# Taking helmet use a bit too far?



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

"Safety rules and regulations in south Wales are dictating that a little girl portraying Mary in a church Christmas play wear a safety helmet while riding a donkey during the nativity scene...According to the BCC, the donkey’s owner informed the play organizers that his license requires riders to use protective headgear."

Nativity regulations in Wales: Mary must wear safety helmet - Washington Times

It was an officer in the RAF (Royal Air Force) who told me "Regulations are meant for the guidance of the wise and the strict adherence of fools!"

I wear a helmet about 98% of the time, but I'm not totally convinced Mary needs to while riding a donkey in a Christmas pageant. :?


----------



## GamingGrrl (Jan 16, 2013)

It's pretty ridiculous (and I'm a huge helmet supporter), but i can understand the donkey owner trying to protect himself in this sue-happy world.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## JustDressageIt (Oct 4, 2007)

Nope, I respect that decision. 
There's a very reasonable explanation: insurance. It's a live animal. Who cares? Put some robes around it and nobody will be the wiser. 
There are better things to spend your time getting worked up over.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## DancingArabian (Jul 15, 2011)

Wear a hooded robe and problem solved!

It does seem extreme I guess but if that kid does fall and smash her head, we all know the donkey would get the blame and the owner would get the lawsuit.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Saranda (Apr 14, 2011)

Seems extreme, yet reasonable - and I know how contradicting it sounds! As DA said, a hooded robe should solve that, and imagine - if that donkey spooks on stage and the kid gets seriously injured? Better safe than sorry. 

Now, although I'm all for helmet use while riding, what I really find over the top is enforcing people to use a helmet while leading, grooming, lunging horses. With a dangerous horse, a very young, spooky and unpredictable horse, or in case of a young kid - okay, it might be useful, but for a reasonably experienced horse person with a reasonably safe horse in an ordinary environment? Seems like a choice dictated by fear and not understanding the animal.


----------



## Clava (Nov 9, 2010)

All fancy dress classes for children at shows in the UK require children to wear riding hats - it makes you very creative with outfits :lol: and no way would I let my child ride without a riding hat! her head means everything to me, far more than people worrying about looks.


----------



## Skyseternalangel (Jul 23, 2011)

Nope, how is this any different than fair ground pony rides? Anything can happen. A helmet should always be worn when riding any equine.


----------



## Hang on Fi (Sep 22, 2007)

GamingGrrl said:


> It's pretty ridiculous (and I'm a huge helmet supporter), but i can understand the donkey owner trying to protect himself in this sue-happy world.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Yeah, my thoughts exactly.. 

I think it's a bit too much, but I certainly don't blame the owner for wanting to cover his own rear.


----------



## Clava (Nov 9, 2010)

Hang on Fi said:


> Yeah, my thoughts exactly..
> 
> I think it's a bit too much, but I certainly don't blame the owner for wanting to cover his own rear.


 It is not just the owners, not one of the mums I know with children who ride would allow their child to do so without a hat, even for a few moments. Even my friend on her wedding day didn't risk it when she rode to the ceremony!


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

"_A helmet should always be worn when riding any equine._"

I guess I'm showing my age. Or maybe it comes from living in a state where kids can ride in the back of pickup trucks. Seems to me the wussie-fication of the world continues...:-x


----------



## Clava (Nov 9, 2010)

bsms said:


> "_A helmet should always be worn when riding any equine._"
> 
> I guess I'm showing my age. Or maybe it comes from living in a state where kids can ride in the back of pickup trucks. Seems to me the wussie-fication of the world continues...:-x


 I had a forum friend who worked on head injuries., she was very graphic about her work...nothing wussie about losing the back of your head, you only get one and why risk it for such a thing as shallow vanity! Now that is sad.


----------



## Shropshirerosie (Jan 24, 2012)

GamingGrrl said:


> It's pretty ridiculous (and I'm a huge helmet supporter), but i can understand the donkey owner trying to protect himself in this sue-happy world.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Whilst it does sadly sometimes happen, the UK is much less of a sue-happy world than the US. 

However, the wearing of riding hats/helmets is ubiquitous in the UK and you would no more expect to see a child on a horse, pony or donkey without a helmet, than you would see a parent telling their child to 'not bother putting the seatbelt on'. It's just part of the culture.

I suspect the school teacher or parent that found the helmet requirement surprising enough to talk to the media was from a non-horsey background. Anyone from a riding, riding school or pony club background would have known and expected the requirement without a moments thought.


----------



## Skyseternalangel (Jul 23, 2011)

bsms said:


> "_A helmet should always be worn when riding any equine._"
> 
> I guess I'm showing my age. Or maybe it comes from living in a state where kids can ride in the back of pickup trucks. Seems to me the wussie-fication of the world continues...:-x


Better to be safe than risk damage to your skull. I don't find this being a wuss at all. Do you consider seat belts to be something only a wuss would wear? Because while they may not keep you unharmed, they help during collisions. I wear one even when I'm travelling down roads of a high of 35mph. 

Horses are unpredictable, the ground is hard, they like to flail their limbs because they feel good.. anything can happen. Better to be prepared.

Now while she isn't going top speed on a donkey, she is a little one and there is still potential for danger such as spooking or bucking or simply falling off because she loses her balance.


----------



## Saranda (Apr 14, 2011)

You've got to remember that head injuries for a small child can be much more dangerous and life changing, than the same type of injury to an adult. Really, nothing wussy about helping your child NOT to become a brain damaged cripple for the rest of his life.
When you're an adult, of course, feel free to jump a skipping rope on the back of a speeding pickup.


----------



## Yooper (Oct 12, 2013)

Human skulls are not made of adamantium and are in fact, not very sturdy compared to a lot of materials. Though it isn't the strength of the skull that is the issue usually, but the rapid stop, that causes the most damage, when the brain hits against the inside of the cranial cavity. If that kiddo were to slide off the donk and land on her head, she could sustain some very bad head injuries. 

So I am with the owner of the donk. He is ensuring the safety of the child. She could still get hurt in other ways, but at least her precious brain will be intact. 

Maybe it is just me, but live animals seem a little over the top for a Christmas pageant. What is wrong with a horse on a stick toy and other props? Animals are unpredictable. They poop, they chew on stuff, they are getting shoved into an unfamiliar environment (full of noise, unpredictable squealing children, etc) and expected to behave normally. Seems like a recipe for trouble to me, but maybe I'm just a cynic.


----------



## Clava (Nov 9, 2010)

As they are riding on a highway they have no choice - it is illegal for a child under 14 to ride on a road without a riding hat.
https://www.gov.uk/rules-about-animals-47-to-58/horse-riders-49-to-55


----------



## Cielo Notturno (Sep 12, 2013)

Safety stuff don't have anything to to with fashion. 

A little girl is going to ride a donkey in a crowd, with loud noises, maybe fireworks, maybe snow or ice on the ground.

If she wears an helmet, then she'll wear an helmet. People will se Mary with an helmet. Nobody will be scarred for life, I'm sure. 

If she doesn't wear an helmet and she doesn't fall, all good. 

If she doesn't wear an helmet and she falls badly (slight chance, but a possibility) she could be severely hurt and the whole parade would end up in a nightmare. 

Risk/benefits: do the benefits of having her head nice and bare outweight the risk of having a little girl in hospital, the donkey's owner sued, the people who organized the parade sued, everyone in the crowd shocked...?


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

Anyone want to guess what the degree of risk of head injury is when sitting on a donkey being led somewhere? I refuse to try to find any statistics, because I suspect it is much lower than the risk of being struck by lightening. Should Mary wear a body protector for her back? What about knee and elbow pads?


----------



## Clava (Nov 9, 2010)

bsms said:


> Anyone want to guess what the degree of risk of head injury is when sitting on a donkey being led somewhere? I refuse to try to find any statistics, because I suspect it is much lower than the risk of being struck by lightening. Should Mary wear a body protector for her back? What about knee and elbow pads?



It is simply illegal here for a child to ride without a hat and not regarded as a big deal to have to wear one. We care about children not being hurt unnecessarily. The law was introduced as most riders have to ride on roads and this was to reduce deaths and injuries, our roads are busy and dangerous.


----------



## updownrider (Mar 31, 2009)

bsms said:


> Anyone want to guess what the degree of risk of head injury is when sitting on a donkey being led somewhere? I refuse to try to find any statistics, because I suspect it is much lower than the risk of being struck by lightening. Should Mary wear a body protector for her back? What about knee and elbow pads?


Now you are just trolling. It is an annoying habit of yours.


----------



## gunslinger (Sep 17, 2011)

Big brother knows best so just shut up and do what you're told! 

It's a sad, sad day, liberty and personal choice no longer rule the day.

DON'T BE A SHEEPLE, THINK AND DECIDE FOR YOURSELF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

PERSONAL CHOICE, PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY, NOT A DICTATORSHIP!!!!!


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

updownrider said:


> Now you are just trolling. It is an annoying habit of yours.


Actually, I am making a point. It is stupid to require safety equipment when doing something with virtually no risk involved. I consider this to be an article showing how ridiculously risk-adverse and sue-happy people have become. The last Christmas pageant I went to, here in Arizona, DID involve a young girl sitting on a donkey and being led, and happily the 'helmets are critical' movement didn't notice.

