Children!
Crossing the road...and for that matter going on holiday in term time. If you have a view this is the place.
Jump to more content from this blog
About this blog
PM The evening news and current affairs programme presented by Eddie Mair.
iPM The programme that starts with its listeners. Join the discussions online and contribute ideas for a weekly programme presented by Eddie Mair and Jennifer Tracey.
The PM Privacy Commission
Read the final report of the PM Privacy Commission.
- Full Audio and Transcripts
- Hugh Tomlinson QC
- Zac Goldsmith MP
- Max Mosley
- Stephen Abell
- Hugh Grant
- Sir Charles Gray
- Alan Rusbridger
- Helen Wood
- Max Clifford
- Marcus Partington
- John Kampfner
- Christopher Graham
- Louise Mensch
- Andy Trotter
- John Mullin
- Avril Sanders Royle
- Jimmy Wales
Meet the commissioners, view the terms of reference and hear the Commission Chair Sir Michael Lyons explain his approach.
RSS feed
Email us
Listen to PM
We have lived on a busy trunk road in Exeter since my son was 4 (he's 14 now) and few children are better at crossing the road than him now. Children need to practise crossing the road to make them safe when we're not with them.
I am a Lollpopman and I wish that parents would teach their children by example!
My son is 10 and has just started walking to school on his own. We had to show him how to cross a road safely. He has had no teaching at school about road safety and I just pray that he will be safe.
I live in a cul-de-sac where cars cannot get up any great speed and children are henceforth safer. Should we not look at making many drive through roads in estates into two cul-de-sacs? More difficult for motorists but much safer for children living on the estate.
David - Yorkshire
ROAD SAFETY
In Newbury a road often includes cycle lane and footpath – sometimes combined. The kerb is no longer safe as it can be part of the cycle lane where no rules seem to apply (speed limit, who gives way etc). There is much more to this un-thought-through mess. To be safe on foot requires a degree in complex logistics, not a catchy mantra.
Those days have gone.
Perhaps someone should ask David Tennant to front a Green Cross-type campaign - kids would definitely listen to the Doctor!
I live in Central Manchester and have to cross the A6 to take my 5-year old son to school.
The problem for us is that traffic is so heavy
that cars use the area of the pelican crossing as
just another part of the road, so that when the
traffic light changes to red and the green man
appears, the crossing is still blocked by cars. Where I live, the concept of 'green man' and 'red man' have no meaning - there is no way I can say to my child that it is safe to cross when the green man appears - it isn't. And once we've waited for the cars to move, it's back to red man. Cars seem to have constant right
of way.
Ann Salter, Longsight, Manchester
Jane Jones (3): I don't mean to sound harsh but why on earth should a school teach your child to cross the road safely?
I imagine the school hasn't taught your child about putting fingers in plugs nor to refrain from eating soil...
How safe do you think it would be to have the teacher (and possibly one teaching assistant) supervising 30 children at the roadside as they play dodge the traffic? How much safer would it be for each parent to do this individually with their own child(ren)?
I am amazed how people abdicate their responsibilities so quickly to school.
You couldn't fail to be impressed listening to the enthusiasm of ex-Green Cross code man Dave Prowse but there is another treason why the child road accident figures are climbing again.
Children are driven about in cars so much they are effectively insulated from the roads. They are failing to learn the essential survival skills they used to gain by walking or cycling to school.
It's up to parents to teach their children road safety from a very early age. Surprising what they learn. Passing temporary traffic lights adjacent to the pavement, my son, in his push-chair, insisted we stop at the red light until it changed to green. He has been a safe pedestrian and driver for many years.
Surely the answer to increasing danger of cars for children is mainly the responsibility of the car industry that continues to use the speed factor to sell cars and now to produce (4x4) vehicles so designed as to make it difficult, if not impossible to see small children from the rear mirror. Also because of their size, it gives drivers a sense of invincibilty that may well negatively affect how safely and condirately they drive.
Talk to the people who make profits from these irresponsible design choices.
