How do people feel about this campaign to make kids under 4 sit rear facing?

[RareTiger]

Don't get me wrong I understand it's safer, but I also know sometimes it's impractical, for mine there are both fast growers and big kids my just turn 3 year old has been in a high backed booster seat for over 6 months now she 17kg wears 4-5 going into 5-6 clothes, but if the law changed I woundnt be able to use the car for her, now for preschool and shopping? fine a incontinence at times but I would just walk or get the bus I do half the time anyway, but for her speech therapy I would have to stop it the travel would mean if something even a bus is 10mins late I don't get home for my son after school or we don't get to speech therapy (3 hour bus, 2.5 hour train ride one way)
I like the current rules both sets, both sets are for different types of car seats why change something that works?
Even with my son we couldn't find a size 0+ to fit in are car we were struggling to fit him in the size 0 at 6 months old he was the size of a 18month old we had no choice but buy a size 1 forward face, he's now 5 been in a high back booster for 2 years

I think it’s bonkers but when my DDs were car seat age they were only rear facing until they grew out of their first baby seats and then front facing. I wasn’t expecting to start saying ‘in my day…’ at the age of 42 but here we are!

It should be height/weight based, not according to age. Maybe there should be an age where you can automatically front face so you don’t get rear facing 7 year olds or whatever.

It's age based though because that's how kids develop. Their skeletal structures don't develop just based on height/weight but also based on age. Their heads are still proportionally way heavier compared to the rest of them, regardless of how big they are overall.

We managed it as we've got small children but some of my taller friends would have struggled. The idea is good in theory but I can see how some families might struggle practically.

I’m not sure how being fast growers make a difference. It’s useful in lots of ways of course being big and strong, and I know all cars, car seats and kids are different. But as long as they fit the car seat you are I can’t see how being bigger earlier would be a problem.

Rear facing to 4 in law is definitely a good thing and brings us into line with other countries where this has been the case for a while. Some say if it’s purely based on safety it should be higher.

Hopefully not, doesn't sound like much fun, driving with unhappy kids in the back for hours.

I think this would be great, it’s so much safer and there are lots of seats that accommodate bigger children. I get a lot of comments rear facing my 3.5 year old and would love to normalise this more

It's fine. We rear faced until 4 and 5. They don't necessarily take up more room.

A 3yo does my have the maturity to be in a HBB and yours is also below the recommended weight for them. It's putting her at significant increased risk of death of serious injury in a crash.

There's also no excuse for forward facing a 6mo just because he's the size of an 18m old. 18m old should be rear facing themselves!

I'm not one saying they should be RF till 7 or something (though upto the individual if they do), but I find your casual disregard for their safety disturbing of I'm honest.

I think its fine because its not giving false information, It is safer to face backwards until older.

We've only just turned our just turned 3 year old because we needed to buy a new seat for one of our cars and I didn't want to spend loads of cash for a ERF seat that we'd use for realistically only 18 months. He still goes rear facing in my car, which is used more often than DH's car, and will continue to do so until he objects too much, or until he gets big enough/old enough not to fiddle with the 3 point seatbelt. He has an older brother and is realising how much more fun it is to face forwards.

His current RF seat cant be used forward facing because he exceeds the weight limit for the 5 point harness, but isn't big enough, or maybe old enough, for the 3 point one

Every parent would have to drive a larger car because there isn't the leg room in some of the smaller ones.

I don't think I've ever seen anyone older than a baby being rear faced.

I agree that it's safer and that is paramount...but my child got dreadfully car sick when rear facing (every journey, no matter how carefully I drove) so for me it would have been very difficult to implement; as soon as she was old enough to forward face life got a lot easier for both of us!

It's wise to encourage it. But taller kids, sicky and yelling kids may not suit it.
Smaller cars don't always fit them if the driver seat is pushed all the way back either. I know people who's male partner couldn't drive the car with an extended rear facing seat in.

Other than actual babies I have never seen older toddlers/children in these rear facing seats.
On Mumsnet is seems that almost everyone rear faces their kids.
In real life.....not so sure 🤔

What campaign? Are you talking about people raising awareness of the safety benefit of RF? That is a good thing IMO. The cultural norm is to FF and there is a lot of resistance to the idea of RF which is not based in reality.

