To think he shouldn’t be forward facing??

[Georgiiii]

At age two?

Told that if legs are longer then shouldn’t be backward facing as it’s dangerous. I thought backward facing was supposed to be the way as long as possible?

I’m not disputing that RF is safer but I don’t completely buy it’s more comfortable than FF.

People are simply reassuring you that what you heard in store was incorrect info, and pointing you towards better information resources than opinions on Mumsnet.

My sons 2 and forward faces

Can you explain your logic? How many kids constantly have their legs dangling? Kids sit with their legs bent, folded, one tucked under another, resting on whatever’s in front.

Dangle your legs off a barstool for the length of a car journey and reconsider.

I’d personally be complaining to the store about this employee, sounds like he needs retraining.

It isn’t really the same as a barstool though. More of an armchair. Their legs are supported in the seat.

Like I say, I am not disputing that RF is safer and I know some feel really strongly about this but past a certain point it is horribly restrictive and isn’t great if you have any travel related sickness either.

DD1 really struggled when we moved her to a HBB from an ERF seat. She hated the feeling of her legs dangling. It took her a few months to stop complaining about it!

Agree with this. Dds were rear facing until about 8. I bought seats from Sweden where they keep children rear facing for far longer than here, even though Swedes are generally taller than Brits.
Rear facing is far safer.

Turn him back round! At 2, if you're in a crash, he stands a very high risk of internal decapitation if you have him FF.

Can someone point me towards the evidence base on forward facing vs rear facing? I’ve only looked at the government guidance which just covers the legal requirements. Otherwise I only find things from car seat manufacturers. Is there an independent resource I can refer to?

I think these sort of aggressive messages are the biggest issues with ERF. Quite a lot of children just aren’t suited to RF. I FFd mine because she gets so car sick. On balance it may be less safe but it’s still safe and not dangerous.

Nope I will not

You’ve obviously just posted that to get a reaction. The fact your son is FF isn’t relevant to what the OP is asking. You do you 👍🏼

ROSPA have a lot of stuff on their website about it. Also the criteria for Swedish plus testing for seats. AFAIK only RF seats achieve plus tested designation, which is based on their performance in tests above the minimum requirements (which are something very low, like a collision at 30mph).

If that's what you think crack on. But I won't get made what to do aggressively thank you

Told*

I wasn’t the one who replied to you originally. I’m not going to tell you what to do with your own child. You do the research and it’s your job to keep your child safe, not mine

Out of interest why won’t you rear face?

Because my sons not comfortable

I keep my son safe.

Have you tried lots of different seats? I went to a not-for-profit place where you can try lots out and the staff there will make recommendations and show you how to alter the straps/ headrest etc. The different inserts and fitting them correctly to the child makes all the difference as well. I had no idea how much of a difference all of these things made to the fit/ comfort/ safety of the seat.

I wasn't being aggressive. It's a fact that if you crash there's a high chance that your child's neck will snap and he will die instantly. If you're OK with that then I guess there's nothing I can do about that, but my assumption is most people want their child to stay alive.

I keep my son safe

Well clearly you don't @teatoast8 because if you did he would be rear facing! Being comfortable is irrelevant if you're dead or severely injured.

It should be compulsory to rear face till 4.

At risk of going off on a tangent, when you look into car seat testing requirements here, it's actually quite scary to realise how low the standards are. Seats that are R44 tested have to pass a 32mph front collision and a rear impact at 18mph. Those are not high speeds.

The Swedish Plus Test is specifically about forces exerted on the neck and spine in a violent collision, hence why it's almost exclusively RF seats that can pass it because the forces on the neck while FFing in a violent collision can cause internal decapitation in children whose bones etc haven't matured enough to withstand it.

Having sadly seen the effects of a young child (2.5) forward facing in a crash on a NSL road when I worked for the emergency services, I was absolutely determined to RF my children as long as possible. The risk is very slim but it's one I can reduce dramatically by simply buying a certain car seat.

But we all have to make our own decisions about safety, just as long as we are properly informed while doing so and not listening to false information (like untrained Halfords employees).