EMERGENCY RESPONSE: CAN WE BETTER SERVE CHILDREN IN CAR CRASHES? 

When a car crash happens, time is everything. The faster help arrives and emergency treatment begins, the better the chances someone survives. Emergency services play a crucial role in saving lives. When a child is injured, we trust those first on the scene to do all they can.

Emergency responders have saved countless lives, both young and old. But there is an oversight when it comes to children. The way emergency systems are set up – from the equipment in ambulances to the protocols – is built with adults in mind. As a result, children helped by these services are not always getting the care for their child-specific needs.

This gap in design and readiness matters. Car crashes remain the leading cause of death for children globally. And while many efforts focus on prevention, we also need to take a hard look at how we respond when tragedy strikes. If emergency services were better adapted for children, we could save more young lives.

CHILDREN ARE NOT “SMALL ADULTS” 

Children are often thought of as miniature versions of adults. But in reality, their bodies and minds work differently and have different needs. Children have different physical proportions. They have smaller airways, more delicate bones, and different responses to trauma. They also experience fear and pain in ways that are not always obvious.

According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) in the U.S., more than half of the children who die in crashes are still alive when help arrives. That means there is a critical window to save them. If emergency responders have pediatric-specific equipment and training, the chance of saving a child would increase. With the right approach, the mortality rate for injured children could drop by as much as 60%.

Almost everything about using roads – roads themselves, vehicle design, safety rules – is built around adult thinking and physiology. Think about something as simple as a seat belt. Seat belts are designed to save lives in a crash, but can actually harm a child if used incorrectly. That’s why we use car seats and boosters to make up for the differences in size, weight and body development between a child and an adult. But similar adjustments are not widely adopted in emergency care. Ambulances still rely on equipment designed around the needs of adults. And emergency systems, by and large, are still operating under a “one-size-fits-all” mindset that does not account for a child’s unique needs.

PEDIATRIC AMBULANCES

Inside most ambulances, you will find everything designed around the average adult patient – stretchers, restraints, oxygen masks, and IV setups. In most cases, nothing has been adjusted for younger, smaller bodies.

Stretchers and restraints in ambulances are not designed around child bodies. Much like seat belts being inadequate for children, incorrectly sized restraints can increase the risk of injury to children during transport. Child-appropriate emergency harnesses exist that would solve this problem. Unfortunately, they are not widely used.

In South Africa, Netcare, a major private healthcare provider, launched the country’s first pediatric intensive care ambulance in 2018. It is fully equipped to handle critically ill or injured children with the care and expertise they need. This is a fantastic step in the right direction, but an emergency vehicle specific to children is still a rarity.

If one specialised ambulance is seen as a groundbreaking innovation, we still have a long way to go. These features should be the standard, not the exception. Especially given the high rate of child fatalities related to our roads.

Specialised ambulances also come at a very steep cost. Often, only a feature of private healthcare providers, children from low-income families must rely on government emergency services. State ambulances are not equipped with the specialised equipment of a pediatric ambulance. Additionally, state paramedics receive little to no pediatric training. In the event of a car crash where child-specific equipment is required, paramedics must wait for an Advanced Life Support vehicle to arrive. Minutes spent waiting for these vehicles to arrive increases the chance of a child’s fatality.

Children from low-income families are more likely to be involved in a life-threatening crash. With no option but to rely on government services that are sub-optimal for their needs, the roads become that much more dangerous for them.

TRAINING & PROTOCOLS TO BEST SERVE CHILDREN 

Even the best equipment is only as good as the person using it. And here, too, there’s a shortfall. Most first responders receive only limited training in pediatric care, if any at all. They may not have specialised expertise in assessing a child’s vital signs, calculating medicine dosages based on weight, or calming a frightened toddler at the scene of a crash.

Guidelines on how to transport or treat children in emergencies differ from one place to another. Some EMTs may be unsure of the safest way to restrain a child in the back of an ambulance, and others might not have access to child-sized equipment at all.

More consistent, hands-on training in pediatric emergencies could change that. Emergency workers need to feel prepared. Not just for adult trauma, but for the unique challenges children present in emergencies. When we put children first in our emergency response systems, we are also positioning people to better advocate for the most appropriate care for children when they need it the most.