I live in a coastal village in rural Wales. My 7 year old twin daughters are allowed to walk to the park alone and cross the road to do so. Lost of children play around the road in our village and locals know this and drive carefully, the children also become very savvy as to road conditions. The problem we have here is that during holiday time city people drive through our village and don't expect to find children in the road, they drive too quickly and will shout at the kids for being there. The city drivers are the ones that need education and children should be warned of the dangers of them!
In the Sixties I would tell our four:
"Never ever run across a road!"
(the first two words said slowly, the latter four quickly.)
Why does your correspondent need advice from anyone on how her son should cross the road. That is her job. My children were taught from the time that they could walk, when it was safe to cross the road. We always stopped looked and listened. It took a long time to get to the shops and we quite often got wet but they knew when and when not to cross
David Prowse has a big ego and is obviously desperate for a job, after all he only wore the Darth Vader costume someone else spoke! Where did he get his figures from? he sounded as pompous as he did on our cruise last year when he was meant to entertain us. Surely Eddie you could have found someone more credible than this man.
Like many children I was taught by my parents and grandparents how to cross the road safely, in Central London. Of course, that was many years ago. Have parents abdicated all responsibility?Why should school be expected to bear the load of parenting? (And don't even get me started about Ellie's grandmother being the best mother in the world.That just cheapens and vulgarises the very term and nature of the responsibility.)
I have and do instill in my children how to cross the road safely. Our 10 yr old son has Downs Syndrome and the concept of road danger and safety is an uphill struggle. However we have never crossed a road with him without using a pedestrian crossing and reinforcing that this is the safe place to cross. However this does not stop drivers from constantly ignoring or jumping the lights at the pedestrian crossing near our home - and this is in a pleasant residential area, presumably these drivers live locally and have children of their own. I thought the European idea of the driver having to prove innocence when a child is injured was a very good step towards getting people to think about the consequences of their actions.
Additionally I recall a radio 4 programme last year in which a medical doctor said that it wasn't until after 8yrs old that a child possessed the visual acuity to cross the road ie. they were unable to judge distance and speed of objects coming towards them.
If my children are doing well in school doesn't it make sense to clear them out of school for the last week of term to make room for those who need catch up lessons rather than watching DVDs for the last few lessons of every subject as they do at the minute?
Jo (6):
That's a brilliant idea.
"I can't go back in time to save you, so cross safely!"
On the topic of parent-sponsored truanting:
So Mary-Ann Bighead says her little darlings Brainella (3) and Intelligencia (7) learn as much on holiday as they do at school? But surely she's depriving their classmates of the good influence of her genius offspring? Isn't that unfair? How on Earth will those other children learn their Latin declensions without Brainella correcting the teacher?
(With thanks to Private Eye...)
Lovely to hear Keith Prowse's burr again.
He passed through my hands once, when I was working on Reception for an independent radio station.
Very tall, very handsome, and breaktakingly charming.
He's quite right: there is no time in the curriculum for this sort of 'learning to live' lesson, and our children (and grown-ups) are the worse for it.
Fifi
I've long suspected that children are no longer being sufficiently instructed in road safety, by schools, parents, government or whoever. The emphasis of road safety campaigns nowadays appears to be exclusivly on getting drivers to slow down. While I wouldn't argue for a moment that drivers shoudn't drive safely and responsibly at all times, it's unfair to put the blame on the driver (as the govt spokesman appeared to do) when a child runs out under their vehicle. Incidentally, I write as the parent of a four year old who lives by a busy road.
Great Blog.
Regarding children being taken on holiday during term time: your article mentioned teachers providing work for absent children. This is fine when a child has, say, a long term illness, and most teachers are willing to do it. It involves writing an individualised programme of study, locating, and possibly generating the necessary resources, liaising with home and school systems to arrange collection and so on.
It is a very time consuming business. Asking already overburdened teachers (particularly in the secondary sector) to go through this performance every time some family fancies a cheap holiday only emphasises the contempt many parents feel for teachers in general.
OK hands up. Who here was in "The Tufty Club" at school?
I was, and still look both ways continuously while crossing the road.
It was sad when Tufty got mugged by that big grey squirrel though...
