The focus is meant to be on the subject of RF, not RF six year olds ;)

eidsvold, RF seats are safer (whether seat belt tethered or fixed to the frame)because they eliminate most of the forces that act on a childs head or neck during a crash.

6 years old is held to be the outside at which a child can travel rearfacing, this thread was started as an aside to a campaign for more awareness for rearfacing in the 9-18Kg category, so up to 4 years. It is possible for chldren to travel rear facing for longer, but it is very much down to individual circumstances - seat type, child size, etc.

how is that safer than car seats that are actually anchored on the car instead of just being held in by a seat belt?

Here in Aus - I have an almost 6yo who is still in a 5 point harness booster seat that is anchored by a huge bolt on the rear dash.

No matter how much room there appears to be - my dd1 would be too tall for this at almost 6 - rear facing that is - she has the longest legs. She would have no room anywhere for her legs.

I would gladly swop. I will email you

Sorry,Aki not Akin.

MrsAkin:

Do you want to make a swap?

I do not think that you can get it without buying it. It coast 12 USD on this web page: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/121/3/619

I have in my possesion a report from a German scientist that shows that even the worse rear facing seats is miles better than the best forward facing seat when it comes to the forces applied to the neck of the child. It is not public yet but I will link to it as soon as I am allowed to do so.

I have just recieved an American research report published by Journal of Injury Prevention in January.

It is called the Car Safety seats for children: Rear facing for best protection.

Objective: To compare the injury risk between rear-facing (RFCS) and forward-facing (FFCS) car seats for children less than 2 years of age in the USA.

They have only researched over there up till two years, but still thats something. The Swedish(but children should RF longer than up till 2 YRS according to their research) have known this for a long time, but if some people won't believe them than maybe they believe the Americans?

Anyhow the conclusion is clear: RFCSs are more effective than FFCSs.

Can't wait to read the whole report .

I know what you mean about statistics. They are hard to compare between countries. As you say, there might be other factors involved. But let me put it this way. The statistics for children killed in accidents USED to be about 12 children per year. That was before children started to be kept rear facing in the car. Now it is down to around 2 a year. That is a good improvement. If you want to see anther illustration on why they are safer, look a the table showing neck forces in this file. If gets dangerous for the child when the force reaches 1000 Newton. This table is actually what converted me

Thanks for the link, Pixie - they have some great other bits and bobs on there, sadly can't stretch to the prices for the car seats though if we were starting from scratch we might.
Will keep it bookmarked anyway

I see your point Mrs HH and Mrs Aki but as Upwind says it doesn't actually address the stats... if there are fewer crashes in Sweden full stop then it stands to reason there will be fewer child fatalities. I am not arguing against you BTW, just merely trying to understand the statistics and see exactly how much safer rear facing is. I would whole-heartedly support a campaign to get RF seats more widely available and accepted in the UK if that discrepancy is statistics is a true reflection of deaths per crash. I hope I've explained that ok, I haven't slept well so maybe not?!

Mrs Aki, that still doesn't address Weegle's point, perhaps there are simply very few major crashes in Sweden involving family cars?

The population of Sweden is, IIRC, less than 20% of the size of the UK and Sweden is bigger allowing for a less densely populated country! So it would be very surprising if the deaths were comparable.

Astrophe, Don't think there's any reason not to use them in people carriers etc...just as you would a FF.

Thank you for your great answer, MrsAkin!

Weegle, during 2007 only 2 children died in car accidents in Sweden. One drowned as the car ended up in water, and the other died in a side collision at 90 km/h. Before these two deaths at the end of the year, there had been a 17 month long period without a single child dying in Sweden. That is as close to zero tolerance as you can get...

