In the wake of a serious accident involving a student at De Wieken primary school in Kinrooi in Limburg recently, the school has taken the initiative to implement a mandatory bicycle helmet policy, which has led to a wider discussion on its benefits.
While there is no existing legislation in Belgium that enforces the use of bicycle helmets, De Wieken aims to prioritise the safety of its students, particularly in light of the incident involving the boy, who suffered a severe brain injury while riding without a helmet.
The school's decision to make helmets compulsory has sparked a debate on whether such an obligation is beneficial. In an interview with Flemish broadcaster VRT, emergency physician Frieda Coeckelbergh and Wies Callens from the cyclists' union, offered their perspectives on the matter.
Speaking to VRT, Coeckelbergh, an experienced emergency doctor with a focus on cycling-related injuries, supported the mandatory helmet policy.
Drawing from her years of experience, she has witnessed first-hand the positive impact of helmets in preventing serious injuries. Coeckelbergh has worked in Oudenaarde, an area frequented by cycling tourists, and strongly believes that helmets can make a significant difference in mitigating the consequences of accidents.
Kid riding with a helmet during a race in De Vijvers in Averbode, Wednesday 6 May 2009. Credit: Belga / Yorick Jansens
On the other hand, Wies Callens from the cyclists' union acknowledged the importance of bicycle helmets in the VRT article but felt that mandating their use goes too far.
Callens said that children should not be punished for not wearing helmets, advocating for a more educational approach. “The cyclists' union emphasises the promotion of cycling as a healthy activity, with studies suggesting that making helmets mandatory may discourage people from cycling altogether,” he told VRT. According to Callens, the health benefits of cycling outweigh the risk of injury.
Contrary to Callens' viewpoint, Coeckelbergh disagreed that mandatory helmet laws would deter individuals from cycling. “I believe that changing the mindset surrounding cycling safety is essential, and even with an obligation in place, people will continue to cycle when they recognise the potential dangers involved,” she told VRT. She drew a parallel to smoking bans, where despite initial resistance, the prohibition has ultimately led to a significant reduction in smoking-related harm.
Fall prevention training
Callens argued that helmets are primarily effective in protecting against head injuries caused by falls at moderate speeds. However, in high-speed collisions, such as those involving trucks, helmets may not provide significant protection. Instead, Callens suggested focusing on fall prevention techniques, such as teaching children how to fall properly to minimise head injuries.
Related News
- Pupils in Brussels increasingly walking or cycling to school
- Fatal cycling accidents and heart failure: Over 400 Belgians died on holiday in 2022
- Major cycling accident involving Flemish scouts, one teenager in coma
While Coeckelbergh acknowledged the value of fall prevention strategies, she said that they cannot entirely eliminate the risk of brain injuries in severe accidents. “Some accidents occur due to the cyclist's own actions, such as losing control while navigating a turn,” she told VRT. Coeckelbergh emphasised the importance of personal responsibility and the need for individuals to protect themselves when engaging in potentially risky activities.
In conclusion, Callens expressed concern that mandatory helmet laws can lead to victim-blaming, where the responsibility falls solely on the injured party. However, while Coeckelbergh said she understood this perspective, she highlighted the fact that cyclists are constantly exposed to potential dangers. “If it is evident that wearing a helmet can enhance safety, society should prioritise protecting individuals from harm rather than assigning blame,” she told VRT.
