Hundred stitches that say belt up

Press, 30 April 1981, Page 19

Hundred stitches that say belt up

By

Colin Dryden,

of the “Daily Telegraph”

Every motoring journalist colleague and driving expert I know, . whether former world champion or road safety officer, has long been convinced of the need to make seat-belt wearing compulsory. This view has brought more than a fair share of abuse down on my head but I still find it inexplicable that people can argue about the liberty of the subject where possible death, injury and disfigurement are involved.

Of course, there are the 1000-to-one cases where it is better to be thrown clear but they are the exceptions that prove the rule. Also, there should be exemptions for those who can convince a doctor that their driving efficiency would be impaired by a belt or for some other medical reason.

Last month my younger son and his fiancee drove into the nearest town to order their wedding invitations. (Their old car has fixed belts, and despite my appeals, they were hardly ever used. Both of them found the belts uncomfortable which is a possible excuse for not wearing an old, fixed belt but has nc validity for the inertia reel type. A driver and front seat passenger need to be nc more aware of an inertia reel belt than of their own clothing, provided it is properly fitted. If an inertia belt

is uncomfortable this probably means that the door pillar mounting is wrong and needs to be changed.) I cannot give the details because the matter is subjudice but my son and future daughter-in-law were travelling at no more than 50km/h in third gear on a country road, near home, when there was an accident. No avoiding action was possible because of a steep bank. There was no question ol speed, just two youngsters in an old car, pottering along a familiar road, happily discussing their wedding. Within a split second their world became a nightmare and my future daughter-in-law’s face was in ribbons after she had gone through the windscreen. She spent five hours in the operating theatre and when we visited her she was recognisable only by her fair hair. Now, a month later, there is a great improvement. The swelling and bruising has subsided and the 100 stitches have been removed from her face and inside her mouth.

She is unbelievably brave about the whole thing. “The trouble is we all think accidents happen to other people but I'll never sit in a car again without a seat belt on,” she told me in the hospital.

She is home now but there will have to be further hospital visits for plastic surgery. Miraculously, her eyes were undamaged and only one tooth was chipped. Meanwhile, the wedding

preparations continue and the simple country wedding in July will go ahead like the great Royal occasion in St Paul's. But instead of the bride doing her own light make-up before she leaves for the church, she will be going to a beauty parlour for a little professional assistance. The surgeon says he expects her looks to be restored but not by her wedding day.

Opponents of compulsory belt wearing will doubtless accuse me of special pleading, cheap sentimentality and sensationalism. But if one pretty girl — or anyone came to that — is spared what happened to my future daughter-in-law and son through always wearing a seat belt in future, then I do not apologise.

The mere fact that it is still not compulsory means that those who always advocate habitual seat-belt wear ing have their cause weakened.

How often have I heard people say; “Oh, we don’t bother to put on belts just to pop round to the shops but we always wear them on the motorway.” They could not be more wrong. As I have described, awful accidents happen at low speeds, near home, while motorways have the best safety record.

Above all, it is the front seat passenger who is most in danger and those motorists who bleat about infringement of their freedom would do well to remember that.