Some advice on biking to school & using their bike shed.

[Puddles]

Storm in a tea cup - he wears a helmet, you signed the 'agreement' - why kick up a fuss ? Oh and your child wouldn't be allowed to do Bikeability or any organised British Cycling events (not SKY ride) without a helmet.

Does the OP ride a bike ?

Oh I forgot to quote this about your bikeability statement, helmet is recommended not mandatory.


http://www.dft.gov.uk/bikeability
Q. Will children need a special bike or other equipment?
[...While no special clothing or accessories are required, a helmet is recommended. They may also recommend a high visibility tabard for poor conditions, especially when training on the road.

Cycle Training UK stated this about the Bikeability programme at the Cyclenation Conference in June 2012
Bikeability is a programme that exists to enthuse young people about riding bikes. Its aims are to up-skill people so they are less likely to crash. It is delivered by professionals who are able to deliver this
training at low risk. The emphasis, time and money involved in active helmet promotion is detrimental to these aims and send the wrong message even putting people off doing this low risk fun activity

 

[mcshroom]

this low risk fun activity

Always worth highlighting

 

[fossyant]

I still dont understand why folk get all so worked up about helmets when they are already using them. My son had to have a helmet on training at school and especially Brittish Cycling training last summer. They both also had to have helmets on Tameside Circuit when doing skills work, again no lid, no ride.

You may also find the local bikeability insists on lids for the very reason of H&S mitigation as most are self employed.


The head is only mitigating those jumped up parents who think they know better and would kick up a stink if the kid did knock their head.

 

[Sara_H]

I still dont understand why folk get all so worked up about helmets when they are already using them. My son had to have a helmet on training at school and especially Brittish Cycling training last summer. They both also had to have helmets on Tameside Circuit when doing skills work, again no lid, no ride.

You may also find the local bikeability insists on lids for the very reason of H&S mitigation as most are self employed.


The head is only mitigating those jumped up parents who think they know better and would kick up a stink if the kid did knock their head.

There are two issues as I see it, the head over stepping the mark with regard to their authority outside school.

Helmet promotion and the detrimental effect on cycling uptake, particularly among girls.

These are both important issues and worth addressing. It's not people getting uppity, it's people quite rightly questioning people when they're wrong.

 

[Puddles]

I still dont understand why folk get all so worked up about helmets when they are already using them. .

If you had read my OP and many other posts you would have realised I was not worked up about the helmet I was annoyed at a school trying to erode my parental rights. If you do not understand that by this stage of the thread I am at a loss as to how else to phrase it for you to understand the helmets were not my issue.

 

[fossyant]

I couldnt give a flying poo about helmets and all the bloody fuss they raise. These threads never end well.

 

[fossyant]

Well my son is one of a handful of kids that cycle to school in about 800 and the school doesn't insist on any helmets. Girls and boys of a particular age won't cycle anyway as its not cool, especially in high school.

The head is only covering their arse as we do live in a blame culture.

 

[shouldbeinbed]

I couldnt give a flying poo about helmets and all the bloody fuss they raise. These threads never end well.

Maybe because of contributions like yours to this thread that state your case but then can't seem to leave it alone or accept a point of view other than your own and repeatedly return to pointlessly re-stoke the fire. piece said move on or add something new to the discussion.
Particularly as you do seem to have missed the point that it isn't the helmet per-se but the presumption of parental authority by the Head, and (for me anyhow) the exceedingly poor way in which she has presented herself as a professional communicator to a parent with a genuine enquiry. Why are you so het up on something you have repeatedly stated is a non event to you and that you don't give a flying poo about? it's not as if it the only thread running on cyclechat for you to look at.

 

[Puddles]

The head is only covering their arse as we do live in a blame culture.

I really dislike getting snarky with people on line, but... do you think you could possible read the rest of this post slowly & let the information sink in....

As pointed out to me today by the

Local Authority Transport Policy Department that specialises in "Safer Routes To School & School Travel Policies"

(This would be the department the Head assured me she gets all her information & guidance from)

They stated

She should not put a mandatory helmet requirement in the cycle policy or as a requirement for a bike pass as doing that is NOT LEGAL and they would be telling her that and asking her to revise her policy.

