ILNews

Debating the merits of mandatory seat belts on school buses

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

On the morning of March 12, an Indianapolis school bus crashed into a stone bridge abutment, killing the bus driver and a 5-year-old passenger, and injuring several students. Almost immediately, in online forums and on news websites, readers began posting comments, wondering why the law does not require seat belts on school buses and whether seat belts would have made a difference in that crash.

Federal and state law does not require seat belts in school buses over 10,000 pounds. But since October 2009, federal law has required lap and shoulder restraints in new buses under 10,000 pounds – small vehicles made for 10 to 14 students.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration reports that in larger buses, the spacing and height of the seats offer crash protection for children through “compartmentalization.” But opinions remain divided about whether compartmentalization does enough to protect students and whether school bus seat belts should be required by law.

Federal regulation

A change in federal law since 2009 has required seat backs on buses to be 24 inches high, as opposed to the

previous standard 20 inches. That added height may offer additional protection for students in specific types of crashes by preventing children from being propelled over a seat.

Church Church Hittle & Antrim attorney Andrew Manna said the school corporation clients he contacted said they are not required to retrofit older buses to have 24-inch-high seat backs. And Dr. Marilyn Bull, co-medical director of the Automotive Safety Program at Riley Hospital for Children said buses are simply not built for easy retrofitting.

“The average life span of a bus is 10 to 15 years, so you can’t buy a new bus, but you can’t retire those buses with low seat backs,” she said.

In 2006, Pediatrics, the official journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics, featured a report by Bull and several colleagues that examined the epidemiology of non-fatal school bus-related injuries. It was the first, and most recent, report to study non-fatal school bus injuries.

Bull said that compartmentalization assumes that children always sit facing forward, with their feet on their floor and hands on their laps – an unrealistic scenario on most buses. Furthermore, while compartmentalization may prevent injuries in front- or rear-impact collisions, it offers limited protection in other crashes.

“Compartmentalization is recognized to be incomplete protection for side impact or rollover crashes,” Bull said. Crash tests have shown that three-point restraints – combined lap and shoulder seat belts – are much safer than compartmentalization or lap belts, she said.

Laws slow to change
 

tom wyss Wyss

Sen. Tom Wyss, R-Fort Wayne, chair of the Senate Homeland Security, Transportation and Veterans Affairs Committee, said that the buzz about the need for seat belt laws tends to arise whenever children are injured or killed in a school bus crash.

“Over the years, there’s been a lot of attention that has come up from different situations, and what has always happened is there’s always been resistance by the school corporations on mandating that this be done because of the vast cost that there would be in putting these in,” Wyss said.

And budgetary concerns are not unique to Indiana.

In Ashburn, Va., the Loudoun County School Board this year was considering no longer buying buses with safety belts in order to save money – about $10,000 per each new bus purchase. And Thomas Reed, an at-large Loudoun County school board member, said students simply weren’t using the safety belts.

“At the time that we did it, we expected that we would get compliance from students, and at the time, we expected that we would be in compliance with the federal government,” Reed said.

But the anticipated change in federal law – one that would mandate seat belts on all school buses – never came.

Wyss explained that people may be slow to warm up to ideas that require some significant effort to implement. As an example, he talked about legislation he authored in 2004 that requires children under age 1 to be in a rear-facing car seat and requires children up to age 8 to use a booster seat.

“We never used to think about putting kids in booster seats until we did that legislation, and I still think that’s one of the best things I was ever involved in,” he said. “But we had signs (at the Statehouse) in protest of what I was doing.”

He said he was surprised when parents complained to him about the cost and inconvenience of having to put multiple children in booster seats or about having to transfer booster seats between family cars, depending on who was transporting children.

“The point was not how inconvenient it was for people to do this for their kids, the point is saving their kids’ lives,” he said.

seatbeltfacts
Public policy

Ron Chew, president of the Indiana State School Bus Drivers Association, said that the organization does not support seat belts on school buses. He said one of the concerns about seat belts is that they may ultimately put children at greater risk in certain situations.

