To keep ds in a rear facing seat?(227 Posts)
Dh thinks so as ds2 (22months) fusses and cries a lot and dh thinks his legs are "squashed up".
He wants to turn the seat round so that ds can see more and might not get as upset in his car seat.
Dh said it won't make a difference and that he drives carefully but I pointed out that it might not be dh that causes an accident heaven forbid one happens and that it all depends where the impact is etc and so if rear facing is meant to be safer I want to keep ds that way.
Dh thinks I'm being over protective and has said he is concerned about ds legs being so restricted.
Over 20lbs I think it's actually safer for them to travel forwards tbh
Op YANBU. Has he done any research? We're one of the worst countries for forward facing before it's safe.
Ds2 is about 18 lbs so maybe I will change him to forward facing when he is 20lbs, I wasn't sure of the weight limit for rear facing but now I know I can tell dh!
Why would you think that mymiracle?
I think you both have a point OP - rear facing still is safer but at almost 2 it's probably marginal. If your DS is distressed rear facing then I can understand your DH wanting to turn him round.
YANBU. Point him in the direction of the forward facing vs rear facing crash test on Youtube.
I can see that his legs are a bit squashed as he is tall but, given the choice (and a horrible choice it is) I'd rather he ended up with his legs hurt than a more serious injury from being in the wrong stage/wrong direction facing seat.
New regulations state rear facing until 15 months, but its much safer to keep rear facing for as long as possible. Forward facing, there is much higher statistics for severe damage to the Childs neck and internal organs from the harness.
Well done on doing the best to protect your child. You're quite right in your thinking.
All dcs have fussed and cried in their seats and I think he would do the same facing forwards to be honest.
Dh just keeps going on about his legs looking uncomfortable.
I've just bought a rear-facing seat designed to accommodate DS until the age of 4. YANBU.
Are you sure he's 18lbs? That's off the bottom of the charts for a 22 month old.
20lbs (9kg) is the lightest you can legally turn them forward facing - average size of a 9 month old. It doesn't mean it's safe at that age/size and certainly not safer than keeping a baby rear facing.
From having had discussions with various professionals regarding when it is safe to move my dd to forward facing.
The law states that up until 20lbs they must be in rear facing (was 18 but apparently has recently been increased). And the advice I was given was that it doesn't matter if their legs are squashed up etc it is down to weight not length.
Rear facing is safer but you have to weigh it up. My DS hated being rear facing and although we turned him round as late as we could, his screaming and crying made driving really stressful and distracting, which isn't safe either. As soon as we turned him round he was happy. We do a lot of motorway journeys so it meant a happier time for everyone.
I'm shocked every day at the number of parents who think a child needs to face forwards. Its all about education and having all the facts available, and until companies start to comply with the new isize regulations, its a losing battle.
(I do this for a living)
He's very tiny, tall but very thin, ds1 is the same (he's 7 and weighs 3stone 3lbs) so I think they are just naturally slight. Most of his clothes are 9-12 months. Another reason why I want to keep him rear facing as he seems so little still
mymiracle - which professionals? I have never heard of anyone suggesting a 9kg baby is safer forward facing.
In that case Hedgehog you cannot legally put him in a forward facing seat yet, he doesn't weigh enough.
I would hope no professional would. Oh except babies R us, their renound for the wrong info
Yanbu. My DD2 is 2.8 and still travels rear-facing. I think DD1 started FF at around 3- and then only because she reached the weight limit. (We have a combi seat rather than extended RF).
Sweden requires rear facing child seats until the child is 26kg or 4 years old. You'll find they have better seats for older DC. They also have a stunningly low rate of serious injury or fatality of children in car accidents.
Yanbu. DC is rear facing at over two in a large seat and will stay there until it is outgrown which should be 3-4.
My twins are rear facing at 3.5 years and are perfectly comfortable. They see everything I point out to them (I just had to get used to pointing out as it passed me rather than in advance!) and can see all sorts out of the rear windscreen.
I was convinced by the crash test videos on YouTube and by childcarseats.org.uk. My children will stay rear facing as long as they can fit in a rear facing seat (25kg or whenever they're too tall). I expect this to be when they're about 6 years.
Having recently suffered severe whiplash in a minor rear end shunt (three months off work so far, still can't lift my kids, still can't push shopping trolley ...) I would keep all children rear facing as long as possible. It doesn't matter which way the accident happens, your car will almost certainly be moving forwards in impact (there are very few high speed crashes when you're reversing )and whiplash could kill your children. The movement causing whiplash is almost entirely prevented by a rear facing seat.
If your DH is worried about leg room and visibility, I heartily recommend the BeSafe IZI seats (there are a few models to do isofix/belted/max 18kg/max 25kg). They are held away from the back seat by a rebound bar, so there is lots of space, and they're high, so the kids have a great view from the window. They're pricey though. If price is an issue, the Britax Two Way Elite is a fab seat, though less high so view is more restricted. I've heard good things about the rear facing Joie seats too, though haven't seen them in real life (they're cheaper still).
Please don't forward face your child until you have made yourself look at the crash test videos. Then you're making an informed decision.
We just turned ds around, 24 months exactly. I wasn't happy (dh had been trying to get him around for ages because he is also v tall) but to be honest.. He really was quite squashed. He weighs double what your baby does. And is in size 3-4 clothes. SO I think that's the difference. If he were the size of a one year old he'd sure as hell still be rear facing..
Tell your husband to google internal decapitation. He will rapidly change his mind about forward facing.
I can't remember exactly when we turned our toddler around, but what I do remember is how many people (including other parents and childcare professionals) remarked on him 'still' being rear-facing when he can't have been more than 12 months.
I'm planning on rear facing until 4. I've seen the statistics and the evidence from other countries and I really think it's a no brainer tbh.
Think some people see it as a "Milestone" like walking and weaning burren.. even though the child has no control over it and is more dangerous.... if we could afford to get new chairs (and a new car) we need 3 car seats now (or will in the next week or two) I'd try and keep ds2 and dd3 rear facing. They just can't do it in their current seats with the space we have
mcphreezing who would you recommend for getting decent seat advice?
Yanbu, your dp is.
Do you have a portable DVD player or iPad you can givehim? My ds is 14 months and will be in a rf seat until he grows out of it ( we live in Sweden so rf is the norm here) he watches in the night garden whilst we are in the car and that keeps him entertained.
mymiraclebubba the only time forward facing is safer is if you reverse into a brick wall, I'm sure we can all agree that is an unlikely scenario.
ikeaismylocal Just to be pedantic, I suspect that actually a huge proportion of motor accidents involve reversing into things. However, they are also likely to be at a sufficiently low speed to have very little chance of injuring the occupants whatever seat they are using.
