To think there isn't enough information given to parents on car seat safety?

[TokenGinger]

Since I became a first time mum, I've been really surprised at how little information is given to parents on car seat safety. I only stumbled upon a page for Extended Rear Facing after I saw a friend had commented on a post and I've since been researching it in detail.

I'm not sure who I expect to give this information to parents because health professionals are already stretched to capacity, but I just feel it's so important and is something that so many parents I've spoken to are unaware of.

Extended Rear Facing up to 25kg is recommended because a child's spine, neck and pelvis are not mature enough to withstand the impact of a forward facing crash without a much higher risk of serious injury.

I see so many friends post pictures of their children bundled into car seats ready for their journey forward facing and they're still so small and could quite easily still be RF, or even in their infant carrier, but I don't blame them because I'm sure they're just unaware of how much safer it is to rear face.

AIBU to think that this is vital information parents are missing out on being told, and wouldn't necessarily know to research when current advice is that babies only near to rear face until 9kg?

We stopped rearfacing at about 10 months as my now 4 year old would scream for the entire journey when rearfacing.
For us, it was/is considerably safer for all in the vehicle if she wasn't screaming her head off and the driver could concentrate.

OP, I 100% see where you're coming from and totally agree.

We bought DS a 25kg RF seat for £190 on Black Friday sale. It's not necessary to spend £300 on these seats like people commonly claim.

So many of my friends have spent much more on the spinning seats only to start FF couple of months into using them as some kind of right of passage "ready for big kid seat" thing.

There is a company trying to promote this kind of thing now. Not so much the fervent ERF thing, although they correctly note that rear facing is safer.

www.carseatsmarter.co.uk/

Useful, measured, easy to understand info. Absolutely worth a FB share etc and they run workshops and seat checks all over the country, which I think is brilliant. You never used to get that kind of thing in the UK at all, and I agree with you that it's badly needed.

I am in a lot of the car seat groups on FB because I am interested in the topic, but I don't agree with the party line on all of them, I don't think every "guideline" pushed in these groups is evidence based, and I find some of the insistence to be too rigid. I'm not admin and I wouldn't say this in the group because that is the admins' choice, their group, their rules. But for example I would prefer that if somebody has a very cheap car seat that they are helped to use that car seat as safely as possible, rather than simply being barraged with information about how rear facing and/or XYZ brand is safer.

I also find that they suffer from that "Facebook Perfect Parent Superiority Complex" where some group members (not admin, to be fair) will pick up a sliver of information, not really understand it fully and then proceed to bash every new poster over the head with it until it has grown into a caricature of the original advice, and then pat each other on the back with competitive likes/loves or shocked/angry/crying faces on any response which goes against the "groupthink", which isn't remotely constructive or helpful. Or get competitive like on a comment thread about sales sites listing car seats for sale, people start claiming to be "so worried they can't sleep" and so on, I even saw someone once claim that they went around second hand selling sites picking up free car seats just to smash them up "in case they were a hazard"... BULLSHIT you did that! But of course that brought in all the fawners and the aww you're such a good person hun xxxx

Yes, the safest possible thing is to rear face for as long as possible but for various reasons this is not always practical (although if you want to, I can almost definitely promise you there will be a way to make it work if you're determined) but also, in what other situation do you go "Right, I must only choose the safest possible option, not taking any other factors into account at all." I mean, if you're going to do that - take a train. Don't put your children into a car at all. In real life people make decisions all the time which are not necessarily based on optimal safety. It's one factor to consider, and an important one of course, direction is also probably the one which will make the most difference, but it's not the only factor. If someone needs to buy a cheap seat for example, I would rather they buy the best quality cheap seat they can get rather than going in blind. If somebody prefers a forward facing seat, then I would rather they know 100% how to install it rather than doing so incorrectly. If you already have a seat, I would rather help you with the problems you're having with it rather than tell you it's a load of rubbish and you need to buy another one immediately. (If you ask me directly, I will tell you.) I am interested in the new innovations included in some forward facing seats, not only rear facing.

The cheapest rear facing seat up to 18kg on the market now is £50. That will take most children up to 3 years old. I could name some reasons not to choose that particular seat, but no concerns at all about safety with it. There is a huge amount more choice and options for ERF now compared with when my first was tiny (he is now 11 and doesn't need a car seat at all.)

OP if you have a car seat that goes with a travel system there's no way it's one that goes forward facing as well. It will be a rear facing only seat isofix or not. And yes even the very cheap brands which tend to fail crash testing over 40mph, their infant carriers perform just as well as the more expensive ones. But it is true that under R44 which you can still certify car seats under, it's legal to put a child forward facing at 9kg. This is because the guidance was set in 1982 when it was fairly rare to have children in a car seat at all let alone a rear facing one past 6-9 months or so. In those days the advice was that a child ought to be able to sit up unsupported before you turned them forwards. This was more due to the upright nature of the seats and lack of recline setting than the crash risk, although the crash risk must have been known or infant seats would have been allowed to face either way, presumably. Anyway, the 9kg guideline is based on the age most babies can sit unsupported. My youngest was 9kg at 4 months old! But even under "old" rules, he wouldn't have been considered "safe" to forward face for another 4 months after that.

