Train driver mental health

[GB]

When strange6 said "arrogant" in an earlier post he was refering to some railway staff in general. It was not directed at anyone in this thread nor the nature of the thread.

Never having been involved in a road or rail fataility I can only speculate what the respective drivers go through, but I'd suggest there are similarities and differences between road and rail.

 

[driver9000]

When the BTP Officers came to my house to take a statement, one of the first things they told me was that the lad's parents had asked them if I was alright, astonishing really when you think what they must be going through.

A similar thing happened to me. The family even sent a card and were very concerned about our welfare. Every year flowers appear at the station nearest the scene although normally I don't stop at that station so I hadn't seen them until I was given a stop order for that station about a year later and spotted them tied to the fence. I always look for the flowers now when passing through and I often think of them to this day especially around the time of year it happened.

 

[Rugd1022]

What on earth are you going on about?

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Not arrogant Strange6, just defensive I would say and until you have been involved in a railway fatality, been tested for drugs and alcohol, had to go to the inquest and meet the familys who all stare at you on occasions making you think you have murdered their dad or mum etc, you will not understand the aftermath for a driver, for a judge to say in court the only way of identifying the victim was one finger print is slightly different than hitting someone in your car.[/QUOTE]

So there is a difference between killing somebody by a car and a train is there? Are you not tested for drugs and alcohol if you kill somebody on the road? Do you not have to attend an inquest or court if you kill somebody on the road? Do people not get serious, horrible injuries if you kill them on the road? Are drivers not affected mentally if they kill somebody on the road?
Some of you think you're an extra special case because you work on the railways; as though you're better than everybody else. I have not written anything derogatory or insensitive in this thread to justify some of the silly little comments thrown at me. How do you know I haven't seriously injured or killed somebody on the road through no fault of my own?
God, some of you have the nerve to criticise what I have written when you should be looking at some of the silly comments you yourselves have written.[/QUOTE]

Silly comments...?? Since YOU started the thread I think you should have a look back through it and read what people have actually said in reply to your OP. I do not think I'm a special case because I'm a train driver, far from it, and sadly I'm not able to read your mind so don't know whether or not you've killed somebody in a road accident. If there's really something else on your mind then say so. Does anything I wrote in my post amount to a 'silly comment'? I don't think so.

As for there being a difference between road and rail related deaths I'd say there are - most rail related deaths are from suicides, ie: people who choose to end their lives that way, whereas most road deaths are caused by drivers doing something wrong, illegal, or downright stupid.... all very different. I'm not saying that there's no remorse felt on the part of motorists who've been involved in such things, but very often those that cause death on the roads live to tell the tale and get on with their lives as if nothing can touch them. You ask 'are drivers not affected mentally if they kill someone on the roads?' I'd say some are, but there are plenty who just walk away with a fine and maybe a short driving ban and think they've got off lightly, then carry on driving just as they did before. That's very different to how train drivers conduct themselves when they get back to work after a fatality, I can assure you.

 

[the sniper]

How many people are killed on the roads compared to the railways? Bigger chance of you killing somebody on the road yet I no of no single person who has. This is what I meant about the chances of killing somebody doing your job. How on earth saying that is stupid is beyond comprehension although I do realise some railway folk are very touchy and arrogant regarding non railway people commenting on their jobs

Just out of curiosity, how have you worked this out? Though there are fewer deaths on the railways then the roads (2,222 deaths on the roads and 500 pedestrian killed in 2009, compared to 258 killed by train in 2010), I'd have thought that there are many, many more road vehicle drivers in the UK then train drivers, and there are many more trips driven on the roads then on the railway. As such, I'd have thought that the ratio of deaths to the number of train drivers vs the number of deaths to vehicle drivers would be much higher for the former.

 

[9K43]

I have been on jobs through Manchester where the loco has been stoned from close quarters, had arrows shot at us, wall toppings laid across our path the list goes on.
In one incident at South Kirby Jct on the up I was on a Freightliner from Stourton, Leeds, doing 75mph, when a numpty on a motorcycle appeared in front us.
I blew the whistle but the driver opened up the throttle and said a four letter swear word finishing in OFF.
This is an everyday happening in quite a lot of the country, and traincrews just get used to it.
Incidents like this effect people differently. To me it seems to be part of the job.
If some person wants to stand infront of a 75MPH train theres nowt much you can do about it.