Dd is 2.2 and will RF til she outgrows her erf seat (hopefully nearing 4yo).
The sight thing is a bit of a myth - forward face your child and they will see out of the window next to them and be looking at the back of the seat infront. Dd has a clear view out of the back window and the one next to her.
mymiracle please please look up some information on forward vs rear facing before making statements like that.
It is categorically NOT safer to forward face at that weight.
Rear facing as long as possible, we can't fit the longer lasting rear facing seats and I really wish we could. Mine stay squished in rear facing until their heads go over the top of the seat.
My ds is rf at 20 months in a britax two way elite and is on the 98th centiles for weight and height. Op we had trouble with getting upset when he was in his infant car seat as width ways it was keeping him squashed, moving to the larger seat made a big difference, wasn't clear whether your ds was still in infant seat or extended rf one?
I am happy at keeping him rf for a long while yet because of the statistics however, I do wonder about it because I have only ever had 2 crashes in my life and they were both where I was stationary and a car came into the back of mine...surely given the direction of force if ds was in the car he would have been better off in a ff seat in these crashes? So my (limited) statistics would say ff was safer.
Also near misses have been on motorways when I've been stationary and someone has come up behind and nearly hit me...very fast obviously. ..does anyone know about whether this is looked into by tge professionals, particularly the rf crowd who seem to do more testing?
When I asked a car seat fitting expert about extended rear facing, he said without Isofix it is not so effective. He said this is because the child loosens the seatbelt by pushing against seat with their legs.
Is this correct?
My DD1 is just out of her RF seat at 5.5 and that is only because she is too tall. DD2 is 4 and still in hers with 3kg until she hits 18kg and heaps more head room than DD1 had at this age.
Some really good points made here! Rear facing is almost always safer, even when you are hit from behind the car is still moved forward.
It's actually safer for ALL passengers to be rear facing (barring the driver of course!). It would cut down on lots of injuries and unnecessary deaths but the car industry don't think a car like that would be as popular
make them as much money .
Look at www.rearfacing.co.uk/ for more information.
Ela that maybe why I was told ff was safer as my car doesn't have isofix
But when you are hit from behind the initial force throws you backwards, making it safer to be in ff. Whereas all the videos promoting rf show frontal collisions where you are initially thrown forwards.
MoreSnowPlease I can assure you that when you are hit from behind the initial force is forwards and then a rebound back. It is the flying forwards at great speed that causes whiplash and, in extreme cases, internal decapitation.
The only accident where the initial force would be backwards is if you reverse into something. Which you are unlikely to do at any significant speed.
To those who are saying forward facing is safer, have you looked at the crash tests?
Mymiracle it makes no difference whether the child seat is held in by isofix or a belt. Rear facing is always safer.
It sounds like you were given bad advice, and I can understand why that is frustrating.
Incidentally, rear facing is also safer in train crashes. Forward facing seats are provided on trains because it's what people want and the risk of being injured is very slim in a train anyway, but if you want to minimise risk of severe injury in the event if a crash/derailment, sit rear facing.
OP just to answer your concern about his legs - there have been NO reported injuries to children's legs in a rear facing car seat in a crash. However there are very many examples of forward facing children's necks being hurt in a crash. (See here www.rearfacing.co.uk/faqs.php)
My dc is forward facing he is 2 i did want to keep him rear facing for longer however he wears 5year old clothes hes like a beanpole. I physically cannot rear face him in my punto. So its not a case of me not thinking of his safety he physically just doesnt rear face....
Totally seperate and a complete hijack.but there seem to be a lot of car seat experts in here my dc can unclip his car seat.and regularly does this. I heard you can buy a lock for them but i cant find one...any ideas
Op rather than forward face if you have headrests on your back seats i cannot reccomend enough an in car dvd player you can.pick them up new from about 40pounds and it will be the best investment you can make for car journeys (besides car seat of course)
I cant believe we didnt buy one sooner. We just stick on his dvds in the car and he will just sit and watch them its amazing.
The key issue in any crash is the difference in forces travelling in each direction. So:
- head on crash, each car doing 7mph -> 140mph force difference (v bad)
- being rear ended when travelling at say 40mph by a car travelling at 60mph -> 20mph difference
- reversing into a wall at say 10mph -> 10mph difference.
In the first instance, rear facing seats can save lives. In the two other instances, rear facing is less of an advantage but the force differences are so much smaller the collision will be less dangerous anyway.
Also, in most cases of a rear end collision, the driver will immediately hit the brakes anyway instinctively - therefore creating a force that would throw a forward facing child's head forward and a rear facing child pressed into their seat.
Personally having read an awful lot of the research, I will keep all my children rear facing as long as is practically possible - certainly at least until 4.
This is all a moot point really as your DS is not heavy enough to face forwards. Is he in an infant carrier or a 0+1 seat? If he's in an infant carrier, is his head sticking over the top of the seat?
My DS didn't like his infant carrier but was fine still rear facing in a group 0+1 seat - it's a more upright, spacious seat so possibly more comfortable than an infant carrier.
Oops ^ that should say in a head on crash, each car doing 70mph
I'm thinking of extended RF for my next DS (currently 18 weeks pregnant) but they all seem massive and bloody expensive (i.e, out of budget range expensive). Can anybody recommend an Isofix (because the others we tried wobbled around and were not safe) ERF seat that will fit comfortably in the back of Punto without the front passenger having to be either 4'2" or less or becoming a contortionist? And at a price we don't need a second mortgage for?
Rear facing is safer because high impact crashes are head on. Someone rear ending you isn't with the same force as you hitting someone head on.
I can't believe we are supposed to be a first world country and educated people still don't know that rear facing is safer and still argue against it! Not a single one of my friends knew about rear facing until I send them a million links. They are a bright, professional people. Probably half now have extended rear facing seats.
It is seen as a mile stone to go forward facing. "So and so is so grown up now they are in their big car seat. I can't believe you have your DS still facing backwards at 16 months."
DC, not DS. Might be but don't know yet!
Perhaps get a bigger rear facing seat that will last till he's 4/5? I have one and my DS loves it!
boydonewrong if he's getting his arms out first to undo himself you can buy a chest strap which should stop him being able to.
sugarandspite how about the scenario where you are stationary on a motorway and someone hits you at 70mph+ ?
