To drive with 6 week old on her own in back?

[Melaniaspilatesinstructor]

I'm confused about the rules?
Up until now, DH has sat on back seat with Dd in her car seat next to him but he's at work tomorrow and I need to go to Drs.
Is it okay to drive her whilst she's on her own in the back?

Me? WTF?

Oh, ok!

See above

Haha missscarlett we are totally having some kind of cross post marathon here

Sorry. I really don't think I'm being alarmist, certainly don't mean to be. But, equally, I don't take 'we all do it, it's fine' as a risk assessment.

It's about primary prevention of accidents, and secondary prevention of injury if there is an accident, and what lowers those risks, weighed with the risks of the interventions.

But it really is likely to be fine!!!

Sorry OP, should have thought before I posted that. Didn't mean to worry you with what is clearly an uncommon situation. Do what you feel comfortable with - if it's your first time doing it solo, give yourself plenty of time for the journey + any unexpected stops.

miss scarlett
I thought the statistics state backseat safer than front?
And the desaturation study noted desaturation at 30mins but unclear clinical significance therefore inconclusive. Also an effect that reduces as baby gets bigger (and less thoracic compression from slumping).

COI: not a mathematician, and haven't read the papers in a long time but am a long-in-the-tooth scientist.

Baby in the back alone from the first trip back from hospital. Never occurred to me not to, even though pfb.
Back is safer in the event of an accident.

Backseat in the middle is the safest seat. Rearfacing. For all passengers, not just babies.

But not if your baby seat doesn't fit there!

And probably not if you're distracted or worried because you can't see them.

And possibly, theoretically, more data awaited, not for long periods due to airway concerns, if at 40 degrees.

The last two points may mean that overall it's lower risk to have in the front, where the baby can have a 'watchful eye' and the driver is less likely to have an accident. With the airbag off.

Risk is complicated! And each car, and baby, and family will affect what those risks are. So it's something everyone needs to decide for themselves.

The front seat can be a good option:
www.carseat.se/rearfacing/position-in-vehicle/front-seat-safety/

It's just not clear cut. That doesn't make me anxious, or alarmist. I think everyone deserves to know the information, and assess it for their situation.

And putting kids in the boot was 'normal and safe' 30 years ago.

Um ... I am 32. I am very sure that I wasn't driven home from hospital in the boot!

You're not really applying the same rigour to the straw man argument as to your main point, which slightly undermines it. Either you're talking about much older children, or you're exaggerating to make a point.

Anyway. Unverified by me cos I don't have time to sit trawling studies (I stress this), but we were told that a big worry with car seats isn't just to do with how long kids sit in them in the car, but also to do with parents who would take the sleeping child out in the seat, put them down inside, let them sleep on ... basically, leaving the baby in the seat for much longer than the length of the journey.

Actually, outside the car, baby seats are at 30 degrees, which showed far far fewer problems than once fixed in the car at 40 degrees. Or vice versa, it's late! Anyway, it was the angle in the car that caused potentially worrying problems.

My boot example was silly, but I was put in the boot carrying my baby sister 30 years ago. I was told to hold on tight! I was trying to make the point that what is consensus among parents as safe sometimes isn't as low risk as they think, but using an extreme example to do it.

What's accepted as normal isn't always the lowest risk option in a situation, was my point. Badly made, clearly.

Sorry, but yes, it is a badly made point, because you are a parent too, right? It just comes across as a little arrogant to claim your methods of making decisions are somehow superior, especially when I don't actually see you providing links to studies or enough contextualising information for anyone to do anything but take your word.

And taking people's word without contextualising information is exactly what you're suggesting everyone else shouldn't do.

What? I'm the only person on this thread who has offered any external links as evidence!

Google exists for other people, too, though, so if someone wishes to look into it, they can.

