@GreenBean Our cars definitely had airbags! But my dad was the stay-at-home parent when I was little - who knows if my mom would have allowed this level of recklessness, even in the early 90s. I'll have to ask them if they remember any of this!
@Rae1 Whoa I never said that I wasn't going to follow current guidelines or that they aren't a good thing. I'm also not going to apologize for some amount of nostalgia for my youth.
@Rae1 Whoa I never said that I wasn't going to follow current guidelines or that they aren't a good thing. I'm also not going to apologize for some amount of nostalgia for my youth.
I didn't say/think you did. The second part of my comment was a general comment, not to you directly. Sorry if it came across differently
And trust me, I remember at like 3-4 riding in the middle front seat of a station wagon (with just a lap seat belt) and my dad letting me sit on his lap and 'drive'. It is really crazy how much things have changed. My smoking comment was just another example of that change in such a short time span.
The law in CA just changed within the last couple of months. I've also seen many strangers in parking lots with forward facing kids who are clearly under two so they either don't care or they aren't aware of the change.
I agree that it's just within the last few years that the regulations have changed. People in our parents' generation have commented to me that it's weird to them but SO MUCH has changed since we were babies. It's a wonder we all survived, right?!
As far as extended rear-facing (past age two), it seems like most people agree "better a broken leg than a broken neck" so I think I'll rear face as long as we can.
@Rae1 I hope I'm reading into this, but this response was a little patronizing. Yes, I'm aware that knowledge develops over time - I'm actually in the sciences, and contributing to knowledge is one of the most meaningful aspects of my work. I asked the question because I didn't know if these regulations were in place when I was little and my parents were simply unaware, or if the regulations were in fact more recent.
Another factor, though, is that carseat companies could easily be lobbying and affecting the studies that are done to get people to use booster seats for longer. My husband remembers seeing a documentary on this (but he can't remember the name - I'm trying to find it), but of course that's just one documentary in a sea of information. (This has nothing to do with the rear-facing aspect, but it does have to do with the recommendations to buy seats for big kids and have them use them for many years.) We'll probably go with the official recommendations regardless, but it is important to keep in mind that the studies that get done on baby products can be affected by money, as they are in many other industries (tobacco!).
@Rae1 Sorry. I read the tone of your response wrong and got defensive. I apologize.
@lph4248 I was born in the early 80s so we didn't have a car with airbags until I was over the weight recommendation anyway.
This conversation has reminded me of long road trips as a kid - my brother would pull down the shoulder strap of his seat belt (or maybe we didn't have shoulder straps in the back seat yet), loosen the lap belt part and turn around on his knees to look out the back window. My dad would yell at him to sit down, threaten to pull over, etc etc. I think today's car seats/booster seats would have saved my parents a lot of stress and maybe helped my dad's blood pressure.
@Rae1 I hope I'm reading into this, but this response was a little patronizing. Yes, I'm aware that knowledge develops over time - I'm actually in the sciences, and contributing to knowledge is one of the most meaningful aspects of my work. I asked the question because I didn't know if these regulations were in place when I was little and my parents were simply unaware, or if the regulations were in fact more recent.
Another factor, though, is that carseat companies could easily be lobbying and affecting the studies that are done to get people to use booster seats for longer. My husband remembers seeing a documentary on this (but he can't remember the name - I'm trying to find it), but of course that's just one documentary in a sea of information. (This has nothing to do with the rear-facing aspect, but it does have to do with the recommendations to buy seats for big kids and have them use them for many years.) We'll probably go with the official recommendations regardless, but it is important to keep in mind that the studies that get done on baby products can be affected by money, as they are in many other industries (tobacco!).
I have strong opinions about car seats and I won't apologize for that. I wasn't being patronizing, I was just trying to prove a point. I honestly can't stand the 'well I wasn't RF and I survived just fine' argument against strict safety standards. The kids that died in car accidents aren't around to tell us about it. There is a reason child deaths due to car accidents has drastically reduced in the last decade.