Oh thanks pocket thats exactly how he does it the bugger. I only put him in, in t shirts and tighten it.as much as i can and he still.manages it
Well theoretically if you were hit at a standstill by a car doing 70mph then the force difference would be 70mph. So bad but still only half as bad as a head on collision at 70mph. And yes, in that case forward facing would I believe be an advantage.
However the odds of that happening are (to me at least) so vanishingly small that I wouldn't consider it as a factor in making a decision on car seats because as soon as my car broke down / pulled onto the hard shoulder I would get myself and all passengers out of the car to go and sit safely up the bank away from the stranded car.
Isn't this what you would do?
sugarandspite I thought so, this is what worries me because I have had quite a few near misses in this situation.
Yes I would do the same as you but I dont mean when you break down but when the traffic suddendly comes to a standstill abrubtly on the m25 (as it does frequently ime) and the person behind you us either too close or doesn't see the traffic stop and almost ploughs into the back of you. The classic motorway 10 car pile up.
I have my ds rear facing anyway and will continue until he outgrows his erf seat because of the statistics. ..but am just thinking that if I went by my own experience, he would probably be safer in ff! He's never been in the car when I have had rear collisions thankfully but considering they are the only ones I have had, it worries me!
If someone goes into the back of you doing 70, seat direction will (literally) be the last of your worries.
We turned DS around a few months shy of 5 yrs.
You have to make sure you check the seat as sometimes they have bits to move as the child gets heavier/older to make more space.
I still worry like hell as he's still light enough to be rear-facing but I am happy that we ignored everyone else's comments and kept him rear-f for as long as we did.
My daughter is 4 in august and still happily rear facing. It is 5 times safer and after doing some research I wouldn't have it any way. Show him 'rear facing - the way forward' website and if you can afford it maybe look into getting a more comfortable rear facing seat. My dd is in the britax two way elite, I got it posted from the Milton Keynes in car safety centre. They give great advice over phone with no obligation to buy. she has plenty of room for her legs and has never asked to face forward despite facing forward occasionally in child minders car.
I hate the way I this country it is like a race to face your child forward. stick to your guns!
The obvious answer to this would seem to be a new rear-facing car seat, in which his legs won't be squashed, Hedgehog.
To those querying 70mph rear ended crashes, please be aware that any car seat on the market only has to be tested to 30mph. Therefore any and every collision at 70mph would cause a "potential disaster"
Ds has a britax seat its not an infant carrier one but the next stage up, it can be rear facing and forward facing.
I forget the name of it and can't check as its in dh car! I think it is suitable for up to age 4 ?
It is a britax first class plus seat that ds has
It might be suitable til 4 forward facing though. Let us know the name when he gets in and we can help
Ah ok. That one is suitable rear facing til 13k. Then can turn it forward til 18k.
DS was RF until he was 4yrs 2 months but that was only because his sister needed the seat. Otherwise we would have kept him in it until he was too big (Britax TWE). Unfortunately it isn't practical to have two of these in our car as are constantly changing the driver's seat position. He is now in a Kiddy Guardian Pro, which is what we felt was preferable to being in a harnessed seat.
When ds gets to 13 kg rather than turn it forward is there another seat I could get that could stay rear facing ? is there any particular seat that is really good. I'd like to keep him rear facing if possible as he has joint/muscle problems so ideally I want him to be rear facing for as long as I can. His joints dislocate so easily so even a small jolt could hurt him and I'd rather he was as safe as he can be.
We have ds in an extended rear car seat, basically because we could afford it, our car is big enough to accommodate one, and on balance we decided it was overall more safe to travel rear facing.
However I do think some people are a little bit pious about the erf thing, and sending links to all their friends etc. They always reel off the '5 times safer' thing, but what does that even mean, how do you quantify that? And as has been discussed on this thread there are lots of different types of crashes with different risk factors which again makes the 5 times safer thing hard to quantify.
Also on that rear facing website they always compare the stats of child death in car accidents between Sweden and the uk. Well for starters the population of the uk is far higher than Sweden so of course there will be more deaths, plus the fact there are far more cars on the road in the uk and also in Sweden they tend to drive more of the big Volvo type cars.
As I said, we rear face ds still as on balance we think its safer. But I never really mention it to friends and I certainly wouldn't send loads of links to friends about it, parents can make up their own minds. Given the vast number of cars and accidents in the uk, compared to the very small number of child deaths, forward facing in a properly tested car seat that has been correctly installed (from a sensible age, not from 6 months as I have seen people do) is fine.
Yes. Id recommend the Britax Two Way Elite.
Yes you can buy bigger ERF seats. At his current weight he is too small to legally FF anyway regardless of age - the minimum weight is 9kg, there's no guarantee that the straps will contain him FF if he's under that weight.
On the leg thing, it's worth noting that children have different ideas of what is comfortable than adults do. Adults often sit on a chair/sofa etc with their legs bent at the knee, straight in front of them (or crossed) but children almost never sit like this if given a choice, they sit cross-legged on the floor, kneel on the floor, pull their legs up around them on a sofa or armchair. Often they lie down and put their legs in various positions, often higher than their head!
In rear facing seats, children will bend their legs, cross their legs, or stretch them upwards (this feels great when you're just wearing socks too ) it's actually in some cases more comfortable than them dangling off the edge with nothing to rest them on which is the case for most FF seats.
You may also find that a larger RF seat has more leg room and looks more comfortable in general than the First Class, which is really designed for RF babies.
[http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2DVfqFhseo The importance of Rearfacing]
Please watch the clip above, bear with it until the crash test videos.
(Its a lovely video, music is lovely)
We got the klippan kiss 2. It's ERF, ISO fix (but can go in with the belt. Has a removeable infant carrier with wheels and a handle (though it won't attach to a buggy). Suitable from birth to 18kg. It's got a thing (can't think if the word) so there is some foot space. Both my 14 month old and 4 year old are very happy in it. It was £340 ish pounds. Not cheap, but no more than purchasing seperate group 0 and group 1 isofix seats.
Securatot.co.uk is brilliant for advice, run by mums Kirsty and Jayne, their knowledge service and help is great. Highly recommended
Those who use ERF I'm thinking of buying the BeSafe for ds, does it come with isofix base?
My Besafe is seatbelt only but I think there is an isofix option. My daughter rear faced until the age of 4 with no problems. Be aware that isofix is only good until 18kg whereas some belted seats like the Britax two way elite last to 25kg - relevant if your child is high on the centile charts.
I think there's a new Besafe that is fine until 4 years old?
I didn't know that Slow - I thought you could get boosters with isofix?
