Parents not having car seats for their children

(364 Posts)
bicyclefish Fri 27-Sep-13 15:50:25

The other day I came out of the supermarket and saw a couple getting into their car with the lady in the back seat strapped in with a CHILD on her lap (less than a 2 year old) and a slightly older child (maybe 4 or 5 ) strapped in but with no child seat or even a booster. I went across to them and told them in what was probably an overly abrupt manner that they should under no circumstances do what they were doing and that i was taking his number down and reporting him. He told me to F off and that he was 'only going up the road anyway'. Oh right thats ok then, accidents never happen on the short trip back from the supermarket... ahem..a little wound up by his lack of care for the people in his care i then told him that if he got back into his car and tried to drive away i would physically stand in front of it and sue him for assault if he drove into me... I know, i know..
upshot is, he got the family back out and went home and got the car seats that they did actually own but didn't see fit to put into the car..FFS
AIBU or should i have minded my own business?

Friday will reply properly when not watching Breaking Bad finale, but thank you for the most informed & interesting response I think I've ever had on here.

I do love a bit of expertise grin

friday16 Mon 30-Sep-13 18:07:23

surely you're not saying that you think car seats have NOT reduced child death rates in cars, are you?

I genuinely don't know. Have child fatalities over the past few years reduced faster than adult fatalities? Adults are dying on the roads at about half the rate they were a decade ago, and the drop has continued long, long after seat belts were made compulsory. Adult seatbelt compliance is high, and has been for a generation (you certainly see far fewer people on the roads not wearing seatbelts than you do children not correctly restrained). There are a huge slew of factors: cars are massively safer than they were both actively (ABS, stability control, modern tyres and suspension; compare with a Ford Anglia with crossply tyres, drum brakes, beam axles, friction dampers, etc) and passively (airbags, seatbelts, crumple zones, door bars, etc). But also rates of drink driving are lower, speed enforcement is better, young men are being priced off the road, the driving test has become massively harder than it was, road design has improved. Somewhere in there, something's reducing death tolls. Your PhD is assured if you can figure out what.

It's also interesting that there's been extensive research into risk homeostasis for seatbelts, but none for child seats. If people think they and their children are safer, do they drive more recklessly to "use up" the improved margin? There's some evidence that's true for seat belts, and anecdotal evidence that ABS has had a similar effect.

A related issue, cycling helmets, is incredibly nuanced, and what seems "obvious" is in fact nothing like obvious. Child seats definitely reduce the effect on a child of the accident once the accident has started. It's unlikely they do any harm. It's likely they do good. As to if they are overall the, or even a, reason why mortality rates on the roads are reducing is an excellent research topic.

FWIW, I had my kids in rear-facing seats until they were too old to use them, but I use trains wherever possible.

bicyclefish Mon 30-Sep-13 18:03:37

ok i'm off home to put my DC's to bed. It's been an interesting day and i hope to see you all here tomorrow.
Have a pleasant evening one and all...
wine

Crowler Mon 30-Sep-13 18:02:51

They're both infinitesimally small risks taken as single events.

colleysmill Mon 30-Sep-13 18:02:39

Ah right so is the crux of the matter that anyone who doesn't use a carseat, even if the law doesn't require it in their particular circumstance, is not being a responsible parent?

bicyclefish Mon 30-Sep-13 17:45:18

Crowler - It's a question of perspective i guess, as well as legality.
None of us can claim to be a perfect parent, heck some of the posters here are with a very strong opinion are not even parents at ALL, but we do what we can.
I don't really find the too comparable to be honest and I don't think that will ever happen, not least because I don't feed my kids that shite anyway, but thats a totally different argument to be honest.
One 'portion' of HFCS does not have a chance of putting my DC at serious risk, however one trip in a car without the correct restraint does.

Crowler Mon 30-Sep-13 17:36:31

Do you always do ALL that you can do?

For example, how would you feel if some "clean diet" person saw you feeding your child high fructose corn syrup and said "You are increasing your child's risk for diabetes by 30%! I am not going to allow you to give your child this food, I shall stand between the two of you to prevent it!!"

bicyclefish Mon 30-Sep-13 17:35:13

and FYI, i din't get physical at all, i simply stood my ground. Lets not skew the facts to fit the arguement.

bicyclefish Mon 30-Sep-13 17:34:00

Crowler - they didn't do all THEY could though did they?
they didnt bother to get their lazy arses into the hall/shed/loft/whatever to get the car seats until someone shamed them into doing so..
If you really want to applaud them for doing a half arsed job, you go right ahead

Crowler Mon 30-Sep-13 17:31:39

As said, it's ridiculous to say they had done nothing to ensure their children's safety. Safety is a spectrum. That's what people are trying to explain to you, to no avail.

