AIBU re cycle helmet use in children cycling to school

[cyclehelmetuse]

AIBU to think if secondary schools are able to enforce an exact length of regulation school skirt, the length of ties and inspect the contents of pencil cases they should be able to enforce the bringing of a cycle helmet when parking a bike on school premises?

Not one child wears a cycle helmet at our secondary school. Apparently it is totally uncool and children are bullied if seen with one. Even cycling with one hanging their handle bars is now unacceptable and is never seen.

I believe schools have a responsibility to enforce the bringing of a helmet as some of these children are only 11 years old and it is totally unacceptable that they are too scared of the older children to protect themselves.

I don't think you can or should force children to wear helmets. Yes, in the majority of incidents it is better to be wearing one than not, but children have to learn by their mistakes.

Intents

The Netherlands comparison is apples and pears
The vast majority of cycling there is done at walking pace, in dedicated cycle lanes and with total adherence to traffic signals

There is no real life comparison to here where cycling is at a higher speed, on paths shared with vehicles or pedestrians, and where jumping red lights is a national pastime

And can we stop this myth that cycle helmets are 'flimsy'
They do a great job at protecting fully grown adults crashing at 30mph

They are designed to take the impact and therefore break, so the state of them after an accident is not indicative of how flimsy they are. It's indicative of how much damage would have been done to a skull if it hadn't been worn.
I've seen this first hand from years of training for and competing in cycle races and triathlons. There is no question some people wouldn't walk away from accidents I've seen happen if they weren't wearing a helmet

"They do a great job at protecting fully grown adults crashing at 30mph "

Really? Based on what research - which would have to be counter to most of the work that suggests that helmets offer very little protection for direct head impacts above around 10mph, and usually ignore the statistical significance of increased accident rates of cyclists wearing helmets in the first place?

"They are designed to take the impact"

They are required to be tested at 12mph, and are designed primarily to ensure riders don't get sweaty heads.

A few stories of your triathlon buddies crashing with helmets is not a sound basis for making a decision.

They do a great job at protecting fully grown adults crashing at 30mph
They are designed to take the impact and therefore break, so the state of them after an accident is not indicative of how flimsy they are. It's indicative of how much damage would have been done to a skull if it hadn't been worn

This is complete nonsense. Cycling helmets are designed to protect heads at speeds of no more than 12-14mph (EN1078).

The vast majority of doctors working in accident and emergency wards support the use of cycle helmets. They see the unhappy consequences of cyclists who weren't wearing helmets on a daily basis.

Those who don't support the use of helmets for cycling. Is your view the same for skiing? Why do all serious cyclists, triathletes etc insist their children wear cycle helmets?

"The vast majority of doctors working in accident and emergency wards support the use of cycle helmets"

Which means nothing, of course, seeing as the ones who don't have accidents because of the lower risk of having an accident in the first place... don't go to a&e.

I'm pretty sure those same doctors would prefer people not to get hurt in the first place.

Cycle helmets can be useful in some accidents, can make certain injuries worse (such as rotational/whiplash type injuries worse) and statistically you are more likely to have an accident wearing one.

Those who don't support the use of helmets for cycling. Is your view the same for skiing? Why do all serious cyclists, triathletes etc insist their children wear cycle helmets?

No, it's not the same for skiing because... it's a different sport with different risks and different standards when it comes to helmets.

And not all "serious" cyclists insist their children wear helmets.

Ah, so you enforce bike helmet use by constantly checking up on your child.

Unfortunately I don't have the time or inclination (or in fact the ability as many cycle paths not near roads) to drive round after DS on his bike, nor do I have lots of folks nearby to also check upon him. Great if it works for you, but most parents of teens don't micromanage them to that degree. The big issue is that teens generally don't do things they think are pointless just because their parents say so. So cycle helmets have to be "cool" (Perhaps they need to be adopted by some youtube vlogger?) or obligatory by law (where still some won't wear them but at least you'll get the law abiding majority).

In terms of cycling to school you're also missing the logistical issue of what to do with your helmet once you get there (which is actually why DS stopped wearing one, nothing to do with bullying and he's not cool anyway). It can be tricky to lock it to your bike, lockers are not big enough (if the school even has them) and no one wants to carry one about all day.