We have the same one bonzo and really like it. We didn't have it from the infant carrier stage, but DS2 is still in it at 3 and seems comfortable. It seems to be one of the more compact RF seats and we have it in both a VW Polo and BMW 5 series (behind the driver's seat int he BMW).
I agree with slowcomputer that you need to take into account the size of your child when buying, as a lot of the RF isofix seats seem to only cover up to 18kg. This isn't an issue for us as ours were low on the centile charts, but it might not last to 4 for a lot of other children. There are quite a few which go up to 25kg, so it's worth looking around carefully.
You can get boosters with Isofix Bertie, but I think it's got something to do with the testing of the harness seats that they don't go over 18kg.
DD3 is 4y 4m, 16kg & 105cm and rfing in a Britax Two Way Elite. She is on the next from top slots so has plenty of growing room, leg room isn't an issue either as she can prop her legs up or cross them. She has been offered ffing but she has chosen to stay rfing (she rides ffing in her spare TWE or in a HBB in other's cars so she does know what ffing is like).
Also all my DDs have HMS (hypermobility syndrome) so is at greater risk of injury like your son. We had an accident recently (DH looked in his rear view mirror just as somebody stopped suddenly so even though he is an excellent driver, circumstances meant he was at fault) and DD4 didn't cry or even wake up (was in a Britax Baby Safe SHR II), DD3 cried but wasn't hurt at all and DD1 & DD2 cried and had very minor pain where their seat belts tightened up.
DD4 is in a Britax Max Way rfing and loves it - she's 17m, 9.5kg & 76cm. No way in hell is she ffing for a very long time.
We do extended harnessing too as we had to ff DD2 when she was just under 4y due to unpredictable vomiting from gastritis (arthritis meds wrecked her stomach) but she stayed harnessed in her TWE until she was nearly 6y when she outgrew it by height..
Also do HBBing until 150cm as DD1 is 129cm & nearly 8y and DD2 is 122cm & 6y and they ride in HBB (Diono Montereys - love them!!). I even make their friends ride in HBB [evil] - our car, our rules.
Rear facing here til 4 in a proper rearward facing seat,
Show your DH the you tube videos and introduce him to the concept of internal decapitation which can happen to a young child forward facing.
Tbh he is a bit of a dick if he feels his driving skills will protect him from the other idiots on the road.
Thank you for this thread,me and dp had no idea they could still be rear facing once they moved up a car seat! We even went somewhere to choose one and get it fitted and not once was rear facing even mentioned though we should have researched it ourselves.Am going to research and invest in a good rf'ing car seat tomorrow.Can you tell we don't know what the hell we are doing? The oldest is 10!!
When ds gets to 13 kg rather than turn it forward is there another seat I could get that could stay rear facing ? is there any particular seat that is really good. I'd like to keep him rear facing if possible as he has joint/muscle problems so ideally I want him to be rear facing for as long as I can. His joints dislocate so easily so even a small jolt could hurt him and I'd rather he was as safe as he can be
The britax two way elite is ideal if hips may be painful,the bit you sit on has low level sides so legs can comfortably fit without being squished. I also understand that it actually fits in the vast majority of cars (I've had it in the back of a lotus élan and a old style and new style vectra all three cars are notorious for problems with car seats.
We had a rf Besafe isofix until DS wa 4.5 and had to change to ff then because he was tall. He didn't have any problem with leg space. We managed to get it in a small Skoda.
As soon as we turned him round he turned into a back seat driver. There was running commentary from the back on the state of my driving.
The legs against the seat loosening the seatbelt is bollox with a good seat.
We have the axkid minikid. Big seat but compact, not isofix but has floor anchors and doesn't wobble.
I keep reading that the regulations require 15 months & a certain length to turn FF. Do your homework.
Yanbu. Dd was rear facing until 2. She's tiny though (9kg at 2!)
One of the problems is lljkk it is against the law to manufacture a group 0 infant carrier they now have to be 0+ but many people don't know this, I believe ones in circulation are ok to use but you can't buy them anymore and those were only ok up to about 9 months that's where the must ff from 9 months comes from.
In the last 3 weeks I've had a mum tell me her 14 week old ((about 10lbs) baby had outgrown his car seat,turns out she was using a old second hand group 0, I didn't tell her that baby hadn't outgrown it as the harness was frayed and chunks of polystyrene were missing (I'm not a complete cunt I did just give her one of my 0+ ones)
We're going for rear facing till 4, which is around the point that childrens proportions change and the risk of serious head and neck injuries diminishes. Yes they have to cross their legs in erf, but broken legs (in an accident) are not as scary as internal decapitation etc.
Your DH seems to thinking of this as a milestone rather than really weighing it up.
yabu. He probably feels sick. The thought of having to travel backwards in a car omg . Risk is about balance. So many people on mn seem obsessive but in rl I see 4 yos on booster cushions, 3yos under 15kgs on booster seats.
Erm why risk management? ??? Not allowed to have a different view? ???
Genuine Q. We do a lot of long drives. The passenger in the front spends large amounts of time leaning around, handing back drinks or snacks and
separating them when they are nicking each others toys chatting. Can you still do that when they're rear facing?
also 2 year old wriggle out of straps and you wouldn't even know.
Can I have an answer on how long I keep my dd in her infant carrier for? Recaro young profi plus isofix. Am I right in thinking its 13kg or head over top of the seat - whichever comes first?
We have a mirror so we can see ds and he can see us.
in rl I see 4 yos on booster cushions, 3yos under 15kgs on booster seats just because people do it doesn't mean it is the right thing to do. People do terrible things to children every day it doesn't mean we should all do the same.
DS was rearfacing until 4. Never had an issue and he was, obviously, much safer. Plan to do the same with DD. I don't get why anyone wouldn't, tbh. Why choose a less safe option, when you have the choice?
And they see plenty from the windows, we handed snacks etc back no problem, the legs weren't squashed (he's always been in the 90th centiles for height, too) and he never knew anything else, so wasn't fussed.
Makes me wonder if people are militant about sitting ff in trains, too? What's the problem with rear-facing? I don't get it.
Yes. The recaro does alter though and the back sort of pulls up to give an extra couple of inches headroom.
I also find it odd when people I know say erf seats are too expensive yet they own brand new icandys or bugaboos.
A pushchair wont save your childs life.
bonzo77 snap - we've got a Kiss 2 as well. I keep getting people come up to me in the Dr's surgery because of the wheels and handle.
