AIBU to be upset after my parents drove DD unsafely?

[worralorralozza]

Staying back at my parent's for Easter. They are in mid to late 70s. My mum is very energetic and active and always encourages me to leave my daughter with them for a day or two so I have some time to myself, which is always much appreciated. I spent a night in a B&B, got back last night and plan to spend the rest of the week hanging out with DD. However last night my mother told me the the 'hilarious' story of how they had driven DD 5 miles without a seatbelt on. Apparently they had gone to pick up DD from an afternoon at my MILs and had decided to use their vintage car instead of their regular car for the journey. On the way there, DD had sat in the front. On they way back, DD had asked to sit in the back next to Nanna, whilst Grandad drove. They set off before DD's seat belt was fastened and realised in motion that it was defective. Rather than stopping and moving DD into the front seat, they decided Nanna would simply hold DDs seat belt in place over her. DD apparently protested about this, said she didn't feel safe and expressed concern that they would get in trouble with the police, but the journey went ahead regardless. I unfortunately reacted very angrily, telling my parents that a 7 year old clearly has more sense than they do. I have spoken to DD this morning, said she was right to express concern and told her I will tell them never to put her in an unsafe position ever again. Meanwhile my mother has been shouting at me when I asked her to clarify the circumstances, arguing that they didn't think this was against the law, offering no justification for not swapping her into the front seat other than 'not wanting to stop', and currently treating me like I'm getting hysterical over nothing.

AIBU - I'm getting hysterical over nothing
YANBU - Never leave DD in their care again

OP was brought up by these “dangerous and risky” people, and appears to have survived.

By luck, not design.

You aren't telling me that you only use car seats and sest belts because its the law, not because it actually makes your kids safer?

Cars and roads are bigger and faster than when the vintage cars were around and there is heavier traffic which all adds up to a far bigger risk.

Yes I remember that they were just mandated in the front seats. That will have been because there were so many cars that didn’t have seatbelts in the backseats.

Do all 7 years old have to travel in rear facing car seats? Since when? I have a 13 year old and my kids moved from rear facing after about 3-4 months.

I don’t think anyone has said that? They are just disagreeing with the people that have incorrectly said that people in their 40s would all have had car seats and seatbelts as children as that is historically inaccurate.

I wouldn’t allow my child in the front seat or to go anywhere without a car seat so I am bewildered by all of this.

I won’t let my in-laws drive my kids anywhere if they’ve had a drink. They’re American so very lax laws around it and they are alcoholics so drive after alcohol regularly. They think I’m ridiculous but I don’t care.

Personally knowing they deliberately went against your simple rules and found it hilarious I wouldn’t leave your child there alone again. Wouldn’t be worth it to me as I wouldn’t be able to relax.

Gah boomers!

“We didn’t bother with seatbelts in the 80s and everyone was fine”

Alright Mabel, but loads of people died and that’s why we wear them now.

ffs.

I think a telling question to ask your mother is would you mother be happy to swap seats with your granddaughter and be held in place by an adult. I think not. That's incredibly dangerous.
They knew they were wrong and told you in a jokey way to get permission, as they knew your daughter would tell you, a sort of gaslighting really, which is troubling. They don't seem trustworthy due to their reaction either. If they had immediately said we can see we're in the wrong and promised never to do it again and to think more carefully in the future, I might have allowed them another chance. This could have been fatal for your daughter, so I completely understand your reaction!
All those people thinking your reaction is extreme, would you feel the same if they had actually had an accident? Our children are precious, nothing is too inconvenient to keep them safe.

That depends on the child. I have a 7 year old who uses a booster seat as she can’t fit in a high backed car seat any more, and hasn’t been able to for quite a while. In the eyes of the law she doesn’t even need the booster seat

I'm surprised that they have seatbelts in their vintage car. It's illegal to have seat belts in a vintage car in New Zealand.

YANBU at all. This was potentially a life threatening misjudgement and youe trust in their ability to risk assess adequately has been affected. I wouldn't be leaving them in charge again until the message sinks in.

If this was me i would also be fuming they had used their vintage car rather than their modern one. Im guessing it isnt as safe in a crash, no crumple zones, less effective brakes, no air bags etc. To me that is also an unaccepable risk when they have a safer vehicle available!

Try not to overreact, its not ideal and something similar might happen in the future. Simple solution is not to leave her on her own with them and find alternative childcare.

Five miles isn't very far, what sort of roads were they on? I know something terrible could happen any where, but 5 miles on low speed limit roads and nothing bad happened I wouldn't be falling out over, definitely say never ever again though. If they were on a motorway it would be the riot act.

This

We didn't even have seat belts or locking back car doors when I was a child but there were way way less cars on the road ergo less accidents, less injuries etc. In this instance people really can't make comparisons

Having looked it up before, this is the timeline.

1965 - seatbelts mandatory to be fitted in the front except for classic cars. Old and new cars (retrofitting). No law for back seats.

1983 (law enacted 1982, but came into force in 1983) - seatbelts must be worn in the front seats. Not necessarily in the back. At this time, it was possible to buy child harnesses, or seatbelts from ordinary shops like Halfords or Argos to fit yourself in the car.

