... to wonder why more people don't buy rear-facing car seats for children over 1 year?

[FrozenNorth]

Sorry if this has been discussed before, but I'm just curious as to why I'm the only one amongst my acquaintances to have bought a rear-facing car seat that should fit my DD up to the age of 4 years?

I realise that the government guidelines / laws don't say much about the fact that it's far safer to stay rear-facing beyond the initial group 0 seat, but a few minutes' internet research and a couple of crash-test videos on YouTube were enough to firmly convince me that it's the way to go. In Sweden it's recommended to rear-face your child to the age of four.

So, if you chose to forward-face your child at an earlier stage, what was your rationale? I know, for instance, that the rear-facing seats may not fit in smaller cars. They tend to cost more and they are harder to get hold of. Not a single large store (e.g. Mothercare, Halfords etc.) in the UK sells them.

In case anyone's interested in the evidence behind rear-facing vs forward facing, here's a few links:

Why consider rear-facing?

Safety benefits

The British Medical Journal recommendations

Buyers' guide and list of UK retailers selling rear-facing seats

YouTube video showing crash test footage

Sorry about all the links. This is something I feel really passionately about and I feel so angry that major UK retailers don't supply the safest possible seats for our children.

LadyBiscuit - DD can't walk yet so not really an issue, though I am quite anal and always comment when we get to a crossing about the red/green man as I think it might lay the foundation for teaching her more later on.

I wouldn't say I'm obsessed about child safety, it just didn't make any sense for us to opt for a FF seat given that we found a more reasonably priced RF/changeable seat that fitted our car.

I suppose a life lived in fear might be a life half lived but it depends on your own experience with serious car accidents.

My dds are both in rear facing seats and have been since I saw a thread on here and did the research.We have Swedish friends too so I knew a bit from them.My elder DD is five and four months,average to tallish,and she still fits fine in hers.It was a big outlay at the beginning as we had just bought new car seats arrgh.But the research is clear.Rear facing is safer.Bump to three sell a rear facing seat now on the basis of the research.My older dd seems comfy enough in hers,the only probs being that is is very upright so she can't snooze easily,and they are tricky to fit.I think they should be the only seats allowed by law frankly.

Beveridge - Yes, that is a good point. MY DH and I have, between us, been involved in 4 fairly serious car accidents (all of them as passengers, some when we were kids) and so we don't dare have the "why subject your child to a cramped, uncomfortable ride for years, just 'in case' of a crash" type of opinion that Ripeberry mentioned.
Though maybe if we had never been involved in a crash we might have that opinion.

(I'm not criticising Ripeberry btw, she is perfectly entitled to her opinion)

Gosh - that's very unlucky I've never been in a serious car accident and I only know of one involving people I care about.

I think the car seat assumes a disproportionate level of attention given how much most of us take our children in cars (not that much). It's probably because it really it the only major piece of equipment that you buy for your child that is solely about keeping them safe.

I am not trying to rubbish anyone's concern and I hope it doesn't come across like that but I want all of us as parents to focus on what are the real risks to our children. Do you know what the accident statistics for children are? And if not why not? That's where our energies should be focused.

So many children die or are injured through oversights that were absolutely stupidly obvious in hindsight.

LadyBiscuit - we get road safety stuff from these people traffic club

LadyBiscuit - I couldn't agree more, believe me my safety craziness isn't limited to cars...

All the blinds in our house have the cord attached to walls so no choking accidents, all medicines are up high out of reach (yep, out of reach of the child who can't stand properly yet...)
The flat screen TV is screwed down to our TV stand because we read about how injuries by falling TVs has risen now that people have flat screen ones rather than old CRTs.
We have fire extinguishers both upstairs and down, with a fire blanket near the hob in the kitchen. We have fire alarms that are wired into the mains in case we forget to test the batteries.

The list is endless really. Some might think I'm mad but I like to think it shows I care

Hurrah EldonAve - that is the kind of thing I'm talking about.

LittlePeopleCo - you do realise you are quite, quite mad?

I would just like to point out that of the roughly 10,000 children who were injured in the UK in road accidents in 2008 - whom as much discussed were mostly not in rear facing child seats... only 0.5% were killed (about 55, if my maths is dodgy.)

In fact only 551 (5%) were seriously injured.

Your child is also twice as likely to die if they are hit as a pedestrian than as a passenger in a car. Maybe we could all do each other a favour and just drive less.

It's all very well trying to protect your child from risk. But there is a point - especially when those risks are essentially huge lumps of metal travelling very very fast where how much safer your child would be in one type of seat than another is a massively moot point. There are always ways to die. Stop obsessing about it and enjoying living.

[for no. checks: www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/statistics/datatablespublications/accidents/casualtiesmr/rcgbmainresults2008 and look at the links on the right.]

So all in. We are probably doing ok with the car seats we've got. Thanks all the same.

(argh, computer very slow. I think the conversation has moved past that point. The statistics are interesting all the same!)

LittlePeopleCo - you have listed some of the things I do as well!

Our plasma screens are actually on the wall, no cords from blinds (also have Venetian blinds within glazed units), hard wired smoke alarm part of our 24/7 monitored alarm system and bought a new car just to fit a RF seat. Common sense for me, and easy to do. I like to maximise my toddler's safety.