The suggestion that "it wasn't until after 8yrs old that a child possessed the visual acuity to cross the road" is rather improbable. Children much younger can play football and cricket perfectly well!
I cycle to school with my 8yr old but pick her up in the car so see two sides of the story every day. Generally drivers treat us respectfully but I'm very aware that it would only take one fool to wipe us out. (Danger of starting discussion on "cycling on pavement" alert) On the other hand I see secondary school children take delight in sauntering slowly across the road so as to hold up the traffic. I suppose, like graffiti it's a way of making their presence felt. No individual wants to be the one to break ranks and stop at the kerb. I've toyed with the idea of carrying an aerosol horn like they do at football matches or maybe a super soaker. For the sake of this discussion (ahem) does anyone know the legal ins and outs of such action?
It's the parents responsibility to teach their offspring to cross a road in safety. Why do posters always want the government to take responsibility for what is a parental duty? By the way it's not just children who don't know how to cross the road in safety.
The local council in my town has had to put five sleeping policemen over a quarter of a mile stretch of road outside some university buildings because the "poor little dears" called students didn't know how to cross a road because Mummy always drove them to and from school in her "Chelsea tractor".You see it's not just chavs on sink estates who are incapsble of good parenting.
Dave Prowse mentioned that there never seemed to be the money available for road safety campaigns.
Why not use the fine revenue from motoring offences such as speeding to fund such a campaign?
How about Sportacus from "Lazytown" as a replacement for the Green Cross Code Man?
-My four year old loves him, and he promotes positive messages.
Aged three I walked safely, alone, the quarter of a mile to collect the daily paper next to the main A74 and crossing a couple of minor roads.
Now I fear for the safety of my elderly father-in-law who has to cross a busy road, with a 40mph limit in a residential area, at a junction where traffic regularly turns right on red because there is no filter and with a ridiculously short time on the 'green man'.
When approached the council said they could not change the lights because it would hold up the traffic for too long - says it all really. Yes children should be taught to cross safely but we also need to change our priorities in relation to vehicles.
Sadly my experience is that it takes the death of a child to make councils implement safety features.
I have two daughters aged 10 and 13 so road safety is a big issue. We live on a busy road a short distance from our primary school. Far too many parents drive their children to school and are completely oblivious to the needs of pedestrians, whether adult or child, as are many other drivers on the road at school start and finish times. I just think it's about time we all stopped driving about - 'reclaim the streets!'
One thing that's had me puzzled for years on car design is why the rear windscreen seems to get smaller and smaller, whilst the rear pillars get larger and larger. As most cars are now hatchbacks, without any post-rear-windscreen boot to speak of, the area behind the car that is invisible to the driver is steadily diminishing. Perhaps one of the reasons increasing amounts of cars are fitted with reversing sensors is because it's impossible to work out what's behind your car based on eyesight alone...
Many years ago (before I learned to drive), I did a brief spot of work experience a few miles away from home and cycled to and fro. Cycling on the road is hair raising enough in 30mph limits, but once the road widens and the speed limit increases, it becomes increasingly dangerous - both from perspective and reality - especially when a bus or HGV is overtaking you. As for cycling on pavements - perhaps one of the reasons it's condoned rather than condemmed is because a cycle (probably travelling at less than 10mph on a pavement) can stop in a far shorter distance than a car (probably travellnig above 25mph). And I've seen reports in the local paper that speed platforms at junctions (where the level of the road is elevated to the same level as the pavement) aren't very conducive to pedestrian safety.
As for pedestrians, what is it with teenagers? The number of teenagers who either (a) cross the road where they want to, regardless of visual safety or traffic levels, or (b) walk past a crossing patrol or pelican crossing, so they can walk out into the road without looking and cross completely unaided (perhaps they think that crossing aids are for "babies", or that if they get knocked down the driver will get the blame whilst they get some time off school).
On the other hand, when road safety schemes aimed at drivers use slightly contrived statistics...
"Hit me at 30..." - but if you think about it, in the case of the scenario they're hinting at, whereby a child walks into the road in front of a car - surely the car driver will have chance to brake before hitting the child - so whilst they are still travelling, and whilst the child will suffer injuries - the speed at the point of impact is likely to be significantly less than the 30mph/40mph claimed.