 

[TDK]

Is it a mandatory requirement that the driver concerned HAS to be at the inquest in person?

If it is then I am very suprised as A) I don't believe that is the same for road deaths and B) I can easily see how drivers can consider this the worst part.

The actual event Im sure is hard enough, but after a while I imagine you can put some kind of distance between you and it (clearly you never forget) but then to have it all dragged up some weeks or months later and see the heartache on the family members....no thanks!!

Depends on the circumstances but generally it is advisable that the driver attends due to the fact that the driver is the only witness. I represented on driver at an inquest and it was judge and dury, the family were after a verdict of accidental death and it was an obvious suicide with note left and everything, I think the family were after the life insurance as this is void if a suicide is proved, in these sort of cases the driver is expected to attend.

 

[Striker]

But how many fatalities?

Eh? By definition a suicide IS a fatality, otherwise it's not suicide!

258 is enough and that is just suicides, what is the source on this and is this an average.........

I've no idea what the bloody source is and neither is it relevant. I was simply commenting on O L Leigh jumping on Strange6 by saying that 258 deaths per year isn't rare when in fact compared to the number of trains run per day it is rare. Whether 258 deaths is accurate doesn't matter in this case as the issue is O L Leighs definition of "rare".

you may say it is a rare event and you are probably correct regarding the amount of trains that are run but it is not rare enough to be taken lightly,

What on earth are you talking about? I'm not commenting on whether 258 is to be taken lightly, just that 258 deaths is rare in the grand scheme of things.

it is unpredictable and the figure of 258 may be higher, until you can deliver the evidence I will keep open minded.

Good grief. I didn't come up with the figure of 258!! :roll:

Not arrogant Strange6, just defensive I would say and until you have been involved in a railway fatality, been tested for drugs and alcohol, had to go to the inquest and meet the familys who all stare at you on occasions making you think you have murdered their dad or mum etc, you will not understand the aftermath for a driver, for a judge to say in court the only way of identifying the victim was one finger print is slightly different than hitting someone in your car.

What has this got to do with anything? Strange6 was commenting on the likelihood of it happening to a driver, not whether it wasn't as serious as hitting somebody with your car? :roll:

 

[TDK]

Eh? By definition a suicide IS a fatality, otherwise it's not suicide!

However if someone is tresspassing and have no intention of taking their lives this is a fatality and not a suicide, your attitue is poor striker and both you and strange have a bee in your bonnet regarding railway suicides and fatalities. All I can say is, yes, if you kill someone in your car, on a push bike or driving a train it is traumatic to say the least. Lighten up a bit guys

 

[Striker]

So there is a difference between killing somebody by a car and a train is there? Are you not tested for drugs and alcohol if you kill somebody on the road? Do you not have to attend an inquest or court if you kill somebody on the road? Do people not get serious, horrible injuries if you kill them on the road? Are drivers not affected mentally if they kill somebody on the road?
Some of you think you're an extra special case because you work on the railways; as though you're better than everybody else. I have not written anything derogatory or insensitive in this thread to justify some of the silly little comments thrown at me. How do you know I haven't seriously injured or killed somebody on the road through no fault of my own?
God, some of you have the nerve to criticise what I have written when you should be looking at some of the silly comments you yourselves have written.

Here here!!

Also, the chances are that a road death isn't suicide and the pedestrian, for example, didn't want to die. I'm not saying it makes it easy for the train driver to deal with, but as a driver has already stated in this thread, knowing the "jumper" wanted to kill themselves can provide some comfort.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

However if someone is tresspassing and have no intention of taking their lives this is a fatality and not a suicide, your attitue is poor striker and both you and strange have a bee in your bonnet regarding railway suicides and fatalities.

If you'd bother to read the exchange "suicides" were quite clearly the 258 deaths.

Strange6: Suicides are still very rare on the network.
driver9000: According to a piece I read somewhere the other day there were 258 in 2010.
Myself: 258 suicides in a year compared with how many trains run on the network every day makes it a rare event in my opinion.
90019: But how many fatalities?


So don't you start talking about my attitude when you can't even get the facts straight. Not on my watch.

nahhhhh, you have a good chance of it not happening to you. Suicides are still very rare on the network.

According to a piece I read somewhere the other day there were 258 in 2010.

258 suicides in a year compared with how many trains run on the network every day makes it a rare event in my opinion.

But how many fatalities?

