To be shocked people are actually rear-facing their primary age kids

My 19 month old will be rear facing until she outgrows her current car seat when she's either 125cm or 36kg. She is a tall girl but I'm hoping she gets as long as possible before we have to turn her round. This is the safest way for her to travel. Of course I hope she stays comfortable but even if she finds it uncomfortable for her legs, it would be a hell of a lot worse if we FF her too early and then crash.

As for looking at a seat 🙄 she loves looking out the back windows and in her car seat mirror.

Why is it shocking for school age children to be RF?

I'm honestly more shocked at the amount of babies I see on the nursery drop off that are forward facing and the lack of education on the benefits of extended rear facing. My son started school rear facing and only went into a high backed booster at 6 as he'd outgrown his ERF seat. He's very long legged and never had any complaints from him about being squashed - look at the weird and wonderful positions they sit on the sofa they're very flexible!

My eldest is 24, all mine were rear facing until at least 2.5yrs, or older depending height. I would have liked to have had them rear facing longer, but at the time it wasn't an option. No one we knew did the same. We had a Volvo seat and an Italian one (not sure of the brand, but not well known).
Also kept the kids in high back boosters until the end of primary.

Also ERF is becoming a lot more common. Among our circle of friends, most have RF’d their kids to 4 and some are still RFing beyond. Car seat safety was talked about a lot in my antenatal group. I think there’s an element of demographics about it though.

DD2 will probably still be RFing when she starts school. We have a 36kg RF seat. It took ages for DD1 to be happy FF when we turned her at 4 (she had outgrown the 25kg seat as she’s a big kid) as her feet were dangling.

IMO it’s a very small thing that can potentially have very big consequences so it is worth doing.

I rear faced until 5.5 and nearly 5. I’d be glad to see children rear facing at primary school. I’m looking forward to the time that people are more accepting of the safest way to carry small children. I’m shocked at the amount of children arriving to school with no car seats or backless boosters when they don’t meet the required height/weight for them.

I turned them at 2 when they started getting carsick. Less risk of us getting hit as there was of them vomiting and choking.

I'd be impressed. We rear faced til almost 4 years - when my child outgrew that seat. I only came across one other family doing the same - a neighbour with a child the same age as ours. I don't think it's a coincidence that we both work in child public health/medicine. We had also both chosen the exact same car seat - the safest available at the time (I'd read the safety reports). Car seats are definitely not all equal in how they perform in different types of collisions, even within a brand. There's no doubt rear facing is safest. There are increasing numbers of extended rear facing seats on the market - I'd probably buy one of those if I was buying now. But we all have different attitudes to risk.

I think one would just assume they’d be squished in terms of legs if you’ve only ever seen a baby in a rear facing car seat. I’m just googling and there is a picture of an older child having to fold their legs in what, to a stiff adult, would seem uncomfortable but children are more flexible of course.

Very odd. There are many shocking things in the world but keeping a child in their rear facing car seat until they outgrow it isn't one of them. It's just common sense. Why would anyone purchase a new car seat if their child is safe and happy in their current one?

Just because you, and lots like you, made a different choice, doesn't make this one "shocking".

Your options for the next stage sear are either:
A high back booster that is forward facing and uses the car’s seatbelt to restrain him, this will last until he outgrows the carseat at either age 12 or 135cm
OR
An extended rear facing harnessed seat that will last until approx age 6, at which point you then buy the booster

So you rearfaced your DD until age 4

But think it's shocking someone else is rearfacing their 4yo?

Bizarre.

Personally we RFed as long as we could with DC2 but I think it started to look uncomfortable by the time DC was 5.5 and moved him at 6. We had very good medical reasons to want to, beyond the everyday. You don't know what's going on for other people.

If you’d read my post, I was responding to a poster who was referring to a time when car seats were not used at all.

When it comes to the type of car seat, every parent is free to choose within the legal requirements. But it’s bonkers to be “shocked” that some parents choose to use what are [advertised as, if you must] the safest products on the market in this context.

Whats your childs height and weight?

I’m confused, my four year old has just about outgrown their car seat and from what I have read online they are now to go in a car seat with a seat belt rather than straps, have I got this totally wrong? As there is no way it would work rear facing!

