Right: Despite a high rate of head injuries to skateboarders, the wearing of helmets, while encouraged by the sport's associations and organisations, is not yet compulsory.Further implications
It seems unlikely that state governments will relax the legislation requiring cyclists to wear helmets. If the legislation was relaxed and increased deaths or injuries resulted this would put governments in a difficult situation both ethically and legally. It is possible that governments might be sued by injured cyclists for the injuries they suffered after the laws were relaxed.This, however, leaves governments with the problem of how to address a lack of enthusiasm among commuters for cycling. The Victorian government has invested heavily in the Share Bike scheme and its limited uptake by commuters is very disappointing. The immediate solution appears to be making helmets available to commuters as part of the rental scheme. It also appears that advances in technology and helmet design will see the development of collapsible helmets that can be carried in handbags or briefcases. At the moment there have been some doubts expressed about the effectiveness of these collapsible helmets. Further research and development is likely to ensure that these helmets are as effective as their rigid counterparts.
It is also at least possible that helmets as a disincentive to cycling has been exaggerated. There have been many studies done which have demonstrated that there has been a decline in bicycle use since the introduction of compulsory helmets. However, there are many other factors, including increased car use and the recreational use of skateboards and scooters which might help account for a decline in the use of bicycles.
It is probable that state governments will have to continue education programs, advertising campaigns and a variety of economic incentives to increase the use of bicycles.