Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Do such folks typically ride in a booster seat or something? Or do they have their cars modified to deactivate the airbags? Sorry, I've never really thought about it...
Also, I think that in Europe they will put a rear-facing carseat in the front set. Is this because they deactivate the airbags?
boosters.. The drivers yes[ to see out the window] but most cars now have a sensor in the seat that will not deploy airbags unless 80 lbs is on the seat...under 80 should not ride the front at all ! also this sensor saves the air bag from deploying when the seat is empty in a crash.
My 10 year old, despite her protests, is still riding in a high back booster seat. It holds until a child is 5 ft. tall (I am only 5' 2") and up to 100 lbs. She will probably be in it until she maxes out the height and weight-- or at LEAST until she is 4' 9", which is what the NHTSA recommends.
My 7.5 year old rode in a 5 point harness until about 8 months ago, when she outgrew it height wise (tops of ears over the top of seat). She is only about 45 lbs. and I would feel much safer if she were still harnessed, but she is now in the Britax high back booster like her sister.
My 4 year old and 18 month old sons ride in the Britax marathon. It holds children in a 5-point harness up to 65lbs. forward facing (33 rear-facing) . They will both use it until they no longer fit in it safely. DS2 is still rear-facing (he is 25 lbs.) and he will use it that way until he is too big.
Hubby is a certified car seat safety tech, so we are pretty safety conscious when it comes to car seats. It makes us both cringe when we see children in the front seat of a vehicle. Hubby's motto is: Why should I have to come scrape your kid off the sidewalk after he is thrown from your vehicle just because you were a moron!
I know that laws vary from state to state. Ours is actually pretty strict: 8 years old OR 80lbs to ride in just a seat belt, NO child in the front seat under the age of 13 unless there is no available seat in the back. I still think it is too lax.
Congratulations.
You haven't done all you can to keep your children safe though.
1) You have not outfitted your car with a tubular steel roll cage capable of 200mph direct impacts and rollover protection.
2) You have not purchased the latest and greatest fire suits.
3) And do you or your children have the latest in Carbon fiber molded seats with side protection and 5 pt harnesses with arm restraints?
4) And don't get me started on whether or not you have equipped every concrete barrier in your neighborhood with SAFR barrier technology.
I always love it when the carseat debate comes up and a group of people have to stand on their pedastal and make parents feel guilty about not owning the latest technology in car seat safety or if their state doesn't mandate that 16 yr olds be in boosterseats. The reality is when a semi hits you at 70mph there isn't a carseat on the planet that can save your child. You will either have a fender-bender or you will have the 10^-6 accident that will completely destroy you and turn that uber-safe carseat you bought into puddy with your child in it. That's a harsh reality that few people want to face.
But...
If we all think traveling by car is this unsafe we should all just walk...but if we all just walked someone would eventually develop regulations on how we should walk safely and come up with products that will make it safer to walk. "Folks...introducing....the WALKING HELMET & PADDED WALKING SUIT". And someone would have a job as a 'certified walking safety specialist' in order to make it safer for all of us. And he would have sayings like, "Why should I have to scrape you off the pavement for not being more proactive in your choice of walking equipment?"
The helmet debate comes up often in my cycling forums. Recently they mandated that pro-cyclists must wear helmets. Most pro's think it's a joke but do it anyway. Why do they think it's a joke? Because they know that if they crash going 70mph down a mountain side and they live through it it's not going to be because they were wearing a helmet.
I always love it when the carseat debate comes up and a group of people have to stand on their pedastal and make parents feel guilty about not owning the latest technology in car seat safety or if their state doesn't mandate that 16 yr olds be in boosterseats. The reality is when a semi hits you at 70mph there isn't a carseat on the planet that can save your child. You will either have a fender-bender or you will have the 10^-6 accident that will completely destroy you and turn that uber-safe carseat you bought into puddy with your child in it. That's a harsh reality that few people want to face.
The majority of car accidents are not a semi hitting a car. We were in a rollover accident a few years ago. My properly harnessed children walked away with a few scratches from broken glass and some bruising from their harnesses. I also was properly restrained (with my seatbelt on) and walked away with a badly sprained wrist and whiplash. We were very lucky. If my children had not been properly restrained, they would not have survived, period. If I thought that my then-two-year-old or my then-28-lb-four-year-old would be just fine in a regular seatbelt, they would not have walked away. It was much more than a fender-bender, but not an absolutely deadly scenario. By the way, they were not in pricey carseats... One was in an Evenflo and one was in a Graco. But they were correctly installed, and the kids were in tightly enough to be safe. A carseat that is not expired which fits your car properly is a safe carseat. We did replace them with Britaxes, but my 7 year old is now in a regular Graco belt positioning booster. It fits him well and it was under $40. He'll be in that until he outgrows it.