EMOTIONAL FIRST AID MATTERS TOO

A child involved in a car crash is not only physically injured. They are likely also scared, disoriented, and overwhelmed. Sirens, flashing lights, and unfamiliar faces can be terrifying, especially if a caregiver is not nearby.

Often, psychological care in emergencies is treated as an afterthought. But for children, the way they’re spoken to can make a big difference in how they cope, both in the moment and long after. Even just having someone explain to them what is happening to help them make sense of what is going on can ease some of the trauma.

Most emergency personnel are not trained in child psychology or trauma communication. Even a few basic techniques – like using calm tones, distraction tools, or child-friendly explanations – can reduce fear and make treatment easier. An ambulance that has a more child-friendly atmosphere, such as cartoon characters, warmer lighting, personnel with an affinity for working with children, and a seat for a parent to go with them to the hospital can provide some degree of comfort.

RETHINKING EMERGENCY CARE FOR CHILDREN

To reduce the number of children lost to road-related crises, we need to rethink how we handle emergency care for them. That means going beyond “good enough” and investing in emergency systems that are designed with children in mind.

Here’s what that could look like:

• Ambulances equipped with child-sized restraints and medical tools
• Specialised pediatric emergency vehicles or modular designs for mixed use
• Standardised protocols across all emergency service systems
• Mandatory pediatric training for all emergency responders
• Better emotional care during transport and treatment.

These changes do not need us to reinvent emergency care. They just need us to expand it thoughtfully. Children deserve systems that recognise their needs from the moment help arrives.

We count on emergency services to show up when things go wrong. They do heroic work every day. But it is time to ask more of the system itself. Children are not just small passengers in an adult-sized world. They are individuals with different risks, responses, and needs.

If we want to save more young lives, we have to build emergency systems that are ready for them.

Can You Use U.S. Car Seat Research in South Africa? Here’s the Truth

When it comes to keeping our children safe on the road, there’s no room for guesswork. As parents, educators, and advocates, we want to base our decisions on solid, proven research. But in a globalised world, where car seat advice often comes from the U.S. or Europe, it’s fair to ask:

Can we trust American car seat research for use in South Africa, where our car seats follow European (ECE) regulations?

The short answer? Not always. But there’s a way to use it wisely.

Why This Matters

South Africa follows the ECE Regulation 44/129 standard for car seats. These are European rules that define how car seats must be designed, tested, and approved.

The U.S., on the other hand, uses a completely different system called FMVSS 213.

And here’s where it gets tricky: a lot of what you see online — especially from U.S.-based websites or influencers — is based on American seats, American cars, and American crash testing.

That means it doesn’t always apply here. And in some cases, relying on it could actually mislead parents into using a seat incorrectly or making an unsafe choice.

What You Can’t Use from U.S. Research

Let’s get this out of the way first. You should avoid using:

• Crash test pass/fail results from FMVSS 213
• U.S. booster seat injury stats (ECE transitions are later and safer)
• “Best Bet” car seat rankings from NHTSA or IIHS
• Field injury databases that are based on U.S.-specific seats, vehicles, or usage patterns

These were developed under a different regulatory system with different dummies, testing angles, seatbelt geometry, and even different crash speeds.

What You Can Use (And Should!)

But don’t throw out the baby with the booster.

There’s a ton of U.S. research that absolutely applies — especially when it comes to how a child’s body behaves in a crash.

• Biomechanical studies on how children’s necks and spines respond to force
• Crash dynamics showing how rear-facing protects the head, neck, and spine
• Parent education campaign results (yes, the emotional stuff matters too!)
• Misuse research — because the reasons parents misuse car seats are surprisingly universal

So How Do We Know What to Trust?

That’s where our new guide comes in.

📥Download the Global Research Guide for ECE Advocacy

We’ve broken down exactly which types of global research you can confidently use here in South Africa — and which ones need a red flag or outright rejection.

Key Takeaway for Parents

“Just because a seat is legal doesn’t mean it’s safe for your child’s stage — and just because advice is popular online doesn’t mean it fits our context.”

If you’re in South Africa, you need advice that:

• Matches the seats sold here
• Respects the ECE testing rules
• Is rooted in crash science, not marketing

Where to Go from Here

• Still using U.S. stats in your brochures or workshops? Time to update.
• Working with parents confused by conflicting info? Use the guide to clarify.
• Advocating for policy change? Ground your arguments in ECE-compatible data for credibility.

