Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Advocacy & Safety
Reload this Page >

Child Endangerment?

Notices
Advocacy & Safety Cyclists should expect and demand safe accommodation on every public road, just as do all other users. Discuss your bicycle advocacy and safety concerns here.

Child Endangerment?

Old 04-11-13, 09:35 PM
  #51  
I-Like-To-Bike
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 28,550

Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked 595 Times in 385 Posts
Originally Posted by Essex View Post
Possibly. However, in the US you are not allowed to:
Not have a helmet for a kid under the age of 12
There are no U.S. Federal laws applicable to children wearing helmets, although some states may have them. Get your facts straight!
I-Like-To-Bike is offline  
Old 04-11-13, 09:39 PM
  #52  
I-Like-To-Bike
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 28,550

Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked 595 Times in 385 Posts
Originally Posted by Essex View Post
Like I said - in certain situations I have liability.
You may find yourself having liability for making false statements and causing harm to innocent people. Better not sleep so well if you are that willing to butt into other people's business and make wild accusations.
I-Like-To-Bike is offline  
Old 04-12-13, 01:24 AM
  #53  
wsbob
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 317
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked 5 Times in 2 Posts
Note: I added the bold, to the quotes below:

Originally Posted by howsteepisit View Post
So at what point does riding with a child in a trailer or carrier become endangerment? Its pretty well documented that some drivers do not notice cyclists at any location, so you could argue that there is no place excepting bike and multi-use paths is safe to carry a child on a bike or trailer. I am not willing to go there, so I must conclude that there is no endangerment occurring in the case of the OP. If there is an actionable endangerment, then I submit that all car free parents are endangering their children and should have their parental rights terminated.

That's a good question. I don't think there's any one answer for all situations, but there probably are some valid points that might be raised about whether the person responsible for the child they're transporting by bike on a road amongst motor vehicles, has taken as many reasonable precautions as possible. People commenting to this thread have raised questions relating to some of those precautions, such as, 'Might the cyclist have had another, safer route option?'. Others might be, 'Did the cyclist consider the safety of the child, by reasonably maximizing the degree to which they on the bike can be visible to people on the road driving?'.
Some months back to an article about a car-bike w/child trailer collision on a main lane of a busy collector street, early evening, dark and rainy Portland (car rear-ends trailer...no deaths or critical injury.), I commented that I considered the parent to have been negligent; not that the parent was legally negligent...and the driver wasn't, but that the parent was somewhat negligent for bringing the child into what the parent would have likely known was a road situation in which his and his child's safety was entirely dependent upon motor vehicle drivers stopping, an action over which the parent had no direct control. Not a popular viewpoint, but nevertheless, I think, probably an important one to consider.

The parent did have some visibility gear...yellow jacket...a blinkie on back of the bike or trailer. In the street situation he decided to bring his child into in a trailer towed by a bike, were there some additional things he could possibly have done to perhaps somewhat counter the potential for danger? I thought so. One easy thing: more than a single, or even two blinkies. Plaster the bike trailer with reflectivity. Also, use an alternative, safer route, if possible.



Originally Posted by prathmann View Post
Nor do any other road users. Unfortunately car drivers and their passengers die with some regularity on our roads and many of them were driving completely legally at the time. Most of the statistics that I've seen place the risk of bicycling somewhere between that of driving and that of walking in a city/town. Since the latter activities with a young child aren't considered excessively dangerous then normal bicycling shouldn't be either.