Saying "well, if a train hits our car, we'll all die anyway, so why bother using carseats properly?" is ignorant and absurd. It's the same as saying "why bother having smoke detectors? If a plane crashes into our house, we'll all burn up regardless."
Though I will agree with you that walking is probably the healthiest option for getting somewhere relatively local... both safety-wise and exercise-wise.
The majority of car accidents are not a semi hitting a car.
Didn't say they were. But likely 70% of them are fenderbenders in which the occupants wouldn't get a scratch even if they were not restrained at all.
And then there is probably the 10^-6 case in which you will be obliterated.
That leaves a 29% band of accidents that would potentially result in injury.
Quote:
Originally Posted by beanandpumpkin
We were in a rollover accident a few years ago. My properly harnessed children walked away with a few scratches from broken glass and some bruising from their harnesses. I also was properly restrained (with my seatbelt on) and walked away with a badly sprained wrist and whiplash. We were very lucky. If my children had not been properly restrained, they would not have survived, period.
You do not know that they wouldn't have survived. Neither you nor any expert can make that call.
Quote:
Originally Posted by beanandpumpkin
Saying "well, if a train hits our car, we'll all die anyway, so why bother using carseats properly?" is ignorant and absurd. It's the same as saying "why bother having smoke detectors? If a plane crashes into our house, we'll all burn up regardless."
If you have them and want to use them by all means...use them properly. But if I'm obeying my state laws (which are waaaaay more strict than when I grew up....it's amazing that I lived through such a dangerous era of not riding in a carseat until I was 15) I would like it very much if my neighbor would not refer to me as a bad parent for allowing my 90th percentile 10 yr old to ride in the flipping front seat of my car.
Quote:
Originally Posted by beanandpumpkin
Though I will agree with you that walking is probably the healthiest option for getting somewhere relatively local... both safety-wise and exercise-wise.
But IS walking safer??? I think that deserves a couple hundred million dollar study to figure it out. After which the government may decide that we can no longer participate in pedestrial activities.
Last edited by drjones96; 10-02-2008 at 11:02 AM..
Reason: sp
Location: In my own little corner... sittin' in Jax FL
589 posts, read 1,635,303 times
Reputation: 331
As a carseat technician, I am always educating parents and caregivers of BEST PRACTICES*. What you do beyond that is on you. However, I will also be the one making a phone call when I see a child in an unsafe situation that is governed by local law. The child is unable to make those safety decisions for himself, in most cases. A 5 yo is not likely going to be able to purchase the restraint that keeps him safest in a vehicle. So, there are a few people that will raise their voices for those whose voices are not strong enough to be heard for themselves.
* We teach BEST PRACTICES that cover the most common scenarios. There is NO restraint that will keep your child 100% safe 100% of the time. There are too many variables.
You haven't done all you can to keep your children safe though.
1) You have not outfitted your car with a tubular steel roll cage capable of 200mph direct impacts and rollover protection.
2) You have not purchased the latest and greatest fire suits.
3) And do you or your children have the latest in Carbon fiber molded seats with side protection and 5 pt harnesses with arm restraints?
4) And don't get me started on whether or not you have equipped every concrete barrier in your neighborhood with SAFR barrier technology.
I always love it when the carseat debate comes up and a group of people have to stand on their pedastal and make parents feel guilty about not owning the latest technology in car seat safety or if their state doesn't mandate that 16 yr olds be in boosterseats. The reality is when a semi hits you at 70mph there isn't a carseat on the planet that can save your child. You will either have a fender-bender or you will have the 10^-6 accident that will completely destroy you and turn that uber-safe carseat you bought into puddy with your child in it. That's a harsh reality that few people want to face.
But...
If we all think traveling by car is this unsafe we should all just walk...but if we all just walked someone would eventually develop regulations on how we should walk safely and come up with products that will make it safer to walk. "Folks...introducing....the WALKING HELMET & PADDED WALKING SUIT". And someone would have a job as a 'certified walking safety specialist' in order to make it safer for all of us. And he would have sayings like, "Why should I have to scrape you off the pavement for not being more proactive in your choice of walking equipment?"
The helmet debate comes up often in my cycling forums. Recently they mandated that pro-cyclists must wear helmets. Most pro's think it's a joke but do it anyway. Why do they think it's a joke? Because they know that if they crash going 70mph down a mountain side and they live through it it's not going to be because they were wearing a helmet.
Your sarcasm has not made your point. Children can get very hurt, even in fender benders, if they are not restrained properly. Hubby went to a call recently where a 9 year old lost her 2 front teeth from smacking her face on the dashboard during a fender bender. If her mother had her restrained in the back seat like she should have been, it never would have happened, and this child wouldn't need fake teeth at age 9!