Regarding the boosters, I think it depends on the kid. You should be in a booster until a seat belt fits you the way it fits an adult (i.e. hits your body in the correct spots). Again, I just don't see the harm in leaving a child in a booster longer when there is literally no advantage to not using a booster.
to the bolded...I really hope you aren't saying that safety studies (on both car seats and tobacco) are false and created by lobbyists. Because that will just open a whole new can of worms that I am not prepared to deal with.
@Rae1 - I love the point about how the kids that died aren't around to tell us about it. I used to teach a foster parenting class and had someone argue with me about safe sleep standards drop side cribs. He tried the argument that "I slept in one and I'm fine!" So I shot back with "well tell that to the kids who died (or something along those lines)! Anyone else have a question?" That argument is just ignorant when there's been so many accidental deaths due to not following safe sleep standards.
My husband I looked briefly at cribs the other day and I was saying how cute the bedding is but what a waste of money since we'll only use the sheet. He said "why wouldn't we use a bumper? Kids get their arms and legs stuck." Uhhhh, cribs have come a long way since we were kids. Those spaces between bars have standards now. Besides - I'd way prefer a hurt arm or leg as opposed to suffocation.
CA law changed 1/1/17. Both DS and DD were FF around 1.5 because they BOTH screamed their asses off the entire time when RF. It was SO difficult and stressful to me when driving - reaching back to try to comfort/ hearing nothing but wailing every time I put them in the car until I got them out.
FF was a lifesaver for me/my family. With this LO we will obviously follow the law, but if s/he is anything like my others, we will be FF asap.
The best we can do as parents is follow all current guidelines and do our own research to get educated on stuff like this, instead of just assuming there's no issue (re: booster seats, drop cribs and bumpers). Yeah we "survived" in the 80's and 90's but most likely our parents were following all or most of the current safety regulations of the time. Thinking that companies interfere with studies to earn more money is a rabbit hole I choose not to go down, simply because I can't afford to spend time doubting and second guessing every single thing. Whatever the current regulations are, I'm going to follow in regards to my child's safety, and if I think something is "questionable", I'll do as much research as I can. I don't care if it means I have to buy 10 different car seats before he's 10 years old. Money isn't really an object if there's a valid safety concern. There's a reason things change. (Just wanted to add my two cents.)
Man I am about to have the most unpopular opinion ever. I think the car seat guidelines are overblown and technically we'd all be safer rear facing in the back seat. The guidelines for the last 5 years have changed from 1 to 3 for RF, in ten years we will be rear facing our kids until they are 18 (yes I know that's a slippery slope argument). And yes I have read the literature and know about neck development and impact studies, not wearing winter coats and triple checking the 5-point harness. I was also told the safest car seat is a seat that's not in a car.
I may be a stickler about the harness clicking armpit level but I turned mine at a year and a half and most likely will with this one too. And I definitely won't subject my kids to a booster seat until they are teenagers if they are short like me.
Man I am about to have the most unpopular opinion ever. I think the car seat guidelines are overblown and technically we'd all be safer rear facing in the back seat. The guidelines for the last 5 years have changed from 1 to 3 for RF, in ten years we will be rear facing our kids until they are 18 (yes I know that's a slippery slope argument). And yes I have read the literature and know about neck development and impact studies, not wearing winter coats and triple checking the 5-point harness. I was also told the safest car seat is a seat that's not in a car.
I may be a stickler about the harness clicking armpit level but I turned mine at a year and a half and most likely will with this one too. And I definitely won't subject my kids to a booster seat until they are teenagers if they are short like me.
^this argument is honestly just as annoying to me as the 'we survived' argument I mentioned earlier. Yes, we are safer not driving at all, so might as well throw caution to the wind since we have to drive?! No. That's not how it works. You are right, RF in the back seat is probably safer for an adult too. But 1) an adult isn't going to get internally decapitated from a car accident if they are FF; and 2) it's not feasible for an adult to sit RF in the backseat. It IS feasible however, for a toddler. RF is FIVE TIMES SAFER for a child. That is not an opinion, it's a fact based on countless national studies.
