Summary: This article was published in 1991, when LAB was still known as the League of American Wheelmen. It is still one of the best on the subject, and we are grateful to LAB for permission to put it up.

The League of American Wheelmen, as part of its mission to support bicycling as safe recreation and transportation for people of all ages, reiterates standards developed by the Snell Memorial Foundation or the American National Standards Institute (ANSI Standard Z90.4). A helmet is an important protective device, which, when coupled with safe and responsible bicycle riding, has the potential for greatly reducing the risk of accidental injury. While helmets protect against injuries, law enforcement and education prevent accidents. All three carefully designed and complementary elements are necessary for a truly effective injury prevention program. The League recommends as the first priority a comprehensive bicycle safety education program initiated at the elementary school level and taught by certified instructors according to the principles of Effective Cycling. Such a program naturally would include promotion of helmet use and active enforcement of laws.

Meanwhile, events have overtaken the League's initiatives on the helmet issue. Strong lobbying groups, including the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Safe Kids Coalition, have been promoting bills requiring children to wear helmets when riding as passengers on bicycles, and setting standards for child carriers. The child carrier industry has also played a part in drafting these bills.

Such bills became law in California (1986) and New York (1989), and were introduced in 1990 in Massachusetts, New Jersey, Missouri, Washington, and probably several other states-maybe yours. A bill requiring all bicyclists to wear helmets almost became law in Howard County, Maryland. Such a bill has been introduced in New York and may well pass. Proposed helmet legislation, often drafted by non-bicyclists, may include requirements for informational tags (hangtags) affixed to all bicycles sold, for reflectors that are incorporated as part of the helmet design, or even other measures that cannot be foreseen. You can help greatly by forwarding copies of pending helmet legislation from your jurisdiction to the L.A.W. National Office with your comments allowing us an opportunity to evaluate it.

We bicyclists are the constituency for helmet laws, and we must look out for our own interests. No matter how good the intentions of the proponents of the legislation, the legislation may fail to achieve its purpose of increasing helmet use or may have unintended and damaging side effects.

The League is an advocate for the rights of all bicyclists, including those who do not wear helmets-still the majority of the general bicycling population. Helmet legislation must be written very carefully to avoid some very serious unintended consequences for people who have not yet been convinced to wear helmets, and for all bicyclists.

All of the helmet and child passenger bills the League has reviewed fail to take this into account, and the Board has taken a position opposing them. However, the Board has agreed to have this background document circulated to League volunteers, so volunteers can steer the development of mandatory helmet bills in order that they not create unreasonable problems for bicyclists.

This policy gives the League leverage with organizations lobbying for helmet use in their development of improved law enforcement and education programs. The Safe Kids Campaign and the American Pediatric Association are already developing such programs, but a review of the materials which they are distributing makes it clear they need the League's expertise to make these programs effective.

Mandatory helmet laws may be unstoppable; helmets have become a "Mom and apple pie" issue, due to widespread publicity in the media, and to recent studies which strongly confirm the point that helmets are effective. In this light, the important issue is no longer whether you support or oppose mandatory helmet legislation, but how to achieve an outcome which works best to protect bicyclists' rights. If you are personally in favor of mandatory, helmet laws, do not give your support too easily to a potentially damaging law; if you are opposed to these laws, please understand that you may need to compromise in order to avoid enactment of a truly damaging law and to avoid making the League look unreasonable in opposing all helmet bills.

It is in the interest of bicyclists, however, to oppose enactment of any proposed mandatory helmet law which fails any of the following tests:

1 ) A bill should specifically require that helmets meet the ANSI Z90.4 or Snell Memorial Foundation standards. Child carriers should be required to protect the passenger from contact with moving parts of the bicycle, should have a safety harness, and should meet current industry standards. Most bills introduced this year do mention these standards.

2) It is reasonable for a law to set a maximum age or weight limit for a child transported in a child seat on a bicycle, but, a provision requiring the bicycle operator to wear a helmet must apply to all, with no exemption based on age or experience. To cite a bad example, the Illinois motorcycle helmet law requires helmets only for learners; for Illinois motorcyclists, getting rid of the helmet becomes a rite of passage and a sign of "maturity."

3) A bill should provide an incentive for use of protective equipment. A fine or other penalty should be revocable upon proof of acquisition of the equipment. This is the case with the current California, New York, and Howard County, Maryland laws.

4) A bill should address the issue of making helmets available to all of the bicyclists required to wear them. To provide a comparison: although all cars are equipped with the seat belts that are mandated by law as standard equipment, bikes are not equipped with helmets. A suddenly passed helmet bill may exhaust the supply of helmets in the stores.

Also, poor people may be hard-pressed to afford helmets. The American Pediatric Association has a laudable helmet discount campaign operating through doctors' offices, and there are other similar programs, but it is only reasonable to acknowledge that not everyone will be able to afford a helmet even after a law is enacted.

