To be upset that my inlaws put my son’s life at risk?

[Chocoholic26]

Hello, this is a bit of a long one, sorry. Looking for some advice. My in laws look after our little boys (3 and 1) once a week. When my eldest was a baby they wanted to buy a car seat to use in their car. We suggested a few that would be suitable. My husband and I feel very strongly about car seat safety and have our boys extended rear facing. My FIL is a very stubborn man and I feel is very controlling over my MIL. He wasn’t happy that we were telling him what seat to buy. MIL then spoke to DH and asked the name of the seat etc that they had to buy but in the end FIL thought he knew best and bought a seat that he wanted. It was actually more expensive than the one we suggested but in terms of safety, it wasn’t rear facing and we simply told them that he could not use it. They live near by and we all decided that they didn’t need one at that moment in time. We offered to buy the seat but they refused the offer.

Fast forward two years and they have gone behind our backs and put our son in the car seat they originally bought. Which is forward facing and he’s far too heavy and tall for it now. We only know this as our son told us. My DH phoned his parents and questioned them about this and asked them if it was the car seat they originally had. They said it was. They knew fine well our thoughts on car seat safety but they still chose to use it. AIBU to be utterly disappointed and extremely upset at what they have done. We feel they have completely disregarded our wishes as parents. We tried to sit down with them and have an adult discussion about it. I got very upset as at the end of the day they are jeopardising our son’s safety. They stood up and walked out. They were so rude, saying that they are sick of us going on the way we do as if we don’t trust them etc etc and said we are being disrespectful to them. I’m so hurt and so upset. I don’t want to fall out but I feel their behaviour has been completely out of order and they can’t see it. My DH has been so good and backed what I say and I’ve told them I’ll be arranging other childcare. DH spoke to his mum today and they still want to look after the boys and we have to buy a car seat (which is what we were going to do on the first place) and apparently that’s going to be that. The boys are due to go on Wednesday and I am the one who drops them off as DH works early. I’ve got absolutely no idea how I’m going to face them after everything that has happened. I sent them both a very long but polite message about my feelings etc and FIL was banging on our door ten minutes after I sent it saying he didn’t appreciate a message and that he deals with situations face to face, but we tried this and he just walked out. What was I supposed to do? I stand by everything I said in that message and I’m glad I put my point across. Arghhhh what do I do? Feeling so stressed, help. TIA

Didn't meet safety standards as the kid didn't fit in it. Mindnumbing.

Op exactly how heavy is your 3 year old? thisncpuld be an issue in itself. Is he regulalrly weighed at baby / toddler clinic and everyone is happy with his weight?

Imo grandparents must be compliant with the requirements of their own dc wrt the grand children.

If not, they shouldn't be surprised if contact is limited.

I think you might misunderstand the balance of power in this arrangement.

The reality of the situation is that when grandparents are local and the grandchildren are very young, the novelty can wear off a bit and the parents are just grateful with whatever the grandparents offer.

inert potato not in my world. But it may be so for you.

those pictures look like they could result in some serious leg/pelvis injuries.

Rather better than the alternative of internal decapitation.

That comment is a bit like the people who come on first aid courses who think you shouldn't move a casualty to clear their airway if they might have a broken leg.

An intact pelvis isn't much use to you if your spinal cord is severed in your neck.

I'm with you OP. I'm pretty relaxed about most things with DS but one of the things I'm really stringent about is car seats (the other is properly fitting shoes!)

We bought ERF seats for both sets of grandparents. I've RTFT so I know you tried to do this and your offer was rejected. The idea that ALL ERF seats are super expensive is nonsense. The Joie Tilt is about £75.

My DS is currently rear facing in a cybex sirona. I'm seriously considering moving him into an Axkid minikid when he outgrows this seat to keep him rear facing until 6 or so. Both sets of grandparents raise their eyebrows and voice concern about his legs but I just ignore it all. DS is clearly fine and knows no different!

I think you'll just have to smile on Wednesday and brazen it out but I'd be keeping a very close eye on things and looking into alternative arrangements. Good luck!

Wow, OP YANBU.

Read the full thread people!

I think your only option for Wednesday is to go Michelle Obama “when they go low we go high”

Paste on your biggest smile, take them some biscuits or something, and mention that “of course the child seat guidelines are really complicated now and have changed loads which is why we’ve researched it so much. Lucky no harm was done though. I know you love DS so much and would have felt awful if something had happened” hard stare

My friend shuts down the whole but-we-did-it-with-you-and-you-survived thing by pointing out that child mortality rates were three times higher when we were kids (although still low, stats purists), partly due to car seat laws, sleep safety, not smoking in homes etc, funnily enough all the stuff her parents were trying to dismiss as health and safety gorn mad.

The laws in rear facing state that a child can forward face from 15 months in a suitable seat.
www.gov.uk/child-car-seats-the-rules
People should stop guessing the laws and find out for themselves.
It's really hard for older generations to comply with current legislation when your child is living proof that most people did it come to any harm in a car without a restraint. I know that's not the point, and that times change, but hey, cut them a bit of slack!