I also don't understand saying you will likely turn the new baby around at 1.5yrs. So even if he/she is perfectly happy RF, you will turn him/her around, just because? Especially when most states laws say 2 years?! (not sure where you live but 2 is the general state law most palces)
I do agree on your booster comment. There has to be a line somewhere, but again that is totally dependent on the child in question.
@rae1 I know it's an annoying point, I hate slippery slope arguments myself. That said I would love to read a study with real data that shows RF is 5x safer than FF. I'd love for you to change my mind. The only study I found found no statistical significance in head on collisions and 15% higher for injury from RF to FF. Once you control for vehicle type and other factors it drops further.
Man I am about to have the most unpopular opinion ever. I think the car seat guidelines are overblown and technically we'd all be safer rear facing in the back seat. The guidelines for the last 5 years have changed from 1 to 3 for RF, in ten years we will be rear facing our kids until they are 18 (yes I know that's a slippery slope argument). And yes I have read the literature and know about neck development and impact studies, not wearing winter coats and triple checking the 5-point harness. I was also told the safest car seat is a seat that's not in a car.
I may be a stickler about the harness clicking armpit level but I turned mine at a year and a half and most likely will with this one too. And I definitely won't subject my kids to a booster seat until they are teenagers if they are short like me.
I'm on that side as well. I probably live in the #2 nanny-state though, so I'm sure Junior will be RF until he gets his learner's permit.
Highly monitored internet and no cell service in the office, so I'm postin' and ghostin' while I'm workin'
I don't have much to add other than to say I'm so happy I grew up in the 80s. I got car sick riding in the back seat and was in the front the entire time I can remember. I still can get car sick in cabs and anywhere I ride backwards (subway, ferry). My poor parents would have been dealing with nothing but vomit for years.
Hopefully LO doesn't inherit my propensity for motion sickness.
I don't have much to add other than to say I'm so happy I grew up in the 80s. I got car sick riding in the back seat and was in the front the entire time I can remember. I still can get car sick in cabs and anywhere I ride backwards (subway, ferry). My poor parents would have been dealing with nothing but vomit for years.
Hopefully LO doesn't inherit my propensity for motion sickness.
Yessss!! I still can't look at anything except straight ahead even in the front passenger seat.
I always offer to drive!
Highly monitored internet and no cell service in the office, so I'm postin' and ghostin' while I'm workin'
I feel like I'm missing something. Did we go back to the dark ages where men actually thought they got a say in our appearance? This thread is just making me even more thankful for my amazing husband who loves me regardless of how well I "keep myself up." I'm so happy I don't have a husband that feels it necessary to critique me or our daughter that way.
This. I've never been a compliment fisher but DH and I compliment each other ALL the time. 12 years hasn't changed that even though I wait waaayyy too long to shave my legs these days and I've gained a considerable amount of weight in the time we've been together. He's always the one going, "You don't need make-up" ... "You're so beautiful" etc. My Dad is always so affectionate to my Mom in this way and she just side-eyes him or rolls her eyes and I've never, in my LIFE heard her pay him a compliment. It makes me sad. He's such a wonderful man but I think it has a lot to do with her shitty childhood tbh. Still ... makes me thankful for what I have. My BF has a really crappy boyfriend and hearing her stories just makes me more thankful for DH each and every day.
People show and want affection in different ways. Some people compliment, others do things for people, others give gifts. It's important that you understand how your SO shows affection and that you can appreciate that.
On on the Valentine's Day topic, I actually love it since having my son. I love getting him a cute card and little toy/candy. He gets so excited it's adorable.