If you don't like my posts, feel free to flag it for the moderators - several of whom are on the thread. It beats calling others 'trolls' when you don't agree with their views.


----------



## Saskia (Aug 26, 2009)

I think it's a good decision. If a horse/donkey is going to spook any time isn't it going to be a christmas pageant with people take photos and costumes etc? Not to mention I used to work in childcare and have seen children fall off stationery chairs and hurt themselves... helmet on an animal in a crowd is not overkill. 

Besides, to me that isn't the primary reason. Kids are smart and they make interesting connections in their mind. By saying you don't need a helmet always you're saying safety doesn't come first all the time, only when it suits. Why teach kids that? It's not like this a grand production, I don't know if you guys have ever seen a christmas play but in my experience having a kid wearing a helmet isn't going to destroy all the realism that it had anyway. 

I'm all for adults choosing not to wear helmets, but I've seen some real stupid horse owners and real stupid parents, having mandatory helmet laws for kids (like I imagine they have in UK, as we do in Australia to an extent) isn't that crazy an idea.


----------



## alexischristina (Jun 30, 2009)

Virtually no risk involved?

You're taking a flight animal into a chaotic situation. Maybe it wont be crazy, but it definitely isn't your typical 'lead line lap around the arena', in a scene with other children, other animals, an audience, maybe some photographers, etc. there's a chance something could go wrong so why not opt for the safest route possible? Not to mention this is a kid with limited experience, not an adult capable of making her own decisions... jeesh, why is it so personally offensive to you?


----------



## DancingArabian (Jul 15, 2011)

gunslinger said:


> Big brother knows best so just shut up and do what you're told!
> 
> It's a sad, sad day, liberty and personal choice no longer rule the day.
> 
> ...


It's a child, not an adult. They don't have personal responsibility nor choice. Adults do. Now if the "Mary" in question were a legal adult then you would be 100% right.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## updownrider (Mar 31, 2009)

bsms said:


> If you don't like my posts, feel free to flag it for the moderators - several of whom are on the thread. It beats calling others 'trolls' when you don't agree with their views.



I do see several mods on this thread that do not support your view, and they have posted thoughtful reasons why. 

Is that what you do, just flag every post when you don't agree with the view of the poster? What a waste of the mod's time.


----------



## MyBoyPuck (Mar 27, 2009)

If common sense and personal responsibility had prevailed over lawyers and people looking for a cheap score, this would be a better world. Sadly it has gone way the wrong way. Any idiot can do something stupid and sue someone else for their own stupidity.


----------



## SlideStop (Dec 28, 2011)

I don't think I've ever seen anyone aruge for someone to be less safe... 

I've heard of two people who have had serious riding accidents. One woman's horse spooked and dumped her... Know one will ever know what happened. She was in the hospital and in rehab for a very long time. She can back to riding 3 years later and had to be led on a lead line because he balance was horrible from her head injury. 

Another, a little more relevant, was one of our boarder trainers. She was riding her old school master when he tripped and fell... At the walk. Last I heard she is still "vegetable". 

Helmets have nothing to do with the "wussification" of America, things like the "everyone gets a trophy for showing up" attitude do. That's like saying if you wear your seatbelt your a wuss.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## MyBoySi (Dec 1, 2011)

bsms said:


> Anyone want to guess what the degree of risk of head injury is when sitting on a donkey being led somewhere? I refuse to try to find any statistics, because I suspect it is much lower than the risk of being struck by lightening. Should Mary wear a body protector for her back? What about knee and elbow pads?


I agree completely. Its a little much. I'm betting the donkey has done this sort of thing tons of times and is desensitized to situations that may present themselves. Being around horses, donkeys or any animals in general is somewhat of a risk weather you are mounted or on the ground.

what about the other children/actors that are around the donkey? Seems as though it could as easily decide to kick out behind it as well. Maybe they should all wear helmets. Lol.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Shoebox (Apr 18, 2012)

This thread is ridiculous. How is that overboard? It's the law. It's not legal for her not to. It doesn't matter if she's being lead on a donkey or riding a bolting warmblood. It's just like a seatbelt law - you have to wear a belt. It doesn't matter if you're going 5 miles an hour down a back road with nobody around it's still the law.

Not to mention she's riding a flight animal - I don't care how well you say the donkey is desensitized, we're all equine people here and should all KNOW that sh!t happens when it comes to equines, no matter how well you think they're desensitized. Donkies aren't much different. I see no reason it should be upsetting that the rider of the animal should have to wear head protection in case the donkey spooks.


----------



## MyBoyPuck (Mar 27, 2009)

I can't speak for others, but my problem with having a law about it should be unnecessary for the mere fact that it forces people to conform while plain old common sense could accomplish the same thing without having laws to dictate it. 

Yes a child should wear a helmet. That is a no brainer. To have a law saying so is the the ridiculous part for me. It's one person's child. Nobody has the right to tell her how to raise her child. This is where common sense should come into play where the helmet is concerned. Nobody need point out the flaw in my thinking. These are "shoulds" in my mind. I get that there are endless people out there with little to no common sense, hence all the laws to protect them from themselves.


----------



## Bagheera (Apr 23, 2013)

I didn't read the whole thread, but I'm just going to put this out there. Anytime someone other than myself rode my horse, I required them to wear a helmet, and sign a release form. I am unwilling to take on such a liability as allowing someone to ride my horse without a helmet. If I fall off my own horse without a helmet on, I can't really sue myself. So unless Mary owns that donkey herself, I darn well understand the owner requiring her to wear a helmet. It's unfair to judge someone because they look out for their own personal interests, so don't judge the donkey owner.


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

updownrider said:


> I do see several mods on this thread that do not support your view, and they have posted thoughtful reasons why.
> 
> Is that what you do, just flag every post when you don't agree with the view of the poster? What a waste of the mod's time.


No, I do not flag anyone's post for disagreeing with me. I also do not call other people 'troll'...

The thoughtful responses boil down to "You can never be too safe!" I disagree, and am shocked that folks who ride horses could take it. Again - just how much danger is involved in sitting on a donkey being led? Have you ever heard of someone being injured that way? I have not. I'd love to see some "donkey death" statistics, though...

I find the sue-happy & safe-at-any-cost approach of modern society disgusting. It is no wonder we never get anything done anymore when we do all we can to make life risk free.


----------



## SullysRider (Feb 11, 2012)

bsms said:


> No, I do not flag anyone's post for disagreeing with me. I also do not call other people 'troll'...
> 
> The thoughtful responses boil down to "You can never be too safe!" I disagree, and am shocked that folks who ride horses could take it. Again - just how much danger is involved in sitting on a donkey being led? Have you ever heard of someone being injured that way? I have not. I'd love to see some "donkey death" statistics, though...
> 
> I find the sue-happy & safe-at-any-cost approach of modern society disgusting. It is no wonder we never get anything done anymore when we do all we can to make life risk free.


I was riding bareback the other day at a WALK and the horse spooked, I survived the first jump came off on the second and I now have a hairline fracture on my right femur. Thank gosh I was wearing a helmet, but what if I had hit my head and wasn't? That was from a little fall (only 15.1 horse) and at a walk. And I am normally very good at sticking with bucks, spooks, etc. What if the donkey does the same thing and the child falls off? It doesn't matter if someone is leading the donkey, the donkey can still jump if spooked. And it doesn't matter how slow you're going or how short the horse/donkey is, all it takes is hitting something the right way.


----------



## greentree (Feb 27, 2013)

DH says he's ridden the danged donkey....and a helmet is not the ONLY piece of protective equipment HE would be wearing!!!

Nancy


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

Just to make sure we're on the same page, here is a picture of a couple of incredibly brave kids riding fearsome donkeys:










Older kids, living the danger:


----------



## Bagheera (Apr 23, 2013)

As long as I don't own that donkey they are riding, I could careless what they do. No lawsuits for me, thank you!


----------



## Skyseternalangel (Jul 23, 2011)

I can do the same thing, posting people doing things that others deem the opposite of "wussy" but that doesn't mean it's safe.



















And my favourite one


----------



## JustDressageIt (Oct 4, 2007)

Shoebox said:


> This thread is ridiculous. How is that overboard? It's the law. It's not legal for her not to. It doesn't matter if she's being lead on a donkey or riding a bolting warmblood. It's just like a seatbelt law - you have to wear a belt. It doesn't matter if you're going 5 miles an hour down a back road with nobody around it's still the law.


A-freaking-men! 

It's the law. Period. Get your knickers out of a knot, and spend your energy on something worthwhile getting upset about.


----------



## JustDressageIt (Oct 4, 2007)

bsms said:


> Just to make sure we're on the same page, here is a picture of a couple of incredibly brave kids riding fearsome donkeys:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Good Lord how I *hate* your "picture proof" posts. They do NOTHING for your argument, it proves NOTHING. Sure, kids are riding donkeys. They don't have helmets. So? 

People ride motorcycles without helmets, if you wear a helmet you're a wuss. 
See? Here's a couple people without helmets:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2169/2312286776_6587b3995b_m.jpg
Here's a whole family on one motorbike!! And not a single helmet to be seen!!!
http://calorielab.com/news/wp-images/post-images/family-on-moped-without-helmets.jpg
Why these people seem happy and unharmed, so why do we make laws for helmets? 
(Totally tongue-in-cheek , by the way. I think it's asinine that anyone rides a bike without a helmet.) 