Kid
Here is some evidence of them working
video.eurosport.co.uk/cycling/tour-de-france/2018/tour-de-france-2018-crash-at-stage-15-finish-line_vid1109575/video.shtml

video.eurosport.co.uk/cycling/tour-de-france/2018/tour-de-france-2018-crash-at-stage-15-finish-line_vid1109575/video.shtml

It is truly bonkers that people will actually try and argue against the use of helmets for cycling.

It is almost always men of a certain age who are a bit 'well this is the thin end of the wedge/well it is just not on is it' oddball libertarian types though

Why are you not also rubbishing helmets being for children riding ponies at walking pace? No one would dream of letting their child on a pony without a proper hat, or demand evidence of research of falls wearing hats vs no hats.
It is insane!

My kids do wear helmets skiing because there isn’t the same evidence that they are less likely to be in an accident if they are wearing one.

Because there is significant evidence that you are less likely to be in a crash in the first place if you aren’t wearing a helmet.

There are so, so many reasons why helmets shouldn't be made compulsory for cycling and why children shouldn't be forced into wearing them as part of school policy.

I don't want to replicate the arguments here but this is a good summary of the reasons why helmets shouldn't be a legal requirement.

www.cyclinguk.org/campaigning/views-and-briefings/cycle-helmets

Personally, I wear a helmet as do the children, but I'm still against compulsory helmet wearing.

You want a legally obeying student to be forced by a school to do something that isn’t required by law?

Would you object to taking an advanced driving course and showing the certificate before being able to drive your dc to school? No certificate then no journey to school by car

spare shall we bring up links to where car helmets have saved lives in F1 and ask why you don’t have 5 point seatbelts in your car and never travel in a car without a helmet?

The thread seems to have shifted massively off-topic.

The question was not "Are bike helmets useful?".

The question was "Should schools force children who attend to wear cycle helmets, monitor it, and invoke disciplinary procedures against children who don't wear helmets?".

I'm somewhat more of the opinion that disciplinary measures should be enacted on the bullies, rather than the victims of bullying, but whatever floats your boat.

I'm sure forcing a child into choosing between detention if they don't wear it and bullying if they do wear it will only make their lives at school happier, and definitely encourage them to cycle.

RedSky - Not sure about constantly checking but perhaps once a month I do a very slight detour on my route somewhere to ensure I pass by and double check. I do tend to be local in the same area which makes it much easier. Also where we live everyone knows everyone and have voluntarily told me about incidents of crossing the road without looking or other incidents so it makes it very easy for my children to think that someone may well report them! Never considered where to put the helmet. I just presumed the strap would be put through the padlock. Why was that an issue? If that is the reason I could ask school to consider storage but I had never even thought of that.

People are convinced a polystyrene helmet will save life and can’t see that it’s segregation of motor vehicles and cyclists that saves life in Nederlands and not wearing a helmet, Dutch children are safer on cycle paths

The question was "Should schools force children who attend to wear cycle helmets, monitor it, and invoke disciplinary procedures against children who don't wear helmets?

No. Because in the UK, there is no legal compulsion to wear a cycling helmet.

DS1 (23) wears a helmet. He uses his bike to get from his room to work and back on camp. When DS2 went to university he took his bike and DS1 bought him a helmet which gathered dust in his room for a while. Then one morning one of his mates fell off his bike on his way to uni and suffered a brain haemorrhage. That put the shits up DS2 and he got a huge lecture from DS1 and the helmet is now worn.

I wish there would be a law brought in about tbh.

Zampa - but there is no legal compulsion to wear a kilt to the knee or a black coat longer than a blazer or a tie where both ends are the same length yet UK schools regularly monitor and give detentions or even exclude children for not following these rules. The schools can set their own rules and don't just follow laws!

wild
There isn't "significant evidence"

There is an experiment done by one man, wearing a body cam and a wig

If that's the bar you set for evidence to make a decision, you would absolutely and definitely be insisting on helmets

Yet another example of the total insanity and lack of logic in this argument. People make no sense when trying to build the case

Zampa

Kids get told they can't eat at certain places at lunchtime
Schools regularly police perfectly legal activities outside school

"It is truly bonkers that people will actually try and argue against the use of helmets for cycling"

No, what is truly bonkers is thinking that a couple of videos of professional cyclists crashing is in any way comparable to the type of incident a teenager will have. You might as well show us videos of people skydiving for all the relevance it has.

"There is an experiment done by one man, wearing a body cam and a wig"

There is, actually, quite a bit more than that.