Ooooo! Good point! I never thought of that. Great idea
@lph4248 I do think that it is. I had no idea the age increased until I entered pregnancy realm but the longer you can keep them RF the better. There have been a lot of new studies recommending it well into toddler-hood. The market really needs to start delivering though. Where are their legs suppose to go?! Haha. (Maybe there are more options available then I'm currently aware of. I should look into that) Here, our law is a ridiculous 20lbs although they do say, "Just because you can doesn't mean you should." Still ... 20lbs?! What the eff!!!
ETA
@LoveLee85 :O :O How is putting suncreen on your kid being a "helicopter parent?" That's absurd. Those people need to feel their heads. Everyone should wear sunscreen! I also love how people (not you) use the term 'helicopter parenting' so loosely. There's an actual definition that doesn't apply to 90% of what people think it is.
I guess I wasn't seeing anyone here making the 'back in the day argument-I survived so who cares'.....or did I miss that?! LOL
My parents had a mini van(before airbags) that we would move the bench seats facing each other, or looking out backwards(the back window of the van)! It was so fun on those long cross country road trips. My parents were big safety freaks also! The van wouldn't move until seat belts were on! So crazy looking back how dangerous that was and they thought it was safe.
I think what PP was trying to say is that anytime big business is involved with laws, millions of dollars are used to lobby in the favor of the way the lobbyist wants! Those lobbyists are owned by big business aka the people who often financially benefit from the laws. Sometimes it works to our safety or health, other times it doesn't. In this case it obviously helps for safety but it could easily have still influenced the outcome. That's why they spend the millions, they make it back. I would like to think that big business doesn't mess around with the health of infants/children...so I will believe that!
Also, sorry if this was obvious(?!), just trying to possibly clarify a thought above. My child will rear face until he's in the drivers seat!
CA law changed 1/1/17. Both DS and DD were FF around 1.5 because they BOTH screamed their asses off the entire time when RF. It was SO difficult and stressful to me when driving - reaching back to try to comfort/ hearing nothing but wailing every time I put them in the car until I got them out.
FF was a lifesaver for me/my family. With this LO we will obviously follow the law, but if s/he is anything like my others, we will be FF asap.
Man I am about to have the most unpopular opinion ever. I think the car seat guidelines are overblown and technically we'd all be safer rear facing in the back seat. The guidelines for the last 5 years have changed from 1 to 3 for RF, in ten years we will be rear facing our kids until they are 18 (yes I know that's a slippery slope argument). And yes I have read the literature and know about neck development and impact studies, not wearing winter coats and triple checking the 5-point harness. I was also told the safest car seat is a seat that's not in a car.
I may be a stickler about the harness clicking armpit level but I turned mine at a year and a half and most likely will with this one too. And I definitely won't subject my kids to a booster seat until they are teenagers if they are short like me.
I don't have much to add other than to say I'm so happy I grew up in the 80s. I got car sick riding in the back seat and was in the front the entire time I can remember. I still can get car sick in cabs and anywhere I ride backwards (subway, ferry). My poor parents would have been dealing with nothing but vomit for years.
Hopefully LO doesn't inherit my propensity for motion sickness.
This too! We just learned this weekend that DD has in fact inherited mine. Sigh.
@rae1 I know it's an annoying point, I hate slippery slope arguments myself. That said I would love to read a study with real data that shows RF is 5x safer than FF. I'd love for you to change my mind. The only study I found found no statistical significance in head on collisions and 15% higher for injury from RF to FF. Once you control for vehicle type and other factors it drops further.
I am at work and don't have time to link a bunch of studies (maybe I will later) but I guess my question would be that if you KNOW about the spine/neck development studies (which you stated in an earlier comment), then you know that the risk for internal decapitation is so much higher if they FF before 2, so why not wait those extra 6 months (at a minimum) instead of using 1.5 years as your turn around threshhold?
@LoveLee85 I don't think anyone here explicitly used that excuse, but it's usually what people jump to when the RF/FF argument is brought up. Hell DH even jokingly said it once when I was first researching car seats. Let's just say he won't make that excuse again haha
Re: motion sickness - I have severe motion sickness as well and can't really sit in the back, and prefer to drive (especially on windy roads). But I didn't have it as a kid. Weird. Not sure how that works.