See my post below laweaselmys - according to the Child Accident Prevention Trust only 26 children were killed - and those stats include children up to the age of 16. The level of attention that most parents focus on car seats is totally out of proportion to the risks

I never knew you could get rear facing seats for that old, and now that I do... Well, I would love to say I shall be getting one, but having seen the price - I simply cannot afford that.

So although I see your point, I do think YAB a little U, as with price / space / general awareness factors all complied, its not a surprise the smaller percentage of people use them.

Why does it horrify you? If only 26 children die in car accidents a year under the age of 16, then there is going to be about 1 who is under the age of one. It really is not enough of a statistic to be alarmed about.

Actually, and while I think that safer car seats can only be a good thing, I will never forget something someone wrote on a US forum during an argument about when to turn babies around in the car.

The poster's mum was a traffic cop in a country where car seats are not mandatory, and she attended a lot of serious accidents. She said that 99% of the time, the kids whose parents had chosen to use car seats were fine or escaped with minor injuries, and it didn't matter if they were forward facing, rear facing, if the car seat was clearly brand new or looked about 20 years old, but the children who weren't in car seats usually died or were seriously injured

And she just said why are we arguing about this, when there are clearly more important things to worry about.

The reason people don't have them is because the mainstream manufacturers don't have them.
We had to get one early because DS is huge and outgrew the weight limit on those baby-type seats before he was old enough to face forward. We had a nightmare trying to find a forward facing one which such a young child could go into.

None of the mainstream places were interested Halfords told us they had no intention to stock them because it would be to expensive to retrain their staff which is pretty appalling IMO. They make a bug deal about being able to fit seats for you but it turns out they're not really interested in safety, it;s just a marketing ploy. What a surprise

We eventually found this place who were brilliant. Although they're only in Milton Keynes, they did next day delivery, and talked us through fitting it on the phone, which was very easy in fact (non-isofix) so I don't know what Halfords were on about.

Now I understand a bit about rear-facing, DS will be in rear-facing seats as long as he can be. Had I not been forced to find out about this, I might well have moved him into forward-facing, falling foul of assuming that because everyone gets them they must be OK .

If the big shops stocked them, people knew how much better they are - and ideally - the government backed them, then people would buy them.

And when you've managed to track down the RF car seat, and saved up for it, are you then going to take out a massive great loan to purchase the car which comes out absolute tip top in all the safety ratings? You may have a perfectly good car already, but there's bound to be one out there which the statistics say is 'better'. And then what about moving house to the optimium area to live in the UK? I mean, statistically, your child is going to be healthier and live longer if you live in certain areas? So why don't we all move there?

I agree with LadyBiscuit - this is disproportionate. We all do the best for our children within the parameters of what we are able to do.

I bought one of the Britax ones rear facing ones MADD for Scandanavian market 6 years ago when DS grew out of his baby seat at 5 months. Unfortunately it wouldn't fit in my Corolla. I got one of those stage 0/1 that go rear and front facing in end.

Agree with violet. And also people with 3-door cars are going to be made to feel they are letting their children down because they can't fit RF seats in the back.

I got a rear facing car seat for my DS after I read about them on a thread here and then did the research. It wasn't hard to get a hold of, there was a local shop that had them. There is plenty of room for his legs too so far, he is 2.5. It doesn't sit completly flush with the back seat, there is space. He doesn't seem to mind going in it and I have been very happy with the seat.

It's one of those things that isn't going to be right for everyone and it's not like the front facing ones are unsafe. The thing that annoyed me was that I had never heard of them until I came on here and started to research it. I think the information should be more widely available so that people can make an informed choice.

Hocus That was exactly my point though, just because I have chosen to use an RF seat doesn't mean I think badly of you if you chose not to/can't.

I assume that everyone has made the best choice for them. For parents with kids who puke if you face them backwards or people with cars that limit which seats you can use or those that think that the risks are small anyway so why pay the extra - that fine, make your choice and be comfortable with it.

But Violethill, don't mock those of us that choose a seat we feel is safer. While I can choose the car seat I want and feel happy about it, I can't move to a nicer area for my kids sake (wish I could) and whilst my car performs well in safety tests, there are better ones but I can't afford them - so no, I won't be buying the best on the market.
Taking an argument to the extreme like you are proposing is trivialising what is an important safety decision for many people.

We couldn't wait to get DS into a forward facing car seat just after he turned 1. He hated, hated his rear facing seat - would get hysterical and scream and often vomit. It was extremely distressing for everyone and dangerous, too - especially on the motorway. It's massively distracting trying to drive with a hysterical child in the car(and we're not huge drivers - we're talking occasional trips to see relatives; going to nursery - only really necessary journeys).
When we moved him into a forward-facing seat, DS completely relaxed because he could see where he was going and trips, finally, were a pleasure.
So for us, keeping him in a rear-facing seat was an unrealistic, unpleasant and potentially dangerous option.
Haven't had time to read through the thread completely, but has anyone else had this experience? Can't believe we're the only ones!
If we're not alone, it's a factor I think the rear-facing-seats-until-children-are-four lobby should be aware of. Rear facing seats aren't necessarily the safest option for every toddler and their family...

I wouldnt wait to get my DS in to a FF car seat either.

RF car seats may be 5X safer in an accident but I felt I was 5 times more likely to have an accident in the first place with him in an RF seat as I spent the whole drive worrying about the fact that I couldn't see or hear him.

He has only just gone in to a FF car seat and is much happier in it. He's 17 months.