Could Boris be right? Are our neighbours down in deepest Dulwich to be applauded? Should young kids have the freedom to walk and bike alone?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/colu ... chool.html
How about our schools?
Stuart
Children at risk?
Like all these things, it depends. Depends on the child / children, depends on the route, etc.
I don't worry about my kids being snatched, but I do worry about the traffic, because there are some loonies out there who will drive around a lollypop man / lady rather than stop. But that's exactly why I taught my daughter how to walk herself home safely when she was in Year 5 (aged 9/10). She had to cross Sydenham Road with the lollypop man then cross the bottom of Sunnydene Street and up to Mayow Road, crossing all the side streets opposite the park. Other parents thought I was mad. But they were the ones having heart attacks when the kids went to secondary school and had no road sense at all but had to make their way by bus and train on their own.
I was confident in my kids and the route was a good one. Other parents have to make decisions according to their own circumstances. My only comment on the Dulwich family is that is seems a bit unfair to make an eight year old responsible for a five year old. On a bike.
I don't worry about my kids being snatched, but I do worry about the traffic, because there are some loonies out there who will drive around a lollypop man / lady rather than stop. But that's exactly why I taught my daughter how to walk herself home safely when she was in Year 5 (aged 9/10). She had to cross Sydenham Road with the lollypop man then cross the bottom of Sunnydene Street and up to Mayow Road, crossing all the side streets opposite the park. Other parents thought I was mad. But they were the ones having heart attacks when the kids went to secondary school and had no road sense at all but had to make their way by bus and train on their own.
I was confident in my kids and the route was a good one. Other parents have to make decisions according to their own circumstances. My only comment on the Dulwich family is that is seems a bit unfair to make an eight year old responsible for a five year old. On a bike.
The original story was in the Sunday Times - I couldn't find a link to the story as the paywall is now in force. However, it was also picked up in the Sunday Telegraph (separately from today's Boris column) and there is a lengthy discussion (I've only read the first page of four) on the East Dulwich Forum:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... alone.html
http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum ... p?5,490368
I think in general terms the parents have the right idea about judging risks sensibly and not being panicked into doing things that might harm the long-term interests of their children, but given the amount of traffic on the roads the school might have a point in wanting both legs of the journey to be supervised, especially as the youngest child is only five. I would though like to see more to be done to enable children to cycle to school, e.g. by some form of supervised journey with others, more bike lines, or greater restrictions on speeding cars on certain roads.
I also notice that whilst Boris takes a swipe at health and safety laws, the Sunday Telegraph says that the school was responding to guidance on children being at risk i.e. from neglect or harm, which I think is more to do with abuse in the family or similar. He also refers to the family being persecuted by the authorities - but again if you read the Sunday Telegraph article the school in question is independent, who responded to guidance from what is now the Dept for Education, which gave them enough discretion to have chosen not to take any action.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... alone.html
http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum ... p?5,490368
I think in general terms the parents have the right idea about judging risks sensibly and not being panicked into doing things that might harm the long-term interests of their children, but given the amount of traffic on the roads the school might have a point in wanting both legs of the journey to be supervised, especially as the youngest child is only five. I would though like to see more to be done to enable children to cycle to school, e.g. by some form of supervised journey with others, more bike lines, or greater restrictions on speeding cars on certain roads.
I also notice that whilst Boris takes a swipe at health and safety laws, the Sunday Telegraph says that the school was responding to guidance on children being at risk i.e. from neglect or harm, which I think is more to do with abuse in the family or similar. He also refers to the family being persecuted by the authorities - but again if you read the Sunday Telegraph article the school in question is independent, who responded to guidance from what is now the Dept for Education, which gave them enough discretion to have chosen not to take any action.
I think its fine for the kids to cycle, though if its only a mile I'd make them walk instead, I think its a lot safer.
Though apparently these two cycle to school on the pavement – I wonder how long it'll be before the 5 and 8 year old get prosecuted for that – presumably that'll be real taste for them of what it's like to be a cyclist in London!
Though apparently these two cycle to school on the pavement – I wonder how long it'll be before the 5 and 8 year old get prosecuted for that – presumably that'll be real taste for them of what it's like to be a cyclist in London!
There is a lovely paradox in the law. It is illegal for them to cycle on the pavement but they are at an age when a PCN cannot be issued. Moreover the guidance on issuing PCNs says they should not be issued when the pavement is being used for safety and considerately. So a parent accompanying/training a young child should be OK.Juwlz wrote:Though apparently these two cycle to school on the pavement – I wonder how long it'll be before the 5 and 8 year old get prosecuted for that – presumably that'll be real taste for them of what it's like to be a cyclist in London!
Which is all good sense really. We don't want cyclists intimidating pedestrians but young kids have to learn somewhere before hitting the road.
Re: Children at risk?
I dimly remember that the cycle path is on the pavement in that part of Dulwich....
-
bigbadwolf
- Posts: 726
- Joined: 7 Jan 2008 21:21
- Location: Forest Hill and Sydenham
Re: Children at risk?
The accused have spoken.
From the east Dulwich forum:
"Thanks to all those who have expressed their support on this thread.
We got sick of being holed up in the house. 4 small kids in 4 walls is not fun after a while.
Some stuff for you to tear apart:
http://schonrocks.com/
Gillian & Oliver Schonrock."
From the east Dulwich forum:
"Thanks to all those who have expressed their support on this thread.
We got sick of being holed up in the house. 4 small kids in 4 walls is not fun after a while.
Some stuff for you to tear apart:
http://schonrocks.com/
Gillian & Oliver Schonrock."