to think the new childrens car seat law is a waste of time.........

[2shoes]

I have lost caount of the ammout of children I have seen using an adult seat belt.

Yes it's better - but some studies have been done to show that it's not that much better ie in a serious accident the LO would still be badly hurt - and yet it's now compulsory to buy car seats (oh, and to buy a new one every time, because oh noooo, you mustn't use a second hand one - this bit being a total con BTW)

"difficulties faced by car free parents of children between 9 months and aroun 3, for whom there is no such f* thing as a lightweight portable carseat for those occasions when you have to travel briefly in someone's car."

what utter bullshite! There's plenty of lightweight carseats for that age (and ones that will fit in most cars), and I'm not exactly big or strong......but I have had 2 children of that age where I relied on other people for lifts.

The advice is not to use a seat where you don't know the history. Like crash helmets. Not a blanket ban on second hand seats per se.

QOQ: by 'lightweight' I mean 'feasible to carry with you on a bus/tube/train journey with several changes, along with buggy, luggage and lively 18-month old. The only way i ever managed this one (we were going to visit relatives for the weekend who live out in the sticks, too far to walk from staion) was to travel with DS father and get him to carry the car seat while I carried everything else.
WHile I'm not disputing that in general is
t's probably a better idea to use a car seat than not to, I think making it compulsory is stupid and (oh where is a proper statistician or risk analyst when you need one) pointless.

have you ever seen a child fly OUT of a car during an accident?? I have and it's not very nice, in fact truly horrific.

I suppose you're on of those parents that don't see the point in helmets for riding bicycles too.......

Having looked after children in ICU who were not restrained appropriately I never let my two go in any car without an appropriate seat. Unrestrained children are like missiles in an accident and adult belts can damage vital organs if they are not positioned correctly.

So although its "probably a better idea" it is still "stupid and pointless"?

ALL tests and studies done prove, without ANY doubt that properly restrained passengers - adults and children alike - suffer LESS injury at speeds as slow as 20mph. They also eliminate injury from passengers in the rear being thrown forward and causing injury to front seat passengers.

Injuries caused by passengers hitting or even going through the windscreen are often fatal. Wearing a seatbelt prevents this almost completely.

Where the fuck do you get your 'stats' from?

the small amount of difference you reffer to madamez is the difference between an injury and death

madamez,

When I was growing up there was a terrible car accident in which a car rolled down and extremely high embankment. Every one in the car died accept one little baby strapped into a carseat. The grandparents proudly declared that one little baby thier miracle baby. That is quite convincing in itself.

good post V why do people care so little for their children's lives that they ignore good advice

Car seats reduce the risk of death significantly - as much as 71 percent for infants and about 55 percent for toddlers.

emed.wustl.edu/emed/emed.nsf/bc156fab5bfc4e0386256ad40066ce82/bde37aa82cdc3ae786256e7e00517f1 f?OpenDocument

Please use one!!!!!!!!

BTW, can someone tell me, what is the law concerning booster seats? We live in Germany and I am not sure of the law in UK at the moment.

My DD is 5 and quite small and my Mum said that she is allowed to use a booster seat. I want her to stay in the proper seat with a back and seat belt clip thingy (the bit that keeps the seat belt at the right level on her shoulder).

At what age are children allowed to use just the booster seat?

See this article in the New York Times:
www.freakonomics.com/times0710col.php

"mong children 2 and older, the death rate is no lower for those traveling in any kind of car seat than for those wearing seat belts"

suggests US guidelines are based on comparisons between children being completely unrestrained or in a car seat

Leati, your link and stats are for crashes where there were restraints vs where there were none. Nobody is suggesting that seatbelts are not effective.

I suspect that someone in the public sector had shares in car seat manufacturers

i think that if you could find the stats you would see there is a great number of car crashes where the only survivor has been a small child in a car seat.

MACMAMA73 - the law suggests that the a child should be in an age approrpiate car seat until 11 or 135cm tall.
it doesn't state that they need either a hi back or booster, its a personal decision i think.

if it helps research guidlines say that a child should stay in the younger style car seats for as long as possible.

Upwind,

For that one article, I found numerous article in the New York Times stating that carseats and booster seats save lives.

I think it was irresponsible of the writer to do an article that may influence people to make poor decisions; when the overwhelming evidence shows that when a carseat is used correctly it is far more like to save lives.

"it was irresponsible of the writer to do an article that may influence people to make poor decisions; when the overwhelming evidence shows that when a carseat is used correctly it is far more like to save lives."

What evidence? All I can find is evidence that restraints (including adult sized seatbelts) save lives.

dd1 is 9 and 143cm tall but i was asked by a police man doing a talk on this at dd's school if she had a booster, obviously I said no and to cut a long story short he actually brought a booster out to my car to show me the benefits only to find dd had her head on the roof of the car if she sat on it.

There have been several studies done showing that many leading brands of car seat are actually unsafe or next to no use. (google car seats failed tests and you'll find a link or two) Again, isn't there a single statistician or risk assessor on here who can give the proper sensible figures to cut through all this bleating?
My objection to making it the law that car seats must be used is that it pointlessly (in statistical terms) causes severe inconvenience - and expense - to the car-free who might make about one car journey per year but still have to spend about £100 on a car seat and then have all the bother of lugging it about whereas statistically you're contributing far more to the safety of your own child and other children by not owning a car in the first place.

I've never spent anywhere NEAR £100 on a carseat!

no one ofrces you top get into a car. if you feel it unecessary then don't buy one...just don't get in a car. and in cases where you really are useing teh car for one journey im sure you could borrow a seat for that trip.

all car seats must reach certain safety requirements although i know which has found that there are many that offer little side impact protection.
any car seat...even the very poor versions are still of benefit as they allow the car seat belt to be properly positioned.

Im sorry but to argue that a law designed to promote the safe carriage of children is wrong is just silly.

Its taken you that long, to google just that?

Doesnt prove your case im afraid.

Madamez, there are some car seats on sale that don't do the job well enough. But even a poorly-designed seat is far, far better than nothing. Seriously.

All seats have to pass basic safety standards - in the past, some that passed for collisions at 30mph (the EU standard) were terrible at 40mph but those were thankfully taken off the market. I've seen results year on year for thorough, independent consumer tests and I do think the situation is getting better.

Can anyone please explain to me what these seat belt clips are that keep the belt at the correct level.I have 2 tots both in full child seats but have never heard of these clips so am now worried i'm not using them properly.