To think most parents don't know that rearfacing DCs is safer?

[mumaw]

I'm in Facebook groups that specialise in advice for mainly extended rear facing car seats. It's proven that rear facing your child is much, much safer (in fact 500% safer) than front facing.

But I never see anybody RF'ing their child and don't know anybody that does either.

Is it just a case of parents not knowing that its safer?

Sorry that was @MumApr18 - not you OP.

We now it's safer and bought an expensive car seat so that it could be rearfacing but couldn't for the life of us work out how to fit it so that it would sit level on the seat, have the seatbelt around it and not have the front seat folded over to accommodate it. Took it to be fitted properly and they also couldn't do it without it being at a funny angle or without the seatbelt not reaching so told us it wasn't compatible. We checked online and it is supposed to be, so now it is forward facing car seat.

Mine were both in RF car seats 21 years ago, I used to sit in the back with them whilst my partner did the driving. They didn’t go in front facing until they were a bit older.

We rear face :)

we will switch to front facing when she is big enough which will probably be at 8 months

Please watch the videos posted that don't put your 8 month old baby FF.

The video posted above refers to RF seats being 90% safer which is not supported by any type of research.

There is a meaningful difference between using seat belts and keeping children in RF seats for an extended period of time. The benefit of seat belts is quantifiable and is widely supported by research. The benefit of rear facing seats is largely empirical. The actual research widely quoted in FB groups has been retracted (as per my earlier post) - although I am wondering how many of RF proponents are aware of it.

I actually agree with the sentiment in the op (however poorly expressed). In my experience, not many parents I know have a clue about ERF and also see ‘turning around in a big boy/girl car seat’ to be some sort of milestone.

However, I think a lot of posters on here fail to understand that outside of mumsnet-land, not all parents research every product they buy for their child and do extensive research into safety stats etc. I’ve seen a few handwringing threads on here about front facing baby carriers, cot bumpers, plug socket covers etc and the fact is that A LOT of people assume that if something is sold in the shops then it’s safe. They’ll pop into mothercare, pick something up off the shelf and away they go. Or they’ll take (often outdated) advice from friends/family, or just copy what they see other parents doing. Just look at the number of threads where mothers are being pressured into early weaning because ‘that’s what we did in my day’.

A lot of people will just go for the cheapest option as they assume they all pretty much do the same thing. Eg a friend of a friend who spent £1000 in a travel system but put their dd in a £40 FF seat at 10 months old.

Many people - like those on this thread - have made informed choices. However, I agree that there are a lot of people out there who just aren’t aware.

Indeed wintertravel. When DC3 spent all that time screaming in the car (DC2 didn't, btw, and was happy to stay RFing for as long as we did it) we spent a lot of time researching the dangers of turning her around earlier than planned and that study you shared above was very helpful in allaying our fears.

My nearly 3 year old is rear facing. The amount of ‘disagreements’ my mum and sister have had with me as they think It’s silly and hilarious is unreal. My child my decision!! X

I knew the risks but stopped rf when ds was about 18 months, it was just too difficult. Yes the risks are more FF but they are still quite low. We all take risks everyday, I chose that one

Rear-faced DD until she was over 5 years old.

I got huge amounts of hassle about it from certain family members - asking DD if she wouldn't rather FF, telling us that we were mean to make her look like a baby, and eventually admitting that they felt that our choice was a way of saying we thought they had made poor choices as parents (we never discussed our reasons - just bought a car-seat that meant DD could rear-face as long as possible).

I rear faced both of my first two till they were three and a half and three years old . They are both good car sleepers ( Possibly the rear facing influenced this). I came across a lot of resistance with my first born from the grandparents. Generally complaining about the difficulty of using the car seats, that DS seemed cramped etc. It was even less common 6 years ago and their was less choice in the shops. I stuck to my guns as long as I could. A few friends also made derisory comments. Even DH started complaining DS needed to be turned. So fully get why people give up. You are lucky OP you are just starting now. Will see how we go with DS 3. He is a lot taller than the other two which which compound the whinging from people I think!

DSno3 that is.

My DD is rear facing, she is 3. We are fortunate that she hasn’t been distressed rear facing, doesn’t suffer from car sickness etc. I’ve got a few friends who also have similar aged children rear facing.

Mothercare advised me of the safety benefits of them being rear facing. She advised me to keep him rear facing as long as possible. That is exactly what I intend on doing.

I am responsible for his safety, which means doing my research and doing what is best for him, full stop.
Why people would go against such clear safety advice is beyond me.

@Bonjourfreddie erm, no, because you latched onto another poster, had one of your posts deleted and have now assumed the worst of my comment too

...I was being lighthearted in my first message, by the way - before you turn on me.

I totally understand most of the reasons including car sickness, cost, screaming etc.

I dont understand the 'the risks are low anyway or low compared to household dangers' arguments. Yes kids are probably more likely to fall down the stairs or be burnt in the home than die in a car accident. But that doesnt impact at all on the decision to rear face or not. Surely it's best to try and reduce the dangers in all situations not just the most likely? Car accidents do happen, you can't predict them, and safety proofing your home instead of your car wont help in an RTA

Surely he was better protected by having the seat behind him? no they are absolutely not !!

I had the third post on this thread, and I see that the OP decided that she was going to lecture everyone - now there's a surprise! These threads always go the same way!

of course you were @instatwat

I rear faced both of mine in a big PITA seat until they were old enough to go in a high back booster - it was fine, they didn't mind at all (they have always been good travellers to be fair) and I figured on balance it was safer than FF. No one else really gave a shit because I didn't go on about it all the time.

However, I am a bit at some of the claims about rearfacing. Like, what does 500% safer even mean? How is that quantified? And I know a lot of the research about the safety of ERF, and comparisons with the UK, came from Scandanvia where there are less cars on the road and there are lots more big Volvo type cars, so you can't compare raw statistics about deaths/injuries. Plus it depends on the type of crash - if you are rear ended at speed then a FF would be safer, it's just that most serious collisions are front collisions. So it's not quite as simple as it's made out to be, and if you have other factors to contend with like the child hates being rear facing etc then I can see that you might want to put them FF.

However I also agree that a lot of people see going forward as a milestone and just don't know about ERF.

I bet the OP won't use a car seat that is a month over 5 years old either because of the 'expiry date'

Mine rear faced until about 2.

After that I felt any safety benefit was really minimal, and was outweighed by them being really car sick and the ease of getting them into the seats.

Surely if hit in an accident, the seat would wobble as not as well secured rear facing and could squash the child into the back seat?

No correctly fitted car seat should wobble. Rear facing car seats should never be less secure than forward facing car seats - the way they face doesn't affect the secureness of their fastenings.

Properly fitted car seats don't wobble. The fact people are used to car seats having a bit of a wobble is because so many (51% according to Which?) are incorrectly fitted!

@Bonjourfreddie I really genuinely was! Hence the laughing face! Sorry, I’ve obviously upset you and I didn’t mean to.

Aaaand I think I need to leave this thread now. Emotions a little too high.