The OP asked, I said that I wouldn't, and why. I consider it lower risk for us to not have the baby in the back alone. Other people can make the risk assessment for their family, and come to a different conclusion. I just encourage people to look at it as an individual risk assessment, rather than "just do what everyone else does", when that may not be best.

Yes, you offered one link, rather a long time into the conversation.

And yes, other people can google ... and maybe they have, you know?

That's sort of what I'm getting at. You're being quite sneery about people, as if you're the only one who could possibly have an authoritative view.

But, TBH, there is nothing magic in the words 'I read a study' that makes your posts more convincing than anyone else's.

I just don't see the need to start out by being sneery and critical.

I think you've explained the risks very well actually, thanks for taking the time.

It can be really tricky to tease out the studies and see what's applicable and what is not. My point was merely that just presenting "30 minutes is a higher risk" to an anxious first time parent is unhelpful and more likely to cause anxiety than safe practice and risk assessment. New parents don't generally have the time or focus to sit and interpret tons of studies, especially when most of them are old or unclear or difficult to access.

My personal feeling is that the information new parents need is: Never use the car seat for night time sleeping, and make sure to break up long journeys. If possible, avoid long journeys altogether with very young babies. The nitty gritty of the rest may be interesting, and certainly might be of use to a parent who is trying to work out whether a specific journey with their specific baby is okay but in general, there can be too much information and new parents have so much already to be anxious about, that it's helpful if people who do have the time and inclination to pore over studies can reduce it.

But I do totally agree that what's generally considered "fine" is not always a good measure of what is, according to the science, best practice. I just feel like statements of one thing being higher risk than another are unhelpful; there is always going to be risk.

Ok, bertie's post is making me feel mine is probably harsh.

Where I'm coming from is that I think it's only helpful to say you're coming at something from a position of informed knowledge, if you're actually able to share that knowledge with some evidence. Just making the claim is only going to worry people who have no idea whether you're any more reliable than anyone else.

I am aware you weren't setting out to do that, though.

I wondered the very same when DS last month. Wasn't an issue until six weeks as I'd had a CS, ended up going in a 20 minute journey and stopping half way to check on him.

Thanks, BertieBotts, I feel you've understood me, even though you don't necessarily agree with what I've said, which is fair enough.

I'm not meaning to be sneary. First I was over anxious, now I'm arrogant.

I don't actually care what other people do with their babies. I wanted to be helpful to the OP. I'm taking my anxious, arrogant, sneary, critical, (sensitive) arse off to bed.

In the least patronising way possible, this made me smile a lot.
I remember this exact feeling with my first.
You are a lovely mummy

I'm informed in that I'm a mum who looked into it all at the same stage of life, and am sharing my conclusions. I thought that makes up most of the posts on mumsnet.

I never said you were anxious!

I just think it's not on to say 'you are all mums sharing what you think is best, and that's not as good as me, because I'm a mathematician and looked at studies'. Because we're all sharing what we think is best!

I drove with my ds by myself when he was 12 days old... I has a mirror so that I could see him in the rear view mirror and made sure he was reclined enough. It's fine!

Lots of crossposting on this thread I think - and it's late and things can be misinterpreted when talking about safety. I think we all just want people to have as much (useful!) info as possible, don't we? And sometimes it can differ. I know I always prefer more info - and I can (and have on past threads) go into detail about the oxygen sats and why the risks differ and what it all means but it's late and nobody has asked, so I'll leave it for now unless anyone is interested.

And it's so much less emotionally charged when you don't have a real newborn to worry about. Mine being about big enough not to need a car seat at all now, I'm quite privileged in that way but I also like research and I like to know "why" and for some strange reason I've always been fascinated by car seats - though I actually saw the latest research on an infant sleep safety facebook page originally.

Anyway, I'm waffling, but trying (probably failing ) to spread a bit of peace and love before going to bed myself. :)

I posted that because a poster said I was anxious. Not because I'm arrogant, but to explain I'm not some over anxious first time mum, in fact I looked at it coldly.