To ask MIL not to use their car seat?

So much misinformation on this thread!

YANBU.

Yes forward facing is legal, but it isn't safe.

A rear facing cat seat has statistically better outcomes in crashed in ALL directions, including crashes from the rear.

You don't need a big car - I had 3 rear facing in a honda jazz.

My kids have complained far more about being uncomfortable when forward facing than they ever did rear facing.

When kids sit on the floor, on chairs, on the sofa, they choose to bend their legs, a child's natural sitting position is froggy style, which is much easier in a rear facing seat.

In terms of cars needing to be huge - they really don't- I have two rear facing in a Peugeot 508 2016 model - much smaller than all the suburby wagons you see around the place

I was pretty chilled with mine watching more telly and having late nights, more snacks with PIL.

i would never compromise on their safety.

From looking at the thread and the photos you (a) need to have a massive car (b) hope your child has short legs or will be comfortable with legs bent at the knee at quite a high angle for long periods and (c) hope no one in the front has long legs as their seats will need to be quite far forward. As I am a short person I might be able to get that to work in my fairly big car but not the little one I had when the kids were little.

I'd just buy her one - just say some research popped up in your newsfeed (link it) and you've replaced your car seat and thought she would also want one, so saved her the hassle and ordered one direct to her.

Just because it’s legal to forward face at younger ages does mean it’s safe. Extended rear facing is 5 times safer than forward facing. My 4 year old still rear-facing and we’re hoping to get at least another year out of his seat (Axkid Minikid 2). We didn’t have this issue with out grandparents, my mum was happy to buy the same car seat as us once I explained about the safety aspects and the very very rare occasions MIL has him in the car she uses our seat.

Could she return the seat she’s got and buy a cheaper rear-facing one. Joie Everystage is a cheaper option, particularly for a lower centile child (we had it in my husbands van but DS outgrew it as he turned 4 because of his height).

Ok, so this is what I was going to ask, how do you physically get a 4, 5, 6 year old in a rear facing seat? My six year old is enormous. He would have to fold himself in half to get in a rear facing seat. Where do the kids’ legs go?

My 6 year old (in march) is still rearfacing. I find it safe and she finds it more comfortable - in rear facing seat she can cross her legs, in forward facing her legs just dangle. Unfortunately she has just a few cm to go before the height limit for the axkid now so will have to forward face soon. Her baby brother will then inherit the axkid as its still within date (outgrew her 360 at 18kg then into axkid)

She has to use a high back booster if grandad runs her down the road in his car, I hate it and she doesn't find it comfortable because of the dangle legs and adult seat belt. We don't allow those journeys unless short and necessary - just can't transfer seat between car each time because it tethers to the bars

Encourage a better seat if you can or wait until a bit older before putting them in grandmother's car, I could never forward face an 18 month old personally

YANBU my DD is 20 months and would not be going in a FF car seat. My MIL also bought a car seat but thankfully she got in touch first to ask which one she should get as she recognised she was a bit out of the loop with it all, and knows we have a FF seat.

As your MIL has already bought a seat I think I would offer to buy her another one rather than her being out of pocket again.

That is older kids (4-10) with a properly positioned seatbelt.

Reduction in what? (Genuine question, not being arsey.)

I'm too lazy to do a lit review but DH did try when ours were little. He never found it.

If it wasn't safe for children to ff then it would be illegal to sell car seats that do so.

This simply isn't true - there are lots of items available to buy that aren't safe - cigarettes, energy drinks, rawhide chews for dogs - just because something is legal doesn't mean it's safe.

I don't have kids and RF wasn't really a thing when I was a child so I have no skin in the game either way.

I found 77% reduction when FF as opposed to unrestrained.

One thing I'd like to note - a bunch of comments seem to suggest you are safer if it's short and closer to home journeys, are people not more likely to crash in these types of journey?

Yes, more likely to crash but more likely to be low speed, low impact - not fun but the child would likely be fine in any car seat. It's in high speed crashes with a very high risk of death and serious injuries for everyone in the car that the marginal benefits of RFing and higher rated seats come into play.

Can anyone link to any specific data on the relative safety please? I have found claims that RF is 90% safer than no restraint. Claims that the load on a neck is 5x greater FF compared to RF, from a manufacturer of RF car seats, so not unbiased.