That's true, but people driving and riding in motor vehicles are not vulnerable road users relative to the degree that people on bikes and foot are vulnerable road users amongst motor vehicles. Even at considerably higher speeds than bikes travel, occupants of motor vehicles benefit from much better protection from other motor vehicles than do people on bikes from motor vehicles. People responsible for a child they're transporting by bike or trailer, have a responsibility to carefully weigh out the degree of threat to the child, posed by the road situation they're riding in, and take safety measures accordingly.
wsbob is offline  
Old 04-12-13, 01:47 AM
  #54  
Astrozombie
Senior Member
 
Astrozombie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: East L.A.
Posts: 902

Bikes: Fuji Nevada, Diamondback Insight, Motobecane Mirage

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 4 Times in 3 Posts
No biggie, but i did see an episode of "wife swap" where they repeatedly showed a dad who rides with his kids to school/work and they took off on the sidewalk on the wrong side of the street! (In Arizona IIRC)
Astrozombie is offline  
Old 04-12-13, 03:19 AM
  #55  
Essex
Senior Member
 
Essex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Northeast United States
Posts: 1,147

Bikes: Tarmac, Focus Urban 8, Giant Hybrid

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
What's most interesting about Bike Forums is the diversity of perspectives/lenses, and adherence to what individuals deem as correct.

Let's see if the original thread-starter posts a followup.

As someone who works in public service - I am held to a higher level of responsibility when it comes to child safety.
Essex is offline  
Old 04-12-13, 04:50 AM
  #56  
rebel1916
Senior Member
 
rebel1916's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 3,119
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
Liked 62 Times in 37 Posts
Originally Posted by Essex View Post
What's most interesting about Bike Forums is the diversity of perspectives/lenses, and adherence to what individuals deem as correct.

Let's see if the original thread-starter posts a followup.

As someone who works in public service - I am held to a higher level of responsibility when it comes to child safety.
You misunderstand what a "duty to report" entails.
rebel1916 is offline  
Old 04-12-13, 06:52 AM
  #57  
fritz1255
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: SE Pennsylvania
Posts: 216

Bikes: Vintage French road bikes, older "rescue" mountain bikes

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
The only follow-up I have is that I have driven on the same road to work every day since, and have not seen the bicyclist and his child. I HOPE he got smart and didn't try it again. When I saw them, it was the first warm day of the year. My suspicion is that the dad owns a car (it would be VERY diffcult to live in this area of PA and not own one), and he had decided to bike to daycare/work because of the nice weather. As far as alternate routes, there really aren't any good ones. Again, we live in a rural area, and most of the roads started as ox cart paths in colonial times. Nothing was planned, it just happened. This is not an instance where you can ride on 48th street if 49th is too busy. If I do see them again on Route 896, I will call the cops. Even if he is not doing anything illegal, he is doing something very stupid, and I think a cop talking to him might convince him of that.
fritz1255 is offline  
Old 04-12-13, 06:55 AM
  #58  
-=(8)=-
♋ ☮♂ ☭ ☯
 
-=(8)=-'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 40205 'ViLLeBiLLie
Posts: 7,902

Bikes: Sngl Spd's, 70's- 80's vintage, D-tube Folder

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by fritz1255 View Post
I will call the cops. Even if he is not doing anything illegal, he is doing something very stupid, and I think a cop talking to him might convince him of that.
__________________
-ADVOCACY-☜ Radical VC = Car people on bikes. Just say "NO"
-=(8)=- is offline  
Old 04-12-13, 07:11 AM
  #59  
Ferrous Bueller
absent
 
Ferrous Bueller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: DC
Posts: 621
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
"911. Please state your emergency."
"There's a man riding a bike with his kid on the edge of 896."
"Are they injured or in trouble?"
"I don't think it's safe because I commute by car."
"Oh..."
Ferrous Bueller is offline  
Old 04-12-13, 07:11 AM
  #60  
StanSeven
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Delaware shore
Posts: 13,415

Bikes: Cervelo C5, Guru Photon, Waterford, Specialized CX

Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 893 Post(s)
Liked 862 Times in 627 Posts
Originally Posted by wphamilton View Post
It's a grown man with his own kid, not children playing somewhere dangerously. Most likely anyway. You have no liability in that situation, absent abuse or neglect. You could be right and it may be true that he's putting his kid in danger, but you could also be doing more harm than good.
This is a very realistic and objective assessment. It seems people here are overly sensitive because it's a bicycle. I wonder if the reaction is the same if the man was walking with his child on the shoulder or carrying him?
StanSeven is online now  
Old 04-12-13, 08:28 AM
  #61  
dynodonn 
Out on Parole
 
dynodonn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: U.S. of A.
Posts: 7,466
Mentioned: 41 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1258 Post(s)
Liked 46 Times in 41 Posts
"Child Endangerment" just another tool by some to penalize people who have no access to a motor vehicle, and their wanting to be able to travel and conduct the same basic daily routines as their motor vehicle driving counterparts.