And remember: the science of child injury in crashes is universal — but the seats, cars, and laws aren’t.

Final Word

In a world full of information overload, this guide is about cutting through the noise and building trust. Because when we speak from a place of clarity and accuracy, we save lives — not just in Europe or the U.S., but right here on our South African roads.

Every day, millions of South African children walk long, dangerous journeys just to get to school. Some cross rivers, navigate unsafe roads, or face threats of violence—simply to access their right to education.
This draft policy is a starting point for change. It calls for a national, coordinated response to school transport—one that puts children’s safety, dignity, and rights first. We’re inviting parents, educators, policymakers, and civil society to help shape a transport system where every child can get to school safely. Every child. Every day.

Did you know that child car seats adjust in size? Many parents do not, and others may be unsure of when it is the right time to make adjustments.

While working with both parents and car seats daily, this is a question that arises more than anything else. Car seat adjustment is often covered in the car seat manual, which is specific to the car seat you have. We would like to cover some of the broader aspects of when it’s time to make adjustments, as well as some things to look out for.

CAR SEAT ADJUSTMENT FOR GROWING CHILDREN 

Car seats are designed to keep your child safe in a crash. Different types of seats accommodate your child at their different developmental stages as they grow. An infant seat is effective in cradling the softer spine, skull, and pelvis of a baby. A toddler seat is better at protecting a bigger child who can sit up and move around.

We often encounter parents who wish to move their children to the next stage of their car seat far too soon. This is often due to misunderstanding or misinformation regarding the function of a car seat. The time to move your child to the next car seat is represented as a range depending on their weight and age. However, many parents view the lowest point of the range as the time to transition. 

When campaigning for better road safety, it is imperative that we use the correct words to achieve our goals. One big topic of discussion is using the word “crash” instead of “accident.” If you have read our articles or social media posts, you may have noticed that we never use the word “accident.”

In this article, we want to explore the reasons behind this deliberate choice of wording, the implications, and the appropriateness of one over the other. We also want to look at some other commonly used terms and phrases that are harmful when talking about road safety.

WHY NOT “ACCIDENT”? 

Calling a crash a “car accident” is a social norm. As the writer of these articles, it was a phrase I had to train myself out of using because it was so ingrained. But that begs the question: if we all use the term, how is it wrong?

The Oxford Dictionary defines an accident as “something that happens by chance and without an obvious cause”.

When we examine a crash, there are almost always identifiable factors that caused it. When so many people lose their lives on the road or are left with life-changing injuries, we should always strive for the improvement of road safety. While no one plans to be involved in a car crash, crashes are preventable.

There will always be a case of if something had been different, the crash would not have happened. A drunk person should have called a cab. A child should have worn a seatbelt. The tyres could have been replaced sooner. Fewer passengers should have been allowed in the vehicle. The bus driver should have been properly vetted. The driver should have stopped to sleep. The road should have had better lighting.

To affect change and save lives, we need to acknowledge that crashes are preventable. They do not happen by random chance to someone unlucky that day. If we want to view them happening through a lens of “chance”, then it should be understood that the factors that increase and decrease the likelihood of that chance are variables. Variables can be changed.

WHY DO WE CALL IT AN ACCIDENT THEN? 

Losing someone to a car crash is devastating. It feels as though someone was taken away from you in an instant. Even if you have not experienced this loss personally, we all empathise with the loss when we hear about it, especially when it comes to children. It feels unfair.

Often we turn to questioning the universe or God as to why this happened, not to explore the actual mechanisms of what went wrong, but to make sense of a tragedy.

When talking to someone who is grieving a loss, we often use phrases like “It was God’s plan”, “Everything happens for a reason”, and “It was his time to go”. These phrases can provide comfort. They allude to a greater plan, rather than a senseless loss. When someone is coming to terms with loss, it is not an appropriate time to tell them that their loved one’s death was preventable or the result of someone’s actions. For a lot of people, calling it an “accident” is easier to accept on a personal level. 

But on the other side of the coin, for some families who want justice, calling these deaths an accident when their loved one has died on account of another careless or irresponsible driver is aggravating.

