Think skiing in Europe and the mind conjures up notions of swooshing down perfectly groomed ski pistes, occasionally glancing at the impressive alpine vista before sliding up to an impossibly quaint hut for a mulled wine and a grilled sausage or two.
Unfortunately in recent years, a series of horrific accidents between skiers has highlighted some very real dangers on the slopes and sparked a debate about whether helmets should be compulsory for everyone heading to the pistes.
On New Year’s Day 2009, the matter was brought to a head when a leading German politician, Dieter Althaus collided with a Slovakian woman named Beata Christandl on a resort in Riesneralm, Austria. Christandl, 41, sustained horrendous head injuries and died en route to the hospital.
She was a mother of four – the youngest of whom is one year old – and, key to the story, was not wearing a helmet. Althaus, who was, is currently recovering from his injuries in hospital but remembers nothing from the incident.
Doctors say Christandl would probably have survived if her head was protected, and politicians and media have jumped at the chance to suggest a mandatory helmet law.
However such a law would only address the effect rather than the causes of the problem. Europe’s ski resorts have generally evolved over a number of decades and consequently there are countless pistes which cross over one another. Increased lift capacity means busier slopes, so add speed, alcohol and testosterone (80% of all prangs are caused by men) and you get a pretty hazardous sport.
Collisions are supposed to be treated just as if two cars crashed. The parties involved are obliged to stop (though many don’t) and swap details. Any injuries should be reported to the police. Althaus is under a formal police investigation and he could be charged with manslaughter.
“A helmet law will not reduce the number of accidents,” says former ski instructor Dietmar Schmidt. “It would be better if there were patrollers to slow people down at unsafe spots. Dangerous skiers should have their lift passes confiscated and the overlapping pistes should be much better marked.”
This is certainly the case in the US and New Zealand where erratic skiing or snowboarding is not tolerated.
One can easily draw a comparison here with New Zealand’s cycling helmet law. Introduced after a fatal accident, the measure is supposed to protect cyclists. Wearing such protection is generally a good idea, but does it reduce the actual incident rate of accidents?
Instead of clamping down on bareheaded riders/ skiers, could efforts go into prosecuting poor driving/ skiing or educating people on how to behave around vulnerable road/ piste users? Do such fire-fighting laws actually solve anything or are they simply a convenient tool for gaining political capital and selling newspapers?
No comments:
Post a Comment