I will rear face my babies until they cannot be rear faced anymore. I do not mind not seeing and interacting with him, he is safer. And safer trumps interaction preferences or making silly faces. Yikes, my spell check just turned "trumps" into "trump's". Even spell check knows Trump *cringe*
ETA if my parents had have abided by the 4' 9" rule, I'd have been in a booster seat till age 17.
RE: motion sickness. I apparently have a car sickness problem when pregnant. Never had this issue before, but every time I'm in the car for longer than an hour I start to get nauseous. Any tips on how to deal with this? It happens even if I'm driving. I know this is semi-off topic for this thread, I just saw a bunch of people talking about it and figured it was worth asking.
Hubby and Me Friends since 2008 Started dating: July 1st, 2013 Engaged: July 1st, 2014 Married: July 1st, 2016 R born: July 8th, 2017 N born: June 30th, 2019 Baby #3 Due: July 7th, 2022 (maybe I only ovulate in October XD)
@Kerils oh yes! Iv been having the same issue!! I thought it was because our car releases more fumes than necessary (jeep) but I just can't sit in the car for more than 40 minutes. I get dizzy and sick and we always have to stop a few times.
People show and want affection in different ways. Some people compliment, others do things for people, others give gifts. It's important that you understand how your SO shows affection and that you can appreciate that.
Agreed but in the case of my Mom, I don't think she shows my Dad any sort of affection in any way. Considering how dysfunctional their relationship has been and listening to the fights and truths that have come out all the times I've lived at their place in adulthood, I'd like to say my suspicions are fairly accurate. Sometimes I think they shouldn't even be together. I fear my Dad is going to be on his death bed having wanted more out of his life. He's a big boy and can make his own decisions, I know that, but part of me can't understand the hold she has on him. Don't get me wrong, I love my Mom to pieces but it was my Dad who smothered us with love, hugs and kisses when we were kids. She's just ... I don't know. She doesn't appreciate him nearly as much as she should and it pisses me off because he is an amazing man. Some stuff she says about him just makes my sis and I so mad. She's very critical of him. I'm not saying he doesn't have his flaws because he does ... I don't know. As I said, I know a lot more about their relationship than I should because of our living situation at various times in my adulthood. Now I'm getting sidetracked haha! Sorries! :P
@Rae1 Yeah, like @LoveLee85 said, I was absolutely not making the argument that "I survived so ignoring regulations is fine." I'm one of the most cautious people you'll meet, so I'm right there with you on that. I'm also cautious about drawing conclusions from studies. Is money influencing child safety studies? I have no idea. But TONS of money is at stake, and parents of young kids are an easy target. Also, my reference to tobacco was to align with your point about people thinking tobacco was safe back in the day... not to say that lobbyists are making us think tobacco is unsafe now... (@LoveLee85 clarified what I was trying to say accurately, thanks!)
Regardless of the "is money involved" question, as an easily scared FTM, I'm going to go with the regulations, so again, I think we are in agreement overall.
@theweevee I didn't even think of that! My husband gets carsick riding backwards on trains and such. Here's hoping the baby has my genes in that department...
Sorry @adabyron for continuing the discussion on a Tuesday =/ I just hate internet confrontations without feeling like I've clarified my points.
@stokesm21 I'm really sorry if I already said something on this, but in regards to people who should not be together.... My FIL and SMIL are a prime example of that. I honestly don't know how they ended up staying together in the first place, let alone getting married. My DH has always said it's because they both are terrified of being alone, but gosh. They just have completely different personalities, and they are always fighting or making snide comments at each other. FIL constantly calls my mother-in-law and complains about his current wife, and says that he wishes she would just divorce him. It's kind of sad, cause I feel like they could both be a lot happier if they weren't together. When they fight, it's really about their differing personalities, not anything, well, more solid. I know some people who have different personalities can get along really well, but it seems like these two don't agree on anything. I'm sure it's much harder to watch, and you would know much better if it's your parents and you've actually lived with them. And it's always hard to see someone you love being so unhappy because of the person they are with.
