- Pregnancy
- Baby & Toddler
- Parents
- Getting Pregnant
- Baby Names
- Product Reviews
-
Registry
- Community
-
More
Want a personalized experience?
Download the free app
August 2011 Moms
ohfour
member
In the News: New Rear Facing Car Seat Guidelines
ohfour
member
https://www.cnn.com/2011/HEALTH/03/21/car.seat.guidelines.parenting/
This has been all over the news as the AAP and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration str officially changing their recommendations to 2yrs or the limits of your seat, and booster seats until 4'9" which may be around 12 yrs old in some cases.
Just wanted to pass along the info to those looking to make car seat purchases.
This discussion has been closed.
Re: In the News: New Rear Facing Car Seat Guidelines
In the state of FL the guidelines are 1 year and over 20 lbs before front facing and booster seat until 4'9" or 60 lbs if I remember correctly.
We recently had a huge discussion about this due to my brother being a corrections officer and even though the pediatrician told him to go ahead and turn my nephew around he refuses due to state law. I think this is something everyone needs to be aware of especially b/c law enforcement is really beginning to crack down on child safety in vehicles.
Planning Bio | Married Bio
Family Blog
Our Family Blog.
Recommendations doesn't mean that it will be against the law. There is no way I'm requiring my pre teen to stay in a booster seat. Middle school is hard enough.
This is what the AAP is suggesting, but its based on pretty solid research on the safety of extended rear facing. Most states that have laws on carseats state 1 year and 20 pounds as the MINIMUM for when to turn a child around. Not all states even have the requirement. I also know that some states are looking into changing the laws because of this recommendation.
Just because its the law doesn't mean its what is the safest, just what is the minimum.
Annelise 3.22.2007 Norah 10.24.2009 Amelia 8.7.2011
LOL ^^ you're hilarious!
And-Thanks for posting, ohfour! I heard about it on the news over the weekend and the safety videos of rear-facing versus front facing are more than enough info for us to keep him turned around until at least 2.
If you read the entire article you will see that the 1 year 20 lbs. was the MINIMUM for turning kids to front facing. They still suggested that you keep the children rear facing for as soon as possible. Now they are just clarifying to try to stress the importance of keeping them rear facing, even after they meet the minimum.
Regardless of what the law in my state is, I would prefer to go with what is proven to be safest.
DS#1- Born August 2011
1 and 20 is the law in ALL states. Not all of them have laws that specifically state that, but the ones that don't have proper use clauses. There isn't a single seat for sale that allows for forward facing before that.
That said, many states have advocacy groups that have been trying to up the law for a while. The biggest hindrances were the AAP's statement, and the fact that car seat manufacturers in the US make seats that crappy for extended rear facing (even though the same brand makes better seats in Europe). These are both changing now.
have you ever watched your kid sleep and wondered "how the heck can she sleep like that? It looks so uncomfortable!"? Kids are much, much more flexible than we are. She can bend her legs, sit with them crossed, hang them over the sides.
DD is 2.5 and still comfortably rear facing. We have the graco my ride, which has a nice deep seat.
I don't think she's necessarily speaking about vanity. Some of this is just about practicality.
Kelly, Mom to Christopher Shannon 9.27.06, Catherine Quinn 2.24.09, Trey Barton lost on 12.28.09, Therese Barton lost on 6.10.10, Joseph Sullivan 7.23.11, and our latest, Victoria Maren 11.15.12
Secondary infertility success with IVF, then two losses, one at 14 weeks and one at 10 weeks, then success with IUI and then just pure, crazy luck. Expecting our fifth in May as the result of a FET.
This Cluttered Life
It's strictly a recommendation. Until then, we can all use our motherly discretion and turn our kids around FF'ing when we feel it's safe/appropriate.
It's fine that the AAP makes these kinds of statements and that independent organizations do testing to ensure that they can make the best quality seats and the best recommendations for their use.
That said, car seat safety testing and manufacture guidelines mandated by the gov't aren't good enough in my opinion anyways. There's no requirement for side-impact safety in a car seat. Not good enough. So, I'll take this recommendation with a grain of salt.
I am constantly getting comments from friends about how my kids are still RF at almost 3 years and 20 months. The most surprising thing about their reaction is that most of the time their response is, "but my DS LOVES being FF and looking out the window". Seriously? I should turn my kid around and risk his life because he will be able to see out the FRONT window instead of the BACK? I have to admit I have become very defensive about it and even snapped at one of my friends that my child's life was more important to me than then him being able to see out the window and look at me. I honestly didn't care if she was offended.