In states and communities with an active bicycle program, it may be possible to address the availability problem directly with helmet discount programs. One suggestion is that helmets be made available free to any children who are in subsidized school lunch programs. These helmets should be on loan rather than outright gifts, to avoid the incentive for children to sell them.

A helmet loan program requires substantial funding, and should be one part of a comprehensive bicycle/pedestrian education program in the schools. Such a comprehensive program is the only truly effective way to reduce the nation's approximately 1,600 yearly child pedestrian fatalities and 350 child bicyclist fatalities: a helmet law without such a program may be a step in the right direction, but, in fact, will have only a limited effect. The state of Florida is the leader in developing such comprehensive education programs. The League office or the Florida Bicycle/ Pedestrian Coordinator's office can provide more information about them.

5) A bill must not set a blanket minimum age limit for passengers on bicycles, for example a prohibition against transporting a child below one year of age on a bicycle.

The American Pediatric Association justifies such a prohibition on the grounds that an infant unable to hold the head up can not yet safely wear a helmet. The League strongly opposes this provision for the following reasons:

a) It is necessary to distinguish between passengers carried "on" a bicycle and those transported "by" a bicycle. While current child seat carriers and helmets are not appropriate for carrying infants on a bicycle, a blanket prohibition against passengers under one year of age will close off the development and marketing of other suitable carriers (for example, a bassinet-type carrier which would enclose and protect the entire baby without the need for a separate helmet supported by the neck). Consequently, any infant-based prohibitions should be revocable upon the development of an approved device.

b) Alternate means to transport infants by bicycle currently exist, for example, bicycle trailers with roll-bar protection and a safety harness for the passenger(s). These are used by many League members and other cyclists. Therefore, a blanket prohibition against passengers under one year of age will damage the bicycle trailer industry and discourage further trailer development. c) Bicycling is necessary transportation for many, not a luxury which may arbitrarily be denied on the basis of age. When legislatures grappled with dangers to young children in automobiles, the solution was not to prohibit children from riding in cars but to promote the development and marketing of child car seats. Bicycling deserves the same treatment.

d) The number of injuries in bicycle accidents to infants under one year of age is relatively small and not a significant public health problem. In fact, they constitute less than 0.1 percent of all bicycle-related deaths and injuries.

e) In the minority of states that have not yet adopted the rule of comparative negligence, a contributory negligence problem arises when carrying a child below the age permitted by a law. This problem is discussed in section eight.

6) A law should not require a restraint device for a child "passenger" astride a regular seat of a tandem bicycle. Children pedaling on the rear of tandems do not represent a serious public-safety problem; most people who take the trouble to set up a tandem for a child stoker are very experienced and safe cyclists. A child riding on a tandem, which is controlled by the adult and is made for stable riding characteristics with two persons aboard, is far safer than a child riding his or her own bicycle or tricycle. Also, tandeming is an unequaled way for a child to learn safe bicycling skills.

7) A model bill should be the basis of any legislation which is introduced. If requirements of helmet and child passenger laws being introduced in various states are different, they may cause difficulties for the child carrier industry as well as for bicyclists. Model bills are included below. The bill should not be loaded down with legislators' or lobbyists' pet ideas about bicycling, which are often not carefully worded and not consistent with the Uniform Vehicle Code and/or League position statements. Such language should be removed.

Requirements for items to be supplied as part of equipment, or provided with such equipment (warning stickers, hangtags, contents of the owner's manual) should not be included in state laws. These requirements should be established by Federal regulation rather than on a state-by-state basis, so that manufacturers, distributors, and dealers will not be faced with the burden of providing a different product for each state. The League is working with the Federal Consumer Products Safety Commission and with industry to develop suitable regulations.

8) In the few states which apply the rule of contributory negligence (viz., Massachusetts, Maryland,...), the bill should include a provision to the effect that failure to use a helmet shall not be admissible as evidence of negligence in a court of law. It is a good idea to check with an attorney familiar with the traffic laws of your state. The wording should be parallel with that of existing helmet and safety belt laws.

In these states, such provisions have been included in the laws requiring the use of protective devices such as seatbelts and motorcycle helmets. The question of who caused an accident and the question of avoiding injury are different questions. If a helmet law does not have such a provision, a driver who-for example- runs a stop sign and injures a helmet less bicyclist can avoid having to pay anything towards the cyclist's medical expenses or other damages. The League, defending the rights of all bicyclists, feels that this is unjust. Child passenger and child helmet laws without this provision would victimize children who are not yet able to decide for themselves about wearing a helmet. This too, is unjust.

What to Do

Find out what helmet bills have been introduced in your state. Do this soon. There may be a bill which you have not heard about.