Children under 4' 9" are not tall enough for the seat belt to hit their bodies in a way so they will not get hurt. An 8 year old in a fender bender can still get internal bleeding from a seat belt cutting across his stomach instead of sitting across his hips.
Talk to your local police/fire department. They don't think it is a joke to not use proper child restraints. It is pretty ignorant when parents do.
Children under 4' 9" are not tall enough for the seat belt to hit their bodies in a way so they will not get hurt. An 8 year old in a fender bender can still get internal bleeding from a seat belt cutting across his stomach instead of sitting across his hips.
Talk to your local police/fire department. They don't think it is a joke to not use proper child restraints. It is pretty ignorant when parents do.
Really? In every car made? I don't think so. Again, we have seen cars where sitting in a booster made the seat belt fit improperly across the chest and the kids were a better fit without a booster. Granted, that is not most cars, but some. As an adult the seatbelt didn't fit me property and I am 5'10!! You have to use enough common sense to admit that every kid in every car with every booster will not result in the same saftey standards. You can't impose 'standards' on a situation with so many variables and expect a 'standard' outcome. Common sense is a good addition to evaluating the safety needs of your kids.
Really? In every car made? I don't think so. Again, we have seen cars where sitting in a booster made the seat belt fit improperly across the chest and the kids were a better fit without a booster. Granted, that is not most cars, but some. As an adult the seatbelt didn't fit me property and I am 5'10!! You have to use enough common sense to admit that every kid in every car with every booster will not result in the same saftey standards. You can't impose 'standards' on a situation with so many variables and expect a 'standard' outcome. Common sense is a good addition to evaluating the safety needs of your kids.
I agree with you, sort of.
The standard that they go by is if a child's knees can bend over the seat and preferably touch the floor. That is USUALLY when a child is 4' 9". You are right, in some children it will be earlier or in a lot of cases, later. You can't say every car, every child, every case. Common sense IS important, but lacking in MANY cases. Most parents stop using booster/car seats WAY too early simply because it is easier.
I am only 5' 2" and I am NOT safe in the front seat of the car. I wish there was a way that I didn;t have to sit so close to the steering wheel and still be able to drive. Car companies have a one size fits all philosophy too, and it sucks!
Location: In my own little corner... sittin' in Jax FL
589 posts, read 1,635,303 times
Reputation: 331
I really like New Mexico's law. You may note that the only mention of front or rear seating position is in Section B (1) in regards to children less than one year of age.
My particular favorite is Section C.
Quote:
SB 586
B. Each person less than eighteen years of age
shall be properly secured in a child passenger restraint
device or by a safety belt, unless all seating positions
equipped with safety belts are occupied, as follows:
(1) children less than one year of age shall
be properly secured in a rear-facing child passenger
restraint device that meets federal standards, in the rear
seat of a vehicle that is equipped with a rear seat. If the
vehicle is not equipped with a rear seat, the child may ride
in the front seat of the vehicle if the passenger-side air
bag is deactivated or if the vehicle is not equipped with a
deactivation switch for the passenger-side air bag;
(2) children one year of age through four
years of age, regardless of weight, or children who weigh
less than forty pounds, regardless of age, shall be properly
secured in a child passenger restraint device that meets
federal standards;
(3) children five years of age through six
years of age, regardless of weight, or children who weigh
less than sixty pounds, regardless of age, shall be properly
secured in either a child booster seat or an appropriate
child passenger restraint device that meets federal
standards; and
(4) children seven years of age through
twelve years of age shall be properly secured in a child
passenger restraint device or by a seat belt.
C. A child is properly secured in an adult seat
belt when the lap belt properly fits across the child's
thighs and hips and not the abdomen. The shoulder strap
shall cross the center of the child's chest and not the neck,
allowing the child to sit all the way back against the
vehicle seat with knees bent over the seat edge.
D. Failure to be secured by a child passenger
restraint device, by a child booster seat or by a safety belt
as required by this section shall not in any instance
constitute fault or negligence and shall not limit or
apportion damages."
This is one of the best laws I have seen. Why? No scale or measuring tape needed! You can look at the child and determine if they are properly restrained by the vehicle's seat belt. And while many will agree that 60 lbs or 6 years is too young to not be in a booster... this provides great guidelines overall. IMO better than the 8/80 or 6/60 that we see in so many "booster laws".
I don't like that the only requirement stated about rear-facing is 1 year old. In my state they require 1 year AND 20 pounds. My daughter only hit 20 pounds at 2 years old, and would not have been safe to front face just because she turned one. (I think she's going to be RF until she's 3 at this rate!)
And what's with "unless all seating positions equipped with safety belts are occupied"? You don't need to be properly restrained if you have too many people in the car? What kind of logic is that?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