OTOH I dislike the all-or-nothing nature of the way many people speak about it. I think it makes more sense to talk about relative risk.

If you mean the petitions etc on social media to change the law - this is unlikely to happen as the evidence isn't strong enough to make it worth it.

Most children who are killed or seriously injured in car accidents are unrestrained or their car seats are badly misused (e.g. fitted totally wrong or harness straps halfway down their back, massively loose etc). The latest legislation helps mitigate some of the misuse by making car seats easier to use correctly. But you can't legislate away people not bothering to use car seats at all (at least, not beyond what we have already). A lot of the non-restraint statistics show a high correlation unfortunately between parents not restraining their child and drunk driving, unlicensed driving, uninsured driving, no seatbelts themselves and risky/bad driving. So children whose parents are generally irresponsible around driving unfortunately have a double whammy AND won't be affected by laws around child restraints, because those laws rely on driver behaviour.

It does make a difference to RF vs FF even in a correctly used, fitted seat etc (and RF is also protective against some forms of misuse - this is part of why it has better outcomes) but it's not the biggest issue in car seat use. If it's working for you then stay RF because it's definitely worth it, but if it's causing an issue somehow or it is going to cause you financial hardship or similar to stay RF compared to FF being an option, then at minimum 15 months it becomes an option in extremis and I'd probably put about age 2 as the point where the trade off becomes more balanced.

Some people are risk averse and would prefer to minimise risk as long and as much as possible, and RF as long as possible is a really effective way to do that. I don't think it helps to judge people who make a different decision as not caring about risk. Risk does not happen in a vacuum and car accidents are relatively rare. A properly fitted & used, good quality good condition FF car seat is a reasonable option also.

My daughter is 6 and still rear facing. We drive a very normal small hatchback. She was in a normal baby seat, then when she outgrew went to a rear facing AxKid minikind, and has stayed in it ever since. No issues with it, she’s comfy, it fits well, she’s never complained. It’s so much safer! And surely if there’s a crash that’s why you want?? Not sure what the issue is really?

Mine were tall, RF was fine.

RF is much safer.

People always resist safety improvements. There was resistance to seat belts, car seats, boosters. Each one was a step forwards in safety terms.

If you actually do the research and understand about children’s bodies and flexibility, it’s not as uncomfortable as you think it is. You can RF up to 6 comfortably with the right seat.

I find it shocking how so many people don’t understand that children’s bodies are not the same as adults and approach the problem thinking they’re little mini adults.

i see so many kids in front seats, some with high back boosters but the majority without, too close to the dash, and all of my kids friends have been taken out of car seats too early. It’s like it’s a competition?! The second they hit a certain height (and usually long before), the car seat is on the bonfire. Before that most of them are just on those stupid little boosters that don’t do very much either.

actually shocking.

neither of my kids were out of car seats until they turned 11. Do not understand the rush.

@Babyboomtastic A 3yo does my have the maturity to be in a HBB and yours is also below the recommended weight for them.

Assume you mean “doesn’t”. Why doesn’t a 3yo have the maturity for a HBB? Mine is in
one. It has a three-point harness and an extra chest strap. It’s functionally no different to her previous baby car seat, apart from the fact she can fit inside it.

If you mean a HBB using the car’s seat belt, I agree.

Many other countries have this law already, there is significant safety data to back up the change.

It’s a LOT safer. Look up ‘internal decapitation’ .

Fantastic, long overdue

I’m only one year younger and in my day, children were rear facing as long as possible, all of mine were until 2.5-3 years, I would have liked longer, and many friends and family did much longer.

And none of mine outgrew their first seat until 3-4 years.

OP seems to be mixing up two different types of rear facing seats, we had one that went up to around 5 or 6.

My two oldest kids are very tall. 99th centile. They rear faced beyond 4. They just crossed their legs. My daughter was also extremely car sick which made rear facing less than ideal, but I'd much sooner she was sick and have to take frequent rest breaks.

It's far safer and I have no idea why people are opposed to it. It's your child's life at stake. Total no-brainer.

My niece was switched to forward facing at 3 because "she likes to look around". Crazy.