The laws in rear facing state that a child can forward face from 15 months in a suitable seat.
www.gov.uk/child-car-seats-the-rules
People should stop guessing the laws and find out for themselves.

As per the link posted a child can forward face in a weight based seat from 9kg. Many children get to 9kg before they are 15 months and therefore can legally forward face in the UK if they are using a weight based rather than a height based seat.

Obviously rear facing is safer and should be used, especially for younger children if feasible and the law is very confusing but if you’re going to post that ‘people should stop guessing the law’ you should at least be correct when quoting the law.

All of this is irrelevant to the OP though, her issues are that a) the GPs used a seat after being told not to and b) the child was over the weight limit for the seat.

I really do not understand the argument that because on a particular occasion nothing terrible happened when a child was incorrectly restrained it means that it was fine.

If we just shoved children in cars completely unrestrained the majority would, of course, be fine. The ones that weren't in accidents (the majority) would emerge unscathed.The point of a seat is to protect a child when there IS an accident. That's sort of the whole point.

As none of us know whether an accident will occur on a 4 hour journey to Cornwall or a 5 minute trip to Tesco you take the precautions everytime.

The legal bare minimum is not the same as the safest option. The OP has assessed the risk and decided that her child will remain rear facing and has communicated this. That should be the end of it.

People should stop guessing the laws and find out for themselves.

No-one is guessing the law - rear facing might not be the law but as has been repeatedly pointed out, it is much safer and, more importantly, the OP and her husband had requested the grandparents to comply with their wishes on this. However in this case the grandparents DID break the law, not because the seat was placed forward facing but because the child had outgrown the weight limit for it. This means the seat was unsafe no matter which way it was facing.

The issue is not however whether rear facing is safer, it's the fact that the grandparents have disregarded the clearly stated wishes of the parents. And it's not about the OP abusing her in laws for free child care, she has already stated she's happy to pay for childcare but the grandparents have asked to look after the child and the OP has complied in order to keep the peace. Why are so many people coming down so hard on her for this?

And for those scoffing at the idea of rear facing being safer, they're showing how out of date they are by quoting prices of £300/£400. That's simply not the case these days. It might not be how things were done in the past but we know better now. Similarly people used to think smoking was good for you - do you still believe that too?

SharpLily, people on his thread ARE incorrectly stating the law on child seats. I know what the issue here is, I read the whole post. Including the parts where people had mis quoted car seat laws.
Absolutely, the wrong use of the seat was unacceptable, but people should not give advice based on incorrect information.

@Sunshinegirl82 we have the axkidd minikid, it’s fab, my almost 4yr old is v comfortable in it.

Oh OP. I could have written your thread.

Except. When GPs showed us their choice of seat and we said no way in hell, they respected that. In the end we agreed that if they were babysitting we would drop off one of our rearward seats and fit it in the car. It's a bit of a pain but at least everyone is happy.

I would have preferred them to get a better seat but given that our choice is the best part of £400 it's also understandable that they dont want to.

There's a very big difference between a legal car seat and the safest available. The legal tests are carried out at 30mph whereas the ADAC tests are done at 70mph. I know which one is want to pick.

No discussion about rearward facing. Our DD will be rearward facing until the very last minute!

The GPs were unreasonable for knowingly using a seat that the child had grown out of.

OP has muddied the issue by being quite demanding herself. Clashing controlling people is a recipe for fall out and escalating battles that didn't need to be fought (top quality car seat for local and occasional use when the ones that the GPs bought was appropriate) which then undermines the seriousness of the battles that do need fighting (child in out grown car sear). Originally the car seat was fit for purpose, but not to OP's higher standards. Trying to convince them now that the seat is no longer fit for purpose where OP is being reasonable has been undermined because she is already percieved as unreasonable.

If the GPs are controlling and unable to compromise on something you consider to be non negotiable, then you don't indulge them with days in charge of the GCs.

Car seat rules and avaliability have changed rapidly in recent years. I'm out of touch and my DCs are 7&5. ERF was a niche, expensive option that was difficult to get for my 7 yo. My car doesn't have isofix which restricts options, my car was not old when I started my family. I was not paying ££,£££ for new cars and seats for what is ultimately a tiny risk in difference in safety outcome in the whole package of road safety. Today there is more choice avaliable and my choices would probably be different. The new i-size rules haven't applied to my 5 year old. Being pedantic about the best hypothetical option is not going to work for my DCs who are likely to exceed the legal height not to need car seats before they reach 25kg. I struggled with car seat progression because they were too tall for the head support/ harnesses before they reached the height limits. GPs of the "never had car seats in my day, we were all fine" disposition, particularly when combined with a controlling streak will find this a natural area for conflict.

There is a big difference between the illegal/ barely legal minimum/ best hypothetical option and where most of us fall, best fit for our circumstances. In life, you do have to compromise sometimes. When DCs get to school and go on a trip, they will not have every seat with the optimum car seat for every child. Their travel will be legal, but you will have to compromise on your preference if your DC's aren't going to miss out.

OP, learn to pick your battles so it's clear when people are over the boundaries of unreasonable behaviour. Sticking to the key point of "DC has outgrown the car seat and must legally be in xxx" is more likely to get your point over than dramatising about their life being at risk.

