Addressing Gender Bias in Vehicle Safety Standards

In 2019, a serious car accident involving my family and a wrong-way driver left us with severe injuries. The crash highlighted stark gender disparities in vehicle safety features. While my husband and son sustained minor injuries thanks to seatbelts and airbags, my daughter and I were gravely harmed. This discrepancy led me to investigate the underlying causes of such differences.

Research revealed a significant oversight in automotive safety design. Women have a 17% higher likelihood of being killed in crashes compared to men and are 73% more likely to be seriously injured. The design of current safety features seems tailored more towards male bodies, neglecting crucial differences in female anatomy. Men typically have stronger necks, and standard seatbelt placements favor male hip bone structures. Women, on the other hand, encounter dangers such as seatbelts cutting into internal organs. Additionally, women’s necks and spinal columns require different support systems.

As of 2011, the incorporation of female dummies in crash testing was not mandatory. Even now, no American carmakers utilize ‘biofidelic’ female dummies, although these dummies better represent the female population.

Biofidelic crash test dummies account for gender-specific anatomical differences. Despite the availability of these models, automakers can achieve high safety ratings without using them. This gap prompted my efforts to reach out and advocate for change.

Initially, I attempted to alert the Biden administration. Having worked at the same think tank as the chief data officer, I hoped for immediate response. However, political priorities overshadowed practical safety concerns. Bureaucratic inertia hindered the advancement of women-centric safety solutions. Predictions suggest around 44,000 women would continue to die with the current system in place.

I also engaged with the Department of Transportation (DOT) officials, addressing the lack of testing female dummies in driving scenarios. Despite presenting clear data, officials justified the status quo by presenting skewed interpretations of safety data. They emphasized enhancements like automatic braking but overlooked the fundamental issue of gender-biased crash tests.

Efforts to push for regulatory changes finally gained some traction. The Trump administration acknowledged biofidelic dummies in a press release. Moreover, the bipartisan She DRIVES Act proposes more inclusive safety testing, yet implementation lags.

Overall, trust in governmental solutions wavers. Despite America’s historic role as a platform for innovation, current road safety rankings challenge its efficiency. U.S. road deaths per 10,000 drivers remain concerningly high. Reform in vehicle safety standards, particularly regarding gender inclusivity, is overdue. Addressing this bias is crucial for enhancing national roadway safety.

Hana Schank, a journalist and policy strategist, highlights these issues informed by her past work with the Obama administration and the Public Interest Technology team at New America.