But not how the reduced load specifically translates to risk of injury. To do that, you need to understand the risk of injury in the first place. A 90% reduction of what the rate of injury is without restraint. I am not arguing that we should go back to the 1970s, rather trying to fully evaluate how solid the evidence set is.

I haven't found the injury reduction from no restraint vs FF. So what is the actual delta between RF and FF?

do you know what seat they bought? And did they buy it new?
I think you could approach it in a few different ways depending on the above

Mine are 10 and 15 now. We bought the best car seats cos we cared about safety. But they were forward facing. So I find myself rolling my eyes about your insistence they're only safe in backwards facing - can't help it - but equally I'm horrified at myself having the same reaction as my parents did when I explained the baby had to be fastened in every single time.
So tread carefully and delicately is what I'm saying. You have to acknowledge what a lovely thing it was she did. You're going to hurt her feelings a little. Be sure to put some blame on yourself. It's hard being a parent - you want to be sure you can never blame yourself if they're in a crash and you hadn't done all the safest things that could have been done. And make it really clear it's other drivers that keep you awake at night not her driving.

Our son was in the 96th percentile for height, he rear faced until he was six (everyone rear faces until four where we live, but most rear face for longer).

In testing, rear facing seats are safer (meaning less resulting severe injury and death). We use a RF for our 20month old.

You do need to think a bit about the safety in practice versus in testing - my parents (70s) really struggle to get little one in our rear facing in our car (Britax Max Safe Pro) because of the space to maneuver being much reduced. I wouldn't want them to use it without us there as I worry she wouldn't be in the correct position/have the straps done up tight enough. She still fits their rotating car seat to RF but once she doesn't we will need to have a think about what to replace it with. As others have said, some little ones undo straps - that happening and you not noticing is riskier than FF.

I did have to have an awkward conversation with my MIL about car seats and bought her an alternative and she took it really well. I started by saying I know she would never knowingly risk our little one.

One thing I'd like to note - a bunch of comments seem to suggest you are safer if it's short and closer to home journeys, are people not more likely to crash in these types of journey?

It is less safe - rear facing reduces the risk of a very rare event to a very very rare event. That doesn't make FF unsafe and at least one poster has said @Babyybabyyy was doing something unsafe when she isn't.

There are lots of reasons people FF:

• space in the car (my DH couldn't move the driver's seat far enough back to drive with a rear facing 360 behind him - Astra, normal car)
• travel sickness (had this one, awful)
• screaming child (even worse than the sickness and dangerous too as you just can't concentrate on the road)
• ERF seats are more expensive

Etc etc etc.

Like I said upthread, OP is perfectly reasonable to want her 18mo to rear face (that's what I wanted for mine at that age too!), but there's no need to vilify parents who make a different choice. No one's sending their children to play on the hard shoulder.

This was my eldest when he was 6.5 (he was FF by then but still fitted into his brother's seat RF) - there's plenty of room for his legs and the seat could be installed with more leg room if needed. My youngest is 6 and also FF as outgrew this seat by weight, he often asks to sit RF again as his legs dangle down and hurt on long journeys.

The majority of my friends and colleagues RF until 4 (all but one of a group of 25 of us in a baby chat did) but I guess we are self selecting as mainly health professionals who understand the benefit.

Why is it a 'dick move' to insist that your own child isn't going in a car seat that isn't rear facing? It seems nobody asked the grandparents to buy the seat. If you're not happy with the situation, you don't have to allow them to take your DC in a car at all, and you don't need to apologise for it.

I used FF seats with mine but that was 15 years ago. Now I'd use RF and not simply assume that it would be fine. Surely you use the best information available to date.

Of course it is. If it wasn't safe for children to ff then it would be illegal to sell car seats that do so. It is safER to rear face, that doesn't make it unsafe to forward face.

Absolutely! I think it's very different when its hypothetical/something read by goggling, to when you have actually seen it.
A 4 year old in a high back booster in a front seat with her feet resting on the dash board will forever stay with me - internal decapitation so paralysed, will need a trache vent for life and both legs had to be fully amputated as despite best efforts to exfix they were so badly damaged would never heal, and she would never be able to walk again anyway. My oldest was 4 at that time, and the thought of this child never leaves me, some patients just stay with you don't they.