Galway Cycling Campaign -Feachtas Rothaiochta na Gaillimhe

Seatbelt Laws

Why You Should Be Worried

© Galway Cycling Campaign: November 2000

What's the issue?

The Irish Government, The National Roads Authority, and the National Safety Council are pushing for seatbelt wearing rates by Irish motorists to be raised from appx. 55% to 85% or higher by using "on the spot fines". 

So why should I be worried?

The history of seatbelt legislation is of drastic effects for those outside cars such as pedestrians, cyclists and motorcyclists.  The UK's seatbelt law was accompanied by increases in deaths to pedestrians of 135 per year and of deaths to cyclists of 40 per year.  In 1981 the UK Department of Transport had commissioned a study on the effects of seatbelt laws in Sweden, West Germany, Denmark, Spain, Belgium, Finland, the Netherlands and Norway.  The study, "the Isles report" [1] used the UK and Italy as controls for non-seatbelt countries. When the wider effects were examined the author was alarmed to find the predominant effect was of increased numbers of injuries to non-car users. Similar effects are also reported from Australia [2] , New Zealand [3] and Canada [4] . The author predicted, that in the UK, deaths to other road users would climb by 150 per year in the event of compulsory seatbelt wearing legislation. In terms of injuries to other road users the prediction was for a 11% increase in pedestrian injuries with injuries to other road users climbing by 12 to 13% (numerically 7,000 and 36,000 respectively).  The UK authorities suppressed the report and the seatbelt law was imposed anyway, resulting in significantly increased cyclist/pedestrian deaths.  A recent study of 19,000 cyclist and 72,000 pedestrian casualties seen at the time suggests that seatbelt wearing drivers were 11-13% more likely to injure pedestrians and 7-8% more likely to injure cyclists [5].

Won't the lives lost among cyclists and pedestrians be outweighed by lives saved among vehicle occupants?

No, the history of seat belt legislation is one of complete failure to demonstrate the predicted savings in lives and injuries among car occupants.  In countries such as Ireland [6] , Sweden [7] and New Zealand compulsory seatbelt wearing legislation was accompanied by clear increases in deaths among car occupants.  The "Isles report" on the experiences of eight European countries predicted that in the UK a seatbelt law would be followed by a 2.3% increase in fatalities among car occupants. In Ireland our 1979 seatbelt law was accompanied by a 4% increase in deaths among car occupants, which rose from 248 in 1978 to 258 in 1979. If this has been a consistent effect then during the intervening years at least an additional 150 Irish car users have lost their lives as a result of the activities of Ireland's seatbelt advocates.

What about car passengers?

In the UK the introduction of compulsory seatbelts for front seat occupants was accompanied by a 75 per year increase in deaths among rear seat occupants [8] .  This suggests that seatbelt wearing by drivers had a negative effect on survival expectancies for rear seat passengers.  This seems to provide an argument for making these passengers wear seatbelts as well however this issue is not clear-cut.

So what about child passengers?

This is a very emotive issue that is often played up in the media by "safety experts".  Unfortunately, according to the official UK accident statistics the extension of compulsory seatbelt wearing to child passengers was accompanied by a 10% increase in fatalities and a 12% increase in injuries among these children [9] .  Causes may include 1) increased risk taking by parents leading to more crashes or 2) seat belt induced injuries caused by using seatbelts designed for adults.  One co-author of a study of 2077 crash-involved children has publicly stated, "The early graduation of kids into adult lap and shoulder belts is a leading cause of child-occupant injuries and deaths." [10]   The resulting "seat-belt syndrome" injuries are reported to include severed intestines, ruptured diaphragms, spinal damage and also increased risk of head injury [11] . More information here not miniature adults.

But are Pedestrian/Cyclist deaths really a problem in Ireland?

Ireland already has the highest child pedestrian death rate and third highest pedestrian death rate in the EU.  In Galway 28% of accidents involve pedestrians but these account for 43% of the fatalities in the city.   In Galway City it has been found that in 71% of injury accidents involving motor vehicles the driver is unscathed [12] , this amply demonstrates where Irish “road safety” policies have placed, and continue to place, the burden of death and injuries.    Ireland has among the highest levels of heart disease and obesity in the EU and is facing a public health crisis as government policy forces more and more cyclists and pedestrians off the roads.  About 13,000 Irish citizens die of heart disease and related conditions annually.

Why does seat belt legislation have this effect?

There are two main theories, the Risk homeostasis [13] and Risk Compensation [14] hypotheses.  These both argue that drivers adjust their driving behaviour in response to an increased sense of personal safety.  A related explanation was recently offered via the British Psychological Society [15] .   This proposes that during near misses the actual physical restraint experienced by seatbelt wearers leads to a reduced sense of threat to life.  A reduced sense of threat may then lead to the adoption of a more dangerous driving style.  Other researchers have attempted to explain the failure of seatbelt laws by appealing to the “selective recruitment” hypothesis.  This argues that seatbelt laws haven't had the expected results for vehicle occupants because those drivers who take the most risks are also the least likely to use seatbelts [16] .  Unfortunately the selective recruitment hypothesis does not explain why deaths should go up following seatbelt laws.           

The evidence in favour of seatbelt legislation.

Seatbelt advocates rely on two types of study, experiments using crash test dummies and hospital based studies.  Experiments using crash test dummies do not allow for any effect of seat belt wearing on driving behaviour.  In hospital studies one or more hospitals may report a reduction in fatalities and injuries to car occupants.  However, there is an inconsistency between individual hospital based studies showing one effect and the larger, more reliable, population based studies that show no such effect or even the opposite effect.  This suggests that many hospitals are choosing not to publish their results.  It is now accepted that there is indeed a problem of bias in how results from medical studies actually get offered for publication, the “missing data problem” [17] .  The advocates of seatbelt laws must also choose to disregard the effects of such measures for people outside cars.  The car lobby generally tends to view non-car users as “somebody else’s problem”.

Official foreknowledge of this effect

Concerns about the actual effects of seatbelt legislation were raised with the national authorities in a detailed submission by the Galway Cycling Campaign in October 1998.  However the issue is common knowledge within the road safety industry.

So why are the Irish authorities continuing to push seatbelts?

It may be simple embarrassment combined with a political desire to avoid conflict with the car lobby over proven measures such as enforcement of the speed regulations and general traffic regulations.  However, like arms or tobacco, cars are big business.  Car “safety” features are a useful selling point while car crashes are worth a lot of money to the industry.   The Isles report found that in all eight European countries studied there was an increase in traffic accidents.  Following our seatbelt law in 1979 Ireland experienced an increase in "material damage" crashes as well as an increase in car occupant fatalities.  All we can do is point out the wider policy context of compulsory car tests, scrappage schemes, hostile road design practices and apparent non-enforcement of the speed limits. You'll have to draw your own conclusions.        

So what can I do?

You must be aware that the agencies involved are being selective in their use of evidence.  Note that the National Roads Authority has been promoting seatbelts while they have long been promoting the use of junction design practices that may be associated with increased risk of collisions [18] .  Seek an explanation for the failure of the government to institute a penalty points system and the standard European hierarchy of urban speed limits.  Ask your TD to explain why seatbelt legislation is being pushed at a time when Ireland has the highest child pedestrian death rate in the EU and 99% of cars on main urban roads already exceed the existing speed limits [19] .  Seek an explanation for the absence of speed cameras and red light cameras in your town.  Query the general absence of area wide traffic calming schemes and the government's failure to introduce "home zone" legislation.  Above all keep asking awkward questions, you are not alone.

© Galway Cycling Campaign: November 2000, Update June/July 2001