Knocking over a glass of milk is an accident, but the preventable death of a person should not be spoken about similarly.

THE BIGGER PROBLEM 

To see a positive change in road safety, we have to hold people or governments accountable for factors that increase the dangers on our roads.

It angers us to read about yet another taxi full of school children involved in a horrific crash. It is disrespectful to the lives lost to chalk these crashes down to an “accident” when there is so much that could be done to save young lives. Road-related injuries are the leading cause of death in children aged 5-19 years old. This is a crisis. Yet not nearly enough is being done to mitigate the dangers to our children.

When we write off a crash as an accident, we are inadvertently saying that it is something that “just happens”. It suggests that it was an unintentional event, yet the causes that lead to the outcome are very often intentional disregard for safety. Child fatalities in road-related incidents are studied and analyzed almost more than any other childhood disease. We know that more often than not it is preventable.

To offer a different perspective: should you be involved in a collision, the language used when reporting the incident or submitting an insurance claim can greatly affect the legal and financial outcomes. If described as an “accident”, this suggests no fault. If described as a “crash” or “collision” this implies there is fault which can greatly influence liability and insurance claims.

This distinction of different terminology carries weight in many areas. In other words, words have meaning and nuance, and the difference matters.

“HUMAN ERROR” 

A few months ago, when writing about a taxi of school children driving in front of a train, a quote stood out to me – one I still think about often. “It was down to stupid human error”.  Human error. “People make mistakes” is an appropriate thing to tell a child when they knock over a glass of juice, but the same sentiment applied to a driver whose reckless driving cost ten children their lives is obscene. 

Often when “human error” is mentioned, it is framed as if it is a reason for a crash. But much like “accident”, it also comes across as “one of those things that just happens”. It certainly feels like it absolves some of the blame.

“ACT OF GOD” 

Framing a crash as an “Act of God” has some more serious implications. Some may understand the sentiment similar to “part of God’s plan”, but the term “Act of God” carries legal weight.

Often used to describe events that are not a result of human action such as natural disasters or extreme weather. In these events, a person cannot legally be held liable for death, injury or damage. “Act of God” is appropriate to the aftermath of a flood, but not a collision as a result of reckless driving.

“THE VEHICLE LOST CONTROL” 

Often when crashes are reported in the news, the phrase “the vehicle lost control” is not uncommon. This has a few problems. Firstly, “the driver lost control of the vehicle” is the correct phrase. Vehicles are under the control of a driver, not the other way around. There are of course situations in which the driver is more likely to lose control of a vehicle, such as on account of adverse weather conditions. However, there are also situations in which the loss of control is preventable or at least could have been minimised.

Losing control of a vehicle can also be on account of poor and irregular maintenance, overloading of vehicles and dangerous driving. When it is stated that “the vehicle lost control” accountability is directed away from the driver.

To a lot of people, this article may seem like a case of nitpicking semantics. However, the words used to describe road incidents can have real-life impacts or consequences. In some countries, advocacy groups, safety officials and public health officials have even gone as far as to try to ban the use of words like “accident” in media reporting. On a topic as serious as road safety, it is crucially important that terminology is appropriate and correct, both legally, and socially and to create change for the better.

REMOTELY AT RISK: ROAD SAFETY & RURAL CHILDREN

Children are vulnerable on our roads, but this is especially true for the rural child. In rural communities, there are fewer resources to create safer streets for children. As a result, low-income rural communities and their children are often forgotten when it comes to road safety.

In South Africa, 68% of schoolchildren walk to school. In rural areas, some children can walk as much as 3 hours per day. It is unjust that this is the length some of our children go through to get an education. In South Africa, education is often thought of as the solution to poverty, and there is credit to that. But for many children, especially those in rural areas, poverty itself is a barrier to education. Children cannot reliably and safely get to school.

To make roads safer for rural children, a combination of policy changes, infrastructure development, community participation, and education is essential.

UNDERSTANDING THE ROAD SAFETY RISKS FOR RURAL CHILDREN

Due to the remote and sparsely populated nature of rural areas, less resources are available to families. As a result, if there is only one school in an area, children must travel the distance to reach it, regardless of the distance.