This is more of an autocentric road engineering, motorist entitlement issue and less about child endangerment.
dynodonn is offline  
Old 04-12-13, 09:27 AM
  #62  
mr_pedro
Senior Member
 
mr_pedro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 629
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 68 Post(s)
Liked 62 Times in 40 Posts
Child endangerment, take a look at the average kid's lunch box and you will see what real child endangerment is.
mr_pedro is offline  
Old 04-12-13, 09:46 AM
  #63  
ZmanKC
Senior Member
 
ZmanKC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Overland Park, KS
Posts: 794

Bikes: 1999 Giant TCR 2T 2009 Giant Cypress DX 2015 Giant Anyroad 1

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Chris516 View Post
Well, My first problem is, how can you live in Pennsylvania, and Delaware, at the same time. So, The proper answer to give you, would depend on what state you actually see this happening in. So please clarify?
I live in Overland Park, Kansas which is a suburb of Kansas City, Missouri.
ZmanKC is offline  
Old 04-12-13, 06:43 PM
  #64  
CB HI
Cycle Year Round
 
CB HI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 13,643
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1314 Post(s)
Liked 91 Times in 58 Posts
Originally Posted by fritz1255 View Post
If I do see them again on Route 896, I will call the cops. Even if he is not doing anything illegal, he is doing something very stupid, and I think a cop talking to him might convince him of that.
Maybe you need to get a firefighter to shoot his helmet. That will fix the problem.
__________________
Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.
CB HI is offline  
Old 04-12-13, 06:47 PM
  #65  
CB HI
Cycle Year Round
 
CB HI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 13,643
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1314 Post(s)
Liked 91 Times in 58 Posts
Originally Posted by StanSeven View Post
This is a very realistic and objective assessment. It seems people here are overly sensitive because it's a bicycle. I wonder if the reaction is the same if the man was walking with his child on the shoulder or carrying him?
Why do so many of you think you are only in danger if you are NOT IN YOUR CAGE?
__________________
Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.
CB HI is offline  
Old 04-12-13, 06:53 PM
  #66  
StanSeven
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Delaware shore
Posts: 13,415

Bikes: Cervelo C5, Guru Photon, Waterford, Specialized CX

Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 893 Post(s)
Liked 862 Times in 627 Posts
Originally Posted by CB HI View Post
Why do so many of you think you are only in danger if you are NOT IN YOUR CAGE?
You misunderstood my comment. I am surprised of the reaction just because they were on a bicycle. I don't think people would be excited seeing them walking.
StanSeven is online now  
Old 04-13-13, 02:27 AM
  #67  
wsbob
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 317
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked 5 Times in 2 Posts
Note: bottom quote excerpted.

Originally Posted by fritz1255 View Post
I live in Pennsylvania, in a suburb of Wilmington, DE. It is a formerly rural area with narrow, winding roads with little or no shoulder. Former ox cart paths have been transformed into major travel roads with little improvement except for paving. As I was driving to work ths morning, I saw a guy riding a bike on route 896, a major travel road with about 1 foot of shoulder on each side. Numerous cars are blasting by him with less than a foot of clearance. Just about the time I am silently cursing the guy for being enough of a moron to ride on that road during morning rush hour, I see that he has a passenger, a small child in a bike seat. I was appalled. Disregarding your own safety is bad enough, but the child has no say in the matter. Is he breaking any laws? If so, I will report him the next time I see him.
Originally Posted by StanSeven View Post
... It seems people here are overly sensitive because it's a bicycle. I wonder if the reaction is the same if the man was walking with his child on the shoulder or carrying him?