According to the AA, 22 children die in car crashes in the UK every year. Every single child that can be saved simply by using a RF seat is worth all the effort. And it is such a simple thing as well. The products are already out there. If I showed any parent 2 prams and said that one of them was 5 times safer than the other, I have no doubt which one they would buy. Same with any other baby product I can think of. Now we have that situation for car seats. The OP of this thread has put two products in front of all of us and said "this one is 5 times safer for your child than the other one, which one would you choose". What Pixiepants, MissHH and I are all arguing for is for these products to be generally available to all parents in the UK, in the usual high street shops, so that all parents can make an informed decision and buy whatever product they want. But the choice has to be available.

Did someone say you can't use them in a van/people mover?

Hi Christiania, Try here for starters. If you live far away from Milton Keynes they do mail order.

Also try your local Volvo dealer, as the one near me in Bristol can order in two types, Britax fixway-Iso-fix and there own model-belt restained).

If you feel strongly call the Britax Helpline 01264 386034 Option 4 (who will direct you to In-Car Safety). When I spoke to them last week I was told that they put a RF on sale generally in the UK 5(?) years ago but no-one wanted it. When I asked where it was sold and how it was marketed the person I spoke to couldn't answer, and the person who could has yet to return my call .

Britax manufacture there RF in Andover, but these are for the Scandinavian market and not available in the UK. Instead In-Car Safety "IMPORT" goods produced in the UK for the UK market...get that!

Sorry for long post.

Also try www.racaro-seats.co.uk as I think they might have some for mail order soon.

Just be sure on the fitting front if you do find one that suits.

And finally here for anything else.

Miss HH - can you explain the stats better to me please? That Sweden vs GB link... the stats could be misleading because per 100,000 capita isn't a true reflection of how many children *per crash* die Sweden vs GB. Therefore, it is entirely possible (given crowding, size of motorways, driving safety overall, population density) that Sweden has fewer crashes per capita than GB and therefore inevitably fewer child fatalities? If however there are fewer child fatalities *per crash* in RF (Sweden) than FF (GB) then of course RF makes perfect sense and we should do what we can to bring that about within the UK. However, I too would struggle with the space issue. We drive an Octavia and both DH and I (both comfortably over 6ft) whether driving or passenger need the front seats on their back runners, how do the seats fit? But predominantly my question is clarifying the stats please!

I've just scanned the thread, watched the you tube video...very interesting, thanks for sharing. I have never seen these bigger RF seats before, but have always been at people desperate to turn their 6 months old babies around.

I'm not sure, perhaps I missed it in my scanning...but where can you get these seats? Can they be ordered online from the UK?

3&nomore, I scrolled down that last link and the stats are shocking, children hurt or killed in accidents here compared to in Sweden...I think that should be enough to make anyone go for RF imo.

Can you say which seats are available here again, for those of us who can't find the info?

And the whole point here is to inform that older kids bigger, than babies, can RF. The point is not six yr olds

themildmanneredjanitor: I think you are putting words in my mouth here. As I have said in the previous thread the child will let you know if it experiences any pain. But I will not turn my kid around until that problem occur. No need to take the sorrow in advance. Of course I won't inflict my child pain by RF, but ATM he is very happy RF.

This was my key point:
The most important thing is to keep them RF for as long as it is possible for you and of course your child.

But newborns are better than anyone at letting you know if they're not happy/comfortable, as are babies and children generally.

well...I think most children are quite comfortable in positions that most adults (unless they are yogis, lol) would find uncomfortable...I know many children who will sit happily with their legs underneath them in some weird way (not in a car now) and that find that rather comfortable...now me...I probably would break my knees or something trying to copy it!
I really don't think that crosslegged sitting is uncomfortable to most children...

says who? how can you say 'kids don't feel uncomfortable'! it's like people saying newborns don't feel pain!

themildmanneredjanitor: There is a six year old RF in that gallery, but there isn't many six YR olds RF here in Norway either.

The most important thing is to keep them RF for as long as it is possible for you.

My boy is soon to be three. He weighs abt. 31 pounds and 37 inches, I believe he can sit RF in our VW Golf for at least another three years. Since I got the opportunity to keep him that way I will do so until we meet problems.

Hi HH, Nice to 'see' you.