Rawr.


----------



## Delfina (Feb 12, 2010)

It's a CHILD. Not an adult that is capable of making sane, rational decisions. The law says she needs to wear one. If you don't agree with the law, go work on getting it changed.... and BTW posts on here aren't going to accomplish diddly towards changing it.

I got dumped by a safe, sane horse who spooked at absolutely nothing. 18 weeks later I am *barely* walking and have yet to take a step that wasn't massively uncomfortable. A good day means I can get through work, struggle through PT without screaming and go home to collapse in the recliner. 

I'm *only* able to do all of this because I wore a helmet. One that I smacked so hard that not only did it split open but in spite of it's protection, I still ended up with a concussion. Sans helmet, that would have been my skull split open.

Want to call me a wuss? Go ahead because today I'm an ALIVE wuss!

I have zero issues with an adult deciding to wear or not wear a helmet. A young child is a completely different story.


----------



## trailhorserider (Oct 13, 2009)

I can't imagine why anyone would make a big deal out of a child wearing a helmet. I'm sure all the spectators would rather see Mary in a helmet than Mary with her brains leaking out. 

People like to feel like it will never happen to them, but it happened to a friend of a friend this past summer and the helmet-less rider still isn't 100%, and perhaps never will be. 

If YOU don't want to wear a helmet, no problem. But how can you say someone else's child should not wear a helmet?

I didn't always wear a helmet. Back when I was a teenager and didn't know anyone with brain damage. Now that I am much older and am aware that people really DO get brain injuries, I always wear a helmet. My friends don't, and that's fine. But I do. How can you fault someone for trying to protect their brain? It's the most important thing you own.

You can't make life 100% safe. But certain risks you can reduce, and head injury is one of them.

PS. I also used to ride in pickup trucks as a child. Now I imagine what would happen if their was a car accident. When you are a kid you don't think about flying out of the bed of a pickup truck. When you are older you do. Maybe that makes me a wuss. But I like to think of it as common sense.


----------



## Saranda (Apr 14, 2011)

What I dislike more than pussfooting and overprotective behavior over every little thing is irrational overMANification (I made a new word!  ) by disrespecting and making fun of anyone who is rationally caring about the health of their prodigy and themselves. How is putting a helmet on a small child who is riding a flight animal "wussy"? How is glorifying carelessness manly and non-wussy? I'm puzzled.


----------



## Rideordie112 (Dec 7, 2013)

bsms said:


> No, I do not flag anyone's post for disagreeing with me. I also do not call other people 'troll'...
> 
> The thoughtful responses boil down to "You can never be too safe!" I disagree, and am shocked that folks who ride horses could take it. Again - just how much danger is involved in sitting on a donkey being led? Have you ever heard of someone being injured that way? I have not. I'd love to see some "donkey death" statistics, though...
> 
> I find the sue-happy & safe-at-any-cost approach of modern society disgusting. It is no wonder we never get anything done anymore when we do all we can to make life risk free.



I agree completely. Well almost completely. I agree with what you're sAying about society. And that the odds of this donkey going crazy are slim. But I understand why the donkey owner would want her to wear a helmet. There's risk involved. An having brains is better than no brains. I'm 17, and I wear a helmet every time I ride, other than when I'm team sorting or penning at a place where they don't require me too. But that in itself is a dangerous, and probably somewhat stupid decision. (But I'm still young enough to be dumb xD) except for maybe when I'm team sorting, I never go much faster than a slow lope. I guess what I'm getting at, is that I make my sister wear a helmet every time she gets on a horse. And I'd make my kid wear one too. 
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Clava (Nov 9, 2010)

bsms said:


> Just to make sure we're on the same page, here is a picture of a couple of incredibly brave kids riding fearsome donkeys:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



These photos are completely irrelevant - neither show the riders on hard tarmac roads in traffic which is the situation that the law covers. 

(all the same, a kick to the head for a child can be devastating). To have a law passed here is never done lightly and would have been so to reduce the number of rider deaths and injuries on the road. Off roads you can do what you like with your children if you honestly think it is worth the risk, but as I said before, no-one I know would even want to have a child ride without a hat.

Just as an aside - we even have santa hats designed to cover helmets as pretty much everyone wears a helmet http://www.equestrianclearance.com/...=17949280929&gclid=CI2X7OLnrLsCFa3KtAodwCAANg


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

Skyseternalangel said:


> I can do the same thing, posting people doing things that others deem the opposite of "wussy" but that doesn't mean it's safe...


Hmmm....you don't see a difference in the level of risk between this:










and this:










It is like the schools expelling kids for pointing their fingers at each other because 'we have a no gun policy' - the unthinking application of a rule instead of using judgment.

"_Good Lord how I *hate* your "picture proof" posts. They do NOTHING for your argument, it proves NOTHING. Sure, kids are riding donkeys. They don't have helmets. So? _"

I don't doubt you hate the pictures, since it makes the point obvious...although some seem to miss it. The point is not that they have bare heads, but that donkeys are LITTLE! Donkeys are not horses. They are not 15 hands and 1000 lbs. I guess in theory they could get very large, but the donkey someone rents for an 8 year old to sit on in a Christmas pageant is likely to be the size of the pictures shown - SMALL! Falling off a donkey like that would be as dangerous as falling while walking.

Riding a little donkey is not dangerous. It would be almost impossible to get hurt riding a little donkey, particularly one being led!

"_How is putting a helmet on a small child who is riding a flight animal "wussy"?_"

In what sense is a 250 lb donkey a "flight animal"? Even if the donkey goes on a rampage and fights free of its lead rope...just slide off the animal. A 3' tall, 250 lb animal is NOT the same risk as a 5' tall, 1,000 lb animal. My granddaughter is 7. With her inseam, her foot would be all of 12 inches off the ground. She is in far greater danger climbing trees, which she does without a helmet, body protector or knee pads...although I suppose some countries have laws against that by now - 'for the children'. 

" _But how can you say someone else's child should not wear a helmet?_"

I have not, and never will. But who are you to tell someone else's child they MUST wear a helmet, even if riding a 250 lb donkey being led around in a play?

What is it like to go thru life afraid of falling 12 inches? What is it like trying to protect kids from every possible harm, no matter how remote? Quick, someone get some toe protectors for this kid!


----------



## Saranda (Apr 14, 2011)

Sigh. This is just going in circles. And it will go on, as long as people persist that it's just their way or the highway.


----------



## gypsygirl (Oct 15, 2009)

I was nearly killed during dressage lesson. I was doing a turn on the forehand with my instructor holding one rein. My horse, without warning, reared and flipped over on me. My helmet literally broke in two pieces. I would most certainly have died without my helmet. This horse had never reared under saddle before.

So yes, you can be severely injured while your horse is basically standing with someone holding it! 


Btw I had to be med flighted via helicopter and hospitalized, brain scans, the whole shebang. Could not stand bc of dizziness for almost 6 months.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Clava (Nov 9, 2010)

> But who are you to tell someone else's child they MUST wear a helmet, even if riding a 250 lb donkey being led around in a play?


 As a country we elect our government who make our laws...and we are not complaining (no-one I know with any horse sense would), it hurts no-one in this case (and I for one approve) and actually it doesn't affect those who do not live here. No-one is making you put a helmet on your child on a donkey.


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

When I posted this thread, I actually expected the typical response to be along the lines of, "I think helmets are great, but are they REALLY needed for a Christmas pageant?" It did not occur to me that so many would actually believe someone sitting on a donkey's back would need a helmet to make them safe.

Riding horses involves risk, yet many here would allow small kids to ride horses. Risks can be reduced in a number of ways. I switched from an English saddle to an Australian design because the Australian design makes it easier to stay on when the horse hits the fan. I normally wear a helmet. Although I've only come off once (and while wearing a ball cap), a helmet seems like an easy way to reduce my risks.

But I still ride, and my horse of choice is still somewhat more skittish than average. It is a risk, not only to my head but to my back, arms, etc. My daughter is 16 now, but she's been riding for 5 years with those same risks, although her horse is much steadier than Mia. But no horse is perfect, and she rides with a helmet.

But a donkey? A 3 foot tall, 250 lb donkey, being led and surrounded by people on a route blocked off from traffic? A donkey someone picked for the purpose of a young girl to sit on? There is more danger catching a horse to halter them than there is in riding a donkey. 

Perhaps it truly is cultural. In Arizona, a lot of young girls who ride horses want to do barrel racing. Many riders grew up riding full grown horses, not always broke to ride, at that age. Riding with a helmet is an exception around here. I think I've seen one other person riding their horse with a helmet on a trail, apart from my family.

It is apparently a different culture from Europe. It never occurred to me someone would defend those laws as reasonable and rational.


----------



## Clava (Nov 9, 2010)

bsms said:


> It is apparently a different culture from Europe. It never occurred to me someone would defend those laws as reasonable and rational.


 I think this just goes to show how out of touch you are with riders who know how dangerous even a 11hh pony or donkey can be, especially when ridden on a tarmac road. No-one I know thinks having to wear a riding hat as a child is a bad or restrictive thing, on UK forums you quite often cannot even post a photo of yourself without a hat on without condemnation - even adults.