This is a bike weblog, so naturally, people will report about incidents involving bikes. If it were a pedestrian weblog, no doubt, someone would comment expressing their alarm about a person responsible for a child, walking them in a road situation the OP describes, as people have here about a person riding a bike and transporting a child. A busy road with hardly any shoulder, carrying heavy, fast traffic, is often very dangerous for an agile adult or younger person to walk along by themselves, let alone someone with a child walking alongside, or being carried by such a person.

Different situation with perhaps some things in common with situation the OP describes: In Portland, Oregon a couple months ago, on an outer eastside, sometimes busy semi-rural neighborhood street, 35 mph posted, no sidewalks, sparse shoulders, a child supervised by a teenager was killed by a car, as the two pedestrians were preparing to cross the street mid-intersection (street doesn't have crosswalks or signaled crossings.). A car stopped to allow them to cross, but another behind the first did not stop, and proceeded to go around the first. The child didn't get what was happening...broke away from the person supervising, to run across the street by themselves, and was struck by the car that was coming around the car that had stopped.

Was the teenager considered negligent by people posting comments to the local news story? Mostly not. The two pedestrians were kind of bound by circumstance: crossing the street to get to their house. Intersections in this part of town are farther apart than the standard 200', much farther I believe...though I can't remember offhand, the distance. They didn't have a lot of options, except if maybe someone could have driven them.
wsbob is offline  
Old 04-13-13, 03:25 AM
  #68  
Essex
Senior Member
 
Essex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Northeast United States
Posts: 1,147

Bikes: Tarmac, Focus Urban 8, Giant Hybrid

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike View Post
You may find yourself having liability for making false statements and causing harm to innocent people. Better not sleep so well if you are that willing to butt into other people's business and make wild accusations.
I work in this sector. And in different contexts - I am held to a higher standard.


The last thing I do is make wild accusations. At the end of the day there has to be a balance, but I have personally experienced crazy-ass situations involving poor decision-making by caretakers with the end result of kids getting hurt. And like I said - I don't like seeing any kid hurt due to their imbecile parents.
Essex is offline  
Old 04-13-13, 04:59 AM
  #69  
rebel1916
Senior Member
 
rebel1916's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 3,119
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
Liked 62 Times in 37 Posts
Dude your responsibilities are not as broad as you think they are. I used to race motorcycles. On any race day there would be dozens of minor children at the track . Racing everything from minibikes to full sized bikes and ranging in age from 3-17. Perfectly legal in NY state. Often results in injury. Not of any concern to any mandatory reporter. Including my wife. The same goes for shooting ranges, boxing gyms and the all you can eat buffet.
rebel1916 is offline  
Old 04-13-13, 06:44 AM
  #70  
markus_mudd
Coffee Powered commuter
 
markus_mudd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Boise, Idaho
Posts: 46

Bikes: Yuba Mundo, Catrike Villager, Easy Racers Tour Easy

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
So the original poster is so upset about this parent "endangering" his child but then you didn't stop to talk to the cyclist or to offer help. You make it sound like that dad is too stupid to be left alone with a child but then you didn't do anything but complain on Bike Forums. It must not be toooooo big of a deal if it didn't motivate you to offer help.

Now for a sarcastic sentence...Calling the Police on a cyclist because the motorists are driving recklessly seems like the perfect solution.
markus_mudd is offline  
Old 04-13-13, 07:03 AM
  #71  
irwin7638
Senior Member
 
irwin7638's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Kalamazoo, Mi.
Posts: 3,039

Bikes: Sam, The Hunq and that Old Guy, Soma Buena Vista, Giant Talon 2, Brompton

Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 84 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 11 Times in 10 Posts
My first response to this was, " I probably wouldn't do it, but I don't know the parents' circumstances." This morning I have too much time on my hands so I looked at the satellite images and street level images of the highway in question. The worst section I saw has a fully paved shoulder 4 feet wide clearly delineated by a white fog line, most sections have 4-6 feet shoulders and the street level view shows them all in excellent repair. I'd ride them with my kid any day. It's the kind of road we use to teach the Boy Scouts their cycling merit badges, and they are on their own bikes. The OP obviously knows nothing about cycling, accident probability or the the law.