Hubby and Me Friends since 2008 Started dating: July 1st, 2013 Engaged: July 1st, 2014 Married: July 1st, 2016 R born: July 8th, 2017 N born: June 30th, 2019 Baby #3 Due: July 7th, 2022 (maybe I only ovulate in October XD)
Legally, here in NJ, you have to rear face at least until age 2.
Same here in CA.
Omg see I'd totally be one of those moms everyone hates and judges because I didn't know the law or the guidelines changed! I started ff'ingDd right before her 2nd bday in 2013.
it's less about the law (which is 2 most places) and more about safety. It's undeniably safer for a child to be RF for as long as possible.
I know, @rae1 . Like someone pointed out here, the law changed last month in California. I switched my kid at 23 months because back in 2013, the conversation wasn't "keep them rf'ing for as long as possible" it was more "rf'ing for as long as possible is safest, but at least just try and wait until 2 if you can." I just mentioned that I'd be one of those moms unintentionally because the amount of vitriol in @CarsonsMommy 's original post was kind of surprising.
(she clarified that her friend also drinks and drives, which, to me, deserves way more vitriol than maybe not knowing the law had changed)
Legally, here in NJ, you have to rear face at least until age 2.
Same here in CA.
Omg see I'd totally be one of those moms everyone hates and judges because I didn't know the law or the guidelines changed! I started ff'ingDd right before her 2nd bday in 2013.
it's less about the law (which is 2 most places) and more about safety. It's undeniably safer for a child to be RF for as long as possible.
I know, @rae1 . Like someone pointed out here, the law changed last month in California. I switched my kid at 23 months because back in 2013, the conversation wasn't "keep them rf'ing for as long as possible" it was more "rf'ing for as long as possible is safest, but at least just try and wait until 2 if you can." I just mentioned that I'd be one of those moms unintentionally because the amount of vitriol in @CarsonsMommy 's original post was kind of surprising.
(she clarified that her friend also drinks and drives, which, to me, deserves way more vitriol than maybe not knowing the law had changed)
Yeah, there's more to it than my original post. She insists even when sober that she actually is a better driver drunk and her daughter would be safe... so it is because she knew that rear facing was the law, AND was safer, yet chose to forward face because she liked it better because she could see her daughter was what crawled under my skin.
The study I cited since it used 16 years of real data (granted it was cut off in the mid 2000s) but the data showed the biggest influence was type of vehicle driven (year and make). Once you start controlling for mitigating factors (impairments, vehicle type, placement of the seat within the vehicle, and even age of driver - sorry younger mommies you aren't as safe...) the difference between forward and rear facing become null. P
@CarsonsMommy SHE DRIVES DRUNK WITH HER CHILD IN THE CAR?!?!?!
Please tell me she doesn't drive drunk with her baby in the car.
Hubby and Me Friends since 2008 Started dating: July 1st, 2013 Engaged: July 1st, 2014 Married: July 1st, 2016 R born: July 8th, 2017 N born: June 30th, 2019 Baby #3 Due: July 7th, 2022 (maybe I only ovulate in October XD)
Oh good. For some reason that's how I read your comment. I'm glad she doesn't drive like that with the baby in the car.
Hubby and Me Friends since 2008 Started dating: July 1st, 2013 Engaged: July 1st, 2014 Married: July 1st, 2016 R born: July 8th, 2017 N born: June 30th, 2019 Baby #3 Due: July 7th, 2022 (maybe I only ovulate in October XD)
Re: UO Thursday
And trust me, I remember at like 3-4 riding in the middle front seat of a station wagon (with just a lap seat belt) and my dad letting me sit on his lap and 'drive'. It is really crazy how much things have changed. My smoking comment was just another example of that change in such a short time span.