 

[Intermodal]

Can we stop this debate and carry on with the matter at hand please - it is detracting from an otherwise excellent and informative topic.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Here here!!

I know you like to get facts straight, so perhaps you'd like to know that it's "Hear hear". Not "Here here".

 

[GB]

But its not a rare event though is it. Works out to what, one every day and half? Hardly a rare event.

The chances of being involved in one however is small...though random.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

But its not a rare event though is it. Works out to what, one every day and half? Hardly a rare event.

The chances of being involved in one however is small...though random.

I think people are confused between chance and rarity. It is not rare - as you state it happens every 1 and a half days. Yet the chance of it happening is less, due to the amount of trains.

 

[GB]

I think people are confused between chance and rarity. It is not rare - as you state it happens every 1 and a half days. Yet the chance of it happening is less, due to the amount of trains.

Thats my take on it anyway.

 

[Striker]

I know you like to get facts straight, so perhaps you'd like to know that it's "Hear hear". Not "Here here".

Thanks for the info.

But its not a rare event though is it. Works out to what, one every day and half? Hardly a rare event.

The chances of being involved in one however is small...though random.

Saying it happens once every day and a half is irrelevant without taking into account the number of train movements.

Just had a quick look for the stats but all I could find was a figure of around 20,000 train services per day in the UK, which I assume doesn't include freight.

So that's 1 suicide per 30,000 train movements roughly, but probably a bit more if including freight. Assuming a driver works 300 days per year and drives roughly 4 services per day, it would mean they would have to work 75 years before they had a suicide. Pretty rare in my book.

 

[TDK]

Strange6: Suicides are still very rare on the network.
driver9000: According to a piece I read somewhere the other day there were 258 in 2010.
Myself: 258 suicides in a year compared with how many trains run on the network every day makes it a rare event in my opinion.
90019: But how many fatalities?


So don't you start talking about my attitude when you can't even get the facts straight. Not on my watch.

Actually the figures are 258 fatalities including suicides so that does not mean all 258 were suicides as some were not suisides - Fact

 

[Striker]

Actually the figures are 258 fatalities including suicides so that does not mean all 258 were suicides as some were not suisides - Fact

I've got no reason to argue with your figures. The point is that at that stage of the conversation, the figure of 258 was assumed to be "suicides" in which case 90019 chiming in and asking "how many were fatalities" made no sense at all.

I know exactly zero train drivers, and not one of them has had a single fatality. I think that figure speaks for itself.

 

[90019]

I've got no reason to argue with your figures. The point is that at that stage of the conversation, the figure of 258 was assumed to be "suicides" in which case 90019 chiming in and asking "how many were fatalities" made no sense at all.

The figure was said to be suicides. Not all fatalities are suicides.
I also asked 'How many fatalities', as in how many fatalities overall rather than just suicides.

 

[scotsman]

I've got no reason to argue with your figures. The point is that at that stage of the conversation, the figure of 258 was assumed to be "suicides" in which case 90019 chiming in and asking "how many were fatalities" made no sense at all.

I know exactly zero train drivers, and not one of them has had a single fatality. I think that figure speaks for itself.

There's no need to be so flippant about this, these are real people being killed by trains, all of whom have a Driver who has to witness it and live and deal with it for the rest of their lives. Maybe if you were involved in such an incident then maybe you would understand that while the statistical probability is low - you have to remember that your statistic means that in a 75 year career, you are almost certain to strike one person, not that you will have to work 75 years before an incident is to occur - suicides are not mathematical certainties and are not 'regular' in the sense that they can be predicted.

Please try and look beyond the numbers and speak to some railwaymen.

 

[Striker]

There's no need to be so flippant about this, these are real people being killed by trains, all of whom have a Driver who has to witness it and live and deal with it for the rest of their lives. Maybe if you were involved in such an incident then maybe you would understand that while the statistical probability is low - you have to remember that your statistic means that in a 75 year career, you are almost certain to strike one person, not that you will have to work 75 years before an incident is to occur - suicides are not mathematical certainties and are not 'regular' in the sense that they can be predicted.

Please try and look beyond the numbers and speak to some railwaymen.

Why are people assuming that just because I think it is a relatively rare occurance (thankfully), that I am taking a flippant attitude to people committing suicide on the railway and the obviously traumatic experience it must be for all those involved? I really don't understand it.