Perhaps more effective than static speed limits in place 24/7 (particularly 20mph zones surrounding schools), time-limited limits would be more effective (say 30mph most of the day, but 20mph at 8-9am and 3:00-4:30pm when there are likely to be children around - you won't find many children in the street at 10am on a weekday!)
I agree with Dave Prowse that it would be good to have the TV road safety ads again. It would also be good to have the more general safety campaigns we used to have. My grown up chlldren thought my insistence on closing doors in the house before the family went to bed was just another example of mum fussing, until they heard the same advice from a fireman.
There used to be lots of good advice on TV regarding safety and hygiene issues, which young people would benefit from hearing.
Shouldn't we be looking at this the other way around?
Why are we subjecting children (not to mention the old and frail, people with walking, seeing, hearing difficulties, etc.) to such danger of death and mutilation?
There is cast iron evidence that 20mph speed limits cut accidents by huge rates - apparently accidents involving children go down by about two-thirds.
Of course, there will always be the need for children to learn road safety, but the danger to them could be dramatically reduced if 20mph became the norm in all residential areas.
So why isn't it being done?
Presumably because it might slightly annoy drivers.
Much better to put the burden of safety onto children rather than inconvenience motorists.
Living in a modern location, where the main roads are mostly avoided with underpasses for cyclists and pedestrians, I wouldn’t be surprised if many locals here did not have the knack of teaching road safety to their offspring. But I have no greater factual basis for this assumption.
I decided this might have been an interesting thing to talk about with my students - so I looked into the figures your guest talked about, as his story sounded very plausible. On the other hand, I couldn't find anything remotely ressembling the increase he talked about - instead a fairly dramatic halving of accidents involving child pedestrians since 1991. (dft.gov.uk). In 2006 there were about 10 000 casualities, of which about 2 000 were seriously injured and 71 killed. Assuming I read the statistics correctly!
Yesterday I wrote a letter to a local school; it's becoming a regular event. I request they remind the pupils of the rudiments of road safety and sensible behaviour when walking or cycling to school.
When term starts I get a rude reminder to vary my working hours so I can avoid the local secondary school at the beginning and end of each day. Yes I'm talking teenage kids who seem to think it's cool to walk across a road through the traffic without looking!
Children dash across the road at the crossing when the lights are red, groups of them meander across the road between the cars, some just dash across without looking, on Monday kids were cycling frantically on the wrong side of the road towards the oncoming traffic.
Because they are such buffoons I always drive at 20 mph.....just in case. I don't want to hit anyone but they make it difficult. Do I EVER see a policeman or woman on duty? NEVER!
Last year one of the staff phoned me to say, we know how you feel, the children take no notice of reasoning, shouting, visits from the police, detention, PowerPoint presentations, letters sent home to parents. The point I made was the pupils behave as though they are in a computer game but if they fail this level they won't get a second chance.
I sympathise with the teaching staff = children being able to use the loo and wash their hands afterwards, being able to dress properly, being able to eat a meal using cutlery, being able to behave responsibly and being able to cross the road sensibly is something parents should be teaching their children - it's not the school's responsibility to teach bascs.
These kids are the drivers of the future - it's not looking good is it!
I sent in email instead of blog earlier.
I live in the East Riding of Yorkshire and the Council has been running very successful pedestrian skills and cycle instruction for many years. Pedestrian training covers infant and junior school children, AVAILABLE THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE COUNTY, which includes professional instruction given by qualified instructors about all aspects of crossing the road and the green cross code. After that the children are taken out in groups of three or four for live road training. The costs about £2 per child. Well worth it I say. WHY IS IT THAT ANYTHING THAT HAPPENS IN EAST YORKSHIRE (RECENT FLOODS INCLUDED) IS NEVER PUBLICISED?!!!!!!
A Dawes (25):
Your assertion that children much younger than 8 years old can play football and cricket perfectly well is wrong.
The problem, however, is not visual acuity - it's the ability to judge distance and speed relative to their own motion.
Sid
Sid: You're quite right, and I have the research to prove it .....