In low-income communities, very few families have vehicles. Families need to rely on public transport or their children have to walk to school. Schools in low-income rural areas often face many financial restraints. A school bus is a necessity far beyond their means. Taxi services may provide transport for school children, but the lack of regulations around this means that it is not also without risk.
For child pedestrians, there are already many safety risks.
Children often walk to school without supervision. This means that they are responsible for their safety. As a result, they are vulnerable to bullying, abduction, sexual assault, injury or death. In rural areas, children may have to walk along poor roads, without pavements or pedestrian crossings. Many have to navigate crossing highways by themselves. Children are susceptible to being hit by a vehicle as they are less visible to drivers and lack good road awareness to always make correct judgements.

Rural areas may also lack enforcement of road safety laws which exacerbates the risks to children.

THE URGENT NEED FOR SAFER SCHOOL TRANSPORT

We have talked about the need for safe school transport in articles before. 36% of child fatalities up to the age of 19 years old are due to road-related incidents.
Many children have no other means of transport aside from taxis, or else walking. A school transport system would provide children who would otherwise be pedestrians a much safer way of getting to school. But, the current tragedies involving overcrowded taxis and unsafe drivers must be overcome first. Regulations around school transport vehicles must be improved to place the safety of our children at the forefront.
Schools do not only provide children with basic education. For those from low-income families who face socio-economic difficulties, a school can be a sanctuary. They can provide meals, basic healthcare, social resources and education, and offer extra-curricular activities to enrich children. Children who are unable to attend school are not only cut off from an education that can aid them in finding a sustainable future. They miss out on the other services and roles schools provide to kids. This makes safe and reliable school transport even more crucial.

ROAD SAFETY EDUCATION SAVES LIVES

Road-related incidents are the greatest cause of child fatalities. Thus, road safety education should be a mandatory part of school curriculums. This is especially true in rural communities where there may be a lower level of education. These families might not be equipped to teach road safety rules to their children.

When taught road safety in a way that is age-appropriate and engaging, children are enthusiastic to learn. Road safety for children should reflect their daily experiences. Arrive Alive stresses the importance of teaching children proper road-crossing techniques. This includes encouraging them to walk facing oncoming traffic, looking right and left before crossing and ensuring adult supervision in high-risk areas to prevent injuries or death.

EMPOWERING COMMUNITIES THROUGH AWARENESS

Children tend to reflect the general road safety behaviours, or lack thereof, of their community. This suggests that education on road safety cannot be the sole responsibility of schools. Rather, encouragement and awareness of road safety should include the greater community.

A paper on road safety education for children finds that although children may understand road safety rules in a classroom setting, they are far more likely to exhibit behaviours they see outside the classroom.
This could be an opportunity to involve your community to improve road safety for children and parents alike. Organising student walking patrols, having parents help children at road crossings and getting them involved in the discussion of school taxis will aid in improving safety.

We have previously spoken about our Halo Beanies project, which provides hi-visibility beanies for child pedestrians. We would love to get in touch with rural communities who wish to band together to knit beanies for their children.

Trying to change attitudes that seem ingrained in a community can be hard. Most of these problems may be larger than most people feel they have the power to fix. But change begins at home. If you do not feel like you have the power to change the country, then consider what you can do to change your town or even your neighbourhood. Please reach out to us to provide you with educational resources to help your community.

DEVELOPING INFRASTRUCTURE FOR SAFER ROADS

Rural areas see less road maintenance and are often left to decay. Roads that are not maintained become a danger to everyone, especially children.
In rural areas, it is common to see children playing together in the streets. Playing and walking around roads is very unsafe for children. They lack the same awareness of the roads as adults do. Playing distracts them from danger. They may not have learnt about road safety, and are not easily visible to drivers.
If children are expected to use the roads, we should ensure that roads are safer for them to use. This includes pavements, pedestrian crossings, and traffic-calming measures like speed bumps. Children are also least visible at dusk and dawn, therefore streetlights can enhance their visibility to drivers.

GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY

Our government needs to facilitate change by coordinating efforts between the Departments of Education and Transport, law enforcement and NPOs. Resources and policies must reflect a “child safety first” attitude.

A lot of road safety challenges are a systemic problem and require a comprehensive and multi-faceted effort to affect change. Greater investment should be directed towards road safety for rural children. The lack thereof has the greatest impact on a rural child’s daily experience.