OP have you tried it facing forward? Just maybe your kid wants a view. If not then facing backwards it is. Our daughter was desperate to face forwards early on, oddly enough she hasn't been decapitated or spontaneously exploded either.
No safest rear facing even as an adult! Should be rear facing ideally to 4 if possible.
Up until the start of Jan, dd who is 4 and wearing size 6-7 trousers was rearfacing in our car....... a Clio! She was sitting in a multi-tech which is one of the biggest seats out there. I only stopped rf her because she had physically outgrown the seat. She now has a kidfix, but is a pita in the car and I am seriously considering importing a radian rxt from America.
If anyone is interested in how children sit rearfacing in a car, I have a few pics on my profile.
Ds 7 months old is just about to go in the seat as he a) hates his shrII with a passion and b) his head is now level with the top of it.
At the time of buying the seat it cost £130 new.
All mine have been in rear facing seats as long as possible.
dd1 was just under 4 when we turned her around (combination of getting a bit big for the seat and her getting ehr feet (deliberately) stuck meant we had to change her seat)
dd2 has only just come out of her 2way elite - she was 7 last week!
ds is still rf. he is 19 months, and not a particularly small child, and we only moved him out of his infant seat a couple of months ago. they last far longer than most people think they do. he's now ina BeSafe izikid, and will be for the forseeable future.
they have all been far more comfortable rf than ff. dd2 is already gutted that she is no longer rf, as the novelty of ff has worn off, and she has realised she is not as comfortable now her feet/legs are dangling.
dd1 has only recently started being less fidgety and more comfortable ff, and she is 9 now - finally her feet reach close enough to the floor to not be uncomfortably dangling.
Cake - yes that's exactly right
To the poster who said they see under 15kgs on booster seats - the driver of the car is actually breaking the law (although interested to know how you know the child's weight on sight )
I would support anyone using a carseat which is within the laws although if someone asked my opinion on turning their 9.1kg 6 month old forward facing I'd give them my honest view which is that they are too young.
However a friend's 10 month old, who is over 9kg and absolutely screams constantly when RF? Not judging her, not judging her one bit. I could not cope with driving when my child was so upset. Every family situation is different and while it's true that RF is safer, sometimes the remote possibility of an accident is not the only practicality to consider.
Rauma the OP's DS is 18lbs so not heavy enough to face forwards. Unusual for a 22 month old yes but not unheard of.
Thank you bertie and ken
The thought of having to travel backwards in a car omg
That's only because you're not accustomed to it.
We had a V-Class for DH's job for a while and both DDs travelled rear facing because it was so easy to turn the seats round. Plenty of friends and family had lifts during that time and happily used the seats rear facing too. No complaints of travel sickness.
I have the isi combo solids - ds is 3 and in 91st centile heightwise and has no problems with his legs etc - is is also higher than a ff seat so he has a fab view out of the window.
To be fair, I used to love sitting backwards as a kid in the boot of my dad's land rover but I feel sick if I sit backwards on a train now.
Interesting thread! Can I ask about maxi cosi? We got the family fix base with the pebble group 0+ with the intention of using base for the nxt stage pearl seat. Reading this is giving me second thoughts and wondering if we wasted money on the baSE. DS is 5mths but already 9kg and pebble only goes to 13kgs so we'll likely be moving him at least by a year I'd have though. I should forget the pearl now...go rf all the way? I checked website for maxi cosi and see they have new pearl that can rf or ff due to new regulations. I'd need a new base though. Or am I better to get a proven erf seat. Aso DS is very tall and I am genuinely wondering g oh he'll fit in rf hen toddler never mind 4yrs old....is feet already touch the car back seats!! Sorry for questions just confused reading thins. Only 5mth so not long since I looked at car seat info and feel I missed this info and so much is changing!
goldmandra so, if you were considering changing cars, and a V class was an option, it sounds like it would be a good way to keep DCs rear facing for even longer, because a standard car seat could be used, and yet still be rear facing. Is that right?
(I had to google a V class though!)
Don't forget growth slows down hugely, I would be surprised if your dc outgrows that seat by 12 months
Sorry that was to feck
Yes. The seats can be turned around to rear facing. However it was an expensive vehicle and I hated driving it because it was so big.
Pookamoo technically not because most child car seats are not designed or tested for use on seats which are rear facing. The forces are different in a crash. A few are (Kiddy seats are) but most aren't, and even fewer are suitable for use on sideways travelling seats.
You have to check the individual manuals for each seat but I think maxi cosi seats are only to be used on a vehicle seat which faces the direction of travel, unless it's changed in the last couple of years.
Sorry, to clarify my post, rear facing harness seats only go up to 18kg, don't apply to belted boosters.
I mean rear facing ISOFIX harness seats
lol I travel on trains frequently sitting backwards makes me feel sick. A lot of people who suffer from motion sickness find the same.
I know from discussing it with the parent. Yes it's breaking the law but not enforced. cos if you can't tell the weight from looking neither can a policeman.
Crispy, we've got the Besafe iZi Combo X3 isofix. There is no actual base as the seat is all one (quite heavy/substantial) piece. Also comes with a leg base as well. The seat would be too heavy to try and lift out of the base any way IMHO. DS very comfortable in it, always naps really well. Very high position so sees everything out of the rear window. I am very pleased with it (got it from Securatot and very good service) and plan to keep him ERF as long as I can.
I would rather broken legs than a snapped spinal chord.. christ i would sit rear facing if I could. i don't understand the rush to face them forwards when their chances of living are better in a crash than rear facing.
Cos they is so big and growd up!
gamerchick, agreed. I do wonder if people realise that's the main risk.
Funnily enough I don't have any travel sickness from rearfacing seats in trains, but I get it (always have) from sitting in the back of cars. I spent most of my childhood car trips feeling nauseated. It's pretty grim, agreed. But the reality is that even if dd gets car-sick both my kids will rearface and get on with it, just as I had to, because a bit of nausea is better than a severed spinal cord.
Oridunda- that's the one I was looking at buying, thank you!
Sorry, to clarify my post, rear facing harness seats only go up to 18kg, don't apply to belted boosters
I have c&p'd this from the in car safer centre it sounds like its harness is ok rf until 25kg not 18
The Britax 2-Way Elite is approved from 9-25kg both rearward and forward facing with the integral 5-point safety harness. It is a versatile seat that can be used rearward facing to 25kg with 2-point or 3-point seat belt. It can be used forward facing to 18kg with 2-point or 3-point seat belt and forward facing from 18-25kg with 3-point seat belt only. When this seat is fitted rear facing, tether straps (supplied) must be used.