Many states have computerized indexes: look for the key words "bicycle" "safety," "helmet," and "passenger." The public safety committee of your state legislature is also a good place to start looking. Find the district of the author of the bill, and of the chairman and ranking minority member of the committee to which it has been referred, and concentrate your lobbying efforts in their districts. Obtain the names, addresses and phone numbers of organizations and individuals who have been promoting the bill. Explain the League's concerns to the legislators and try to get these concerns written into the bill. Contact League members and affiliated clubs requesting them to call or write their state legislators as necessary. Keep the League's Government Relations Director informed of your actions.

Remember that lawmakers truly don't want to push bad bills, and they may welcome your ability to work privately to hammer out a better bill. Legislators may be quite surprised and dismayed to find that a bill is controversial. Explain to the legislators how it is possible to reduce the controversy. Contact the organizations lobbying in favor of the bill. Describe the League's strong position in favor of helmet use, but explain the League's concerns to them. Try to get the lobbying organizations to accept the League's suggestions, and indicate that the League opposes any bill which fails properly to protect the rights of bicyclists. Suggest to the lobbying organizations that the League develop a long-term working relationship with them to promote helmet use, education, and law enforcement. Review the programs which the organizations have initiated in these areas, and offer the League's assistance to strengthen these programs.

Note that the national office is maintaining contact with national organizations and providing information on materials and programs being developed at the national level. You may contact the Government Relations Director to coordinate with this effort. Since most actual education and law-enforcement programs are developed at the state or local level, the work of local volunteers and Effective Cycling instructors will be extremely important in strengthening and guiding these programs.

Sample Bills

California: (Vehicle Code 21024)

b) No person operating a bicycle on a highway shall allow anyone to ride as a passenger other than on a separate attached seat. If the passenger is four years old or younger, or of 40 pounds or less, the seat shall adequately retain the passenger in place, and protect him/her from the bicycle's moving parts.

c) No person operating a bicycle on a highway shall allow anyone four years old or younger, or of 40 pounds or less, to ride as a passenger who is not wearing a helmet of good fit, fastened securely with straps, and meeting ANSI Z90.4 bicycle helmet standards, or the Snell Memorial Foundation's 1984 Standard for Protective Headgear for Use in Bicycling.

d) The first violation of (c) shall be dismissed if the person charged proves that a helmet meeting the standards has been purchased for use by the passenger. Otherwise. any violation of (c) is punishable by fine, including all costs, of not more than $20.

Comments: This law has no liability exclusion. Provision (d) is creative, in providing an incentive to purchase a helmet. The law does not address the question of trailers which do not require infant to wear a helmet.

New York: (Vehicle and Traffic code, para. 1238)

1. No person operating a bicycle shall allow a person who is under one year of age to ride as a passenger on a bicycle nor shall such person be carried in a pack fastened to the operator. A first violation of the provisions of this subdivision shall result in no fine. A second violation shall result in a civil fine not to exceed fifty dollars.

2. No person operating a bicycle shall allow a person one or more years of age and less than five years of age to ride as a passenger on a bicycle unless:

(a) such passenger is wearing a helmet meeting the standards of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI Z90.4 bicycle helmet standards) or the Snell Memorial Foundation's 1984 Standard for Protective Headgear for Use in Bicycling. For the purposes of this section, wearing a helmet means having a helmet of good fit fastened securely upon the head with the helmet straps; and

(b) such passenger is placed in a separate seat attached to the bicycle and such scat shall have adequate provision for retaining the passenger in place and for protecting the passenger from the moving parts of the bicycle.

3. Any person who violates the provisions of subdivision two of this section shall pay a civil fine not to exceed fifty dollars.

4. The court shall waive any fine for which a person who violates the provision of paragraph (a) of subdivision two of this section would be liable if such person supplies the court with proof that between the date of violation and the appearance date for such violation such person purchased or rented a helmet which meets the requirements of paragraph (a) of subdivision two of this section. Further, the court shall waive any fine for which a person who violates the provisions of paragraph (b) of subdivision two of this section would be liable if such person supplies the court with proof that between the date of violation and the appearance date for such violation such person purchased or rented a seat which meets the requirements of paragraph (b) of subdivision two of this section. Such waiver of fine shall not apply to a second or subsequent conviction under paragraphs (a) of (b) of subdivision two of this section.

Comments: The blanket prohibition against children under one year of age is unreasonable, though the prohibition against carrying a child in a pack is reasonable unless packs become available which protect the passenger without potentially injuring the operator-considerably more difficult than making a child sent to cradle and protect an infant. The law does not address the question of trailers. The warning on first offense and revocable fine are good. The amount of the fine is rather large.

Two models follow which are suggested for helmet bills to avoid serious infringements on the rights of bicyclists.