----------



## updownrider (Mar 31, 2009)

bsms said:


> It is apparently a different culture from Europe. It never occurred to me someone would defend those laws as reasonable and rational.


It is not cultural or European. Many US organizations require helmets while mounted. Two states, Florida and New York, have youth equestrian helmet laws. 

This video is from 2007 and several more symposiums on safety advances have been held since then.


Len Clement of Tipperary Helmets: Head Injury Statistics in Equestrian Sport (2nd Helmet Safety Symposium)


----------



## dbarabians (May 21, 2011)

updownrider said:


> Now you are just trolling. It is an annoying habit of yours.


No he is not trolling. He is stating his opinion. 
There are movies made in Great Britain that depict children riding horses without helmets. This is a theatrical production what is the difference.
I for one am thankful that I live in a country and a state that does not try and control my every move or parent my child for me.
In the State of Texas even if the child fell of the donkey the owner would most likely be immune from being sued. 
I understand it is the law and I do agree live animals are a little over the top but then again its not a holiday I celebrate. Shalom


----------



## Speed Racer (Oct 21, 2009)

dbarabians said:


> In the State of Texas even if the child fell of the donkey the owner would most likely be immune from being sued.


Sorry dba, but anyone can sue anyone for anything, even in Texas. Nobody's immune, nor does it mean they'd win if a case were brought against them.

Not even sure why some people are having the vapors, calling other folks 'wussified', or screaming about individual rights and responsibilities when it's the _law_ in the UK to wear helmets *when riding on the streets*. Sounds pretty cut and dried to me regardless of one's political leanings, interpretation of individual rights, or macho posturings. :???:


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

^^ The dispute is not about the fact of the law, but the wisdom of the law.

"_I think this just goes to show how out of touch you are with riders who know how dangerous even a 11hh pony or donkey can be_"

Yeah, I guess I am. I'm surprised Joseph allowed his pregnant wife to ride on such a dangerous beast! I don't know how I lived to be 55, or others in my generation lived, when our lives were filled with such omnipresent danger.


----------



## SlideStop (Dec 28, 2011)

If they were that upset why dont they just dismiss the donkey owner and find a new person? Whether anyone likes it or not its HIS animal and there for HIS decision.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## dbarabians (May 21, 2011)

Speed Racer said:


> Sorry dba, but anyone can sue anyone for anything, even in Texas. Nobody's immune, nor does it mean they'd win if a case were brought against them.
> 
> Not even sure why some people are having the vapors, calling other folks 'wussified', or screaming about individual rights and responsibilities when it's the _law_ in the UK to wear helmets *when riding on the streets*. Sounds pretty cut and dried to me regardless of one's political leanings, interpretation of individual rights, or macho posturings. :???:


Sorry Speedracer here in Texas livestock owners a immune from being sued when someone is injured handling livestock. Section 87 of the Civil code specifically states that there is an inherent danger when handling livestock. 

It is suggested that a sign with the code should be posted for all to see.
My insurance company was not concerned with the fact that I own horses. Shalom


----------



## SullysRider (Feb 11, 2012)

I live in Texas and I have not been to any barn or arena that doesn't require helmets on anyone under 18. No matter if they're just walking, if you get on a horse, they wear a helmet. Frankly if you think riding a horse while walking poses no risk, and that the donkey being small poses no risk, you've got another thing coming. There's a reason the law exists, it because of people like you who wouldn't put a helmet on their child in this instance, which many consider common sense to do so. So the laws takes care of that.


----------



## JustDressageIt (Oct 4, 2007)

No, BSms, I hate your so-called "photo proof" posts because they prove nothing other than you can image search.
Look! Chair seat is effective because this picture shows someone in the 1900's in a chair seat!
Look donkeys are safe, because there are children riding without helmets!

*nod*
With that, I'm out! 

_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

I live in Arizona. It is common to see folks riding at a stable without a helmet, including teens. But then, riding a horse and riding a donkey just don't seem equivalent to me, regardless. What do you do if the donkey goes on a rampage? You slide off and drop 6-12 inches. I guess it is about as dangerous as stepping off a sidewalk into a crosswalk.


----------



## Clava (Nov 9, 2010)

bsms said:


> ^^ The dispute is not about the fact of the law, but the wisdom of the law.
> 
> "_I think this just goes to show how out of touch you are with riders who know how dangerous even a 11hh pony or donkey can be_"
> 
> Yeah, I guess I am. I'm surprised Joseph allowed his pregnant wife to ride on such a dangerous beast! I don't know how I lived to be 55, or others in my generation lived, when our lives were filled with such omnipresent danger.



You were lucky, some kids don't make 55 and some end up crippled with brain damage, but that obviously isn't everyone's concern. As said before you are free to do as you like with your children unless you are planning on having some in the UK, even then it is unlikely you would ever be caught or prosecuted so feel free, but the majority of sane horse people over here agree with children wearing riding hats on the road.

And again with the pointless photo? We are talking children on roads not Queens on turf.

Even back in '91 the Queen made her grandchildren wear hats even if she doesn't .


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

JustDressageIt said:


> No, BSms, I hate your so-called "photo proof" posts because they prove nothing other than you can image search.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


It seems to me they prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that lots of riding donkeys are quite small. Maybe this one, taken in England, will help:










"_You were lucky, some kids don't make 55 and some end up crippled with brain damage_"

Can someone tell me how many kids, in the last 50 years, have been crippled with brain damage from riding a donkey without a helmet? Has ANYONE ever suffered brain trauma from falling off one of those spirited creatures?

And we are discussing kids in a pageant on a closed road, being led on what would undoubtedly be a well behaved and LITTLE donkey.


----------



## MissingStar (Feb 20, 2013)

The only law in question is that children under the age of 14 must wear an approved helmet when riding on the road. 'Mary' and the donkey will be using the Queen's highway, so the law comes into play.

Years before this law was implemented, my friend's sister fell from her pony when it slipped at a walk on tarmac. She wasn't wearing a helmet and died instantly of a head injury.

Quite frankly it shocks me to read "the wisdom of the law" being called into question.

As an adult, we can make an informed choice. My friend's sister didn't reach adulthood.


----------



## JustDressageIt (Oct 4, 2007)

bsms said:


> I live in Arizona. It is common to see folks riding at a stable without a helmet, including teens. But then, riding a horse and riding a donkey just don't seem equivalent to me, regardless. What do you do if the donkey goes on a rampage? You slide off and drop 6-12 inches. I guess it is about as dangerous as stepping off a sidewalk into a crosswalk.


Let's say that the donkey is 3' tall at the wither. Let's say the child's torso is 2' tall. That means her head will be falling 5' with velocity to help her along. 
But sure, your guess of 12" was almost close. Kind of.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## SullysRider (Feb 11, 2012)

bsms said:


> I live in Arizona. It is common to see folks riding at a stable without a helmet, including teens. But then, riding a horse and riding a donkey just don't seem equivalent to me, regardless. What do you do if the donkey goes on a rampage? You slide off and drop 6-12 inches. I guess it is about as dangerous as stepping off a sidewalk into a crosswalk.


I love how you assume that a child would be able to hang on enough to simply slide off and land on their feet. The child could be thrown just as easily as if on a horse.


----------



## JustDressageIt (Oct 4, 2007)

bsms said:


> It seems to me they prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that lots of riding donkeys are quite small. Maybe this one, taken in England, will help:
> 
> [


Sure. They're small. Sooooooo what? Doesn't prove that the child shouldn't wear a helmet. Doesn't prove they're safe. Just means that they would fall less distance-- sooooo?? 

Okay really very done with this argument. Nobody will change your mind.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Tazzie (Nov 8, 2011)

JustDressageIt said:


> Let's say that the donkey is 3' tall at the wither. Let's say the child's torso is 2' tall. That means her head will be falling 5' with velocity to help her along.
> But sure, your guess of 12" was almost close. Kind of.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I was seriously about to post this exact thing. I feel like the OP was subtracting how far the distance was from her feet, but not the height her head would ultimately fall before hitting the ground. I do have to agree with the donkey's owner for wanting to uphold the LAW and have the child wear a helmet. It's not like it'd be a huge chore to cover that up.

And I'm an enormous advocate for helmets. I took a bad spill off my mare in July. Nearly died from rupturing the artery in my arm (because, like a fool, I tried to catch myself). My head was perfectly fine. The helmet was not. My husband hadn't always understood why it was important to wear one when riding, but he does now. I bought him one for Valentine's Day. Felt it was the biggest sign of "I love you, don't die while riding horses please".

Also, an 8 year old kid who may or may not have riding experience may not think to just slide off. Could result in being thrown. Donkeys may be small, but they are obviously strong enough to be used as pack animals...


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

JustDressageIt said:


> Let's say that the donkey is 3' tall at the wither. Let's say the child's torso is 2' tall. That means her head will be falling 5' with velocity to help her along. But sure, your guess of 12" was almost close. Kind of.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


It was close. Let's say the kid is 4 feet tall. EVERY fall the kid makes, if the head hits, is a fall of 4 feet. If the kid trips while walking, or slips on ice - 4 feet. Sitting on the donkey adds 12 inches...assuming the kid falls and hits their head. But when your feet are a whopping 12 inches off the ground, sliding off and keeping your feet is pretty easy. We aren't talking a 5 foot tall horse, weighing 1000 lbs and galloping at 35 mph. We're talking about a 250 lb donkey being led on a rope. 