SO

You would think if the Head was "Just covering her arse" one of the things she might do in order to make sure she is doing just that, is to check with the department she says she gets all her information & guidance from before she implements a policy?

Or does that not seem a reasonable assumption to make if the Head was simply "covering her arse"?

 

[fossyant]

I do accept the point of the thread but heads are teachers and these days businesses managers. The head probably included the statement in all good intention as most folk dont know much about bikes and helmets.

Yeh the head didnt make a good job of the statements but they all have the school to run. Some things you might not like. Unfortunately by coming to a cyclists forum and having a debate on helmets and a head teachers misguided opinion, or indeed that if the governors, will just get the two sided of the cycling camp at war.

I think you mentioned you had one child of 3 and another of 6. I would say having a helmet on at that age is a good idea, as the helmet we had for my son saved us quite a few A&E trips.

As said the Head is only trying to do the right. We dont always agree with the policy of a school.

 

[Puddles]

I think you mentioned you had one child of 3 and another of 6. I would say having a helmet on at that age is a good idea, as the helmet we had for my son saved us quite a few A&E trips.

As said the Head is only trying to do the right. We dont always agree with the policy of a school.

Umm for eleventy million hundredy twelfth time, my children do wear helmets

See that photo over there <------------ thats the 2 1/2 yr old in a helmet

Here is one of the 7 year old in his helmet too

He is not on his bike in this picture because I make him wear his helmet everywhere "just in case" because well "you never know" and I am just "covering my arse" I have nothing to base this on but hey why the hell not. Because being a Mum is like being just about everything including the God of your choice

FYI I came on a cycle forum because

a) I was a member before this and hey have you been on Net Mums at all ? I like myself as a Mum, I am not perfect but I think I do ok and wish to continue to do so!

b) Although my issue was with parental rights erosion, it was over a helmet issue, if I wanted a helmet debate I would have posted it in the helmet & headphones forum, as I was asking had any other parent had a similar experience and did they have any advice on this I posted it in the Family section.

You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make a cow read

 

[fossyant]

I know you have the kids wearing helmets, but then govenors and head is probably thinking about the broader picture and that some primary kids may be riding to school unaccompanied.

Oh christ a mum netter.

Thought you might be whenmyou mentioned parental authority or what ever. You are asking a bunch of hairy arsed cyclists you know, this is all too mumsy, I will exclude the ladies of this parish from the hairy ass remarks.

 

[Puddles]

No I am not a Mum Netter as I said I think I do ok, I wish to continue to think I do ok,

As a Head or a Governor I would hope (I am now sadly devoid of that hope) but I would hope that they would KNOW when something is NOT LEGALLY in their remit.

I would prefer they think about the little picture, the NOT LEGAL picture.

Hey tell you what, hows about I suggest to the head & governors that we go ram raid the huge Halfords nick all the helmets and issue one to each child in the school - Ta Dah - broader picture all sorted - yes?

Errrr no, why? Cos it is NOT LEGAL!

This is all too Mumsy ? Knowing what Parental Authority is means you must have a hoo-har?

Seriously? There is only one response to that

 

[fossyant]

Primary Heads think they rule the world, so good luck. Ours did and we did our best as our son was bullied all the way through primary. They have very thick skin, more like an armoured tank.

 

[Profpointy]

Really good effort in pushing this.

The head was, perhaps inadvertently, using the power of the school to push a political point, and a controversial one at that, and this really must be stood up to. Helmet efficacy is highly debatable, and compulsion even more so, so compulsion by the backdoor is a threat to cycling in general.

For the record I used to wear a helmet, and was in fact an "early adopter" in 1980 something. I even thought those who didn't are stupid. Subsequently I revised my view as the evidence simply doesn't back up "common sense", at least not with any degree of conviction. Hence very anti compulsion, and personally no longer wear one. I was always anti compulsion in any case.