I agree that it's just within the last few years that the regulations have changed. People in our parents' generation have commented to me that it's weird to them but SO MUCH has changed since we were babies. It's a wonder we all survived, right?!
As far as extended rear-facing (past age two), it seems like most people agree "better a broken leg than a broken neck" so I think I'll rear face as long as we can.
Another factor, though, is that carseat companies could easily be lobbying and affecting the studies that are done to get people to use booster seats for longer. My husband remembers seeing a documentary on this (but he can't remember the name - I'm trying to find it), but of course that's just one documentary in a sea of information. (This has nothing to do with the rear-facing aspect, but it does have to do with the recommendations to buy seats for big kids and have them use them for many years.) We'll probably go with the official recommendations regardless, but it is important to keep in mind that the studies that get done on baby products can be affected by money, as they are in many other industries (tobacco!).
@lph4248 I was born in the early 80s so we didn't have a car with airbags until I was over the weight recommendation anyway.
This conversation has reminded me of long road trips as a kid - my brother would pull down the shoulder strap of his seat belt (or maybe we didn't have shoulder straps in the back seat yet), loosen the lap belt part and turn around on his knees to look out the back window. My dad would yell at him to sit down, threaten to pull over, etc etc. I think today's car seats/booster seats would have saved my parents a lot of stress and maybe helped my dad's blood pressure.
Regarding the boosters, I think it depends on the kid. You should be in a booster until a seat belt fits you the way it fits an adult (i.e. hits your body in the correct spots). Again, I just don't see the harm in leaving a child in a booster longer when there is literally no advantage to not using a booster.
to the bolded...I really hope you aren't saying that safety studies (on both car seats and tobacco) are false and created by lobbyists. Because that will just open a whole new can of worms that I am not prepared to deal with.
My husband I looked briefly at cribs the other day and I was saying how cute the bedding is but what a waste of money since we'll only use the sheet. He said "why wouldn't we use a bumper? Kids get their arms and legs stuck." Uhhhh, cribs have come a long way since we were kids. Those spaces between bars have standards now. Besides - I'd way prefer a hurt arm or leg as opposed to suffocation.
CA law changed 1/1/17. Both DS and DD were FF around 1.5 because they BOTH screamed their asses off the entire time when RF. It was SO difficult and stressful to me when driving - reaching back to try to comfort/ hearing nothing but wailing every time I put them in the car until I got them out.
FF was a lifesaver for me/my family. With this LO we will obviously follow the law, but if s/he is anything like my others, we will be FF asap.
my happy boy
I may be a stickler about the harness clicking armpit level but I turned mine at a year and a half and most likely will with this one too. And I definitely won't subject my kids to a booster seat until they are teenagers if they are short like me.
I also don't understand saying you will likely turn the new baby around at 1.5yrs. So even if he/she is perfectly happy RF, you will turn him/her around, just because? Especially when most states laws say 2 years?! (not sure where you live but 2 is the general state law most palces)
I do agree on your booster comment. There has to be a line somewhere, but again that is totally dependent on the child in question.
Highly monitored internet and no cell service in the office, so I'm postin' and ghostin' while I'm workin'
Hopefully LO doesn't inherit my propensity for motion sickness.
I always offer to drive!
Highly monitored internet and no cell service in the office, so I'm postin' and ghostin' while I'm workin'
Met: 08/2001 ~ Dating: 07/2004 ~ Engaged: 11/2009 ~ Married: 06/2011
TTC: Since 09/16 ~ BFP 10/28/16 ~ EDD 7/5/17
Team Pink * Canadian Bumpie
ETA
@LoveLee85 :O :O How is putting suncreen on your kid being a "helicopter parent?" That's absurd. Those people need to feel their heads. Everyone should wear sunscreen! I also love how people (not you) use the term 'helicopter parenting' so loosely. There's an actual definition that doesn't apply to 90% of what people think it is.