Risk assessment: what are the odds of the donkey going nuts? What are the odds of the person on the end of the rope controlling said 250 lbs donkey if he does go nuts? And if the person holding the rope cannot control the rampaging donkey, what are the odds the person on the donkey will have any difficulty is stepping off? And in the worst case, if the rider falls off and hits her head, it is still just 12 inches further than a fall while walking.

If anyone has any statistics on the number of folks injured while riding donkeys, I'd love to hear them. Until then, you have an extremely safe activity - riding a donkey being led in a play. The kid will be in greater danger from tripping on her robe while walking home. And let us hope she never gets a role in a play that requires her to fall down...

I use a helmet, but I do not worship it. I don't wear it hiking, unloading hay from the pickup, walking, shopping, driving, etc. I don't put one on before climbing a ladder or cleaning the roof. Nor do I put one on my granddaughter before she climbs trees, which is a much more dangerous activity than riding a donkey.


----------



## DancingArabian (Jul 15, 2011)

Honestly I think that if the donkey were to go on a rampage the "Mary" would do what most kids without horse experience would do: freeze, hold on with both hands and scream until she was tossed off or someone caught the donkey.

I'm also assuming of course that this is an average child with little to no riding experience or horse sense. For all I know she could be one of those kids people tie to the saddle to "barrel race".
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## greentree (Feb 27, 2013)

bsms is ALWAYS right, and will fight do the death....have you all not yet figured that out???

just say uh-huh and go on...


----------



## Celeste (Jul 3, 2011)

bsms said:


> If anyone has any statistics on the number of folks injured while riding donkeys, I'd love to hear them. Until then, you have an extremely safe activity - riding a donkey being led in a play. The kid will be in greater danger from tripping on her robe while walking home. And let us hope she never gets a role in a play that requires her to fall down...


Different cultures accept different levels of risk. It's not Arizona, and it's not Georgia. BSMS, there are people over there in the UK that don't even let their 10 year olds have their own shotguns........


----------



## SamBadger (Aug 7, 2011)

I know someone who was sitting on one of the tiny donkeys at the beach, just standing still. The donkey spooked, the kid fell off and got his head kicked in, luckily he was wearing a helmet. 

The culture in the UK and US are very different, when I first joined this forum and was very inexpirienced I was so shocked to see people who rode without helmets because in the UK, everyone wears them, pretty much. 

I think its a personal choice if you're an adult, but I know if that was my kid riding that donkey I'd want them to wear a helmet. Plus, if I was the owner of the donkey I would want them to wear a helmet. Its easily covered up so whats the big deal?! 

Saftey first, I don't care if theres a 0.001% chance that my five year old is going to get hurt being led on a donkey, I would want to minimise that risk if that were my child. Its certaintly not 'wussie', thats just pathetic saying that.


----------



## EliRose (Aug 12, 2012)

She's doing a little more than just "sitting on a donkey". She's being led through town, across a main road with other people around.

Here's another article of the story, and it shows where she will be riding. I don't know about you, but I wouldn't let a little kid ride on that road without a helmet: Crash test Mary: Bizarre 'Elf and Safety rule will see mother of baby Jesus ride into Bethlehem on a Donkey wearing HARD HAT | Mail Online

In any case, she's wearing a shawl over her head. Who cares if she's wearing a helmet underneath.


----------



## Bagheera (Apr 23, 2013)

The state of Illinois requires helmets for riding equines if you are under the age of 18.


----------



## remka (Aug 2, 2013)

I do not understand why it is such a big deal, that a young girl under the age of consent, is being "forced" to wear a helmet. The guy doesn't want to get sued.


----------



## its lbs not miles (Sep 1, 2011)

dbarabians said:


> Sorry Speedracer here in Texas livestock owners a immune from being sued when someone is injured handling livestock. Section 87 of the Civil code specifically states that there is an inherent danger when handling livestock.
> 
> It is suggested that a sign with the code should be posted for all to see.
> My insurance company was not concerned with the fact that I own horses. Shalom


There are a great many states that have similar laws on the books now with some variations. 

In SC they require a sign (that the state provides at a low cost). It gives the code and quotes the law. Basically says that dealing with horses carries a risk and if you deal with a horse here you are accepting that risk.
Of course there are still liabilities, but they have to do with things like someone not disclosing known risks besides the what is normal e.g. the bridge on the trail is unstable so creates a known risk that a rider must be notified of or the owner is liable if the rider is injured trying to use the bridge. It's basically common sense.


----------



## Rideordie112 (Dec 7, 2013)

Why is everyone stating that in the US no one where's helmets? Here in California, many people wear helmets. I wear one 98% of the time and so does everyone else I ride with. I actually find my Tipperary quite comfortable. And personally, when I'm riding in parades sometimes I wish I had my helmet on. It's such an unpredictable situation.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## its lbs not miles (Sep 1, 2011)

I hate when I type out a load of information and lose it because I time out :-x

Ok, condensed form.

First, I read the article and what jumped out at me is what are they doing taking a nativity scene/play or whatever it is down the highway. Of course there's suppose to be law enforcement. Hopefully to eliminate traffic. Is Joseph suppose to lead the donkey with Mary from the stable to the church?

I don't blame the owner of the donkey for requiring protection. In their case it's a common sense precaution.

Now all that said I must be incredibly lucky. 56, helmets were never part of my riding attire and I'm still alive (and riding  and working with new horses). It must be a miracle :lol:
I believe that what a person wears is up to that person. If I want to require my children to wear a helmet that should be my choice (of course they're likely to tell me to ****** off if they don't want to since they're all grown, but I can still try :lol:...and they'll call me a hypocrite for my troubles :lol

Now this is beyond what this thread was started about, but is in keeping with what the tread has become 

Since everyone is so fond of pointing out being injured, etc.... let's look at the realities. i.e. the statistics since that's what everyone uses to support the premise that everyone "should" wear helmets (even when not required). Now remember. I believe you have the absolute right to wear one and no one should have the right to tell you that you can't or shouldn't.

My personal experience over the last 45 years has been that head injuries tend to be extremely few and far between. I've know people killed and crippled in equine activities (in the deaths they all fell off, all hit the ground, all had helmets and all broke their neck). It wasn't until a couple of years ago that I met a friends mother who had suffered a concussion from a fall without a helmet. She is the only case of that sort I'm personally aware of (doesn't mean it never happens, I know that it does, it just means in 45 years I've never met anyone else who a helmet would have made a difference for).

Of course statistics do vary year to year and location to location so the information I'm going to give you is from a national medical study done over a period of years. While I'm certain that a different set of years will show some variations the general information shouldn't actually change much (and they don't tend to keep constantly doing the same studies)
Head and neck (combined) make up about 1/5 of all equine related injuries (take out the neck and the head usually drops under 20%). My experiences has been pretty indicative of what equine related injuries generally are. So far I've been spared any fractures of the extremities (which actually represent a significant number), but I've cracked ribs (worst thing for long term pain), sprained wrist and ankles, injured hands, pulled groin and deep tissue bruises (second worst after cracked ribs). By greatest fear is a spinal injury (neck/back) since they are the ones most difficult to prevent most likely to have the greatest impact on your life (if you live).

Now on to the really fun stuff with a medical association study that was done comparing head (the area above the neck) injuries of several popular athletic activities. Comparing the number or reported injuries.
Golf has about 250% more injuries the equine activities.
Water skiing has about 80% more.
Tennis as just a few % more (it looks even worse if we compared the number of eye, mouth and ear, but we don't want to pick on tennis too much)
Snow skiing, while a couple of % points lower in number of head injuries has about 150% more concussions.
To be fair if law makers are going to require helmet for riding a horse, they should also require them for these more dangerous athletic activities. Granted, I haven't been involved in any of these since I was younger, but I don't recall anyone wearing helmets to play golf, tennis or when skiing even though they are at greater risk then I am when riding.

Let's get a little deeper since obviously we really want to look at protecting those who are most at risk. Statistically (were looking at percentages, not numbers, so it's not based on there being a larger number of one group riding then another, but on the amount of that group that's injured when compared to another. e.g. if 10 boys are riding and 9 of them get hurt then that's 90% where as if 1,000 girls are riding and 200 of them get hurt that's still only 20%).
Women riders suffer almost twice as many head injuries as men (it's ever greater in the younger ages through the 20's). Which means that even with more ladies riding the number of head injuries they suffer is significant enough that even the % is higher as well as the actually number (which means the numbers comparison would look worse than the % comparison)

The point to all this (I did have one ) is that based on actual medical studies of reported head injuries there are athletic activities that pose a significantly greater risk of head injury than horse activities so if riders need helmets then Tiger Woods needs to start wearing one, etc... (I wonder what Chris Evert would have looking like on the court with a helmet). Since females suffer a disproportionate number of equine related injuries they need more protection while men require less.
Now of course that would not be fair and I'm certainly not advocating that (remember, I think it's a matter of individual choice that should not be left up to someone who makes laws based on limited information.....ladies better hope they don't start doing their homework :lol, but it is what the medical study shows.


----------



## its lbs not miles (Sep 1, 2011)

Ooops.....not thinking. Getting old. Here's the correction.

