Reasons for driving children to school

doolox wrote: »

Very stupid policies.

That is THE macro reason in the Irish context.

beauf wrote: »

You're looking at the problem very simplistically, from a very insular point of view. There's more to it than simply getting to work. Or getting to school.

Whatever the problem is, it never stopped me getting to work, or school, by bike.

Mind you, I still use the car for some school runs. I have my own reasons/excuses. Speaking of which, must dash!

beauf wrote: »

Your premise was that the school is on the way to work, so there isn't an extra cost to stopping at the school on the way. Your saving is delusional in that context.

Sorry, I have no idea what you're getting at there.

My understanding was that you were saying that the likes of a cargobike is very expensive, implying that it is not an affordable option for school travel.

I was simply pointing out that even a pricey bike can be bought and maintained for a fraction of what it costs to run a car, which means that cost cannot be used to justify driving instead of cycling. It is clearly the other way round: one of the many justifications for cycling to school instead of driving is the obviously huge cost saving.

AltAccount wrote: »

How were the options presented?

If you gave me the following options and only allowed me to pick one:

1. It’s on the way to work
2. The distance between home and the school is quite far
3. It is safer for children to be dropped at the school door
4. There are no public transport services available
5. Are regularly running late in the morning.

I'd probably pick number 3, despite numbers 1, 2 & 4 also being true.

If I pick number 3, will you interpret that as me dropping off the kids and heading home rather than onwards to work?

I haven't seen the original research or the questionnaire, so I'm not in a position to comment.

However, I did refer to another report, published by the Heart Alliance/Irish Heart Foundation and said to be based on the 2006 Census, which stated that "60% of parents who drop off by car don’t go to work".

What's of interest in the context of this thread is that the need to drive to work is often cited anecdotally as a reason for many if not most people doing the school run by car.

As I've already said, I had someone give me that exact "reason" again today, in the context of a discussion about the traffic mayhem around a particular school. He had nothing to go on except supposition, which is a lot weaker than either of the surveys referred to in this thread (eTrip and Census).

What is of most interest to me is that the supposed work travel imperative is being used to justify not just routine use of the car for the school run, but also the seemingly inevitable traffic and parking free-for-all around many schools. The cultural context is that motorists and their offspring are Too Important To Walk, because they have jobs to go to or whatever, and that parents and their children who walk, cycle and take the bus to school should just move over and make room for all the cars.

In fact my interlocutor today suggested that I should just avoid a particular route when cycling away from the school, after I pointed out that I frequently encountered motorists cutting a corner at speed and driving over the Stop line on the wrong side of the road in order to get as close as possible to the school (perhaps as little as 50 metres away). No mention of adherence to the Rules of the Road or the possibility that the law might be enforced. In other words, the onus is on the children and their parents walking and cycling to school to keep themselves safe, and nothing will be done about the motorists' behaviour, because they are busy people with important things to do under time pressure. If that's not another Irish two-tier system I'll eat my child's cycle helmet.

_Brian wrote: »

It seriously discredits a person's point if they cannot accept that it cannot be 100% applied to EVERY situation no matter what.

Quote/link?

monument wrote: »

Another quote which answers a lot of the OP's question:

It is often assumed that short trips could easily be made by bicycle or on foot (e.g., DfT, 2011, pg 5), and the statistics suggest that there are many short trips that could be converted. According to the National Travel Survey (2010) 36.1% of trips under 2 miles and 53.0% of journeys under 5 miles undertaken by car, with walking accounting for 23.4% of all trips and cycling only 1.5% of all journeys. When compared to other European countries, whilst levels of walking are broadly similar, cycling in Britain is substantially less common than elsewhere. For instance in Sweden and Finland 9% of all trips are by bicycle, in Germany 10%, in Denmark 18% and in the Netherlands 26%. The research reported here suggests that assuming trips (in the UK) could be undertaken by bike or foot just because they are short is a rather simplistic approach that fails to fully understand the nature of the problem. A purely distance based understanding of the problem ignores difficulties caused by the physical environment, complex household interactions and a perception that walking and cycling are not normal.

It all depends on where the school and your workplace are -- maybe there's another practical solution, but maybe there's not.

I'm not sure that the above UK research is saying anything new in that regard.

Distance is an important indicator, and a very useful starting point, but it is far from the whole story.

I have already described in this thread the new school travel situation I have to adapt to, starting just today:

Iwannahurl wrote: »

The trip home by bike is very different from the trip to school in the morning. The later time means encountering more motoring mayhem than last year (people driving and parking on footpaths etc) and the change of direction means that there are new challenges in terms of safety and access, eg dangerous junctions and lack of pedestrian-priority crossings that the 7-year-old can use.

I don't cycle on the footpath, so I now have to work out a way to get home that allows me to stay close and which does not expose the child to danger.

Not easy. When I drove I didn't have to think about such things, a luxury that people in motorised metal boxes very much enjoy.

The distance is the same (3 km) but the trip to school and the trip home are quite different in terms of barriers and hazards. In fact I had to sit down and discuss with IWH-OH what the best route home might be, and which I will try out on Monday.

We don't have to do that when travelling by car.

However, it is also an undeniable fact that well over 80% of our neighbours aged 5 years and up travel by car to work, school or college. Yet their children go to the same set of schools, and their parents to the same parts of the city generally.

On the same routes to the same locations, the distances and the conditions are self-evidently the same, yet there is the hard reality of the 80% in cars versus the 20% travelling by other modes.

Perhaps the research should be focusing on the positives: eg the individual or family factors which determine or predict cycling or walking to school rather than driving, all other things being equal.

AltAccount wrote: »

It strikes me, based on your descriptions so far, that you might be happier and safer in the car.
... your commentary about cycling to school is far from positive.

I tried driving the school run once or twice a couple of years ago. Total insanity, imo. How anyone can pay so much of their hard-earned to sit in a car travelling at less than walking (or cycling) pace is beyond me.

I simply lack the patience for such carry-on. The greatest satisfaction with cycling is that, for the most part, you can keep moving.

IWH-OH took the bus a few times and had the same experience. Fuming at the bus stop waiting for a bus stuck in traffic somewhere on the route, and watching cyclist after cyclist whizzing by.

Active travel to school is inherently positive. The negatives are all environmental, human-made and modifiable.