The Association of Paediatric Emergency Medicine has called for it to be made a legal requirement for children under 16 to wear a helmet whilst cycling. Doctors within the Association say that the number of deaths and serious head injuries occurring on roads would be reduced as a result.
According to The Times, of the 190,000 accidents involving cyclists every year, more than half involve children.
It is no real surprise that this is the case. Children by their nature are not as responsible as adults. They still have a lot of growing up to do and therefore they are less likely to be aware of their responsibilities to other road users and the dangers of traffic and are also more inclined to take risks.
Cyclists are not required by law to wear helmets. This is quite baffling when studies have shown that they can reduce the risk of head injury by 85%, brain injury by 88% and severe brain injury by 75%. Evidence seems to indicate that they are therefore more effective at preventing injury than, say, a seatbelt in a vehicle.
A spokeswoman for the Department for Transport said that the Government “strongly encouraged” cyclists to wear a helmet. But why not make it a legal requirement?
According to the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents, there are more than 16,000 cyclists killed or injured in reported road traffic accidents. Surely the number of injuries would be dramatically reduced by making protective head gear compulsory, or at the very least would lead to a reduction in the severity of injuries suffered?
By law, motorcycle users have to wear a helmet and, as cyclists travel on roads, it seems illogical that the same law doesn’t apply to them. They may not travel at the same speeds as motorcyclists but they are just as vulnerable, if not more so, to being hit by another vehicle and sustaining injury.
