to be closer to my job. I live pretty much as close as I can, but as it's on a motorway junction, there isn't housing within walking distance, cycling across a motorway junction isn't happening and there is no public transport, I really dont have any options. The company does provide sme bus transport itself, but hat is for people working standard hours and takes no account of people workig part time or shifts or who have children or other caring responsibilities.

Maybe I should just give up my job and live on benefits?

WaxOn then if you haven't chosen it, my post isn't about you, is it?

Surely we can recognise that there's a difference between the person who is forced to relocate by work circumstances and the person who actively chooses to live a distance from work that is only commutable by car because they just want to be in some posh suburban or rural area that lacks convenient public transport? Actively choosing a lifestyle that requires a commute is quite different from being forced into one by circumstances, isn't it? And despite the fact that the name of the incredibly boring game in this thread is finding exceptional justifications, there are plenty of people who are simply choosing to commute by car.

No, but then your post implies that it's common for people to choose to arrange their lives. I'm pointing out that in general people don't choose to arrange their lives at all. They just have deal with whatever life deals them in the best way they can and I've given a personal example.

If people were able to choose their lives, I am sure (in the main) they wouldn't build it around wanting to own an expensive depreciating asset. Most people want to work near where they live and have DC able to walk to school if nothing more than to have more free time and spend less of it travelling. The reality is that even if you try to live near where you work, you may lose your job, not be able to find one nearby, not be able to afford to move or not want to take your family away from their support or schools etc.

Even with the best planning in the world, life tends to intervene and take over.

Actively choosing a lifestyle that requires a commute is quite different from being forced into one by circumstances, isn't it?

Exactly.

I've given up the chance of things I'd really like to have (a garden, the opportunity to have a dog, lots of space) in order to be able to live without a car. And that was my choice, and I take responsibility for it, but if I'd made a different choice, I'd still have to take responsibility for the consequences of that choice, including the harm I did to other people.

I'm pointing out that in general people don't choose to arrange their lives at all.

Really? But Mumsnet is full of threads about "shall I move to x with my partner?" and "which school is best - y nearby or z 5 miles away?", and "what do you think of this house?".

Yes, all of us live with many huge constraints, including money, being near to family, living where the work is, and all the rest of it. But many, many people do exercise a great deal of choice in how they live within those constraints.

"Most people want to work near where they live and have DC able to walk to school if nothing more than to have more free time and spend less of it travelling."

I am not sure this is true - in my city, the wealthy and desirable areas are peripheral, and a way from the centre of the city. That's partly a legacy of industrial pollution (now less of an issue), partly of later suburbanization and middle class/white flight from the city centre. There are plenty of people in the wealthy middle classes here who are choosing to live a car ride away from central places of work for the sake of a certain neighbourhood/social cachet, instead of cheaper (but still nice) neighbourhoods closer by. And that's not counting those who prefer to live in bijou cottages in villages that are even further out despite work and school being in the city.

(Also popping back in to point out that other people have gardens, dogs, space and still don't need a car. That was just me, and where I've chosen to live.)

And not all of us are single. It's pretty hard for people to find jobs and a suitable house with close by schools, after school care, family who might need support etc when you are talking about two working adults and childen and get that all withing walking distance or in suitable places to cycle. My DH can and does walk to work, DC and I need transport. There is no safe route or suitable transport for us that doesn't require us to drive. We lived within 200 meters of their primary school but High School is a different matter.