Just as sure as you are more cautious in this one particular way than these parents you write of, you are certainly less cautious in other ways to other parents; and how would you feel if they tried to physically prevent you from carrying on with your activities?

bicyclefish Mon 30-Sep-13 17:29:00

heartisaspade - you're right, that scenario could happen and if it did, i would probably agree as i agree with you now. The difference comes in the fact that i wouldn't be breaking the law in strapping my children into a car seat, but be NOT doing so, these guys were breaking the law, but before they usual suspect jump on the whole 'you are not the car seat police' train it's really not the law i am concerned for its the fact that parents who are not ignorant of the benefits of having a car seat/booster for their children still still feel that is it their right to do as they wish with their children instead of doing what they should FOR the children. Being a parent is NOT a right, it is a privilege that too many take for granted

Well, in your OP you said that the older child and the adult were both strapped in. Which means they were doing something, better than nothing. (it is unquestionably better to have a seatbelt of some sort)

Seatbelt is better than nothing.
Car seat is better than seat belt.
Rearfacing car seat is better than forward-facing (and that has definitely been proven in studies, they definitely reduce fatalities)

So it's not quite so black and white.

I'm not evangelical about rearfacing car seats, and have never mentioned it to anyone else, but it's not beyond reason that someone might have a go at you for doing less than you could to ensure your children's safety. And you'd (justifiably) think they should mind their own. ..

bicyclefish Mon 30-Sep-13 17:18:50

Theodorakiss - by "you" i mean, of course "one" not you specifically.

bicyclefish Mon 30-Sep-13 17:18:24

Theodorakiss - it doesn't win an argument, it simply makes you look petty, but it is something that one poster assumed was relevent to raise.
Yep, relevent.
wink

bicyclefish Mon 30-Sep-13 17:16:45

heartisaspade - in fairness, my point has never really been that those guys were not doing everything possible to ensure their childrens safety, more that they were doing nothing to ensure their childrens safety. I've never maintained that I am perfect in my ways but, as i previously say, at least i use what I have, which is more than can be said for the people who i objected to..

Theodorakiss Mon 30-Sep-13 17:11:31

I thought it was bad form to slate people's spelling? Cheap way to win an argument.

two points:

1. "friday16 Mon 30-Sep-13 15:30:50
but isn't a likely explanation for your data that the children aren't dying in car accidents because they are in carseats?

The rate of child deaths in cars has fallen at a lower rate than child deaths as pedestrians in car accidents. An equally plausible explanation would be anti-lock brakes. Anyone who can untangle this will get a good paper out of it."

friday : surely you're not saying that you think car seats have NOT reduced child death rates in cars, are you?

2. bicycle if you don't use rearfacing seats after infant stage I think you may be being hypocritical here. As I said earlier, I've taken my daughter in a car a couple of times without a car seat - however, the car seat we DO have is extended rear facing, and at 3 years old and around 100cm tall she is still in it, and will stay rearfacing (especially for motorway journeys) as long as possible. I actually think in terms of reducing risk you are probably much better off having the occasional journey on an adult's lap but facing backwards for longer and higher speed journeys.

bicyclefish Mon 30-Sep-13 17:03:15

fyi - I leave any spelling mistakes i make in now, as i know how much one specific poster loves it so...

bicyclefish Mon 30-Sep-13 17:02:13

Bamboobambino -
1.) Yes, no - but i do use what i HAVE instead of leaving them in the shed/garage etc if i'm only going on a short trip because the chances of anything happening etc etc etc yawn....this is a tired arguement
2). No. it's not my study and the content was not the important bit it was the holistic use of data and statistics to skew and arguement that i was alluding to.

Bamboobambino Mon 30-Sep-13 16:57:38

OP. Can you answer some questions for me. I'm genuinely interested in the answers.
1) Do you have children of your own, and if so, do you use rear facing car seats once past the first stage?
2) Can you point me to, or comment in the morbidity data for your smoking study, as opposed to the mortality data.

Theodorakiss Mon 30-Sep-13 16:56:34

I was quite serious about running over a person who threatened me, wasn't being nasty. There is something about your manner that makes me uneasy. I can't go into dadbikes, they make me queasy.

bicyclefish Mon 30-Sep-13 16:42:48

Theodorakiss - ref: "I bet you're one of those people who rides his dadbike in the middle of the road " - do mums ride dadbikes?

bicyclefish Mon 30-Sep-13 16:35:42

Theodorakiss - I give as good as I get and reply to comment in the tone in which they are received. Frankly given some of your comments are:
"I would have happily driven over you."
"personally I would have thought you were on a day out and would have been looking over your shoulder for the carer."
and of course the one deleted by mumsnet.
I don't think you are in any way on the moral highground, do you?

Theodorakiss Mon 30-Sep-13 16:27:53

Seriously do you get off patronising people like that? I bet you're one of those people who rides his dadbike in the middle of the road. Unpleasant tone you have.

bicyclefish Mon 30-Sep-13 16:19:12

ErrolTheDragon - you could be right but i think it depends on what 'average' you median mean....
sorry..blush

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now