As for the 75 year figure, I am well aware that a driver could technically have a suicide every day. But it just highlights the rarity of the event. I am the only one actually coming up with figures instead of just saying "it's not that rare".
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

That's to be expected - if you don't know any drivers then you won't know if they've had a fatality!

Er yes. I was wondering how long it would take for someone to respond to this. It was clearly a satirical, sardonic even, swipe on my part at the sheer ridiculous of internet forums giving a voice to those that shouldn't really have one. In other words, people who think that their own experiences are the norm and that it must fit a general overall pattern.

 

[GB]

As for the 75 year figure, I am well aware that a driver could technically have a suicide every day. But it just highlights the rarity of the event. I am the only one actually coming up with figures instead of just saying "it's not that rare".

Yet again you are confusing what is (not) a rare event with chance. Yes, the ratio of train services against fatalaty numbers is small and as a result a driver has a slim chance of being involved in one (though as already established its random), but an event that statistically speaking happens every few days somewhere on the network is not by definition "rare".

 

[Striker]

Yet again you are confusing what is (not) a rare event with chance. Yes, the ratio of train services against fatalaty numbers is small and as a result a driver has a slim chance of being involved in one (though as already established its random), but an event that statistically speaking happens every few days somewhere on the network is not by definition "rare".

I'm not confusing anything my friend. You are the one who has little basic understanding of statistics. The raw figure has no use whatsoever unless you take it in the context of the overall frequency of events where NO deaths occur.

For example, there were 706,248 births in the UK in 2009. That's one birth on average every 40 seconds!! Yet the average female will have just over 2 children in their whole lifetime!! The figure of one birth every 40 seconds makes babies being born a VERY frequent event. But in the context of roughly 30 million females, it's quite insignificant to the individual.

Of course, it doesn't mean that one female won't have twenty children ihn their lifetime, just as it doesn't mean a driver won't have 20 suicides in their career, but then you will always get an extreme spike in statistics.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It was clearly a satirical swipe.

Now you see what you've done is confuse "satirical" with "sarcastic". What I was doing was satirical because I was using wit as a weapon in which to make a serious social comment, that being the internet is responsible for allowing people who wouldn't normally have any intellectual merit have a voice. What you wrote was sarcastic.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Maybe everyone on here should just back off on this one. This started out as a perfectly good thread, but has since descended into utter rubbish, especially since my favourite member joined in.

Suicides and mental states thereafter are not something to talk openly about such as 'Oh, it'll never happen'. You can naver be so sure. i find any comment on that both insulting to drivers who it occurs to, and the loved ones of the deceased. please show more respect to the drivers etc who have to live throught this for the rest of their days, and stop mocking and playing down chances of it occuring. I'm with OL Leigh on this one.

Matt

 

[GB]

Sorry Striker but we will have to agree to disagree with your definition of rare. I have just looked on the national logs for the entire network and since the start of the year there has been at least 30 odd fatalities recorded. To me that says fatalities as an event on the network are fairly common place.

 

[strange6]

As for there being a difference between road and rail related deaths I'd say there are - most rail related deaths are from suicides, ie: people who choose to end their lives that way, whereas most road deaths are caused by drivers doing something wrong, illegal, or downright stupid.... all very different. I'm not saying that there's no remorse felt on the part of motorists who've been involved in such things, but very often those that cause death on the roads live to tell the tale and get on with their lives as if nothing can touch them. You ask 'are drivers not affected mentally if they kill someone on the roads?' I'd say some are, but there are plenty who just walk away with a fine and maybe a short driving ban and think they've got off lightly, then carry on driving just as they did before. That's very different to how train drivers conduct themselves when they get back to work after a fatality, I can assure you.[/QUOTE]

I think you and I live in different worlds, mate. You just don't make any sense whatsoever.

 

[pendolino]

What a depressing thread.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Could you please learn to quote correctly strange6? When you click 'Reply with quote', please don't play with it, it makes your posts so hard to read.

 

[strange6]

Could you please learn to quote correctly strange6? When you click 'Reply with quote', please don't play with it, it makes your posts so hard to read.

I wish I never started this thread in the first place. The way some of my comments have been taken and interpreted is an absolute disgrace.
If a mod could remove this thread, then I would appreciate it.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Maybe everyone on here should just back off on this one. This started out as a perfectly good thread, but has since descended into utter rubbish, especially since my favourite member joined in.

Who's that - me or Striker?

 

[strange6]

Who's that - me or Striker?

Striker is a man of common sense. He can see Tosh when he reads it!