For those of you who haven't seen this video consider yourself warned. It is a tear jerker and the reason I decided to keep my kids RF for as long as possible:
Here is another one with facts:
Jacob 3.23.08 * Grace 7.22.09 * Eli 7.26.11 * Annabelle 1.18.14
I said nothing about RF toddlers being an issue. I simply said Middle School is hard enough and I won't be putting my pre teen in a booster seat. Unless, however, it becomes a law. You can call it vain if you'd like.
I had no idea about the proper use clause. I'd always wondered why some states didn't explicitly state the age/weight requirement. Thanks for the clarification
Annelise 3.22.2007 Norah 10.24.2009 Amelia 8.7.2011
I'm pretty sure the AAP doesn't really gain anything from recommending you keep your child rear-facing for longer. It's not just a scare tactic, there is a lot of information out there that proves RF is much safer.
Need help with high fat food ideas? Chunky Monkey
It's a recommendation by the AAP. Obviously, if it's not the law, you don't have to follow it. It's like circ-ing your son or vaccinating your child against rubella. You don't HAVE to. It's your choice. He/she is YOUR child. But, the AAP makes a recommendation based on the health, safety, and welfare of *most* children in the general public based on the information available to them.
No one said you have to follow the recommendations of Pediatricians. WTF do they know, right? /sarcasm
I really understand where Cardegani is coming from. My husband and I are both short. I didn't reach 5 feet tall until about 10th grade. I was under 100 lbs. all the way through high school. I don't remember exactly when I reached 4'9" and 80 lbs. but I know it was most likely late middle school. I was made fun of enough in middle school and high school. I cannot imagine how much worse it would have been if any of my peers had seen me getting out of or into a booster seat in my mother's car. I understand that safety should come before vanity, but this would actually be a tough parenting choice for me to make considering my own experience and the likelihood that my son will be on the small side as well.
This. Car seat manufacturers aren't even the ones who funded the studies. It's basic physics, not a marketing ploy.
This isn't some ploy to get you to buy something you don't need. Children are 500% safer rear facing in a crash. Period. It doesn't matter if that seat is a 50 dollar seat from walmart or a 500 dollar seat from your local baby boutique.
I would disagree. Race car drivers use 5 point harnesses, why don't we? They have cars that have (in some cases way) way more safety gadgets than regular cars. We should ALL be rear facing. However that is just not practical. I think (and this is my personal opinion) that the car seat manufacturers have a lot to do with it. A LOT. They come out with all these seats, in all different price ranges, and then try to sell to parents, that the more expensive the car seat is, the better. They all have to meet MINIMUM requirements. Spending more does not necessarily get you more. They have infant seats, convertible seats, no back booster, high back boosters, all kinds of seats. The choice is good, but they all meet the minimum requirements, regardless of how much you spend on a seat. And I will say it again, if the crash is severe enough, it does not matter which way you are facing. Just be smart about it, and dont get all riled up over something because someone says you should. That's all. We as parents should use our best judgement when it comes to our children, and unfortunately, no matter how hard we try to protect them, it may not be enough.
Many European countries have been recommending/requiring extended rear facing for years. They also have a lot less fatalities of small children in car accidents.
Frankly, it never ceases to amaze me the things people freak out about during pregnancy, but they are perfectly fine using a car seat incorrectly. Lets face it, when you strap your child into a car, you can be the best driver on the planet, but you can't control every other crazy out there. Why wouldn't you follow the safest recommendations (which applies to a lot of other things, not just FF vs RF). At the very least, truly educate yourself on what the risks are before you make a decision just because little Johnny "likes being forward facing better"
Annelise 3.22.2007 Norah 10.24.2009 Amelia 8.7.2011
how is keeping your child rf instead of ff from ages 1 to 2 promoting or encouraging the purchase of a specific product? You still need a seat for your child...this discussion is about which direction it should be facing to be safest at 18, 19, 20... months of age, no?
ETA: ftr, I think this is something that can be very child-to-child dependent and each parent has to make their own decisions what is best. I just also think it's crazy that people want to poo-poo every new recommendation made by the AAP as some conspiracy to sell more products. And believe me - I'm one who believes airport body scanners were designed to pad pockets, and that all studies put together confirming that handsfree driving is safer were put together by manufacturers of handfree devices - so I'm all about the "how this benefits their bottom line" conspiracies. I guess RF until 2 as a min (ideally) just seems to make a TON of sense to me and I don't understand the argument against it at all.
I am actually surprised that the law in every state in the U.S. continues to be 1 and 20. The British Medical Journal put out research that caused them to make recommendations of RF until 4 yrs old. In countries where car seats are manufactured to accommodate extended RF, their kids are much more safe in cars. I will not be doing anything different than I already am. I researched and bought a seat that would allow my child to RF until 40lbs because with all the information and statistics out there, I just had to. After seeing the videos, reading the research, etc., I cannot bring myself to turn her knowing what I know now. There would have to be an extreme situation for me to consider it, and being inconvenient doesn't count. Those few extra minutes putting her in could save my child's life. Worth it to me.