Longer children can cross their legs too. Although adults might find this uncomfortable, children don't!

Pixiepants: That is actually me there on car seat.org :D

I think what children would probably do, is they would sit cross legged...

I don't think the child looks uncomfortable though...he is lounging about, isn't it!

sorry-one of the posts /links further down was saying it should be done to year 6!

But also, just to say again, that a child in a carseat, RF or FF is sooooo much safer than an unrestained child, or a child in an incorrectly fitted seat.

well that is ridiculous.
would you like to travel like that?

well, an 8 year old is not meant to travle rearfacing though...don't think anyone was saying that!

It's recommended upto the age of 4 mildmannered. Until then the spine and neck are still forming and very vulnerable as the head is disproportionately large. The most vulnerable ones are the 9 month to 4 years as our government recommends FF at this stage.

and my 4 year oold is 3' 10" and again would not fit rear wards

just came across a picture on a different forum.
Shows rather well what a child does with their legs
scroll down to 3. or 4. post

just 8

How old is your 4'10" DS mildmannerd?

Yes, those mirrors are available and your DC's can see your face too in the rear-view mirror.

my son is 4' 10" and when he sits on the seat his feet touch the floor. how on earth would he go rear facing? ditto even my smaller boy! his legs would just not fit!

3andnomore. You'll be pleased to hear that there isn't any evidence that legs get injured either . RF seats apparently don't move enough on impact for legs to be damaged.

Lala, please keep voicing your concerns though...It's good to know why people are reluctant to see positive change. It's not about everybody being forced/guilt tripped to get one, just about letting people know that there is an alternative (which just happens to be safer in MVHO)

Oh, also lalaland, no one says KIds should NEVER sit forward facing....but it's better to wait till the spine is better develloped.
If, when my Kids were smaller the seats like the ones in sweden would have been available to us, I would have used them.

To those that want to look at their Kids when travelling...aren't there those mirrors available that you cna place in a way that you can see your Kids?

Experts suggest that a childs head is still too big for their bodies to safely travel FF until 4 years old...then they can FF for the rest of their lives.

lalaland, that is a ridiculous idea, that it would actually cause accidents....!

I think it's great that more awareness is being raised about this.
I said it on a different thread, that whilst my Kids now are forwardfacing, they were for as long as possible in their Britax First class (es in a Britax Clubclass) rearfacing, and whilst it did not allow them to sit rearfacing past 18 month, at leats they sat rearfacing for longer then most Kids.
So many Baby's outgrow the Babyseats at about 9 month and are sitting forwardfacing, well before an age where the spine could nearly be well developed enough to truely support them in that position, espeically incase of an accident...and often people put Baby's into the bigger carseats, NOT because the heads are above the seat, but because the legs can't be streched out....I mean, yeah it is so much more important to have legroom then be safe in an accident...I mean...hm...broken legs or being paralysed...the choice is so so difficult...

yes but you might as well keep them safe for as long as possible.

if the big seat will fit rearfacing with two other seats already in my car then i will be getting one.

Yeah but they have to sit forward at some point in their life. And it would probably cause accidents just by people disbelieving what they are seeing, that is, until the are more common IYSWIM.

safer though lalaa

Bit old to be facing that way. they are kids, not babies.

3andnomore: That is right.

It is safere RF in the front seat(when the airbag is turned off!) than FF in the backseat.

you dont have to intoduce yourself on mumself, i think its purely a jump in and go forum lol.

Cadmum, a rearfacing carseat on a frontseat would only be a bad idea in a car with an airbag fitted...or is that incorrect?
Our car is lovely in that way, you can turn the airbag off if you want too!

I started a little thread, Pixiepants

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/1372/533443?ts=1211221333658

Camouflaging the thread continent with my headline

But maybe still in the wrong place. Is there no forum here for new members to introduce?

Hope so! You really know this stuff, and I'm still learning...as are plenty of MN's.