Now on to the really fun stuff with a medical association study that was done comparing head (the area above the neck) injuries of several popular athletic activities. Comparing the number or reported injuries.
Golf has a % of about 2.5 X more injuries the equine activities.
Water skiing has a % of about .8 more.
Tennis as just a few % more (it looks even worse if we compared the number of eye, mouth and ear, but we don't want to pick on tennis too much)
Snow skiing, while a couple of % points lower in number of head injuries has a % of about 1.5 X more concussions.
To be fair if law makers are going to require helmet for riding a horse, they should also require them for these more dangerous athletic activities. Granted, I haven't been involved in any of these since I was younger, but I don't recall anyone wearing helmets to play golf, tennis or when skiing even though they are at greater risk then I am when riding.


----------



## Incitatus32 (Jan 5, 2013)

In response to 'was it excessive for Mary' I don't think so. It wasn't like this was her personal donkey, and that the owner wanted the rider to have a helmet. He knows the animal and knows what will make him feel better. I for one require every kid (under 17) to wear a helmet when they climb on my horse, it's just a "I don't want to see you get hurt on my horse" thing for me. I do however, find it incredibly excessive when barns or laws require anyone to wear a helmet to even be around horses on the ground, or when they require adults to wear them. Had the child been an adult I probably would have been 100% in favor that this was excessive. Be that as it may a helmet is not a cure all. 

As a child (which was not too terribly long ago) I hopped on mini donkies/ponies all the time without a helmet, got bucked off and was not hurt in any way. I made the choice to stop wearing a helmet every time I rode because that was my choice. (I'm still alive and kicking btw :wink Heck, my worst accident happened when I was wearing a helmet and my head was completely fine; my spine was the one that took the beating. One of the girls I used to help with lessons was wearing her helmet and because of that when she fell it broke her neck and left shards in her skull. 

Maybe it's a cultural thing for me (and my area) but I've always thought that common sense should be the deciding factor. If you don't make your kid wear a helmet then don't go crying when he/she has a brain injury, and you don't turn around and sue the owner because it's common sense that it's an animal and unpredictable. 

In short I'm trying to say that I can understand why the owner would want the child to wear it. There's something different about a kid getting hurt on my animal vs an adult, probably because the kid hasn't had an in depth biology class and/or fully understands the risks like an adult. Either way to make it mandatory for an adult who knows the risks or 'bubble wrapping' a person in a situation (like making them wear a helmet to go get a horse out of a field) that doesn't need bubble wrap is excessive and unnecessary in my opinion.


----------



## dbarabians (May 21, 2011)

SullysRider said:


> I live in Texas and I have not been to any barn or arena that doesn't require helmets on anyone under 18. No matter if they're just walking, if you get on a horse, they wear a helmet. Frankly if you think riding a horse while walking poses no risk, and that the donkey being small poses no risk, you've got another thing coming. There's a reason the law exists, it because of people like you who wouldn't put a helmet on their child in this instance, which many consider common sense to do so. So the laws takes care of that.


I live in Texas and know plenty of barns that do not require helmets and no fairs, youth shows, or other venues that require them.
If you are unaware of the civil code and how it protects horse owners then the next time you are at your barn read the sign I am sure is posted there. Shalom


----------



## SullysRider (Feb 11, 2012)

dbarabians said:


> I live in Texas and know plenty of barns that do not require helmets and no fairs, youth shows, or other venues that require them.
> If you are unaware of the civil code and how it protects horse owners then the next time you are at your barn read the sign I am sure is posted there. Shalom


I am fully aware of the civil code, thank you. It has nothing to do with the civil code and I have no idea where you made that connection. They don't require minors to wear helmets because of any civil code, they're being responsible.


----------



## HorseMom1025 (Jul 17, 2012)

Both barns we ride at (in TX) require helmets for anyone under 18 and waivers for all. Every show we've been to has waivers that we have to sign prior to stepping on the show grounds. They do it for insurance reasons. Of course they have those liability law signs posted everywhere too.

4H and even the Breed shows (AQHA and APHA) all mention helmets in their rule books, but they usually only strongly recommend them (except when jumping, then they are required).

As for donkeys, my friend rides and shows donkeys and yes, I've seen donkeys of all sizes go crazy and buck and kick. While very amusing in the minis, those little critters are pretty powerful and can launch their riders into the air. A scared donkey will freeze and refuse to move, but an angry donkey delivers a double barrel kick that packs a punch!

To me, I think the owner is wise to protect his *** (pun intended) and require Mary to wear a helmet.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## updownrider (Mar 31, 2009)

its lbs not miles said:


> Of course statistics do vary year to year and location to location so the information I'm going to give you is from a national medical study done over a period of years.


Is there a link to this unnamed national study that is available for anyone to read?


----------



## Yooper (Oct 12, 2013)

its lbs not miles said:


> Now on to the really fun stuff with a medical association study that was done comparing head (the area above the neck) injuries of several popular athletic activities. Comparing the number or reported injuries.
> Golf has about 250% more injuries the equine activities.
> Water skiing has about 80% more.
> Tennis as just a few % more (it looks even worse if we compared the number of eye, mouth and ear, but we don't want to pick on tennis too much)
> ...


To be honest, I am very leery of that medical study you posted. For example, the following quote from your post does not make sense:

"Snow skiing, while a couple of % points lower in number of head injuries has about 150% more concussions."

A concussion IS a traumatic head injury. How could there be fewer head injuries but more concussions? Do concussions not count as a head injury in this study? 

Please post where we could read this article as well. I definitely want to evaluate it and see if it actually is a quality medical study. What medical assosciation actually did the study? What was the sample size? Who funded the study? What did the researchers hypothesize they'd find, and how did it compare to their findings? Those are just a few questions that come to mind. Learning how to properly evaluate a research article is an important skill in life, if you are going to use them to prove a point. An article must have reliability and validity in order to be considered a quality research article.


----------



## Saddlebag (Jan 17, 2011)

Ask any hockey or football player whose careers have ended because of concussion even while wearing a helmet. I met a fellow who fell off his bike at 19 without a helmet. Two years later he still loses his train of thought, has slight spastic movements at times, etc. When I met him he was cycling to promote helmet use.


----------



## MyBoySi (Dec 1, 2011)

Saddlebag said:


> Ask any hockey or football player whose careers have ended because of concussion even while wearing a helmet. I met a fellow who fell off his bike at 19 without a helmet. Two years later he still loses his train of thought, has slight spastic movements at times, etc. When I met him he was cycling to promote helmet use.



How ironic


----------



## dbarabians (May 21, 2011)

SullysRider said:


> I am fully aware of the civil code, thank you. It has nothing to do with the civil code and I have no idea where you made that connection. They don't require minors to wear helmets because of any civil code, they're being responsible.


Sullysrider the Civil Code protects me as a livestock owner, organizations, and exhibitions, from being sued due to injury that might occur when handling livestock.
My brother and I own over 3000 acres we have too much to loose to not be informed about the law. if one of my horses bucks you off or one of the bulls gore you I am protected by Article 87 of the Texas Civil Code.
Anyone in Texas that requires you to wear a helmet is doing so for safety reasons not fear of a lawsuit. Shalom


----------



## SullysRider (Feb 11, 2012)

dbarabians said:


> Sullysrider the Civil Code protects me as a livestock owner, organizations, and exhibitions, from being sued due to injury that might occur when handling livestock.
> My brother and I own over 3000 acres we have too much to loose to not be informed about the law. if one of my horses bucks you off or one of the bulls gore you I am protected by Article 87 of the Texas Civil Code.
> Anyone in Texas that requires you to wear a helmet is doing so for safety reasons not fear of a lawsuit. Shalom


I don't think you understand that I was saying they were doing it NOT because of civil code, no where did I say or imply they were doing it because of the civil code.


----------



## its lbs not miles (Sep 1, 2011)

updownrider said:


> Is there a link to this unnamed national study that is available for anyone to read?


Ah, you 're going to make me work :lol:. Fair enough.

Yes and no. The one with just the basic % of what parts of the bodies is from a lecture I gave and I'm doing it from memory (which is why you didn't see the actual number for head and neck or the drop with just the head. The head stood out as the lowest number on % of injuries and I believe the upper extremities had the highest, but I couldn't remember all the actual numbers so I just stuck with the head (and that is, after all, the topic of this issue anyway :lol. I might keep looking for it though in case it's out there on the web somewhere. It was a great report. But there are loads of studies, so you can pick the ones you like :lol:

The good news is:
The fun stuff :lol: with comparing just the had injuries from various athletic activities I did find a link too (thank goodness :lol. And I do apologize for leaving out bowling (it was apparently part of the study too.... sometimes I miss or forget things...it does happen) Doesn't give all the actual numbers and details, but you can see the comparison (at least shows I didn't make it up :lol:, which is what I'm sure many are thinking). Many of the tests you'll come across are older, but I've found that in general they are still pretty accurate. Considering that any study is just a snap shot in time and if we pick a different time period or location there will always be variations.

And my thanks to the University of Vermont for keep all these records and even more so for posting them.

American Medical Equestrian Association

Also remember that statistics can me manipulated, which the helmet industry does quiet well. There are Dr out there, who like me, worry more about the spine based on what they've had to deal with when it comes to horses related injuries.