Marc

Last edited by irwin7638; 04-13-13 at 07:04 PM.
irwin7638 is offline  
Old 04-13-13, 07:07 AM
  #72  
jerseyJim
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Hawthorne NJ
Posts: 377

Bikes: Surly LHT, Wabi Special, All City Big Block, 1933 Iver Johnson Mobicycle, Giant TCR Advanced

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by markus_mudd View Post
Calling the Police on a cyclist because the motorists are driving recklessly seems like the perfect solution.
How does one come to this conclusion? Incomprehensible.
jerseyJim is offline  
Old 04-13-13, 07:29 AM
  #73  
-=(8)=-
♋ ☮♂ ☭ ☯
 
-=(8)=-'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 40205 'ViLLeBiLLie
Posts: 7,902

Bikes: Sngl Spd's, 70's- 80's vintage, D-tube Folder

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by irwin7638 View Post
My first response to this was, " I probably wouldn't do it, but I don't know the parents' circumstances." This morning I have too much time on my hands so I looked at the satellite images and street level images of the highway in question. The worst section I saw has a fully paved shoulder 4 feet wide clearly delineated by a white fog line, most sections have 4-6 feet shoulders and the street level view shows them all in excellent repair. I's ride them with my kid any day. It's the kind of road we use to teach the Boy Scouts their cycling merit badges, and they are on their own bikes. The OP obviously knows nothing about cycling, accident probability or the the law.

Marc
Lolz--Looked at a satellite image

Answers like this and the rest of the A&S philosophers of similar opinion quantify why we are our own worst enemy.
You live many states away, attitude and geographically, and use a photograph to determine your opinion on this subject? Right
When you use that stretch of road on a bike or car, for years, get back to us. You still wont get it, but I can assure you no satellite
images or A&S pedant theoretical can convey what its like to utilize that road during rush hour, by car or bike. The OP is correct,
although legal, the individual who rode the little kid down that road at that time made a judgement that had a high probability
of a bad outcome. Since A&S pedants only use what works for them in their tiny sphere of reality to judge the rest of the world, I
would not expect you to ever understand the reality of this or similar situations
__________________
-ADVOCACY-☜ Radical VC = Car people on bikes. Just say "NO"
-=(8)=- is offline  
Old 04-13-13, 10:53 AM
  #74  
CB HI
Cycle Year Round
 
CB HI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 13,643
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1314 Post(s)
Liked 91 Times in 58 Posts
Originally Posted by -=(8)=- View Post
The OP is correct, although legal, the individual who rode the little kid down that road at that time made a judgement that had a high probability of a bad outcome.
Well Mr. A&S pedant theoretical, show us the data that proves your claim.

Since you claim the probability was so high, why is there no news report of a child death?
__________________
Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.
CB HI is offline  
Old 04-13-13, 10:56 AM
  #75  
howsteepisit
Senior Member
 
howsteepisit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Eugene, OR
Posts: 4,305

Bikes: Mecian

Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 500 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
SInce I have not read endless hand wringing over cyclists being mowed down on that stretch of highway, especially here in the A&S, claiming that there is a "high probability of a bad outcome" seems exaggerated and unsubstantiated. Could you elaborate on what a high probability is? 1:1000? 1:10???? How many cyclists have come to a bad outcome along that stretch of highway in the last year? What defines a bad outcome? Death? injury? scared the pants off?

EDIT I was not trying to pile on - CB HI beat me to the post while I was typing.
howsteepisit is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.