To protect South Africa’s rural children, road safety must be prioritised. We need better infrastructure, stricter transport regulations, widespread education, and stronger policies. These interventions will reduce child pedestrian fatalities and make school commutes safer. Creating a secure travel environment for children is a fundamental responsibility that requires urgent and sustained action.

In South Africa, overloaded vehicles are a common sight on our roads.

It could almost be an emblem of road safety in developing countries. We have touched on overloaded vehicles in terms of school transport, but let’s dive deep into this weighty issue.

A few years ago, a video circulated of a minibus taxi. It was bursting with passengers, luggage stacked high on the roof and an entire living cow loaded in the boot. All while a man clung to the outside rear of the vehicle. Video proof here. While this does not specify where in Africa this took place, it does not seem to be South Africa. But we have all seen enough instances of overloading that it would not surprise us if it was.

This example takes it to the extreme, but it does not take a cow to push the loading weight of a vehicle over its limits. It may surprise you to know where the limits lie. Beyond being a gross violation of road safety, overloading also impacts vehicle maintenance, road infrastructure, and public safety.

WHAT IS OVERLOADING?

It’s time to get a little bit technical. Vehicles have a Gross Vehicle Weight Rating which is the maximum weight limit of the vehicle up to which it can be safely operated. This includes the vehicle, fuel, passengers and cargo. The load/payload capacity of a vehicle specifically refers to the weight of passengers and cargo. Load capacity is determined by the difference of the Gross Vehicle Mass minus the weight of the vehicle and all the parts, fluids, fuel and so on that are required for its operations..

An important aspect of child road safety that starts at home: driveway danger and reversing cars.

As the new year begins and everyone settles back into their work and school routines, we want to highlight an important aspect of child road safety that starts at home: the risks posed by driveways and reversing vehicles.

In the US, 50 children are injured by reversing vehicles, and of this number, 2 are fatal. In 70% of cases, the driver is a parent or relative. There are few statistics for this in South Africa, but given that we have some of the most dangerous roads for children, one can assume reversing vehicles poses as much, if not more of a risk for our children.

These driveway tragedies predominantly happen to children under 5 years old, with 1-year-olds being the primary victims. 

STORIES TOO CLOSE TO HOME 

While actual statistics about reversing car fatalities in South Africa may be sparse, news stories are plenty to attest that reversing cars are a risk to our kids as well.

In 2021, a toddler was treated for serious injuries after his father reversed over him while backing his SUV out of the garage. While their mother prepared breakfast, he and his brother darted out of the house to say goodbye to their father.

“I immediately felt something was wrong and ran out. I saw him lying in the driveway. My husband said he felt he bumped something and immediately stopped. He didn’t drive over him. When he got out he saw him lying on the ground,” said Danelle Kerswell, his mother.

The article includes the eerie and heartbreaking detail that a little plastic bucket and spade lay next to the toddler.

While the Kerswell’s son may have survived the incident, a Graaf-Reinet mother faced charges of culpable homicide after she reversed over her 2-year-old toddler who died.

In 2015, a 1-year-old toddler in Constantia was also killed by a reversing vehicle in a driveway. In 2016, an 18-month-old child in Cato Ridge was also injured from a reversing vehicle in a driveway.

In an article by Highway Mail, an ER24 paramedic highlights that toddlers are the primary victims of reversing victims. He said, “All incidents involved toddlers. One incident involved a girl between 18 months and two years old. She sustained minor injuries. Another incident involved an 18-month-old boy who sustained a femur fracture, and unfortunately, there was nothing paramedics could do to save the child in the third incident.”  

WHY TODDLERS ARE HIGH RISK 

Young children, especially toddlers, are often the victims of reversing cars. They are at a higher risk due to the behaviours typical of their age and being less easily seen due to a vehicle’s blind spots.