Or my favorite statistics game: What's the most popular pet in the US? Dogs or cats?
Cats, because there are more of them. (Well if it's just the number of them as pets that determines it then fish are more popular than cats....of course then never figure in ant farms or other insects)
The answer (since there were only two choices given) must be dogs. The reason (which is why you really need to look at the actual information and not "just" the statistics) is because more people own dogs than any other pet in the US.

I'm reminded why I left the podium 30 years ago after only 3 years and wouldn't stay for a raise :lol:. It's work teaching adults (even young adults :lol


----------



## its lbs not miles (Sep 1, 2011)

Yooper said:


> To be honest, I am very leery of that medical study you posted. For example, the following quote from your post does not make sense:
> 
> "Snow skiing, while a couple of % points lower in number of head injuries has about 150% more concussions."
> 
> ...


Sample size doesn't alter %, just the numbers (see my dog vs cat comparison). But in this case the sample size was more skiers than riders.


----------



## Clava (Nov 9, 2010)

I don' think statistics matter, if just one child is prevented from being harmed by wearing a riding hat (which is no big deal) then that is enough, that would make the whole difference to that family and their lives. 

Personally I would never forgive myself if my child was hurt when it could have been easily prevented, but those that aren't worried can do as they like (it is only children under 14 riding on adopted highways that fall under the legislation of having to wear a riding hat in the UK).


----------



## its lbs not miles (Sep 1, 2011)

Oh, thank you U of V. They posted loads more than what I talked about. I'll enjoy reading the rest.


----------



## its lbs not miles (Sep 1, 2011)

And ladies, you don't have to like the study, agree with the study or believe it.

Like any study that's done at a given time for a given place you can always find one that differs from another time or another place. :lol:

Industries have been doing that for decades. Using one study to contradict a different study. Why do you think statisticians can make so much money? :lol:


----------



## its lbs not miles (Sep 1, 2011)

Clava said:


> I don' think statistics matter, if just one child is prevented from being harmed by wearing a riding hat (which is no big deal) then that is enough, that would make the whole difference to that family and their lives.
> 
> Personally I would never forgive myself if my child was hurt when it could have been easily prevented, but those that aren't worried can do as they like (it is only children under 14 riding on adopted highways that fall under the legislation of having to wear a riding hat in the UK).


Agreed, but we need to put the helmets on all children doing any activity that could result in a head injury. The children that ride a horse aren't just more deserving of being protected form injury that the child who's skiing, golfing, bowling, playing tennis (or hand ball, basketball, baseball - where only batters get helmets, skating (which my ex once got a concussion from), etc, etc,, etc.......). They all deserve the same consideration and the same level of protection from being injured.

If just one child is protected from being injured in any athletic activity by wearing a protective helmet then it's all worth it to that child's family and friends. I couldn't agree more. Call your legislature and get them working on it. All activities that could potentially cause a head injury to a child will, by law, require that a helmet be worn by any child that participates.
But brace yourself. As noble, insightful, caring and ultimately safety conscious as that is, there well be a massive backlash. Unfortunately your politicians will realize this immediately and take the needed actions so a most noble idea will pretty much ignored.
Why? Because no one "really" cares that the potential for injuries exist. They only care about the odds. So you can protect the one child on a horse, but sacrifice untold or limitless children to injures with other activities so their families and friends can suffer, because no one bothered to worry about the children who play basketball, skate, etc....
It's just not fair how they only want to protect the chosen few.


----------



## its lbs not miles (Sep 1, 2011)

Yooper said:


> "Snow skiing, while a couple of % points lower in number of head injuries has about 150% more concussions."
> 
> A concussion IS a traumatic head injury. How could there be fewer head injuries but more concussions? Do concussions not count as a head injury in this study?


Sorry, I forgot to address your question.

While a concussion is certainly a traumatic head injury not all head injuries are traumatic and not all traumatic head injuries are concussions. Being blinded as a result of an impact to the eye is a traumatic injury, but not a concussion (as is having teeth knocked out, nose broken, etc, etc....)


----------



## updownrider (Mar 31, 2009)

its lbs not miles - this report is more current than the data you used in your argument. But since you later say "any study that's done at a given time for a given place you can always find one that differs from another time or another place" the point of posting statistics (or any poster that asked over and over for them) was pointless in the first place. That said, you might want to scroll down to the section on Horseback Riding.

AANS - Sports-related Head Injury


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

Clava said:


> I don' think statistics matter, if just one child is prevented from being harmed by wearing a riding hat (which is no big deal) then that is enough, that would make the whole difference to that family and their lives...


That rationale would have all of us riding with vests. Actually, since injuries while riding are not totally preventable, that rationale would require that no child ride a horse. Nor could they handle horses from the ground, since somewhere in the area of 10-20% of injuries occur to someone on the ground who is near a horse.

No one would be able to ride motorcycles, climb mountains, or even leave the home for an unneeded shopping trip. It sounds nice, but in reality, no one would ever live their life according to that principle."_Compassionate fellow-feeling, however, can soon become self-indulgent and lead to spiritual pride. It imparts an inner glow, like a shot of whiskey on a cold day, but like whiskey it can prevent the clear-headedness which we need at least as much as we need warmth of heart. Pascal said that the beginning of morality was to think well; generosity of spirit is not enough._" - Theodore Dalrymple​


----------



## Skyseternalangel (Jul 23, 2011)

bsms said:


> That rationale would have all of us riding with vests. Actually, since injuries while riding are not totally preventable, that rationale would require that no child ride a horse. Nor could they handle horses from the ground, since somewhere in the area of 10-20% of injuries occur to someone on the ground who is near a horse.
> 
> No one would be able to ride motorcycles, climb mountains, or even leave the home for an unneeded shopping trip. It sounds nice, but in reality, no one would ever live their life according to that principle."_Compassionate fellow-feeling, however, can soon become self-indulgent and lead to spiritual pride. It imparts an inner glow, like a shot of whiskey on a cold day, but like whiskey it can prevent the clear-headedness which we need at least as much as we need warmth of heart. Pascal said that the beginning of morality was to think well; generosity of spirit is not enough._" - Theodore Dalrymple​


It's a CHILD versus an adult. Adults fornunately and unfortunately (lol) can make their own decisions. Children should take all safety precautions that the parents and the owners of the equines ask them to take.

I won't let ANYONE ride my horse, especially a child, without a helmet.


----------



## DancingArabian (Jul 15, 2011)

dbarabians said:


> Sullysrider the Civil Code protects me as a livestock owner, organizations, and exhibitions, from being sued due to injury that might occur when handling livestock.
> My brother and I own over 3000 acres we have too much to loose to not be informed about the law. if one of my horses bucks you off or one of the bulls gore you I am protected by Article 87 of the Texas Civil Code.
> Anyone in Texas that requires you to wear a helmet is doing so for safety reasons not fear of a lawsuit. Shalom


The code does prevent them from getting sued, but you can't tell me that it's good business for a boarding barn to have students getting their head smashed in because they weren't wearing a helmet. If you're new to horses, which barn are you going to go to - the one that has had incidents where a kid got their head caved in, or the one that didn't?


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

It would be interesting to see what the head injury rate is from riding horses when not involved in jumping.

"Among the study participants, 34 (6.1%) had been hospitalized at least once because of a riding injury and 153 (27.5%) had been treated by a physician within the previous 2 years for such an injury. The overall injury rate was 0.6 per 1000 riding hours. Among those injured, sprains or strains (41.8%), lacerations or bruises (40.0%), and fractures or dislocations (33.3%) were the most common types of injury. A total of 27.5% of those injured sustained concussions or other head injuries. Riding 15 to 24 hours per month (odds ratio [OR] = 2.04), being female (OR = 1.81), and riding English style (OR = 1.77) were the characteristics most strongly correlated with injury."

Horseback riding injuries among children and you... [J Fam Pract. 1994] - PubMed - NCBI

"UNITED STATES PONY CLUBS involve youth under the age of 22 years, and record all accidents whether or not an injury occurs. A concussion is defined as any momentary confusion, seeing stars, etc. During the last two years, ASTM SEI protective hats replaced the previous USPC standard helmet. If a head/face injury occurred, the injured was more than twice as likely to require hospitalization. If a head injury occurred 68% had a concussion. *During the last two years using SEI approved protective helmets, head/face/neck injuries decreased 38.1%; head injury 27.2%*, face 63.1%, and neck 15.4% from the previous 8 years of the study. *The severity decreased: the need of inpatient hospital treatment decreased by 41.3% and those requiring physician office or emergency room treatment by 44.4%.*"

"The place where most accidents occurred was on cross country. Cross country involves jumping fixed obstacles at speed. If a horse hits one of these obstacles, either the rider or horse and rider will fall. The second most common area was either stadium or other unspecified. Warmup areas for the jumping phases were the next most likely place for an injury. It comes as no surprise the jumping phases accounted for 86% of the injuries. Dressage accounted for only 1% and the stable area and other accounted for 12%, again indicating the surprisingly large number of unmounted injuries."

American Medical Equestrian Associaton

"Horse race meetings:
Flat 1 in 292 rides / Jump (National Hunt) 1 in 15 rides" - Table 11

"With regard to admission to spinal units for horse riding accidents, there are far more lumbar and thoracic injuries than cervical in contrast to all other sporting injuries (Table 12) which are almost entirely cervical injuries, indicating that there are different mechanisms involved...This would be in keeping with the speculation that in horse riding accidents there are two methods of riding: either jockey style (cross country position) with the head forward, where the rider would be more likely to sustain a cervical injury accompanied inevitably by a head injury, and classical style where the head is held high and the rider would be likely to fall on to the buttocks.