If a school bus were to overturn, he said, rescue might be more difficult if the children are buckled-in.

“There is also the possibility of a fire on the bus, and if the students were in an upside-down position, this would really slow the evacuation process tremendously,” he said. “Also, who is going to monitor the students to make sure they have fastened their belts?”

Bull is familiar with these concerns.

“In terms of egress during emergency, all children over the age of 5 know how to unbuckle their seat belt. Unfortunately, they do it too frequently,” she said. “Evacuating the bus during a fire is a concern always, and it’s something that is practiced twice a year by bus drivers.”

Bull said she’s heard arguments that children will use seat belts as weapons against each other, or that they simply won’t use them – but those issues should be addressed by outreach and education.

“With or without belts, behavior on buses needs to be a component, not only for the child, but for the parents,” she said.

Bull said that children who grow up riding in booster seats, being taught to fasten their seat belts and sit properly in family vehicles may be receiving inconsistent and confusing messages when they ride to school in buses that have no seat belts.

“One of my partners said her 5-year-old came home and asked, ‘How come only the driver gets a seat belt?’” Bull said.

Statistics

The NHTSA reports that school buses are one of the safest modes of transportation. Bull and Chew agree. But many of the statistics that support the safety of school bus travel look only at the number of school bus fatalities – not injuries – and school bus crash data is flawed for several reasons.

Many national crash datasets cannot adequately be compared, due to lack of consistency in terminology. Furthermore, Bull and her colleagues reported in their research that the Transportation Research Board – which at the time estimated the number of annual school bus related injuries to be 5,500 – accounted only for injuries that occurred between 6 a.m. and 8:59 a.m., and between 2 p.m. and 4:59 p.m., Monday through Friday, from Sept. 1 to mid-June. The research that Bull’s team conducted included injuries that occurred during any month of the year, concluding that the actual number of school bus injuries was about three times what the TRB reported.

Wyss remembers when he introduced legislation that ultimately lowered Indiana’s legal blood alcohol limit to 0.08, drunk-driving fatality statistics tended to persuade people of the value of such legislation. But without understanding the number of injuries, or their severity, people may be unaware of the extent to which crashes can ruin lives.

“People never really understand what ‘injured’ could be,” Wyss said.

Injuries in bus crashes vary by age, with children under age 9 more likely to sustain head injuries during a crash, Bull explained, and older students more likely to sustain injuries to their extremities – some of which are minor.

“We all recognize that for vehicle miles traveled, school buses are the safest vehicles on the road, but if you’re paraplegic or brain-damaged, it’s not minor,” she said.

Wyss anticipates that lawmakers will encounter some public pressure to take a closer look at the seat belt issue in the next legislative session.

“If parents demanded it – you’d have to find a way to do it,” he said.•

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. OK so I'll make this as short as I can. I got a call that my daughter was smoking in the bathroom only her and one other girl was questioned mind you four others left before them anyways they proceeded to interrogate my daughter about smoking and all this time I nor my parents got a phone call,they proceeded to go through her belongings and also pretty much striped searched my daughter including from what my mother said they looked at her Brest without my consent. I am furious also a couple months ago my son hurt his foot and I was never called and it got worse during the day but the way some of the teachers have been treating my kids they are not comfortable going to them because they feel like they are mean or don't care. This is unacceptable in my mind i should be able to send my kids to school without worry but now I worry how the adults there are treating them. I have a lot more but I wanted to know do I have any attempt at a lawsuit because like I said there is more that's just some of what my kids are going through. Please respond. Sincerely concerned single parent

