Question:
I heard the whole thing, and the point of the article was to tell you how they were informing children about the potential for head injuries and how to avoid them. Only one way of causing such a head injury was mentioned on the programme: no prizes for guessing what it was. Their website is marginally better, but still has undue emphasis on cycling.

I have tried complaining, writing to programmes, but the BBC continues to act in an extremely biassed manner, practically putting out propaganda for BHIT. Has anyone ever got a response from them?

Answer: I didn't hear it, so maybe you would like to go to their feedback discussion board and mention that over half of child head injuries are due to trips and falls, and there are more child head injury admissions due to assault than due to cycling; and that the major factor in deciding whether there will be a serious head injury is not whether the child is cycling, but whether a motor vehicle is involved. I was rarely if ever smacked as a child, though the threat existed. It seems from this, and other comments in the group, that the environment that existed when I was a child just doesn't exist now. We're so "safety concious" to avoid the risk of litigation. Has the threat of mugging really increased dramatically, or is it a case of too much media hype? There seems a lot more talk of different ways of being accused of child abuse - if some MPs have their way even light smacking would become another. Also I hear of more and more kids on various kinds of chemicals to deal with "Attention Deficit".