@BertieBotts Thank you so much for those replies and all of the constructive advice. They're really helpful and so are the links.

I completely agree that the behaviour in some of those groups is ridiculous and I think you're totally right that all factors should be considered when buying a car seat, not just the safety rating of the seat.

Which? have also had an impact on the popularity of some RF’ing seats. For a while they tested all car seats FF’ing and those that can RF RF’ing. Obviously RF’ing only seats fairer extremely badly in those tests as they weren’t meant to FF

We could also do with other companies following Britax’s example with their Fit Finder

Size of child > fit in car > RF or FF should be the order of purchasing for seats

I've just posted the figures and it's 40% risk of serious injury when FF and 8% risk of seriously injury when RF. I don't see a 32% reduction as a small reduction in risk.

You're missing the point that there's a less than 1% chance of being involved in an accident in the first place. So the reduction in risk is only 0.32%. Not something to get overly preachy about.

If I took the children I childmind in forward facing seats and we (God forbid) had an accident that injured a child and it could had probably avoided if the seat was erf, and I knew the advice, I would be completely blamed on this site for not following that advice 🙄

@Hercwasonaroll Thanks for your helpful response but you'll see that the poster to that statement has already replied to me and I've offered apologies for misunderstanding the point she raised.

@lyralalala I've just signed up to Which?, thank you for that. Be interested to read into all of that!

Agree re: Britax!

That's not quite true, Lyra - the test results that companies like Which? use are all done at a central location in Germany by ADAC. Which? and other consumer testing organisations purchase the test results and publish their individual consumer guides in their own language.

Seats are tested in every configuration they can be set up in, and for the safety test the worst result is recorded. That means for seats such as a high backed booster where the back can be removed, they tend to get extremely low results - even a Britax booster recently got the equivalent of a "Don't Buy" rating! Ridiculous in context - the booster is just the same as their other ones which are some of the highest rated boosters on the market, and in fact the instructions strongly discourage removing the back until the child is 135cm tall, but recognise that at this height the shoulder seatbelt guide can interfere with the safe fit of a seatbelt in cars, so it actually provides better safety in terms of offering a backless option between 135-150cm, which can give a better seatbelt fit at that stage.

A rear facing only seat is not tested forward facing by ADAC/Which? and never has been. A seat which can be tested both ways would generally perform worse in forward facing mode yet this would be the result which is recorded - even if the rear facing result for that seat was the best seat they had ever tested, that info wouldn't generally make it into the report.

Rear facing seats tend to get marked down on being difficult to install, which I actually think IS a fair criticism despite the fact most ERF proponents disagree with me (because "a parent who is interested enough to seek out ERF is one who will ensure their car seat is fitted securely") - I don't think this applies when you're trying to make ERF mainstream, and I think it's imperative seats are easy to install if you're recommending them to the masses.

@JellyNo15 Yep! 🙄🙄🙄

ÖAMTC is a fascinating one to look at - they publish the actual numerical scores of each aspect of a tested seat (bearing in mind German rules that 1 is the best you can get and 6 is an absolute fail). You have to translate it all from German but it's not difficult to understand, and Google Chrome does most of the heavy lifting for you.

I agree to a point, the information is out there for everyone but most people still choose forward facing for a number of reasons including cost, perceived comfort, and that its seen as a right of passage beyond a certain age.

I only know of a few parents rear facing past 15 months and find it utterly bizarre, it's not like the statistics aren't known. I've even been told it's cruel, you should have seen her face when I told her one of our seats rear faces till 25kg. But then she also though forward facing was "just as safe or safer"

I have an axkid minikid and a rekid now. I love these seats, but I did start off with a joie seat which was cheap and cheerful and still rear faced till 18kg and had no problems with any of them. But you are 100% right or else I was living in the dark ages because it took me to have my 4th baby to come across facts and study’s done on rear facing. My first 3 children were forward facing at about 9 months and even now I still look back and wonder how I missed all this information. I think a class should be mandatory when people are pregnant so the can be given the best information on car seats, safe sleeping etc etc. YANBU

It was a no brainer for me to keep my child rear facing for as long as I can. My niece had an accident with just under 4 and broke her neck. It is fixed, she survived, she is not severely disabled, she was very lucky. However if you have seen a child suffering with such a trauma, you want to do everything you can to avoid seeing something like this ever again.
My son is very happy in his Axkid Minikid. He sees A LOT through the back window. He spots every ambulance, every bike, every bus and is generally a happy chappy in the car. We have a mirror to see each other, which is great.