  2. California Sex Offender Management Board (CASOMB) End of Year Report 2014. (page 13) Under the current system many local registering agencies are challenged just keeping up with registration paperwork. It takes an hour or more to process each registrant, the majority of whom are low risk offenders. As a result law enforcement cannot monitor higher risk offenders more intensively in the community due to the sheer numbers on the registry. Some of the consequences of lengthy and unnecessary registration requirements actually destabilize the life’s of registrants and those -such as families- whose lives are often substantially impacted. Such consequences are thought to raise levels of known risk factors while providing no discernible benefit in terms of community safety. The full report is available online at. http://www.casomb.org/index.cfm?pid=231 National Institute of Justice (NIJ) US Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs United States of America. The overall conclusion is that Megan’s law has had no demonstrated effect on sexual offenses in New Jersey, calling into question the justification for start-up and operational costs. Megan’s Law has had no effect on time to first rearrest for known sex offenders and has not reduced sexual reoffending. Neither has it had an impact on the type of sexual reoffense or first-time sexual offense. The study also found that the law had not reduced the number of victims of sexual offenses. The full report is available online at. https://www.ncjrs.gov/app/publications/abstract.aspx? ID=247350 The University of Chicago Press for The Booth School of Business of the University of Chicago and The University of Chicago Law School Article DOI: 10.1086/658483 Conclusion. The data in these three data sets do not strongly support the effectiveness of sex offender registries. The national panel data do not show a significant decrease in the rate of rape or the arrest rate for sexual abuse after implementation of a registry via the Internet. The BJS data that tracked individual sex offenders after their release in 1994 did not show that registration had a significantly negative effect on recidivism. And the D.C. crime data do not show that knowing the location of sex offenders by census block can help protect the locations of sexual abuse. This pattern of noneffectiveness across the data sets does not support the conclusion that sex offender registries are successful in meeting their objectives of increasing public safety and lowering recidivism rates. The full report is available online at. http://www.jstor.org/stable/full/10.1086/658483 These are not isolated conclusions but are the same outcomes in the majority of conclusions and reports on this subject from multiple government agencies and throughout the academic community. People, including the media and other organizations should not rely on and reiterate the statements and opinions of the legislators or other people as to the need for these laws because of the high recidivism rates and the high risk offenders pose to the public which simply is not true and is pure hyperbole and fiction. They should rely on facts and data collected and submitted in reports from the leading authorities and credible experts in the fields such as the following. California Sex Offender Management Board (CASOMB) Sex offender recidivism rate for a new sex offense is 0.8% (page 30) The full report is available online at http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/Adult_Research_Branch/Research_Documents/2014_Outcome_Evaluation_Report_7-6-2015.pdf California Sex Offender Management Board (CASOMB) (page 38) Sex offender recidivism rate for a new sex offense is 1.8% The full report is available online at. http://www.google.com/url?sa= t&source=web&cd=1&ved= 0CCEQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F% 2Fwww.cdcr.ca.gov%2FAdult_ Research_Branch%2FResearch_ documents%2FOutcome_ evaluation_Report_2013.pdf&ei= C9dSVePNF8HfoATX-IBo&usg=AFQjCNE9I6ueHz-o2mZUnuxLPTyiRdjDsQ Bureau of Justice Statistics 5 PERCENT OF SEX OFFENDERS REARRESTED FOR ANOTHER SEX CRIME WITHIN 3 YEARS OF PRISON RELEASE WASHINGTON, D.C. Within 3 years following their 1994 state prison release, 5.3 percent of sex offenders (men who had committed rape or sexual assault) were rearrested for another sex crime, the Justice Department’s Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) announced today. The full report is available online at. http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/press/rsorp94pr.cfm Document title; A Model of Static and Dynamic Sex Offender Risk Assessment Author: Robert J. McGrath, Michael P. Lasher, Georgia F. Cumming Document No.: 236217 Date Received: October 2011 Award Number: 2008-DD-BX-0013 Findings: Study of 759 adult male offenders under community supervision Re-arrest rate: 4.6% after 3-year follow-up The sexual re-offense rates for the 746 released in 2005 are much lower than what many in the public have been led to expect or believe. These low re-offense rates appear