There are loads of issues that could be addressed here... I am a senior road safety officer in charge of a team that works within schools and we spend our entire time working with children to raise their awareness of road safety. Pedestrian, cyclist and car passenger. Our time is divided between a couple of hundred different school so it has to be up to the parents to take the lions share of the ongoing training of their children. If you want a job doing well....
Statistics, at least in my county, indicate that the largest number of casualties are as a result of being a passenger in a car. Slowing cars down would begin to deal with this issue AS WELL as make an impression on the pedestrian casualty statistics. Advertising campaigns about speed (and seatbelt wearing) within cars give a better return for the limited finances available. One could (and possibly SHOULD) argue that more money needs to be made available, but when good parenting is free (and parents are apparently eager for their children to learn how to cross the road) perhaps there should be an expectation that they should get involved themselves. Schools are very busy dealing with obesity/unruliness/whatever the latest 'schools need to address...' issue is, whilst trying to teach the curriculum, to be able to address every issue - even though all teachers i have met appreciate that road safety is vital.
There are more cars on the road than ever - there is likely to be a smilar increase in road casualties. But to separate the children from the road will never allow them to learn how to deal with traffic. Many counties use a scheme called RoadCraft for pedestrian training (that nice Mr Prowse was wrong about their being no training... ) but that requires a significant volunteer network to be involved as taking children to work on real roads is not without risk. Can we get parents interested...? Not to the extent required - it's always the same ones who offer (for which grateful thanks are extended) - and their time committment has to be significant, so counties may have stopped these schemes because they were not manageable.
Our child casualty numbers have dropped to about 50% of what they were 5 years ago and, as far as I'm aware, this is a national trend (though this is ALL child casualties, not simply pedestrians). Work IS being done in schools - as far as I am aware it is being done in all counties.
Bring back the Green Cross Man, by all means (and I have always been a fan of the campaign) but do not allow parents to avoid their own responsibilities.
end of late night rant.
I have no children.
I do have neices.
Surely it's plain common sense to teach any child about how to negotiate a road!
If two people can procreate and produce a child then surely they can teach the child about road safety!
I can only repeat what I said on the earlier thread on the issue of Children learning to cross the road:
"Eddie - well, if the parents in my area of North London are anything to go by, I'm not surprised by those statistics.
Those parents who do not drive a vast SUV and abandon it at interesting angles across the path of traffic in order to take little Tiphanii-Amba [sic] or Theodore the five hundred yards to school... sorry I just need a bit of a towelling down after that... those that actually walk any distance seem to have no concept of road safety whatsoever. They ignore pedestrian crossings - often less than 10 yards away - and drag their children out into the middle of the road! They don't stop at the kerb and check that the road is clear of traffic and that it is safe for them to cross (as the Highway Code states you should), they just walk out in front of oncoming vehicles. What kind of example is that for their children?
As a result I have nearly run over older schoolchildren - secondary school age - twice, where they just ran out in front of me. On both occasions I was doing the speed limit, but they were so close to me I had no time to react. Fortunately I missed them both, but only by fractions of an inch and more by luck than judgement.
For too long people have debated who is responsible for the behaviour of our children. The arguement has turned into buck passing and blaming "the other guy". No-one wants to take responsibility. The whole of society needs need to take that responsibility not just schools or parents or government or volunteers. We all have a part to play. Then, if we can get something simple like crossing the road safely right, who knows what else we can then do? It just requires that we turn off the "somebody else's problem field" and all pitch in."
I would like to add that as a driver I would wholeheartedly support the reduction of speed limits in built-up or residential areas to 20mph. I would also support some kind of automatic rising bollard system at traffic lights and pedestrian crossings to physically prevent vehicles from moving before a green light. Yes, I'm sure there will be several incidents where someone attempts to beat the bollard as it rises when the lights change to amber and gets stuck. Perhaps the anger of the other road users for holding them up will persuade that driver to be less arrogant in future?
I'm with Jason Good and others. It's properly a parent's responsibility.