ERF was pretty recent, niche and very expensive when my DCs were babies. The i-size seats have come out since. The car that I had for the majority of their childhood did not have isofix which affected choices avaliable to me.

I used the rear facing infant carrier for as long as my DCs would tolerate it. DS2 could be squeezed in until 15m. DS1 started screaming incessantly at about 12m so he went FF then as I'd rather not be distracted into crashing the car than getting the full benefits out of the car seat.

Weight guides don't work with lean children. I found that there were phases where my DCs had outgrown the harnesses and head rests on a car seat, but weren't at the weight limit for the next stage. Parents straight-faced promising that their child will be ERF until 25kg is just downright amusing when you have a 9yo that is still not 25kg, and couldn't be contorted into a ERF seat even with his hypermobility. He is only 7cm away from not needing any car seat at all and will probably reach that stage around the time he gets to 25kg!

The real world is more complicated than strict adherence to best practice. Given that car seat laws have been in place for a good 30 years, it's more worrying the number of people neglecting to use a car seat at all than the people not choosing the hypothetically optimum seat which is highly unlikely to make a substantial difference.

It's great that there's much more focus on ERF these days (couldn't even buy them when my kids were that age), but there's two other things that seem to get ignored by so many:

1. Dangers of having young baby in an upright (RF or FF) car seat for extended time - why don't more people have the lie-flat car seats? Much safer and also easier for keeping them asleep between car and buggy or home. I really worry when I see young babies in upright car seats being pushed round the shops or taken out of cars in their seats at motorway services.
2. That the 135cm minimum height for not needing a car seat is just that, a minimum, and that RoSPA recommends staying in one until 150cm at least. Nearly everyone we knew had their kids out of them before 135cm whereas mine stayed in to 150cm (though I did let them use the booster cushion type seats if we had their friends in the car as well). I remember telling a parent whose daughter we were taking in the car (age about 9) that we had a car seat she could use and being laughed at and told that even her sister (age 6) didn't use one.

I think there's loads of info, it's just in lots of different places and quite confusing to navigate. Having both the I-size and the old group 1/2/3 ratings is hugely confusing. And the choice of seats doesn't always reflect the best practice. E.g. not many good lie flat infant seats. And loads of erf seats are massive in a normal family car and restrict the space in the front seats. Not everyone can afford a new car to fit an erf seat.

I would pay serious money if someone could solve the no padded coats in car seats issue. I do stick to it without fail but honestly it's a massive pain in the arse.

AliMonkey that's incorrect, lie flat carseats aren't safer. For all passengers, a more upright position is safest. Lie flat carseats are only for babies with breathing difficulties or in situations where you cannot adhere to the time limits for reasons beyond your control.

ShinyGiratina the safest carseats are belted, not isofix. All 25kg seats are belted. 25kg seats also have a talker shell than 18kg seats which will help tall lean kids as much as heavier kids to remain rear facing for as long as possible. My child will be rear facing until they outgrow their current seat, whether that is by height or weight remains to be seen!

In America, some seats rear face to 36kg as children over there are heavier. They also have taller shells. It's becoming more common here for high back boosters to have a 150cm limit, some even more despite the legal minimum being smaller. This is a good thing.

AliMonkey I agree with the rest of your post though

Shiny, he would probably fit into the Klippan Century! That's an extremely tall 25kg seat that goes up to about 135cm on average. But I agree with your point generally. Except for a few outliers, the vast majority of car seats will be outgrown physically by height before the child gets anywhere near the weight limit. This is actually by design, they are specified to a weight limit, and then a height which is 98th percentile for that weight is chosen to be the size around which they design the maximum dimensions of the car seat. So for example an 18kg seat is designed around a child who is 105cm tall in its maximum configuration. 105cm is the average height (50th centile) of a 4 year old, 18kg is the average weight of a 4.5 year old. Only very stocky children are generally outgrowing car seats by weight rather than physical size.

I believe (I am not 100% sure) this is to prevent the seat accidentally being used past the weight limit which would be extremely dangerous as the seat could perform unpredictably, the harness could fail for example.

Ali - lie flat car seats have fallen out of favour because they do not perform as well in crash testing. While breathing concerns are valid, crash performance is the higher priority in cars. Parents should be advised to leave babies in car seats no longer than 30 minutes at a time up to 4 weeks and no longer than 2 hours thereafter. Also many car seat manufacturers are developing wedges and inserts which help flatten the angle for newborn babies now, which is a big change since my eldest was little.

All the information I have read suggests that the front passenger seat is the least safe position for a child car seat. Followed by behind the driver, diagonal from the driver, and the safest being in the central seat in the back, all else being equal in terms of seatbelts and fitting of the seat.

This is only the case because of the airbags in the front, which can and have fatally injured children. Where the airbag can be reliably deactivated, the front is no less safe than anywhere else. Beware of sources from North America where it is illegal to deactivate airbags - European cars are not the same.