Met: 08/2001 ~ Dating: 07/2004 ~ Engaged: 11/2009 ~ Married: 06/2011
TTC: Since 09/16 ~ BFP 10/28/16 ~ EDD 7/5/17
Team Pink * Canadian Bumpie
My parents had a mini van(before airbags) that we would move the bench seats facing each other, or looking out backwards(the back window of the van)! It was so fun on those long cross country road trips. My parents were big safety freaks also! The van wouldn't move until seat belts were on! So crazy looking back how dangerous that was and they thought it was safe.
I think what PP was trying to say is that anytime big business is involved with laws, millions of dollars are used to lobby in the favor of the way the lobbyist wants! Those lobbyists are owned by big business aka the people who often financially benefit from the laws. Sometimes it works to our safety or health, other times it doesn't. In this case it obviously helps for safety but it could easily have still influenced the outcome. That's why they spend the millions, they make it back. I would like to think that big business doesn't mess around with the health of infants/children...so I will believe that!
Also, sorry if this was obvious(?!), just trying to possibly clarify a thought above. My child will rear face until he's in the drivers seat!
@LoveLee85 I don't think anyone here explicitly used that excuse, but it's usually what people jump to when the RF/FF argument is brought up. Hell DH even jokingly said it once when I was first researching car seats. Let's just say he won't make that excuse again haha
Re: motion sickness - I have severe motion sickness as well and can't really sit in the back, and prefer to drive (especially on windy roads). But I didn't have it as a kid. Weird. Not sure how that works.
ETA if my parents had have abided by the 4' 9" rule, I'd have been in a booster seat till age 17.
Friends since 2008
Started dating: July 1st, 2013
Engaged: July 1st, 2014
Married: July 1st, 2016
R born: July 8th, 2017
N born: June 30th, 2019
Baby #3 Due: July 7th, 2022
(maybe I only ovulate in October XD)
Met: 08/2001 ~ Dating: 07/2004 ~ Engaged: 11/2009 ~ Married: 06/2011
TTC: Since 09/16 ~ BFP 10/28/16 ~ EDD 7/5/17
Team Pink * Canadian Bumpie
Regardless of the "is money involved" question, as an easily scared FTM, I'm going to go with the regulations, so again, I think we are in agreement overall.
@theweevee I didn't even think of that! My husband gets carsick riding backwards on trains and such. Here's hoping the baby has my genes in that department...
Sorry @adabyron for continuing the discussion on a Tuesday =/ I just hate internet confrontations without feeling like I've clarified my points.
Friends since 2008
Started dating: July 1st, 2013
Engaged: July 1st, 2014
Married: July 1st, 2016
R born: July 8th, 2017
N born: June 30th, 2019
Baby #3 Due: July 7th, 2022
(maybe I only ovulate in October XD)
I know, @rae1 . Like someone pointed out here, the law changed last month in California. I switched my kid at 23 months because back in 2013, the conversation wasn't "keep them rf'ing for as long as possible" it was more "rf'ing for as long as possible is safest, but at least just try and wait until 2 if you can." I just mentioned that I'd be one of those moms unintentionally because the amount of vitriol in @CarsonsMommy 's original post was kind of surprising.
(she clarified that her friend also drinks and drives, which, to me, deserves way more vitriol than maybe not knowing the law had changed)
Please tell me she doesn't drive drunk with her baby in the car.
Friends since 2008
Started dating: July 1st, 2013
Engaged: July 1st, 2014
Married: July 1st, 2016
R born: July 8th, 2017
N born: June 30th, 2019
Baby #3 Due: July 7th, 2022
(maybe I only ovulate in October XD)
Friends since 2008
Started dating: July 1st, 2013
Engaged: July 1st, 2014
Married: July 1st, 2016
R born: July 8th, 2017
N born: June 30th, 2019
Baby #3 Due: July 7th, 2022
(maybe I only ovulate in October XD)