Model Helmet Bills for Child Passengers on Bicycles

Whereas the major cause of death and permanent disability in bicycle accidents is head injury;

Whereas helmets and child carrying devices which meet nationally recognized standards have been demonstrated significantly to reduce the numbers of head injuries in accidents;

Whereas many cyclists do not use the appropriate equipment;

Whereas incentives are necessary to encourage bicyclists to wear helmets;

Therefore, be it enacted that: a) No person operating a bicycle on a highway shall ride other than on a permanent and regular attached seat.

b) No person operating a bicycle on a highway shall allow anyone four years old or younger, weighing 40 pounds or less, to ride as a passenger on the bicycle, other than in a seat which shall adequately retain the passenger in place, and protect the passenger from the bicycle's moving parts; or else astride a regular seat of a tandem bicycle.

c) No person operating a bicycle on a highway shall transport a passenger as defined in (b) who is not wearing a helmet of good fit, fastened securely and meeting ANSI Z90.4 or subsequent bicycle helmet standards, or the Snell Memorial Foundation's 1984 Standard for Protective Headgear for Use in Bicycling or subsequent standard, unless the passenger is in an enclosed trailer or other device which meets or exceeds current nationally recognized standards of design and manufacture for the protection of the passenger's head from impacts in an accident without the need for a helmet.

d) A passenger exceeding 40 pounds or four years of age may only ride astride a regular seat of a tandem bicycle or in a trailer or other device towed by the bicycle.

e) The first violation of (b), (c), (d) or (e) shall be dismissed if the person charged submits proof that a equipment meeting the standards in (b), (c) or (d) has been acquired for use by the passenger. Otherwise, any violation of (b), (c), (d) or (e) is punishable by fine, including all costs, of not more than $20.

Failure to observe the provisions of sections (b) through (d) shall not be admissible as evidence of negligence in a court of law. g) The provisions of this bill shall become effective six months from the date of its enactment.

~ Provision fl is included only for those few states retaining the rule of contributory negligence.

Model Helmet Bill - All Ages

Whereas the major cause of death and permanent disability in bicycle accidents is head injury;

Whereas helmets and child carrying devices

which meet nationally recognized standards have been demonstrated significantly to reduce the numbers of head injuries in accidents;

Whereas many cyclists do not use the appropriate equipment;

Whereas incentives are necessary to encourage bicyclists to wear helmets;

Therefore, be it enacted that:

a) No person operating a bicycle on a highway shall ride other than on a permanent and regular attached seat.

b) Every person operating a bicycle on a highway shall wear a helmet of good fit, fastened securely and meeting ANSI Z90.4 or subsequent bicycle helmet standards, or the Snell Memorial Foundation's 1984Standard for Protective Headgear for Use in Bicycling or subsequent standard.

c) No person operating a bicycle on a highway shall allow anyone four years old or younger, weighing 40 pounds or less, to ride as a passenger on the bicycle, other than in a seat which shall adequately retain the passenger in place, and protect the passenger from the bicycle's moving parts; or else astride a regular scat of a tandem bicycle.

d) No person operating a bicycle on a highway shall allow anyone to ride as a passenger unless the passenger is wearing a helmet as defined in (b) or else is in an enclosed trailer or other device which meets or exceeds current nationally recognized standards of design and manufacture for the protection of the passenger's head from impacts in an accident without the need for a helmet.

e) The first violation of (b), (c), or (d) shall be dismissed if the person charged submits proof that equipment meeting the standards in (b), (c) or d) has been acquired for use by the operator or passenger. Otherwise, any violation of (c), (d) or (e) is punishable by fine, including all costs, of not more than $20.

~ Failure to observe the provisions of sections (b) through (d) shall not be admissible as evidence of negligence in a court of law. g) The provisions of this bill shall become effective six months from the date of its enactment.

~ Provision f) is included only for those few states retaining the rule of contributory negligence.

This position paper was developed by the League's Helmet Law Task Force, chaired by Marc Weiss, with major contributions from John Allen, Michael Gessel, and Anne Markham. For further information, contact the League's Government Relations Director, Anne Markham, at the League's National Office. [Note: The Government Relations Director in 1997 is Alan Greenberg, labdc@aol.com to reflect his office address in Washington, DC. (202) 462-8376.]

This paper has been prepared by the League of American Wheelmen for its State Legislative Representatives (SLRs) to assure that mandatory helmet laws enacted by state legislatures will not have unintended side effects which unduly restrict the rights of bicyclists. This paper can also be helpful to advocates of bicyclists' rights on the local level, as well as to children's safety advocates who are concerned about safe bicycling.

Reprinted with permission of the League of American Bicyclists.

The League's Web page has lots of good info, but not this paper.

This page was last revised on: August 22, 2006.

Contact us.