In the ,(if there is one), the present age will be looked upon as the "age of contracting-out", when everyone worked extremely hard to earn enough to pay other people to do things for us that we used to be able to do for ourselves.
Salaam/Shalom
ed
Ookymonkey (37)
Your pessimism is understandable, but it seems to me that car ownership has a very positive effect on most people. It is a serious financial commitment and involves various other legal requirements. Thus it helps people to become more responsible.
When I was 10, a policeman came to address the school (juniors & infants) on road safety, and at the end there was a question time. I lost count of the times when members of it infants' section put up a hand and said "You mustn't cross the road when there's cars coming." I felt quite irritated by the repetition. Now - when it's the driver's fault come what may - I see how wrong I was.
WRT pelican crossings and the like (pelicans I like, toucans I don't) drivers usually don't park on them. However, if you have avoided going onto such a crossing in order to allow walkers to cross, and they then press the button anyway, I don't think you can be blamed for taking your turn when opportunity arises. Who hasn't had to wait at a crossing just because a passing pedestrian has maliciously pressed the button?
Yes, Wonko (43) we do seem to like passing the buck!
Personally, I think it's up to the parents to teach their children cross the road, so Jane (3) I really don't understand what you're so shocked at.
Amanda at (11): surely it us demanding fast cars, or at least, finding speed sexy and therefore choosing cars that fits that view of ourselves that is the problem? I hate 4x4s but if nobody bought them them then the car companies wouldn't sell them.
Nope, it is up to those of us who have children to teach them how to cross the road properly and those of us who drive not to drive dangerously or fast. So, SteveB (34) I think it would be a good thing to make all residential streets 20 mph.
On the topic of teenagers wandering around the road willy nilly; I admit that winds me up just marginally more than school run Mums, but only marginally. I think cross green man (26) is right, it's just a way of making their presence felt and after all they are immortal, are they not? (I am reminded of a cartoon with the caption: Quick ask a teenager, whilst they still know everything!).
This is a harder one to crack (although their parents having taught them safe road behaviour in the first place would be a start) but I do think there is a role for schools when it is a problem outside the school.
I went to a school in Sussex that had a public road running through it. It was a large school with about 1,500 - 1,700 pupils and one zebra crossing..which everybody had to use. No ifs, no buts, no cutting across, no nothing. I have no idea what the punishment for infingement (as I am naturally a good girl and never pushed those sorts of boundaries) was but it certainly seemed to work.
It was not, however, a road you would want to be on at 11.10 in the morning, at break time.
And Francesca (12), I do hope the lost children of your village get found!!
As I understand it, crossing a road safely requires being able to judge distance and speed of approaching vehicles, the amount of time each will take to arrive at the same place as the road-crosser and the time it would take the road-crosser to cross. Seeing that on most roads a child, or anyone, would need to assess this information from both directions at the same time, the development of the concept necessary to make an informed judgement does not appear to mature sufficiently before the age of about 10. Obviously the circumstances involved i.e. more practice - more maturity of this particular concept, means that some children are able to undertake this task safely earlier than others.
(24) Yes, I was in the Tufty Club, where I learned how to cross the road. My goodness how that ages me! We also learned road safety in the Brownie Guides. Oh, and my parents taught me too (of course).
My nephew is 3 and a half years old and already his parents and I are teaching him about road safety. He knows to hold Mummy or Daddy's hand when going near or crossing the road and not to cross when cars are coming. He is also aware of the red and green men at pedestrian crossings. Children should be taught road safety from a very early age, rather than delegating this essential life skill to schools. Their parents should certainly have taught them how to cross the road safely by the age of ten.
The main problems of teaching children how to cross the road safely are,
1. they frequently see little point in what they are being asked to do. Result - boredom.
2. they are totally reliant on the adult who accompanies them, so we have little idea as to whether or not they have become safe to cross by themselves.
My way of solving the above problems may seem strange but it worked as far as my little charge was concerned.
"Let's pretend I can't see" I told Michael, "and you be my guide dog. I will close my eyes and only cross the road when you "Woof"
This simple, but effective way dealt with both the above problems.
1. the boredom issue (who can be bored when they are pretending to be a guide dog?)