You can buy an ERF seat for about £75, they are not all expensive. The OP offered to supply a suitable seat, the GP refused the offer and agreed that they didn't really need a seat and wouldn't drive the OP's DC.

The OP has said they are more than willing to pay for childcare but the GP have requested to have the DC on this day, this is for their benefit. This is not (according to the OP) a situation where the poor hard done by GP are providing free childcare at the OP's request (and even if it were I think using a car seat specified by the parents when they have offered to pay for and supply that car seat is reasonable).

The OP has assessed the risks and has decided that rear facing is very important to her and has communicated this to the GP, her DH agreed. That should be the end of it.

May I jump on this thread and ask for advice on rear facing? I have a large vehicle with 9 seats and you can change the 2nd row of seats so they rear face. In the car manual it states you cannot fit any car seat to this row of seats when they are turned that way. That confuses me as it makes sense that young children should be safer doing this with the exception of a baby in a rear facing seat as effectively you would then be making baby forward face.
Anyone share any wisdom on that?

You'll probably find tigwig that the purpose of the seats being able to be turned round is for social reasons eg if travelling somewhere and all wanting to chat or pulled up with the doors open at a country park and you can all sit facing each other whilst eating your sandwiches.

It is a mystery why built-in functionality for rear facing isn't an inherent part of car safety design but there you go.

I have a 4.5 year old and a 13 month old.

I have only recently, in the last month or so been truly educated about car seats and it has

A) Horrified myself about the car seats I was currently using and led to me replacing the seats for both my children.

B) Made me feel quite guilty at the fact that I put my first son in a forward facing seat at 10 months of age because I thought it would be more fun for him.

I look at my old photos now from when he was forward facing and I can’t believd I thought it was a good idea.

The fact of the matter though is that I knew no different so saw nothing wrong in what I did. The same goes with the infant carrier I currently use for my 13 month old, I had no idea how crap the ‘safety testing’ is of most non-branded car seats and that if I were in an accident I don’t think my baby would come out of it too well.

My cousins baby died when he was 14 months old as a result of a car crash. He was in a forward facing seat and it has been acknowledged that if he had been rear facing the chance of him having been killed would have been much, much reduced. I think my cousin struggles with that fact every day and has said that if she ever has another baby she will never, ever scrimp on car seats and will always buy the safest one out there and adhere to the rear facing guidelines.

Everyone thinks they won’t be in a car crash but that kind of naivety is very stupid. You can be the most careful driver in the world, but there are lots of unsafe drivers out there too and there’s nothing to say your car isn’t going to be on the receiving end of their recklessness.

My FIL has recently bought a car seat without my knowledge and after seeing which one it is I have told DH that there’s no way my children are going in it.

Sometimes I drive my 10 year old niece around and whereas she has previously been used to a little booster seat I now put her in a high backed booster seat with protective wings around her upset body and her neck and head. She may think she’s too old for it but I really don’t care because safety is paramount!

My baby is now in a rear facing seat that will last up to approximately 4-5 years of age and I will keep him facing that way until he outgrows the 18kg weight limit.

Just because something is legal doesn’t make it right or the safest.

In fact the GP wouldnt have been illegal if they’d just used no seat at all because this is permitted in certain circumstances. They made it worse in legal terms by using the seat but I suppose better morally because they were probably misguided about what car seats do and how weight limits work. My 7yo DS was RF till he was 4 and I went to great trouble to buy a seat all those years ago. There were only about 2 on the market and from specialised shops. Not expensive compared to similar FF seats though.

www.gov.uk/child-car-seats-the-rules/when-a-child-can-travel-without-a-car-seat

Well said @QueenofmyPrinces
So sorry for your loss

^The laws in rear facing state that a child can forward face from 15 months in a suitable seat.
www.gov.uk/child-car-seats-the-rules
People should stop guessing the laws and find out for themselves.

As per the link posted a child can forward face in a weight based seat from 9kg. Many children get to 9kg before they are 15 months and therefore can legally forward face in the UK if they are using a weight based rather than a height based seat.^

The link you posted doesn't seem entirely clear (in the way it is about 12 years or 135 cm). It says they must use rearfacing height based seats unitl they are 15 months old (not mentioning any specific heiight) . Then goes on to say they can use forward facing weight based from 9 kg which is about the average weight of a 10 month old.

And for those scoffing at the idea of rear facing being safer, they're showing how out of date they are by quoting prices of £300/£400.

I think this price might be for one suitable for a child up to 25 kg rather than the more readily available seats for a child up to 18 kg.

I think this price might be for one suitable for a child up to 25 kg rather than the more readily available seats for a child up to 18 kg.

Nope. For example;
Britax Two Way Elite - erf to 25kg - £185
Britax Maxway - erf to 25kg - £220
Axkid Move - erf to 25kg - £225
Diono Radian erf to 25kg - £225

Thanks again for those who have supported and thanks all for your input. I’m glad I’ve stuck to my guns. Queenofmyprinces I’m so sorry for the loss of your cousins baby, this story makes me realise you can never be too safe and I’ve been well within my rights to be upset at what has happened. Thank you x