• Toddlers have less environmental awareness. They are also less likely to notice and move out of the path of a reversing vehicle. If they are playing, they may be completely distracted from the oncoming danger.
• Toddlers are more likely to impulsively and spontaneously run into the path of a vehicle. They are also hindered physically – less coordinated, less balanced and have slower reactions. Toddlers who have just started walking tend to take off at a faster-than-expected pace with often little thought for their destination.
• Young children are already vulnerable in general when it comes to vehicles as their small size makes it hard to see around the body of a vehicle. When a car is reversing, the driver is blind to about 4-7 meters behind the vehicle. Sloped driveways leading up to a garage are very common in South Africa. These create even less visibility, having a narrow view while backing out of the garage itself.
• Children are also likely to follow a leaving person to their car, sometimes going unnoticed. Children may also run up to a vehicle to greet an arriving person without knowing the dangers of a moving car.
• Children, especially toddlers, have a higher chance of fatal injuries when knocked or driven over by a reversing vehicle. Even when not fatal, injuries are likely to be severe, resulting in brain damage or lifelong disability.

As adults, we must actively counter these factors to mitigate the risk to kids.

YOU CAN’T REVERSE TIME – AVOID THE RISK

 Many people become complacent in thinking “accidents” could never happen to them, but no one plans an accident. All it takes is a single moment of error to shatter your entire life. The risk should never be assumed to be 0%, but one can take steps to ensure the risk percentage is as low as possible.

Safety checks:

• When leaving the house, ensure the doors are closed behind you so that your child cannot follow you to the car.
• Before climbing into your vehicle, look behind and under the car.
• Keep your children in the car while you drive in or out.
• If another adult is with you, have them watch the back of the vehicle while you reverse, especially if you are reversing out of a garage.
• Set your GPS or take calls before you start your car. Avoid all distractions while driving, especially while reversing.
• When someone else is arriving or leaving your house, hold your child’s hand so they cannot dash into the path of a vehicle.
• Don’t solely rely on reverse sensors or rear cameras to show a clear path when reversing. These also have blindspots that can easily hide a small child.

Minimise the risk:

• Driveways should be inaccessible to children. If children can reach it from your garden or play area, fence it off.
• Teach your child that the driveway is a no-go zone. Allowing them to play in the driveway teaches them to become comfortable and unaware of an unsafe area. Toys should also never be left near or around the driveway.
• Teach your children to say goodbye or greet you at the door and not on the driveway.
• Open doors and gates yourself rather than teaching your small children how to open them. Young children having the ability to open doors before they learn how to navigate the world is dangerous in all aspects.

WHILE WE ARE ON THE TOPIC OF REVERSING CARS..

 Reversing cars is not only a risk to children in driveways. Anywhere where cars park is a potential danger.

Parking lots that have a high density of cars and pedestrians should also be treated with added caution. These could include malls, shopping centres, taxi ranks, schools and so on. Densely packed parking lots offer limited visibility to drivers and pedestrians. This US poll found that two-thirds of drivers are distracted while driving through parking lots. 50% of drivers admitted to texting, sending emails, using social media and setting the GPS while operating a vehicle in a parking lot.

When walking through a parking lot with your children:

• Firmly hold onto their hands while navigating a car park.
• Avoid walking behind the rear of a car where possible, making use of sidewalks.
• If walking behind a car is the only option, be vigilant of reversing cars.
• When you get to your car, secure your children inside first before loading your shopping.
• If you are loading or unloading multiple children, have your children stand with their hands on the vehicle until you are ready to go.
• Please do not allow children to run or play in the carpark and encourage them to look right and left before each crossing. To keep them from running around, try to have them stand in one place with their hands up in the air. For many small children, this sometimes will root them in place.
• Make use of pedestrian crossing areas.
• As a driver, reverse parking in a parking lot will allow you more visibility when you leave. Still, pull out of your parking spot carefully as small children may still be obscured by the height of your car.

Driveways and parking lots are spaces we navigate daily. They can become sites of unimaginable tragedy if proper precautions aren’t taken. The statistics and heartbreaking stories underscore the importance of vigilance. Especially when it comes to protecting our youngest and most vulnerable.

By adopting proactive safety measures—such as checking your surroundings, minimising distractions, and educating children about potential dangers—you can significantly reduce the risk of this happening to your child. Simple steps, like holding a child’s hand in a parking lot or securing driveway access at home, can make all the difference.

Ultimately, we all share the responsibility of ensuring our children’s safety around vehicles. A single moment of caution can prevent a lifetime of regret. Remember, you can’t reverse time, but you can reverse carefully and thoughtfully to protect the lives of those who matter most.