Thanks for the tips Pixiepants! I posted here because I saw your post.. :-)

Maybe I will post a thread somewhere else when I'm getting to know MN a bit more.

Thanks for the link, I wish some of those were available over here.

Glad we got the Concorde now though.

Sorry, you weren't on your own...I only wizzed through the thread but have just had a proper look...

And, for future threads MissHH, it might be worth opening the thread in 'Products' or 'In the News'. (You open a thread in the topic and then click the 'start a new thread' there). I only did "AIBU" out of desperation.

MissHH, I've only just seen this thread and hadn't realised you'd been 'fire-fighting' on your own for the last two days! Thank you. The first few posts really made me realise just what the manufactures are up against when introducing a new product....can hardly blame them for not pushing it when people don't even want to know the facts .

Thank goodness we're still talking about this, as I think some people are glad to find out that there are alternatives.

Unfortunately it's not going to work for everyone who'd like one (yet), and I was/am a bit reluctant to mention this to friends who'd already bought FF, but I wish we'd known about it 15 months ago. (I'd ordered a FF in the Mothercare online sale and just count myself lucky that they didn't have enough stock to honour the purchase.

Hopefully we can make Mum's-to-be aware that they might have a choice.

You cannot use any seat rear-facing only the seats that is approved for rear-facing

But here in Scandinavia we are so lucky that we have a pretty wide range to choose from.

You can see a list here kidsincars.blogspot.com/2007/11/which-rear-facing-car-seats-is.html

Concorde is made in Germnay btw.

We have a Concorde Ultimax for Ds2, which is like a brick, it faces backwards till 18 months. He's 11 months now and still plenty of leg room. I think it just has a longer base iyswim, so their bottoms are further back (towards front of car direction) so their legs have more room. Not sure how it works but it does.

Ds1 in Britax First Class, but the only prob is at nearly 5 the straps are pushing their limit. He is forward facing though.

Can you use any seat rear facing, is that what this is about? If so I might try it with the Britax. Wasn't aware you could do this.

As far as I'm concerned the Scandinavians know their stuff with child safety, they have the best prams I've ever seen (we have an Emmaljunga and I think it would come off best against a truck )

nappyaddict No that maybe right, but if one can have the youngest child RF for as long as possible that is great.

i was looking at a diff pic sorry. that pics shows 2 front facers and 1 rear facer which a lot of people manage to fit in the UK, but most people don't have to manage to fit 2/3 rear facers in the uk (unless you've got twins/triplets). i just can't see how in a small car you'd be able to do it cos most men and quite a few women need to put the seat right back on its runners in cars like polos, clios, 206's etc.

also that pic doesn't show the children in the seats. they children using them might only be 1/2/3 - there aren't any pics with 4/5/6 year olds using them.

Just bumping this thread a bit. Since RF already has made MN frontpage today.

Way to go, pixiepants :D

nappyaddict : That yellow car is a VW Polo.

There's some interesting facts on the rearfacing website, DNB. There is no difference in mortality rates between children under 1 (who will all be rear facing) for Sweden and UK. The differences only become apparent at over 1 year when UK children go front facing. If it was an issue of cars, then you would expect the difference to be at all ages. Als agree with MissHH - Volvos were ahead of their time on safety issues, but are now no more safe than most other cars of similar sizes, and most features are aimed at adults.

MissHH - what car is in that link?

yes thats it

misdee : Do you mean Britax Nordic Secura?

I can say that here it is recommended to sit RF up till four years after that most kids sits in high back booster seats. But if one can RF for longer that is the best thing(that is actually safer for everybody adults too) but most kids sit in boosters as I said earlier.

I am pretty sure that safe Volvos is a minor factor here(but Volvo has done a lot of research on the area of RF. They have even made a manual about the importance of RF). That everyone in Sweden drives a Volvo is a myth ;)

And a Volvo isn't particularly more safe than any other normal car.

