Examining Gender Disparities in Vehicle Crash Safety

In 2019, a head-on collision involving my family and a wrong-way driver left significant injuries. The driver attempted to pass a motorcycle uphill and crashed a Ford F-150 truck into our vehicle. This collision resulted in a few broken bones for my husband and son. My daughter and I suffered severe injuries, as seatbelts damaged our internal organs and an airbag impact led to my traumatic brain injury.

Surprisingly, while seatbelts and airbags protected my son and husband, they almost proved fatal for my daughter and me. Consumer Reports highlighted this discrepancy, sparking my inquiry into vehicle safety. Statistics indicate women face a 17% higher risk of death and a 73% higher chance of serious injury in crashes.

While working at a think tank focused on public interest technology, I intended to leverage my connections to address this issue. A firm specializing in “biofidelic” crash test dummies develops models representing 95% of women. These dummies consider anatomical differences such as neck musculature and body positioning in relation to safety devices, unlike earlier female models, which were simple scaled-down male versions.

Despite these advancements, American car manufacturers do not use biofidelic female dummies. These companies achieve top crash test ratings without them. Communication with the Biden White House and transportation authorities revealed their focus elsewhere, overshadowing this pressing safety gap. Attempts to mandate biofidelic dummies face challenges due to entrenched standards focused on male models.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration primarily uses models based on 1970s male dimensions. Female dummies, representing only a small fraction of women, are not mandated for driver-side testing. Officials argued they couldn’t mandate every test, despite investing significantly in technologies like automatic braking.

Progress appeared with a press release from the Trump-era Transportation Department supporting biofidelic dummies. Additionally, the She DRIVES Act, involving bipartisan support, aims to enact regulatory changes. Nonetheless, prevailing resistance from bureaucracies delays immediate resolutions.

U.S. road safety remains a concern, with higher death rates compared to some developing countries. This narrative highlights systematic inadequacies challenging public trust and points to determining equitable solutions through informed legislation and technological adaptation.

Hana Schank, a journalist and technologist, reflects on past governmental roles advocating for digital strategies and public interest technology initiatives.