Hit children on the head with mallets if they don't wear cycle helmets.

[jonesy]

...
But I really object to is the fear-based message of the whole site. We create an environment that's hostile to children, are unwilling or too selfish to make concessions, then attempt to scare them into coping with that environment and blame them when they get it wrong.

This link sums it up nicely.

Quite. An environment that makes it harder for children to be physically active, and discourages parents from being active with their children, is the 'fat kids' question posed on P&L really such a mystery?

 

[ufkacbln]

How can the bit in bold be an argument for cycle helmets? Not even BHIT claims that helmets can help reduce injuries that aren't caused by cycling!

Thudguard® - Infant Safety Hat
"Over 318,575 baby & toddler head injuries are recorded each year!"(Department of Trade & Industry)
It's normal for young children to sustain bumps and bruises occasionally as part of exploring. However, learning to walk in a world of hard surfaces can turn a special moment into a heart rendering incident in a flash. Consider for one moment being the height of an average toddler. If you're not sure about this, get down on your hands and knees and have a wander around. Look at all the furniture, hard surfaces and sharp edges you would hit if you fell on them - both inside your home and outside in your garden.

Now imagine you have wobbly legs, you're only just finding your balance and you fall over more than you'd like to, because you're just learning to walk. Remember learning to ride a bicycle or learning to ice skate for the first time?

What are the chances of you falling over and hitting something sharp or solid? Most homes today have hardwood floors or tiles so statistically the chances are really high. The problem is this kind of fall is very common in even the safest homes and gardens. The damage to a falling toddler's hands and knees can be an acceptable form of pain for learning but a head injury can be traumatic for both infant and parent. Thudguard® goes one step further and takes the protection straight to the infants head giving you great peace of mind.

Safety Helmets for Bouncing Babies
“When you see a 7-month-old bouncing around in this soft headgear, which stretches as the kid grows, you might be quick to say that this is the child of hysterically overprotective parents. But when you consider all the large number of head injuries that children under two suffer, you stop laughing, and start thinking that this newly patented product -- now available in the U.S. -- might catch on.” – Buck Wolf

.. and it is suported by doctors and paramedics:

It is a pleasure to support the 'Thudguard' in my capacity as President of the British Association for Accident and Emergency Medicine. Any device which helps to reduce the number of head injuries sustained by young children each year is most welcome

John Heyworth
President
British Association for Accident and Emergency Medicine

From the advertising for Thudguard childrens helmets...and finally supported by RoSPA

... should make a valuable contribution to risk reduction in a similar way to cycle helmets...

David W. Jenkins BA MPhil(Eng) PhD DCA FTSI
Product Safety Adviser to RoSPA

Now is anyone out there not going to be making their children wear one?

 

[User169]

..


Now is anyone out there not going to be making their children wear one?

I won't be.

 

[Dan B]

I see kids on roller skates and on scooters wearing helmets. Is there any evidence to suggest that this is worthwhile?

I would be very surprised if there was any evidence either way: who's collecting the statistics in the first place? A&E admissions don't tell you anything about the kids whose injuries didn't merit a trip to hospital.

My gut feeling is that helmets are probably more use on roller skates than on a bike, simply because there are so many more ways of falling over when wearing skates. But that's purely a gut feeling

 

[Origamist]

Here's the DFT's stock reply to complaints about the campaign:



I am sorry to hear that our new child road safety game, 'knocking
noggins has upset you.

I'd like to explain why we produced this game and why we took the
decision to portray the message about the need to always wear a cycling
helmet to children in this particular way.

Although child road deaths have reduced steadily over the last ten to
twenty years, there are still on average thirty seven road safety child
casualties each week in the UK. Our aim is to continue to reduce child
road deaths and injuries and to ensure that correct and safe road
behaviour is something that children learn and remember throughout their
childhood and into their teenage years and beyond.

To develop the most effective campaign, we conducted extensive research
on children's knowledge and understanding of road safety, how the
previous Hedgehog campaign was resonating with children today and what
strategic ideas would potentially have the most impact and retention
amongst this audience. What we found was that the children in our sample
groups could recite 'stop, look, and listen' by rote but on further
probing seemed to lack a clear understanding of when or how to implement
this behaviour in a real life situation. Our research also indicated
that children of this age range wanted to understand the reasons for
needing to cross the road safely.

