Reversing camera
Mandatory reversing cameras could contribute to a reduced sense of risk among drivers.
There’s one big flaw with assuming reversing cameras will eliminate the tragedies of childrenbeing knocked over when a car is reversing.
If people aren’t looking at the camera’s screen, then they are useless.
Sure, the cameras provide a wide field of vision that will likely pick up a child hovering anywhere near the rear of a car.
But they’re ineffective if the driver is not actually looking at the screen, which is typically housed in the rear vision mirror or the centre console of the car.
It’s something the Department of Infrastructure and Transport noted in a 2012 report ondriveway deaths and low-speed vehicle run-overs.
It even went so far as to say some researchers consulted for the paper suggested the fitment of cameras could create complacency with drivers.
“Installation of such devices might even contribute to a reduced sense of risk among drivers,” the report noted.
In the quest towards developing the crashless car, which most major car makers are working on, various technologies are currently being developed to reduce the chances of reversing into another human.
The Backup Collision Intervention system uses sensors on the rear of the car to detect other objects (including, potentially, people) and warns the driver before applying the brakes. 
While it won’t be perfect – in the same way as any of the new crash avoidance technologies has its faults and foibles – it could at least alert drivers in some instances to a child or other animal being behind the car.
As with anything involving the road toll, though, there will likely be many solutions or measures required to tackle what is a particularly distressing tragedy.
It’s also worth looking at driveway and house design. As has been done with backyard pools, part of the solution may lie in making it more difficult for children to be subjected to a dangerous location.