Jumping is the most dangerous horse riding activity. In Australia, injury rates were found to be especially high among event riders and in the USA cross country schooling accounted for 22.5% of accidents at pony clubs."

http://img2.timg.co.il/forums/1_100057126.pdf

If someone really wants to make a dent in injuries to kids, outlawing jumping by minors would probably have a bigger impact than mandating helmets.


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

Skyseternalangel said:


> It's a CHILD versus an adult. Adults fornunately and unfortunately (lol) can make their own decisions.


PARENTS are welcome to make any decisions they wish FOR their kids. If the PARENT of Mary felt the risk justified a helmet, then I'd have no heartburn with either 'Mary' wearing a helmet or finding a different 'Mary' - it is, after all, a play. 

I understand the law in the UK mandates the helmet use. I merely think the law is poorly thought out.


----------



## its lbs not miles (Sep 1, 2011)

updownrider said:


> its lbs not miles - this report is more current than the data you used in your argument. But since you later say "any study that's done at a given time for a given place you can always find one that differs from another time or another place" the point of posting statistics (or any poster that asked over and over for them) was pointless in the first place. That said, you might want to scroll down to the section on Horseback Riding.
> 
> AANS - Sports-related Head Injury


Certainly more current by over 20 years :lol:.

I'm glad to see that the head injury % is still the lowest of the four areas of the body at 18% of injuries, but they're addressing the head alone so if they add the neck it should still get over 20%. However they are only addressing potential brain injury so the neck would be pointless.

Also found it interesting that how many more activities were including in this study. I don't think they should have classified water skiing and snowmobiling the way they did. Yes, they are a water and a snow activity I would not have grouped them with swimming, tubing and water polo; or snow skiing, snow boarding and sledding. IMO motorized activities should be classified differently. they should have been in the power recreational vehicle group (certainly snowmobiles).

Golf was listed lower, but that's to be expected since most of the severe head injuries in golf involve the face. The ones impacting the brain represent a much smaller %. Yet, still a respectable number at 10,035 when compared to riding at 14,466 for potentially brain damaging injuries (that is what we're talking about now?)
I know there was some risks in gymnastics and cheerleading, but wow, it's almost as bad as riding a horse for potential brain damaging injuries (lets get helmets on those cheerleaders).

Also noticed that horseback riding didn't even get an honorable mention among the list of top 10 head injury categories for children 14 and below.
Even trampoline made that list.

Noticed that the top two (cycling and football) do "technically" (and in many cases legally) require helmets and yet they each have more the 2X the numbers. Baseball/softball and basket ball do not require helmets. In fact except for batting helmets are not worn for either activity and yet they both have over 2X the number of injuries too.

Of the 20 activities (in some cases groups, but we can only use what they give) used in this study 11 are rated to be more potentially dangerous than riding a horse (including "fitness and health club"?....come on :lol. Most of these do not require helmets (nor are the ever worn)

Now on to the part I know you were anxious for me to read .
Horseback riding:
First I'd like to say that while I might disagree with some of how they grouped some activities (which would certainly have altered the numbers) nothing in how they did the grouping of activities had any bearing on the numbers regarding horseback riding. That's important, because is makes the riding numbers "cleaner" (if I can use the term).
They do draw the conclusion and state that wearing a helmet would decrease the severity of the potentially brain damaging injuries to the head (interesting that they didn't reach the conclusion that it was reduce the number of them....I find that interesting, because it's the conclusion I would have drawn from the information they've given, but I haven't seen all the information they had for this study, so they could have a very good reason for not saying that).

The also point out that "it is the height from which the rider falls that most significantly impacts the severity of the injury". While it only takes a couple of feet to create the potential for brain damage. A rider's head is, of course higher than that when on a horse, but then so are most school aged children's head when they're standing up (hopefully they don't trip and fall).

Yes, I saved the best for last . In this study (and I do not dispute this information) they found that out of these activities horseback riding resulted in 11.7 % of the traumatic brain injuries. What people seem to miss is the there are 88.3% still being caused by activities, most of which, where no one does or is required to wear a helmet (nor is anyone every likely to require one or in some cases even allow one).

Thank you for letting me know about the study. I truly did enjoy it (which I normally do when I can gain more information).

Now, I still believe that's an individuals choice. In the case of minors (who are not considered to be mature enough to make these decisions) I think the same rules should apply consistently. e.g. if they make a law that requires all minor riders to wear a helmet then all minors participating and any activity that could potentially result in a traumatic brain injury should be required to wear on too. Fair is fair and excluding groups is not fair. All minors deserve the same protection under the law (or rules or what ever you want to call it). It's not right to only protect children who cycle, ride horses, play football and hockey. Children who participate in basketball, cheerleading, dancing (you can read the studies list for yourselves ) all deserve that same care, consideration AND PROTECTION.


----------



## Clava (Nov 9, 2010)

bsms said:


> That rationale would have all of us riding with vests. Actually, since injuries while riding are not totally preventable, that rationale would require that no child ride a horse. Nor could they handle horses from the ground, since somewhere in the area of 10-20% of injuries occur to someone on the ground who is near a horse.
> 
> No one would be able to ride motorcycles, climb mountains, or even leave the home for an unneeded shopping trip. It sounds nice, but in reality, no one would ever live their life according to that principle. "_Compassionate fellow-feeling, however, can soon become self-indulgent and lead to spiritual pride. It imparts an inner glow, like a shot of whiskey on a cold day, but like whiskey it can prevent the clear-headedness which we need at least as much as we need warmth of heart. Pascal said that the beginning of morality was to think well; generosity of spirit is not enough._" - Theodore Dalrymple​


 
On your own land, or any private land, do what you like so it wouldn't " have all of us riding with vests". But I also feel that it is a good thing that you have to also wear a helmet to ride a motorbike on highways and that you must wear seat belts in cars. If it means less children die / injured on our roads then what is the problem?? No-one who lives here seems to be bothered (and generally support it), so it is not an issue for us, and really doesn't affect anyone else.

This law just refers to what you do on roads, no-one is saying that in other areas you have to wear a hat, but in the UK we actually WANT to use riding hats and as a nation support this law. TBH those that don't wear hats in the UK are rather regarded as suitable candidates for a Darwin award.


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

"_TBH those that don't wear hats in the UK are rather regarded as suitable candidates for a Darwin award._"

Thank you for calling those who don't wear helmets 'stupid'. Since riding in an English saddle is associated with increased risk of injury, should 'smart' people reject riding in an English saddle? Since jumping involves significantly greater risk than going helmetless, should minors be banned from jumping, at least in 'smart' countries?


----------



## Skyseternalangel (Jul 23, 2011)

bsms said:


> "_TBH those that don't wear hats in the UK are rather regarded as suitable candidates for a Darwin award._"
> 
> Thank you for calling those who don't wear helmets 'stupid'.


No, that's not what Darwin Awards label people as. Please do not jump to hasty generalizations.

Darwin Awards: Darwin Awards

I quote

*"The Darwin Awards salute the improvement of 
the human genome by honoring those who 
accidentally remove themselves from it..."*



Now I hate to assume, but likely the reason those in the UK believe them to be suitable candidates is because due to their actions, they will likely accidentally remove themselves from the human populace. Actions are stupid, not the persons executing them.


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

"_Actions are stupid, not the persons executing them._"

The Darwin Awards are for those who improve humanity by dying early. Thus the inescapable conclusion that the majority of western riders would do the world a favor by dying early, since the majority of western riders do not choose to use helmets. 

Of course, it could be that most western riders are like me, and have never met anyone who injured their head while riding apart from breaking horses. I'm not saying they don't exist, but the numbers seem to be pretty low.

But please notice I do NOT say jumpers deserve a Darwin Award for participating in a higher-risk activity - one that is more dangerous than riding the flats helmetless. I have no problem with someone choosing to jump, or allowing their child to jump - although I wouldn't make that choice for MY kid. I don't think jumpers are stupid, or that they should die before reproducing to improve the gene pool of humanity.

Jumpers accept risks that I don't choose to accept, as do rock climbers and folks like my nephew who rode dirt bikes or a very smart engineer I knew who lived to race motorcycles - and who had a steel plate in his head, and once spent 6 months in the hospital. We each assess our risks and live or die accordingly. But the risk of head injury while sitting on a 250 lb donkey being led in a play certainly is minimal - or at least, vastly lower than allowing a child to learn jumping.


----------



## SullysRider (Feb 11, 2012)

But what you can't deny is that there is a risk, and it's not as small as you like to think. Why do you have such a problem with a child wearing a helmet? A lot of things involve risk, so we should do whatever we can to be safe, if that involves wearing a helmet, so be it.


----------



## Skyseternalangel (Jul 23, 2011)

bsms said:


> "_Actions are stupid, not the persons executing them._"
> 
> The Darwin Awards are for those who improve humanity by dying early. Thus the inescapable conclusion that the majority of western riders would do the world a favor by dying early, since the majority of western riders do not choose to use helmets.
> 
> ...


I really don't understand where you're coming from, at all. I'm going to bow out of this discussion.


----------