Out of interest and not wanting to derail but it is on topic, did some new regs come in last year that say you cannot use a ff isofix seat for a child younger than 15 months?
Would the two way elite be suitable for a 4 year old weighing 18 kg?
This has made me rethink dds car seat too. Spoke to dh and he said she doesn't need one but I'm wondering if its a good idea.
NeedsAsockamnesty, it's not that you can't, it's that it is safer. Under the age of 15 months, a childs neck/back are still unstable enough to be under serious strain/damage during impact. Extensive research has proved this to be true. So in order to preserve life, we are now keeping children rear facing until a minimum of 15 months. Extended rear facing is the preferred option though, for as long as humanly possible.
There are a few ff car seats on the market, which offer a front impact shield. These, on impact, allow the childs body to natually 'roll' so the wipelash action is minimised, and there internal organs are protected. Where as, in a ff 5 point harness, the childs body is restrained. Causing the neck to 'wipe' causing more damage. The 5 point harness can also cause damage to organs. However, these particular seats don't hold up so well in a car which rolls.
The new maxi cosi twoway pearl keeps the child rear facing until around 4 years old, but the one problem is that they have made it impossible to use it with the current family fix base. Which personally I think is wrong. But, the base doesn't have a way of rotating the seat, unlike the Cybex Sirona.
There also seems to be this myth that Isofix is safer. It isn't, it's just error free. If a car seat is properly fitted in the first place, then there's no real need for isofix.
Does anyone have two rear facing seats in a ford focus? We have one TWE but can't have two as we are constantly changing the drivers seat leg room (DP and I are a foot different in height!) plus my partner is 6'3" so not sure what seat I could put behind him, we don't have isofix.
DD is now in the TWE, and DS who is 4.3yrs is now just FF. Would like to get another RF if possible but not sure how to work it.
How old is Dd? To be honest, I would be thinking about keeping the youngest in the TWE, and your 4 year old in a good ff seat with decent side impact protection.
Although it's very easy to visualise and awful when it happens, almost no children are killed as passengers in cars. In 2012 (when for what it's worth almost all were forward facing) 4 of the 473 deaths of children aged 1-4 were as passengers in car accidents.
The base risk that these expensive seats are (possibly) reducing is very low in the first place. My opinion is that it's not worth making my child uncomfortable.
As many children under 4 due in the bath as die in cars. Perhaps we should all buy £400 bath seats.
That'd be die in the bath. Sorry
4 children dying, are 4 children too many
theonlyoneIknow we have a ford focus, a DD aged 4 in a TWE (she won't hit the weight limit for ages), DH is 6'6" and we know that if we ever manage another child we would have to change the car!
Well having looked into this the research seem very biased and nit whole conclusive imo and at over £300 for a erf seat I cam safely say I won't be using one!
The risks are minimal imo and I do very little motorway driving these days. Plus they are far too big to fit in my car when I also have 2 other kids in the back, one of whom still requires a booster seat. The eldest whinges already with an infant seat that he is squashed
I thought the isafe European regulations came into force in July 13 and that they actually state that you can't put a under 15 month in a ff isofix seat but they don't apply to existing belt fitted seats?
At least that's what the road safety officer at the car seat testing day told me
The britax two way elite is £220 you can fit 2 in the back of a vectra with another seat and it allows more space than most ff
I'd be looking for KSI stats - killed or seriously injured.
I admit, the regulations seem to be less than black and white. Especially when companies are still manufacturing ff seats for babies of 9 months+
Ultimately, as a parent, its up to us to make an informed decision. But I always stress to parents to do their research, read the reviews and watch the crash videos.
Where does a 4 year olds legs go if they are backwards facing?? Must be really uncomfortable for long journeys surely?
Don't get me started on booster seats either! My lanky 8 year old just does not fit into a high back booster. She even looks too big on just the booster cushion. What age can they safely just sit on the seat.
Their legs hang down, and tbh when you way up leg or head injurys, I know which I'd prefer. One is definitely easier to recover from.
Bloody phone posted too early.....unless they exceed the max height limit
Red my dds are loosely crossed, or dangling over the sides, or stretched up the back of the seat they are facing.
She recently did two fove hour journeys and not a grumble out of her.
Volvo do an own brand rear facing seat suitable to 25kg (it's non isofix). You can use it in other cars too - contact your local Volvo dealer for information.
We are debating whether to get another ERF as the Besafe only goes to 18kg and DD is approaching 17kg weight (aged 4). Torn between getting the latest Besafe or the Volvo one, or switching her ff to the Cybex, which has scored highest in the European forward facing seats.
We do 25,000 miles a year, so we have seen lots of accidents (mostly cars driving forward into things) - I guess this makes us more nervous.
Which cybex are you looking at?
Needs the conversation upthread was referring to isofix limits rather than RF or harness limits. I think it got a bit confused.
New regs have come in for manufacturers, meaning that car companies and car seat companies can begin making and testing seats and cars compatible with new i-size regulations, which, yes, involve RF until 15 months.
However I'm not sure how it's going to work because it uses a new system similar to isofix, ie, you need anchor points in your car. If the cars have only been started to be made since last year then it seems unlikely that all parents will have an i-size compatible car by 2018 which is when I read that they are bringing the new standards in as law. But, it's possible I've misunderstood something somewhere.
The current regulation is still the ECE R 44-03 as introduced in 2005.
Ah OK, I did misunderstand - they use isofix, but the two will run side by side (possibly only until 2018) because cars have been manufactured with isofix since 2002, so it's likely that by 2018 the majority of parents will own cars with isofix fittings.
I was looking at the Cybex Solution X2-fix, which is an isofix and has won quite a few awards for safety.
Anyone a member of which to access their best buys? Iknow they are predominantly FF but would be useful for us whose DC have outgrown RF?
theonlyoneiknow I don't have Which, but the Cybex is flagged as a "Which Best Buy" on several websites, and the blurb said it came out top in the Which tests.
Wow, I can't believe so many people use rear facing car seats for their older children. I have honestly never seen a child older than 8-9 months in a rear facing car seat. I know my two both went into the forward facing seats when they were 9 months old, I never even thought of keeping them the other way (and didn't know you could get car seats for older children this way)
I can see the reasoning behind it but like someone else said, I can 't concentrate when there 's screaming/crying coming from the back of the car so it made sense to have us all facing the same way and without the crying
and with easy distance of passing food and toys to the back of the car
Thanks world we actually have the kiddy guardian pro in our campervan and like it - looks like the Cybex are the same idea but a different make. There definitely seems to be a for and against camp with regards to impact shields vs harnesses though!