to contradict a conventional wisdom that sex offenders have very high sexual re-offense rates. The full report is available online at. https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/236217.pdf Document Title: SEX OFFENDER SENTENCING IN WASHINGTON STATE: RECIDIVISM RATES BY: Washington State Institute For Public Policy. A study of 4,091 sex offenders either released from prison or community supervision form 1994 to 1998 and examined for 5 years Findings: Sex Crime Recidivism Rate: 2.7% Link to Report: http://www.oncefallen.com/files/Washington_SO_Recid_2005.pdf Document Title: Indiana’s Recidivism Rates Decline for Third Consecutive Year BY: Indiana Department of Correction 2009. The recidivism rate for sex offenders returning on a new sex offense was 1.05%, one of the lowest in the nation. In a time when sex offenders continue to face additional post-release requirements that often result in their return to prison for violating technical rules such as registration and residency restrictions, the instances of sex offenders returning to prison due to the commitment of a new sex crime is extremely low. Findings: sex offenders returning on a new sex offense was 1.05% Link to Report: http://www.in.gov/idoc/files/RecidivismRelease.pdf Once again, These are not isolated conclusions but are the same outcomes in the majority of reports on this subject from multiple government agencies and throughout the academic community. No one can doubt that child sexual abuse is traumatic and devastating. The question is not whether the state has an interest in preventing such harm, but whether current laws are effective in doing so. Megan’s law is a failure and is destroying families and their children’s lives and is costing tax payers millions upon millions of dollars. The following is just one example of the estimated cost just to implement SORNA which many states refused to do. From Justice Policy Institute. Estimated cost to implement SORNA Here are some of the estimates made in 2009 expressed in 2014 current dollars: California, $66M; Florida, $34M; Illinois, $24M; New York, $35M; Pennsylvania, $22M; Texas, $44M. In 2014 dollars, Virginia’s estimate for implementation was $14M, and the annual operating cost after that would be $10M. For the US, the total is $547M. That’s over half a billion dollars – every year – for something that doesn’t work. http://www.justicepolicy.org/images/upload/08-08_FAC_SORNACosts_JJ.pdf. Attempting to use under-reporting to justify the existence of the registry is another myth, or a lie. This is another form of misinformation perpetrated by those who either have a fiduciary interest in continuing the unconstitutional treatment of a disfavored group or are seeking to justify their need for punishment for people who have already paid for their crime by loss of their freedom through incarceration and are now attempting to reenter society as honest citizens. When this information is placed into the public’s attention by naive media then you have to wonder if the media also falls into one of these two groups that are not truly interested in reporting the truth. Both of these groups of people that have that type of mentality can be classified as vigilantes, bullies, or sociopaths, and are responsible for the destruction of our constitutional values and the erosion of personal freedoms in this country. I think the media or other organizations need to do a in depth investigation into the false assumptions and false data that has been used to further these laws and to research all the collateral damages being caused by these laws and the unconstitutional injustices that are occurring across the country. They should include these injustices in their report so the public can be better informed on what is truly happening in this country on this subject. Thank you for your time.

  3. Freedom as granted in the Constitution cannot be summarily disallowed without Due Process. Unable to to to the gym, church, bowling alley? What is this 1984 level nonsense? Congrats to Brian for having the courage to say that this was enough! and Congrats to the ACLU on the win!

  4. America's hyper-phobia about convicted sex offenders must end! Politicians must stop pandering to knee-jerk public hysteria. And the public needs to learn the facts. Research by the California Sex Offender Management Board as shown a recidivism rate for convicted sex offenders of less than 1%. Less than 1%! Furthermore, research shows that by year 17 after their conviction, a convicted sex offender is no more likely to commit a new sex offense than any other member of the public. Put away your torches and pitchforks. Get the facts. Stop hysteria.

  5. He was convicted 23 years ago. How old was he then? He probably was a juvenile. People do stupid things, especially before their brain is fully developed. Why are we continuing to punish him in 2016? If he hasn't re-offended by now, it's very, very unlikely he ever will. He paid for his mistake sufficiently. Let him live his life in peace.

ADVERTISEMENT