Advanced search

To keep ds in a rear facing seat?

(227 Posts)
Edenviolet Tue 25-Feb-14 09:09:35

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.


Edendance Tue 25-Feb-14 09:44:00

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.

ReadyToPopAndFresh Tue 25-Feb-14 09:44:12

Think some people see it as a "Milestone" like walking and weaning burren.. confused 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

ReadyToPopAndFresh Tue 25-Feb-14 09:45:15

mcphreezing who would you recommend for getting decent seat advice?

ikeaismylocal Tue 25-Feb-14 10:34:23

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.

ikeaismylocal Tue 25-Feb-14 10:36:37

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.

Edenviolet Tue 25-Feb-14 10:37:59

DVD player a good idea

Velma67 Tue 25-Feb-14 10:43:55

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.

MyNameIsKenAdams Tue 25-Feb-14 10:48:15

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.

MyNameIsKenAdams Tue 25-Feb-14 10:49:33

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.

Louiseville Tue 25-Feb-14 10:49:36

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.

MoreSnowPlease Tue 25-Feb-14 11:02:22

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?

ElaClaw Tue 25-Feb-14 11:14:20

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?

blueberryboybait Tue 25-Feb-14 11:18:39

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.

PocketFluff Tue 25-Feb-14 11:27:28

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 for more information.

mymiraclebubba Tue 25-Feb-14 11:31:47

Ela that maybe why I was told ff was safer as my car doesn't have isofix

MoreSnowPlease Tue 25-Feb-14 11:31:56

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.

HappyAsASandboy Tue 25-Feb-14 11:39:08

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?

NewJobNewLife Tue 25-Feb-14 11:41:40

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.

NewJobNewLife Tue 25-Feb-14 11:44:50

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.

sugarandspite Tue 25-Feb-14 11:45:05

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

boydonewrongagain Tue 25-Feb-14 11:50:22

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.

sugarandspite Tue 25-Feb-14 11:51:28

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.

HamAlive Tue 25-Feb-14 11:52:53

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.

sugarandspite Tue 25-Feb-14 11:52:56

Oops ^ that should say in a head on crash, each car doing 70mph

natwebb79 Tue 25-Feb-14 11:53:11

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?

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