As I understood it, the shield is only used once the child is over the age of 4 anyway, and hopefully most children would be in their other rear-facing seat until that age. When we switch (unless another seat scores higher in testing) we will be using it with the seatbelt fitting.
Haroldplays, I'm so glad you wrote that because I was beginning to think I was the only one who had never seen a older child rear facing. I actually looked at my 2 year old in his forward facing car seat and thought there is no way he'd sit rear facing.....where would his legs go for starters.
How old are your DC Harold? I don't know anyone who has done extended rear facing, but I also don't know anyone personally (children under 4) who has turned their baby around as early as 8-9 months. All infant seats have had to last til 13kg for the last few years so most people seem to keep their babies rear-facing until 12-18 months depending on size. I think the safety aspect for babies is becoming much more well known.
I didnt know anything about ERF until Mumsnet. The information really isnt readily avaliable.
Harold my 2.2yo is in 3yo clothes and she fits nice and comfy in the erf seat. Ill try and tale a photo next time we are in the car.
I also find it easier to pass stuff to her as her head is right behind the passenger seat, so I just lift my arm and put it behind the passenger seat.
Impact shields are used till 18kg then seatbelt only
Seatbelt only with the seat I mean, just take impact shield away. If it is a group 123 seat likw the kiddy guardian pro
I think the safety information available on car seats is poor, muddled and most is obviously biased.
DS is huge, and at 2 years 9 months has outgrown the 'up to 4 years' seats (18kg limit!). You can't get a car seat with a harness over 18kg so he has to go in a forward facing seat with only an adult belt. The only seats I could find on sale in the UK with a harness above 18kg are either a specially made SEN one (£350ish!) or a ERF seat which you can only buy from one place in Milton Keynes. I am heavily pregnant and struggle to drive DS to pre-school let alone drive to Milton Keynes.
Can anyone tell me why harnesses are only tested to 18kg? DS is huge but not massively so - above 95th centile for weight. That still means there is another two or three children per hundred whose parents also face this problem. Why do small children get to be safer??
Anyway, the only way to keep sane about this is to look at it from the 'managing risks' angle - we don't drive much, not a lot of motorway driving and have a safe modern car. Not a lot more I can do. I think we will get an ERF for DS2, but I expect to face the same problem with him having to go FF before he is 3 because he is even bigger than his brother.
You can order online from the milton keynes place if you want
At under three he absoloutley should NOT be secured with an adult seatbelt only.
A britax TWE can keep them harnessed to 25kgs
And can be ordered online and easily self fitted.
A child who is too small to use an adult seatbelt, will go straight through the windscreen
Worldgonecrazy - when we bought our Volvo a couple of years ago, their 'branded' seat was actually a britax TWE - but about £100 more expensive. I don't know if it's changed since, but if that's a seat you're interested in then I would see if the Britax branded one is cheaper and save yourselves a few £££
A child who is too small to use an adult seatbelt, will go straight through the windscreen
An 18kg child is presumably not too small for an adult seatbelt though? They can use HBB from 15kg.
They also can travel without a carseat in a taxi. Doesnt mean they should.
An under three year old needs a proper harness.
What difference does age make to safety? That's a genuine question by the way - why is an 18kg 2yo not safe in a seatbelt but a similar sized 3 yo is?
Ill be rear facing dd til 4, so I dont think a three year old should be in a hbb either.
I see, so the problem as far as you see it is that the child is forward facing rather than the seat belt and age being a problem?
No. The problem is a small child is being restrained only by an adult seatbelt. Rear or forward (though mypreference is rearward), imo a full harness is needed. The seat dd has will keep her in a full harness til 25kg. It so happens that it is a rear facing carseat.
The poster who is securing her toddler with an adult belt imo should purchase a seat that uses a safer restraint. It is my opinion that an adult seatbelt is not safe enough to secure a small child.
An 18kg child is hardly small though, that's what I don't understand about your objection.
Why is an adult seatbelt not safe enough at 18kg? Is it safe enough for an 18kg 4 yo but not a younger child? Or do you believe all children should be in that specific seat that is harnessed until 25kg?
I don't think a 2 year old should be secured using just an adult seatbelt. regardless of weight. a 2 year old cannot comprehend the safety implications of sitting straight and sitting still. and their behaviour is too unpredicatble, and it is too easy to shift out of an adult seatbelt by leaning over, or even undo the seatbelt (I know there are various devices to help with this, I have used most of them)
Surely that depends on the individual child? Mine has never tried to undo a seatbelt.
Not in that specific seat, no, but should be harnessed as absoloutley long as possible.
It is possible to harness til 25kg (in more than the one seat I own). Therefore an adult seatbelt is not the last resort.
As the pp said too, a five point harness will protect a younger child against themselves too.
OK, so not a specific known safety concern with using a seatbelt for children over 18kg? I was wondering if there was something I hadn't read about.
The volvo own brand seat is now a britax multi-tech. There is a picture of one on my profile. However, when you come to buy it, watch out as they should only be charging you 5% vat and not 20% vat as it is a children's product
For those of you who are wondering where legs go when rf, pics also on my profile of dd rf. She never said anything about her legs being uncomfortable rf either.
vj32 there are lots of very good places to buy erf seats, even mothercare stock them, and kiddicare. For more choice look at www.securatot.co.uk Mums Kirsty and Jayne are a wealth of information and run a fab company. Ive broken my seat twice, by overleaning on it, and both times they have sent a courier to collect my seat and had it back repaired within a week.
Www.rearfacing.co.uk has a list of stockists.
Prof Lynne Bilston has done research into adult belts used on 2-5 year olds (and generally children under 150cms) with the outcome that adult seatbelts have, can and most likely will cause damage to a childs abdomen. Sometimes fatally.
She argues that children up to the age of seven should be restrained using a five point harness.
In general 2 year olds are not able to sit safely using an adult seatbelt. Which is why child seats exist.
I do agree that there should be a wider range of seats which are harnessed to 25 kg. dd1 was a 98th centile child and it does make life tricky. Dd2 was the opposite hence rf til almost 7. She's only just hit 18kg recently!
onetwo i have two kids in besafe combis in the back, my oldest outgrew his, but they never had problems with their legs either, there is ample space, my 3.5 y old is very comfy still.
Loving all the educated people on this thread.
Rearfacing here too. I don't give a damn what other people!e think. My child will be in safest mode of travel til at least 4.
