Outrage: How to respond?

I would have thought that
I would have thought that ‘absolving’ the school of liability if your child was involved in an accident whilst in the school grounds would be questionable practice. It’s like giving the school permission to injure your child while they are on school property. That’s why organisations have public liability insurance. You can be guaranteed that it ceases to offer cover beyond the school gates. Will they be asking families that walk to sign a similar disclosure? Somehow I think not. The solution is to ban cycling within the gates of the school.

When I cycled to primary school, we had to push our bikes from the gates to the bike shed. To dare to be caught on the saddle let alone bring your bike into the playground was to incur the wrath of the headmaster.

As far as not guaranteeing the integrity of a secure area for the bikes surely that is a failure in duty of care especially as they have made provision for the safekeeping of children’s property.

Nothing wrong with it in my
Nothing wrong with it in my opinion.

The school my kids go to do exactly the same. Its a simple choice, let your kid cycle and enjoy the exercise and fresh air whilst wearing a helmet or pack them up in your car and cause complete mayhem whilst you drop them off at the gates because so many other parents do the same there’s no room to park.

Schools are in a very
Schools are in a very difficult position nowadays – what would have, in the past, been seen as an unfortunate accident and put down as a life experience can now be used as an excuse to sue.
Using a legal term , schools have to cover their arses because they can (and do) get sued by greedy morons for any old nonsense.
Schools are screwed by insurance companies just like the rest of us (money that could be better spent on resources) and whilst in principle i find this letter very annoying one has to look at it from the schools point of view.
Its little consolation but at least they are giving you the option for your kid to come without a helmet – some schools wont let kids come at all.
I suppose you could make a moral stand and kick off about it – i would have a good old moan to one or more of the governors about it if i were you.

Its very good of them to
Its very good of them to accept full liability for kids cycling to school with a helmet on. I don’t think that is what they are really saying but by explicitly denying liability for those without helmets they are in effect accepting it for those that do. Given the actual statistics for helmets that is a very stupid move on their part. It might be worth mentioning that to them.

Looks fairly reasonable to me
Looks fairly reasonable to me but if they can’t guarantee the security of the children’s bikes / scooters then it makes me wonder how secure it really is…

Prob just a silly insurance insistent clause though.

What’s wrong with that? Seems
What’s wrong with that? Seems legit.

It’s pretty obvious what the headline is:

“Boy, 10, dies cycling to school [with no helmet]”

Will more kids die from being obese than from cycling related incidents?

Up to you.