Before commissioning this game, we researched a range of ideas among
children aged six to eleven, from both genders and different social
groups. We also researched ideas with groups of parents and primary
school teachers. This particular creative route was shown to demonstrate
both the negative consequences (showing an injury to an animated
character as a result of failing to follow safe road behaviour) followed
by a demonstration of positive road safety behaviour, and because of
this was by far the most successful in research across all of our child
groups and with parents and teachers. The creative which was tested
engaged the children but also made them think about the consequences of
their actions.

This campaign is targeted at children aged six to eleven and advises
"Should you fall and hit the dirt, a helmet might prevent the hurt". We
also run campaigns offering information and advice to parents about how
to help their children to learn how to be as safe as possible on the
roads. Our new Education website offers a new range of offline and
online materials and information for parents and teachers, including a
range of posters, booklets, a website and assorted games.

The agency who developed "knocking noggins" had also shared the game and
spoken with the NSPCC, to get their approval. Of course they do not
endorse any form of "violence" against children, however the general
consensus is that "knocking noggins" can have its benefits:

· This type of game is very popular among children and to an
extent, adults who will remember these type of games from their childhood

· These sorts of games are widely available and recognised in
the public domain

· The game has been researched and devised to be enjoyed by
children, but the most important thing is that the game has been
developed to communicate and reinforce a very important message; the
consequences of a bad decision i.e. choosing not to wear a helmet

· The game is one part of the Tales of The Road campaign, and
will help to deliver a bigger road safety message to children. As the
message is being delivered in the context of the TOTR website, it is
quite clear as to why the characters are getting hurt. It is therefore
not very likely that the message will be perceived as condoning violence
against children

· And in some countries like Australia, where it is compulsory
to wear helmets, this has saved many lives

I hope this helps to answer your concern and gives you the necessary
reassurance that the Department for Transport is doing the best to
educate and communicate a serious message in the most engaging and
effective way.

 

[Bollo]

Thanks O, I look forward to receiving that one.

Wow, I'm starting to sympathise with bonj. I just thought it might have been dreamt up by a couple of civil servants and a failed Flash developer. But JHC, they look like they've spent millions on it! What a waste of bonj's taxes!

It fails to address any of the concerns here though and makes some pretty dramatic and evidence-free statements. For example, there's nothing in that response that mentions the responsibility and education of drivers or any other approach to road safety. I forgot, kids don't pay road tax.

I also suspect the NSPCC didn't particularly like the game - the wording is VERY careful there.

I've just had a response from the CTC. They're not exactly chuffed, but then would you expect them to be?

 

[Tony]

"In Australia...etc"
Saved lives? Bollocks.

 

[dellzeqq]

the CTC (aka Young Geffen) is good on that intra-departmental DfT thingy stuff. Young Geffen understands that there are civil servants in the DfT that are put in out-of-the-way places in the hope that they don't do anything silly. But sometimes they do. It's then a question of pressure points.

 

[atbman]

I think we should all encourage the government's, "Wear a HELMET or you WILL DIE!" campaign to encourage cycling

 

[MartinC]

"In Australia...etc"
Saved lives? Bollocks.

Yes, it's interesting that they claim this is true - I'd ask them to back it up. The available evidence doesn't seem to support this at all.

 

[ChrisKH]

"· And in some countries like Australia, where it is compulsory
to wear helmets, this has saved many lives".

I wonder if this guy was wearing one (probably not).

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Wo...To_Save_Boy_With_A_Blood_Clot_Under_His_Skull

 

[MartinC]

"· And in some countries like Australia, where it is compulsory
to wear helmets, this has saved many lives".

I wonder if this guy was wearing one (probably not).

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Wo...To_Save_Boy_With_A_Blood_Clot_Under_His_Skull

The answer is probably in your post!

 

[CotterPin]

Looks like the game is gone but the message remains the same

 

[Bollo]

I've just had a response from the NSPCC. I didn't complain to score forum points so I'm not going to post up their response verbatim but, in summary, they're NOT HAPPY.

It appears that they've also got wind of the standard response posted by Origamist and take issue with the weasel words that claim the NSPCC were 'involved'.

 

[lech]

The NSPCC weren't happy, neither were the CTC and Headway- the head injuries charity.

It is beyond belief, it reinforces bad stereotypes, encourages violence, solves nothing and was pretty unpleasant.

I got 400 first go.