BeSafe have released a rearfacing seat up to 25kg called the Besafe Izi Plus Here
A HBB is a child seat - not sure why a child would be less able to sit safely in one with a seat belt than with a harness.
Honestly, I understand the concern about babies/small toddlers being turned forward facing too soon, but when people express such horror at an 18kg child sitting in a car seat appropriate for their size it makes them look a bit fanatical.
How much of a risk is there, really, of an 18kg child in a HBB being flung straight through the windscreen?
It's not the thought of an 18kg child sittingn in a hbb that bothers me. It's the thought if an 18kg toddler
I'm very gal your toddler hasn't yet fiddled with the seatbelt. Or had a tantrum whole sitting in their hbb. But that doesn't mean it won't ever happen. A 2 year old is not mature enough to sit in a hbb, imo. And I had a very mature and sensible 2 year old, so not just coming at this from a position of curious nightmare toddler.
Ensuring safety Ina car is not fanatical.
Presumably the mother who is putting her 2.8 year old in a HBB is better placed to decide if he's capable of sitting safely
The classes of child seat exist for a reason, you know
Or do you think hey decided on the different styles and types of restraint on a whim?
I know how tricky it can be when you have a child at the top end of the weight ranges, a they aren't actually old enough to move up a seat but are too heavy to stay in their curret seat. There should definitely be more seats which stay harness to 25kg. There are more on the market now, and hopefully his situation will improve.
The classes of seat and restraint are based on size/weight - the age ranges stated are approximate.
Apart from the TWE can someone let me know which seats stay harnessed up to 25kgs? Doesn't necessarily have to be RF, DS was in his TWE until over aged four but his Sister needs his now and I can't get two RF seats on our car
Thescience have a read about internal decapitation. The reasons an 18kg four year old is okay in a HBB is their head to body proportion. Unlike a toddler whos head will be proportionally bigger than the rest of their body.
What difference does a seatbelt vs. harness make to internal decapitation?
Yes, I also thought the internal decapitation thugs was to do with direction of travel rather than type of harness.
Why is an adult seatbelt not safe enough at 18kg? Is it safe enough for an 18kg 4 yo but not a younger child?
I was answering this ^
As for why not use an adult seat belt on a young child - it's already been said up thread. Children don't sit really still, in the safest possible position in their seats. The amount of children who like to put the seatbelt under their armpits when they think no one is looking...
However I get the feeling that some people on this thread are no really interested in anything but a point scoring argument, rather than making sure people are traveling safely.
Sorry, I'm not sure I understand the link between sitting safely in the seat and internal decapitation? Like Yoni I also thought that was about direction of travel.
Yep, I'm with you on the point scoring...
research says that they really should stay rear facing at that age, so I'd stick to that.
Nope it's not point scoring, it's just that no one has really been able to give a valid reason (apart from maturity) why an 18kg 2.9 year old cannot go in a high backed booster seat.
I am all for rear facing, ds is in erf, but internal decaptiation is due to the direction of travel, not the type of seat.
Its to do with bone maturity. Rearfacing toddlers had a good post of their Facebook page in last few days about it.
Tbf I dont really care if you think this is "point scoring". Rear facing is the safest way for a child to travel. Putting a two year old in a hbb with an adult seatbelt securing them is the least safe, bar actually no child seat at all.
There are seats out there that safely secure small children way past 18kg. It is a fact that this is safer.
This also covers using a five point harness
Err I'm not sure if that was aimed at me Mynameis ? I'm all for RF
I read the "point scoring" thing as if it was a dig from the "you can put a two year old in a hbb and adult belt" side of the argument.
The problem with parents deciding when a child has outgrown a seat is a huge % of them are wrong!
That's the main reason for the phase in of the new regs
yeah because some parents are stupid.. I mean really stupid that it's scary. needs
Thank you crashbangboom for that link, interesting about the pelvis width. And a lot more informative than the '*in my opinion* 2 year olds just shouldnt be in a high backed booster/its to do with internal decapitation' posts that came before.
The problem is, that parents just think that if their child is in a seat then they are safe.
It has everything to do with their height, there weight, there age and stage of physical development. I mean, would you fix a two month old in with just a seatbelt? No. Why? Because all of the above tell us they wouldn't be safe. This is no different for a child of 1,2,3 or 4 years old. We just need to educate more. Safety in cars is paramount. You cannot judge the actions of other cars around you. So by doing everything you can to physically protect tiny passengers, the better an outcome can be.
This has been a fascinating discussion, lots to think about. It does seem an extremely expensive way to slightly lower risk though. Do you think we'd save more lives just encouraging people to drive less often?
My ds is a similar age and weight to yours and is still rear facing, it is so much safer, especially so for children who are small for their age due to the risks of internal decapitation in an accident. He is happy rear facing but probably would be happier forward facing but that's not a good enough reason for me to turn him. I read a good article once from 'the car seat lady' (FB) who explained that sometimes adults see children's legs as being squashed or uncomfortable rf just because the adults would not sit like that, whereas on reality the children were happy with how their legs were and often sit on the sofa etc with their legs squashed up. Not saying this is the case with your ds but maybe something to consider. IMO your ds is too small/ light to be forward facing x
When you're talking about lowering a risk of my child surviving or not, I know which I'd prefer.
But do you also lower that risk by not using your car when there is any other way to manage? Anyone how drives to the supermarket instead of getting shopping delivered for example?
I'm not having a go honestly or telling people not to rf their kids, I just think it's odd that we obsess about safely driving children when the obvious risk reduction is not to drive at all.
But how many families could actually not ever drive?
I can't fit two RF seats in our car so need to have one FF, he is 14kgs. But I keep reading conflicting advice on harness v impact shield. I do have a kiddy guardian pro which is an impact shield but have read they van be really dangerous to their internal organs in an accident, but then on another report read that harnesses can be dangerous due to the spinal cord damage in an accident.
Why do they make it so hard for us to make the right choice.
Sorry to hijack OP
theonlyone I think by the time they are 14kgs (approaching 3?) it becomes less important that they are forward facing so if you cannot fit 2 erf seats then an erf for your youngest is still good! I have also heard different things about harnesses vs the impact cushions. I think the problem is there are many different types of crashes and depending on the crash will affect the effectiveness of the different types of seats which makes the risk factor much more difficult to quantify.
DS is actually 4.3yrs! Just very skinny!
Yip, failing two ERF seats DD in the TWE. We have a kiddy guardian pro in the camper van so I am just swithering about the best FF seat for the focus if can't RF. According to Which? Impact shields are better than harnesses but have read conflicting info. Arghhh
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.