In Norway the traffic organization states that it is even more important to secure your kids the best possible way in *newer cars*. Modern cars are much more secure for the adult than for the kids The reason is that cars from the 90's and newer has a harder construction which keeps the cars coupe intact even in a high speed collision. This increases the chances of survival for the people who sits in the car while it sets even higher requirements for the rest of the cars safety equipment. That is why a car has got airbags and seat belts for reduction of the power that the impact would inflict on an adult body.

For children FF this means that in a new car the forces will increase on the neck/head area, because less of the force under an impact is absorbed because the coupe stays intact and doesn't get disfigured like it did in the older cars.

Thanks MissHH for information. Certainly my very tall 6yo is beyond RF but it's a possibility for my nearly 4 & 5yo.

I'd want to see more detail on the statisitcs between Sweden v England child car injury/death statistics though. It might just be down to your lovely safe Volvo's!

Third picture in this article: sikringavbarnibil.blogspot.com/2007/10/biler-med-plass-til-tre-barneseter.html

Two high back boosters an one RF car seat in the back.

i'd rather broken legs than brokwen necks.

once we get our new car, if its possible, i will see if the britax nordic(?) think thats it?, will fit into a zafira with two forward facing seats and will report back. it means taking a trip upto top milton keynes to the safety centre, but will do it works out about the same price anywa as buying two seats, and cant see how it will take up any more room than a standard stage 1 seat (9months-4years one) as they dont look any wider.

also i can see how you would probably get a 2/3 year old rear facing in a 206 etc but surely a 4/5/6 year old wouldn't have enough room?

i can see how this would work if you only have one child, but what if you have 2 children that need car seats and the driver is tall and needs the seat right back on its runners. there's no way a rear facing seat would fit then in something like a polo or 206.

Okay, thanks for clearing that up for me :D

We have no law against car seat in a peoplemover here.

MissHH, a "peoplemover" is an MPV - ie one of the big cars with 6-7 seats.

Rear-facing seats seems like an excellent idea to me, so much safer for their heads/necks - I notice that most of those pictured are mounted several inches from the seat back, leaving room for little legs. (Not sure about big legs though...can imagine 2 bored pre-schoolers aiming kicks at each other )

Cadmum - they will not break their legs in an accident as the seat will not move at all. They are not only strapped in using the seat belt but "tethered" to the front seat. It's a fallacy that children's legs need to be straight (in both group 0 AND 1). Their necks are far more vulnerable, and that is what they are designed to protect.
OOps sprry, just seen missHHs link, which is much more scientific than my comments

*Some times it is very difficult trying to explain something online because of the form of communication gives so much room for interpretation and misunderstanding. And the fact that English is not my language *

thanks MissHH, no offence taken - just get upperty when we think we are doing our best only to find out that actually there is better - but to go better would cost us too much at which point I start grumbling about "pesky government making me work to afford my mortgage and thus paying a small fortune in childcare (more than my mortgage each month)" yadda yadda - straw that breaks the camels back and all that.

hippipotami: Yes, I believe that your DD is a bit to big know ;)

Meely2: I did not mean to say anything about the space in a Peugot 206. I know it is tiny. The Golf was just an example for everyone not just you. I'm sorry if you felt that I was attacking you because that was not my intention.

*The most most important thing is to secure our children in the car the best way we can*(that also includes FF ), I think we all can agree on that one?

To day a saw a mum in the backseat of the car with a little baby standing in here lap(while the car was moving yes!!) That is far far more worse to me than a child FF.

Here, in Norway, I see FF as a next best alternative when one for different reasons cannot have an RF seat. I think the the most important thing is the knowledge and taking a choice after one has that knowledge.

If anyone understands me? I'm not out to make any judgment on parents keeping there children FF here in the UK it is the information that is important. As many mums here says the never heard about this, that is actually a step in the right direction.

Ah okay HH, I was looking at this with my (tall) five and a half year old in mind, and could not see how she would fit.

I think it is a good idea in theory, but would need to see it in practice to fully understand.