2 Now Michael was put in charge of our road safety (or so he thought) he HAD to look and listen. In other words he had to take our road safety seriously.
Of course waiting for the "woof" to come sometimes took ages as Michael would see cars from a great distance but still waited for them. Other times, kind drivers would stop and wait for us to cross and it was difficult to signal to them that I was teaching the lad without him being aware of what was happening. Teaching my great grandson this way may seem strange but who cares, as long as this vital message sinks in?
The main problems regarding teaching children how to cross the road are
!. they see little point in it so can become easily bored.
2. they usually just leave it to the adult in charge and take little responsibility themselves.
I solved both the above problems when I taught my great grandson Michael in a rather strange but effective way.
"Let's pretend I can't see and you are my guide dog" I said. "So you tell me when it's safe to cross the road by giving a big "Woof"
Michael loved it and was far from bored, what is more I was already teaching him to take responsibility to keep us both safe.
Of course it was frustrating when I had to wait when he saw cars from a distance. Even more frustrating was when cars actually stopped and I had to signal (without him being aware) that I was training him in road safety. Finally, however, strange my lessons may appear to be, they really are effective andin the final analisise that is really all that matters.
Joan @ 50, That's lovely! Thank you! Michael is very lucky, it seems to me. :-)
Did you reward him with Bonios when he got it right? My son loved those, and we had to protect the dog or they went 'missing' all the time.
Eddie - The debate on what age to allow children to cross the road - reminded me of our one and only holiday with Saga, at each stop the rep would hop off the coach first and then tell us when to and when not to cross the road. On returning to the UK it took a few days to become streetwise again.
On my regular cycling route to work, from S.London to the Strand and other destinations.
I think I can count on one hand over the 20 years of cycling in and around London the times when I observed parents teaching and indeed showing them how to cross the road properly, (it's not too dissimilar from that other rare event, witnessing soembody put something in a littler bin).
You see parent, running across the road, dragging child behind them, flapping like a shopping bag. Yelling quick, quick... or run!
I suspect said parents have never been taught either.
Lee
I still have the road safety ruler from when I was 7 (1956) and it says "Ar the kerb HALT LOOK if all clear GO. in between the letters of LOOK it says : 1 look right 2 look left 3 look right again.
Why not provide road safety rulers in school again?
At the risk of preaching to the converted, I too have been teaching my sons (currently 2 and 4) how to cross a road safely since they could walk - indeed I think I talked them thru it even while still in the buggy. Joan is not unique - we too have done the 'pretend you're my guide dog' with our eldest, and it works brilliantly - even without Bonio, Chris G!
Another idea, for when they're too little to grasp left and right, is to look 'my way' and announce "nothing coming my way", then get them to look 'their way' and tell me whether anything's coming their way - then when it's clear we both say "let's go!" This is another way of starting them taking responsibility from an early age.
All this seems natural as a parent walking with young offspring, so I just don't get it if others are not doing similar things. I hope that, like many things, actually the majority are, and it's only a minority, however glaring, that are not.
orange pekoe @ 56, I think the majority of children *must* know how to cross roads, or somehow have been taught to, because if they didn't a whole lot more would be damaged by cars...
I s'pose that if the number of cars has risen a whole lot, and the population the same, and the number of children who get hurt hasn't gone up, then we're probably getting into a state of worry about something that isn't actually happening, now that I come to look at it. Thank you to Kate @ 36, if those figures are right...
(This reminds me of someone's reason for believing in God, voiced during a drive on a Bank Holiday: "God *must* exist! You only have to look at how people drive and look after their cars to be sure that he must be making little miracles for them *all the time*!")
Anne P, @ 30, way back from the 1950s to the1970s and later an aunt of mine ran a nursery school in Oxford, on the Woodstock Road I think (one of the two big ones out of town to the north, anyhow). She very much wanted a crossing on that busy main road, for the safety of her pupils, but the answer from the Council was that she couldn't have one because no child had yet been injured outside her school -- I don't know whether there is one there even yet. No change there, then, grrrrr.
Joan (50). That's a great way of teaching road safety to a child. You are a fab grandparent IMHO!