When you look at accident stats, the overwhelming majority of children who are killed or seriously injured in car accidents are not restrained at all. Close analysis shows that it may appear that the % of deaths of restrained children has increased over the past 50 years, this is down to the fact that the majority of children are now restrained. The actual number of deaths has steadily declined and is now at a plateau.
It stands to reason that a passenger who is appropriately restrained has less likelihood of being injured in the event of a crash. But there are many other factors at play not least the car that is being driven, the state of the driver, the road conditions and the speed it’s being driven at.
Statistics can be manipulated to tell us what the manufacturers want to tell us - rear facing car seats for older children is a case in point. You’d be hard put to find statistics on the likelihood of a rear facing 5 year old being killed in a car crash compared with a forward facing 5 year old. You’d need to find all the 5 year olds who have been killed, they’d all have to be the same size child, in the same car, same road conditions, same speed etc. only then can a direct correlation be made. The rest is just speculation - albeit based on previous knowledge.
When we live in a society whereby the motor industry relied on car safety data based on male test dummies only, it’s important to not blindly believe everything that’s being claimed. Especially when it’s claimed by child car seat manufacturers.

of course there are reasons like car sickness that make parents decide not to rear face but there’s no escaping the fact that It’s still safer to have them rear facing - whether they’re prone to sickness or not - you obviously have to make that call yourself as to whether you want to take that risk. You should watch some crash test videos and read some of the research available and you will perhaps understand better why so many opt for rear facing for as long as possible.

It’s Unbelievable that people get so upset about this topic when it’s just a fact that it’s safer - why would you argue the point. It’s like saying I prefer my kids not to wear seatbelts because they cry when they wear them!
Extended rear-facing travel significantly reduces the risk of death or serious injury - fact.

I knew a baby that was turned the moment she hit the legal minimum (fortunately a good solid baby) because she'd scream and scream until she vomited or passed out. The driver would then end up pulling over to check on baby's safety sometimes in much less than ideal places.

I remember a 15-20 min journey with her wondering why I was gushing milk mid-afternoon as my body had adjusted to DS in nursery by then, and realised that the ferocity of her screaming was triggering my lactation response.

I wouldn't generally advise turning that early, but the consequences for that family of regularly vomiting and passing out vastly outweighed the benefits in a hypothetical crash that never did happen (long outgrown car seat range).

ERF in young children and its increasing accessibility is a positive thing, but enthusiasts do tend to lack nuance and overstate the realistic benefits.

If I'm honest, I'm more shocked how many people DON'T know that RF is safer. (Not a criticism of the PP who didn't know, because you don't know what you don't know).
I think there is a long way to go on the awareness.

You can get those inflatable cube things to put in the footwell for his feet. https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B0BDKH4BBQ/ref=sspa_dk_detail_4?pd_rd_i=B0BDKH4BBQ&pd_rd_w=uo6mf&content-id=amzn1.sym.7c2bff8e-4ce3-4cc7-b3f6-35ac6c74cf9b&pf_rd_p=7c2bff8e-4ce3-4cc7-b3f6-35ac6c74cf9b&pf_rd_r=4GN28J1YMXY2KA3YA45F&pd_rd_wg=TKwUH&pd_rd_r=c4233a49-23d5-4fd7-8ba8-8312935313d8&sp_csd=d2lkZ2V0TmFtZT1zcF9kZXRhaWw&th=1

It's so much safer. It wasn't really a thing other than for infants when my adult kids were babies but for my 11 year old, he was rear facing until 5 (he's tall so grew out of his seat at that point).

And cars were slower, roads weren't as busy etc etc. Comparing the situation 40 years ago when I was the age in question to nowadays is apples and pears.

OP your post is weird, why would you be shocked that people follow safety advice?
The evidence for rear facing being safer is very strong, but you are right, most people don't max out their RF options.
Lots of people I know made a big deal of buying a rear-facing seat for their toddlers and then turned them around about 3yo.
I'm not sure of the point of your post, you say its "only on Mumsnet" you hear of people RF for longer, and then you start a poll on ...ummm... Mumsnet to see how common it is?

we survived

…apart from all the children who were killed or seriously injured in car accidents obviously.

Both of mine were still rear facing into reception. They don’t suddenly grow and mature the day they turn up to school. It isn’t really a milestone that changes how they are in a car.