However, my dc are nearly 9 and 5.5 so perhaps I am past this stage anyhow.

Chirpygirl: I know you can't but this might make the demand for RF seats more visible over here so someday it might be possible to get one without "robbing the bank".

To get some changes the word has to be spread even though some people might find the facts scaring.

In USA, Norway, Finland, Sweden and Denmark the experts recommend RF for as long as possible. People from France, Poland, Holland and Germany is reading up on the subject and wanting RF car seats.

I think the power really is in the consumers hands, but that might be difficult to see and it is way to little information on this specific area.

Iota: No, the Norwegian experts(doctors) says that very few children gets carsick because they are RF.

hippipotami: It is not an alternative placing a child car seat on those kinds of seat and turn the cars seat RF if thats what you meant? The seats isn't tested for that kind of use. And there where no six year old in the Polo, that might have been a problem yes ;) I have a soon to be three year old RF in my Golf. It is not much leg room but he doesn't complain because it does not hurt him(and believe me my son is not afraid to speak his mind ).

TheDutchessOfNorksBride: *The kid you mention with the plaster is to big and the text says so too but in Norwegian so no wonder you didn't understand that* It was the big brother trying out the seat.

Cadmum: In Sweden many experts recommends the front seat, mind you ONLY and only when the airbag is deactivated! Can you(or someone else) please explain to me what a people-mover is? I have never seen that word before. Keep in mind that this is in Scandinavia and that some of the laws might differ to those in your country.

Scandinavian facts about placing of the car seat: kidsincars.blogspot.com/2008/03/where-to-place-car-seat.html

The children often sits in Indian position or just with bent legs. In an accident broken legs is way easier to fix than the alternative unfortunately.

You can see many kids in that position in this American ERF gallery(the cars over there are a bit different than the European ones so most children in Europe have way more space for their legs than in the US): www.cpsafety.com/articles/RFAlbum.aspx

oh fgs meely don't be so melodramatic
so its wrong to share information about a possible safer way of transporting children because it makes you feel guilty.
It seems to be the people providing this information are doing so to raise awareness which could benefit everyone by such seats becoming more commonplace and therefore cheaper to buy in this country...it has nothing to do with making you feel guilty

a golf is bigger than a peugeot 206, believe me and you probably don't have your drivers seat right back on its runners. With my two forward facing britax's (you raving about the britax rear facing, I am assuming they wouldn't make an UNsafe forward facing one) in the back there is no room in the middle for a rear facing or forward facing seat, hence with baby 3 planned we are looking at buying a new car.

How can the the seat not be as big as they look? the rear facing part of it means that the head part of the seat sticks quite a way into the footwell space of the rear seats - i don't have rear footwell space at all. I would struggle to get a slip of paper between rear seats and drivers seat.

My argument is falling on deaf ears I realise that - and I also realise for my kids to be at the safest they could be on car journeys I would buy a people carrier and rear facing seats from Sweden or wherever at the small cost of what? couple of grand perhaps? No can do, so they are not as safe as they could be, but as safe as I can afford them to be - I hope my conscience can cope with that if we are ever in a high speed crash, god forbid - but thanks for the guilt trip none-the-less.

My dd1 can only travel rear facing for about 5 minutes before being violently sick, so this would never work for me.

Some statistics(first graph showing Sweden vs GB): members.essentialbaby.com.au/index.php?showtopic=532878&hl=statistics

To everyone who is concerned about leg rom:
A collection of expert statments: kidsincars.blogspot.com/2007/09/bent-or-crossed-legs-are-not-dangerous.html
www.rearfacing.co.uk/faqs.php#legs

Dynamicnanny: Looks aren't everything, it is how a seat performs in an actual crash that is important. It i possible to buy mirrors so that you can see your RF child(and the child can see you) in your rear view(is it called that?) mirror.

Meeley2:They are not so enormous as they might seem. I drive a Golf and I have a Akta Graco Duologic RF in the back and sometimes I have an Britax Two Way Elite back there as well. A Golf is NOT a huge car.