Also, I don't get how something like this:
is not practical? There are plenty of small women who use a pillow or cushion to boost themselves up to see better or so their seatbelt will fit better. What's the big difference, honestly?
because it wasn't really possible to make it a law here when (until recently) many car seats require forward facing at 30 pounds...and most kids reach that well before 2.
It's only been in the last few years that the manufacturers have upped their weight limits in the US. The true fit and my ride seats were HUGE news because of how high their rear facing limits were.
Just for one example, look at britax. So often touted as the best of the best in so many forums and by people who think expensive = better. They make really crappy seats for extended rear facing. Even though they came out with high weight limit seats (only just last year at that!) they did nothing to help their short shell problem, making the new weight limits basically worthless.
As manufacturers release seats that allow for rear facing longer, I think we'll see states changing their laws to ones favoring extended rear facing.
I truly hope it does become a law but even then, parents will choose to ignore it.
They also ignore recommendations. They throw 5 year olds in a front seat when they have a full van available.
We just moved my 6 1/2 year old to a booster. He was in a 5pt harness.
My ELEVEN year old is still in a backless booster. She's not quite tall enough to be out (strap doesn't quite sit right where it should), even though she's 90 pounds. Funny. She doesn't have any issues with it at all. My guess is she'd have more issues with being paralyzed then sitting in a booster that is barely noticeable. Not something I'm about to waiver on. Want to wear your clothes a certain way? Fine. Want to not be in a booster seat because it isn't the "cool thing" to do? Tough luck.
Per capita? European countries also have a lot less automobiles on the roads than America, and I mean a lot!! So, we can't really compare the two, can we?
Furthermore, I'm reading statistics that say that 1 out of 4 child deaths (0-14yrs) in traffic accidents involved a drunk driver. Over 2/3 of those children were actually riding with the drunk driver.
So, when we're looking at US child traffic accident fatalities, those are some stats to keep in mind.
only in some parts of Europe. In areas of Sweden, England and Germany, they drive quite a bit. They also have the autobahn, and because of their safety standards, children have even survived high speed crashes there.
It disgusts me that people drive drunk with their kids. I know it happens, but it disgusts me.
It is absolutely disgusting that anyone would drive drunk, let alone with kids. There is still a probability that a drunk driver could injure or kill my child while driving alone drunk. OY! That's clearly something we can all agree upon.
Sweden, England and Germany don't even come close to the US in terms of autos per capita.
Per 1,000 people the US has 842 cars, where Sweden has 475, England 458 and Germany 558. Clearly, there are more densely populated areas here and there, but these are the per capita stats on cars.
I'm amazed at the ignorance of the some of the moms in this thread.
Seriously, anyone with a basic understand of physics, and who has seen the size of a one year old's head in comparison with his body... should be able to understand why rear-facing longer is safer. And looking at any videos should seal the deal.
I just don't see why you would do it, or why you would try to argue it. My almost 2.5 year old is happy rear facing. He tells me what he sees out the window, he crosses his legs or puts them straight up against the seat back and is fine.
And my car seat costs a third of the price of some Britaxes and DS will be able to rear face until 40 lbs in it. So if this is a ploy to earn car seat manufacturers more money, they are failing. He would still fit in a $40 Cosco Scenera rear facing right now.
And WTF? So just because in really terrible accidents, no one would survive it... means that for small or semi-serious accidents, your child can go ahead and die there too? Or become paralyzed or have serious brain injuries?
And the number of small or semi-serious accidents greatly outnumbers the number of serious accidents with no survivors.
And yes, it obviously would be safer if everyone rear faced... but you know what? My 2.5 year old doesn't drive yet, so he doesn't need to face forward. And while it's hard to find a car that has rear facing seats for passengers, rear facing car seats with higher weight limits are easy to find. And I really don't think it would be so bad if all cars had 5 pt harnesses for everyone... but they don't. My kid's car seat does. Cheap car seats, expensive car seats, and everything in between.
Some of the excuses for not rear facing your child longer are truly disgusting. Do whatever you want, but don't try to tell me that what you do is safer or justified. Just say it's for vanity reasons or because you are too lazy to pay attention to proven safety recommendations.
Oh yes, a ploy, you can't be serious. We should all be in 5-point harnesses and wear helmets? Yes, maybe if we had the body of a two year old still. You are comparing an adult in a car accident to a toddler? I don't post on this board often, but some of the things i've read from your posts are just ridiculous.