Buckle Down on School Bus Safety Laws

“Buckle Up, America”--unless you are one of 2 million California children who travel daily in large school buses. For decades we have known the benefits of using restraint systems in motor vehicles. Yet conscientious parents and health professionals are dismayed at the failure of California to follow the lead of New York, New Jersey and many municipalities across the country that require lap belts in large school buses. By federal statute, all small school buses are equipped with lap belts.

Compared with automobiles, school bus transportation is relatively safe. However, in the statewide fleet of 22,878 school buses, there were 2,044 reported collisions in 1997. Between 1995 and 1997, an average of 723 pupil passengers sustained injuries annually. While industry representatives claim that most of the injuries are “minor,” the reality is not so reassuring. In fact, injuries range from bruises to lacerations, broken bones, facial injuries and head trauma. More than 15% of the reported injuries in 1997 were ranked by police officers at the scene as “moderate” or “serious.” Occasionally, there are fatalities.

Considering the physical and psychological trauma to youngsters associated with school bus injuries, what parent would find reassurance in the claim that most injuries are “minor”? The parents I work with are bewildered and concerned that large school buses do not have seat belts.

Fortunately, state Assemblyman Martin Gallegos (D-Baldwin Park) has introduced AB 15, which would require lap belts or lap/shoulder belts on all newly manufactured school buses. AB 15 is similar to Gallegos’ 1998 bill, defeated by an alliance of public and private school transportation officials, and the state Department of Education. While claiming there was no demonstrated need, their arguments really were economic: The cost of seat belts and the potentially reduced seating capacity could impose a modest financial burden on local school districts and might diminish the profits of companies that provide pupil transportation.

Of course, opponents of AB 15 offer loftier arguments. They claim that a 25-year-old concept called “compartmentalization,” a high, padded seat back and close spacing between seats, confers adequate protection. The reality is that the sheer size of a school bus offers some protection and “compartmentalization” may provide an added margin of safety in some crashes. However, hundreds of scientific studies and more than 40 years of experience have taught us that restraint use is the single most effective means of reducing injuries and fatalities in motor vehicles. It’s simply unreasonable and unscientific to believe that children are better off unrestrained when riding in a school bus.

One of my 12-year-old patients recently asked me why the law requires children to “buckle up” in automobiles but not in large school buses. Pediatricians and other health practitioners, as well as concerned parents, are asking the same question. You can voice your opinion by writing to Assemblyman Gallegos and your own state representatives.