I have a friend recently turning their 2 YR old from FF to RF again. They drive a Opel Vectra. Their FF seat took up so much space that their two oldest couldn't have high back boosters. Now when the youngest is in a RF in the middle they have room for one high back booster on each side.

Now, I have just seen the boy with the plaster on his forehead. He is way too tall for that seat, the harness straps come from down by his shoulderblades
If that is the alternative to forward facing in proper fitting seats then I go forward facing any day.

Quattro, I saw that, but I must be missing something. When the seat is rearfacing, where do the children put their legs? Up the backrest they are facing?
Sorry, genuinly confused
Because even in the baby seat, my dc's feet touched the backrest. So once they were bigger, their legs would have to be bent to fit?

I missed the earlier discussion but live on the continent where I would be happy to see children in carseats full STOP.

Does anyone think that the last picture on the second link showing the child rear facing in the front seat can possibly be safe? Every car and carseat manufacturer would argue otherwise as would common sense.

There is no leg room and they will break their legs in an accident.

As for the rear facing car seat in a people-mover, this is also not legal or in accordance with the vehicle or carseat manufacturers recommendations.

(Sorry if this has already been pointed out...)

I've got a rear facer in a Peogeot 206,which is obviously a very small car but with a tall driver you'd need to put it behind the passenger seat. Works fine - no car sickness and I manage to chat away quite happily to mine. Also have a mirror on rear seat headrest so I can see what she's up to!

Interesting, I've never seen these for older children. So is this popular on the continent?

But! I'm also interested in the leg room question- nearly all the pictures show babies/toddlers. On the first link, there is a tallish boy in first picture but the leg room is a bit squashed.

There is another boy towards the end who is quite tall (with plaster on his forehead) but the picture doesn't show his legs at all (also, he is too tall for that seat as his head is above the head rest and would get no support in a crash and may even clunk heads with the person behind him, but that's just incidental).

Explain the legs someone please!

and perhaps my dh is bigger than yours too!!

tegan, at last, someone else in my situation, however my car is smaller still than yours....

We have a vectra and dh has to have the driver seat right back so he can get in as such dd1 (10) has to sit behind as there is no leg room and we can't even put a carry seat back facing behind dh as there is no room.

Great Link. My children are rearfacing until they are about 5ish. I don't see the problem with it at all and I don't think British children or British cars are that much different from Scandinavians. Chilling quote from the doctor about the children he sees unecessarily injured.Hippipotami, my last car was a Golf. Not a massive car at all. We had rearfacing seats no problem.

I am also glad that my children are too big, however i think its great that people are raising awareness of this, the point being that they should be more readily available in the uk

hippo the picture on the second link is of a vw polo

Okay, I get in in like a grande voyager where you can turn the actual seat (not carseat but seat that comes with the car iyswim) around.

But in a VW polo, where do the legs of a six year old go in a rearfacing seat?

<<heaves sigh of relief that her kids are past this stage>>

A serious question - isn't car sickness more of a problem if the child is travelling backwards?

me too chirpy - i think we can be reassured that we are doing the best we can given what we have. I have isofix britax and as i understand (as unsafe as they may be) they are a very good make.

But we can;t buy them here easily, they are expensive and they don't fit in all cars cos belts have to be longer (is my understanding)
So now I have massive guilt about DD's being in front facing when there is nothing I can do.

those seats are even more enormous than i first thought - not a chance they would fit in my car dudes sorry. Will however consider them for baby 3 when we have robbed a bank gathered the money for a new bus...

Ah yes, dynamicnanny, whether or not a car seat looks safe is obviously a very important thing when choosing one. And being able to see what your children are doing is much more important than their safety. What bizarre logic!

Are we still discussing this - I still don't think they look safe - also you won't be able to see the children and what they are upto you if we're all sat back to back - although I agree carjourneys are boring I enjoy chatting with and seeing the children when I'm in the front and their in the back.