Compulsory vaccination is currently debated in France. Just like wearing seat belts in the car in the 1970s, noted honorary professor of medicine and road safety specialist Claude Got in an interview given in early July to Sunday newspaper . Discussions that now seem crazy as its obligation is no longer contested.
READ ALSO. Seat belts have been compulsory for 40 years
Tests and stunts
Appeared in the field of aeronautics in the XIXe century, the seat belt was tested throughout the following century. April 16, 1958, West France for example announces a rally between “ motorist doctors [qui] will be their own guinea pigs ».
The latter wish to study “ on themselves the reactions caused by fatigue, a major cause of road accidents “. Divided into two groups, ” one of them will be wearing a seat belt and we will be able to compare the interest [de cette dernière] for driving », We can read in conclusion.
Another example, ten years later, in Nantes. A ” exhibition »Is driven by professional stuntman André Hubert, said “Mustache”, for “ demonstrate effectiveness “From what he nicknamed the” Saint-TUTURE » (West France, December 19, 1968).
READ ALSO. Prevention. 45 years ago, road safety took a big turn
June 28, 1973
In 1970, car manufacturers were forced to equip the front seats of their new vehicles with seat belts. But only 20% of motorists use it. In 1972, 18,000 deaths were recorded on the roads. Christian Gerondeau becomes the first interministerial delegate for road safety, appointed by Jacques Chaban-Delmas. He examines the studies carried out in particular by Claude Got, then at the Garches hospital, and ” people from Renault and PSA. We have shown that we were twice as protected when we were belted », Recalls the professor, contacted by phone.
The seat belt obligation was finally decreed on June 28, 1973, in the front seats of vehicles, outside built-up areas. France is the first European country to impose it.
Belt mounted inside out
June 14, 1973 West France collects the opinion of some readers. A family helper emphasizes that “ seat belts are poorly adapted, too complicated. Manufacturers make no effort to simplify their use “. She tells : “ When I bought my car, I was only said: you hang it there and you shoot … But we haven’t tried it “. Result: his belt was fitted backwards and “ the attachment point is too low and the strap hurts the shoulder ».
A mother of three children and responsible for the union association of families, for her part: ” I believe this is a good precaution. We use it especially for long courses, but we must recognize that their handling is not easy. In the event of an accident, I know that a lot of people are afraid of getting stuck in their car. I am not competent to judge; all I know is that there is, it seems, one burn for forty ejected: it is therefore this last risk which is the greatest ».
” It’s dangerous “
These concerns, Claude Got knew them well: “ People said: “it’s ridiculous”, “it’s dangerous”, “it bothers me”, it was an argument that was often developed. “. In 1975, Jérôme Spycket published The belt that kills. The subtitle ? “The so-called ‘seat belt’ has killed and will kill again. Motorists, know what you are exposing yourself to “by buckling it” “. And take the example of a deceased man, trapped by his belt, while his vehicle catches fire.
January 19, 1972 West France works to deny a fake news, that of ” opponents [qui soutiennent] that the belt was dangerous in the event of fire or immersion. Statistics prove the opposite […] »We can read. Christian Gerondeau also insists, in Ocean Press, January 31, 1976: “ There is no miracle solution in road safety as elsewhere: but if, once in a thousand, the seat belt can be harmful, 999 times it is the best protection for the motorist. ».
“Why don’t they let me free?” “
A year earlier, a survey by Alain Chaplais appeared in Ocean Press : « “CEINTS and why not safe…”, Every year in France, wearing a seat belt would save thousands of human lives “. The journalist shares the arguments put forward by the opponents: “ “If you had to think about the accident every time you get in a car …” This reflection is not devoid of common sense and it is obvious that the psychosis of the accident does not reduce the risks, on the contrary. However, say those who are opposed to the belt, whoever takes the precaution of buckling, does so in anticipation of the possible accident. Psychologists have also looked at the motorist’s feeling of superiority and we know that we naturally tend to think that the accident is for others. “How would I look with this belt?” “We often hear people say,” I want to be free to move around “” (September 24, 1971).
In a “point of view” published by West France on September 5, 1976, Jean-Marie Domenach wondered: “ Until what point […] Does the state have the right to intervene to protect me, even against myself? […] But isn’t the car a sort of extension of the home (inviolable like it, until a recent decree, very disturbing, which authorizes the police to search them without a warrant)? If I prefer the risk (moreover discussed) of going without a seat belt to the physical and moral embarrassment it causes me, why shouldn’t I be left free, at my own risk? »
« Now it’s completely forgotten, but we had important and relatively long oppositions », Concludes Claude Got. The obligation to wear a seat belt was extended to urban expressways and at night, in built-up areas, in 1975. In 1979, in built-up areas, day and night. It was not until 1990 that it was compulsory at the rear.
– .