1986 - all new cars to have seatbelts fitted in the front and back

1989 - children must wear seatbelts in the back seats, if they are fitted. Carrycots can now only be used if they are strapped in. This was also the first child seat law but it was very limited, because child seats were often permanently installed needing tools to remove, so it just said if there is an age appropriate seat for a child travelling in the car fitted, they must use it rather than sit on an adult's lap etc. There is a weird thing as well about children aged 1-4 needing to have a booster seat in order to legally use an adult seatbelt, but then it says right at the end that there's an exemption to this if there is a seatbelt available and no booster seat or child seat. I'm not sure what it means in practice - whether it was up to parents to decide whether they had toddlers in their own seatbelt or held on an adults' lap. I think it was known at this time that young children are not protected well by seatbelts, hence the bit about a booster seat being necessary, although we now consider booster seats not to be appropriate for that age group.

1991 - seatbelts must be retrofitted in the back of old and new cars, except classic cars. Adults must also wear seatbelt in rear seats.

1993 - first proper child seat law - children up to age 3 must use child seat, babies can still use carrycot but again only if strapped in. No unrestrained children in front seat. (Not sure what this referred to - perhaps the exceptions which still apply?) By this point, seatbelt fitting for child seats was the norm, so easier to take in and out.

2006 - extension of child seat law saying all children up to 12 years / 135cm must use appropriate car seat or booster seat. Carrycots now only permissible if they meet the child seat regulation (R44 at the time, later +R129).

As well as the bare minimum of keeping the child safe and not committing motoring offences, this is the most important aspect as a PP wrote-

to show your daughter that she was right, and that you listened to her concerns even when they didn't. She needs to know she can tell you when a grown up has made her feel unsafe and that you will take calm, decisive action to safeguard her going forwards.

It's obvious they shouted at you because they knew they were in the wrong and as we all know attack is the best form of defence.

^This 💯. I would be wary of trusting them not to do it again personally.

My 5 year old is 132cm so I can well imagine she'll be much taller than 135cm when she's 7

Really?
The wearing of front seatbelts was mandatory from 1983
Children under have been required to wear seatbelts since 1989
All car occupants have been required to wear seat belts since 1991

Exactly what I am saying! I don’t know the age of the OP but my sister was born in 1980 and she didn’t have to wear a seatbelt by law as a kid till the age of 9!

@catipuss I know someone who was in the back seat of a car that pulled out of a driveway on to a clear road. As they moved on to the road he started to put his seatbelt on. At that moment a speeding car crashed in to the back of them. The other people in the car were already belted in and were fine, but he sustained life changing injuries. Literally just from not belting up before the car started moving. So in a 5 mile journey there are plenty of opportunities for injury.

OP I’d have been furious. I know a lot of people grew up in the pre-seatbelt era, myself included (born in the 60s) and they’re fine, but anecdotal evidence is irrelevant in this situation. The fact is that deaths from RTAs more than halved since seatbelts were made mandatory, which is hugely significant.

I would give your parents time to reflect. As someone else said, they’re probably going on the attack as a form of defence. Hopefully when the dust has settled they’ll realise how reckless they were.

OP I'm not a parent but I think your reaction was very normal. It's not even just about their poor judgement at the time but also about the fact that they've given you no confidence that they wouldn't do something this cavalier again. I have a dog who I love very much and if my parents did something to put her at risk AND then act like it wasn't a big deal after I'd be very upset. Your daughter is old enough where she could (and did) vocalise her concerns about her safety and they still disregarded that. Your daughter probably doesn't want to be in that situation again even if you feel able to allow it. All it took was someone crashing into your parents while this happened and this could have been a very different outcome. Allow the dust to settle and then revisit the conversation with them to ask if they see your perspective and how they plan to rebuild your trust regarding taking the safety of your child as seriously as they should be.

my late 70’s father in law drove us dangerously back from their airport to their house. I had a word with my husband. That’s the last time they have ever driven my children. I just take cabs, hire a car or my brother in law drives. No thank you!

Here we go again, my generation being vilified once more by whichever your generation is. In my experience, my generation - OAP's - are far more understanding and accepting of life, and in particular, people, than some of the people in generations that have come after us. If your own parents are more old fashioned than that, then I feel sorry for them, because of the restrictions it will put on their lifestyles, and even their ability to feel long term contententment.

However, Lavender, please do not assume that because your parents are like that, it must mean that all of us oldies must be the same, because I can assure you, that we are not. Many things have changed since mine were little ones, and I promise you that things like having compulsay car seats for children now, and for them not to wear heavy thick coats when strapped into their car seats, and many more things that I can't recall right now, have given me much heart felt pleasure, and relief that my wonderful grandchildren - and the fact that every young child - should now be even safer than they would have been in my day.

I personally had each of my new babies (I had one at a time) stay in a cot beside me and my DH in our bedroom for at least 6 months, and probably even longer, as it just didn't sit comfortably with me for them to be further away. Anyway this isn't about me and what we did in the old days, but from my - maybe selfish - point of view, I am rather fed-up with the admittedly few Mumsnetters, who refer to the unreasonableness of their pension age parents inability to think that things might have actually changed for the better, but then go on to liken all/most of us in the same way. Any of you who know you are guilty of this, please stop, as it is very frustrating!

@worralorralozza, I am so sorry that your parents are so ignorant that they don't even want to know about the huge improvements in child safety requirements. I'm afraid that if they refuse to sit down with you, and look at some of the amazing knowldge and evidence, and listen to you explaining it, and maybe have you play a couple of podcasts about the safety issues to them, then you have no choice but to not leave your DC unattended with them.

Sadly, I think your more difficult decision will come if they do listen without arguing about any of the points, and seem to take it all in, and accept everything, how will you know whether to trust them or not, and obviously, if you are not entirely sure, you still have to not let them have your DC without at least one other adult, that you trust implicitly, being there. I just wish that parents like you OP, were never put in these difficult situations, life is hard enough anyway without these other stressors.🩷xxx