Vote on Rear Facing Car Seats

[VickyFord]

Advice sought please. Next week in the European Parliament there is a vote on whether children up to age 3 should have to travel in rear facing car seats. I have a vote. Apparently evidence from Sweden (where they are compulsory) is that these seats are safer if there is an accident. Also being told that studies in UK and US show same... but I think my kids would have kicked up such a fuss that we would have been more likely to have had an accident in the first place. However my youngest is now 10 so I?m probably miles out of date. Views from those with under 3s welcome. Have you read research? do you own a rear facing seat? what do your 2 year olds think?

p.s. I also think the EU shouldn?t be passing rules on car seats, surely we could decide this closer to home, but that is another matter altogether.

"but indith, doesn't that already happen? some people can't fit 3 forward facing seats across the back of their car. so they have no choice but to buy a bigger child, or wait until one doesn't need a seat, or just not have more kids."

So it's not a problem to make that a bigger problem for more people?

Making something legally required is likely to lower the cost of meeting that standard, but it will still be a higher cost than the current standard. Pushing costs onto parents has an impact on all sorts of areas of people's lives. If we make having children, or driving children, or other aspects of normal family life more expensive there will be significant negative consequences for parents and children. Some (many?) people may agree those costs are worth the pay off of slightly fewer injuries and deaths in car accidents, other people will not - does it have to be a government insisting that balance is always raised towards safety and away from other opportunities? Couldn't that be left to parents?

'or just not have more kids.'

Ooh, great idea! Shall we legislate for this as well?

'not sure why it would be harder to lift a child in/out of a seat simply because it faces the other way either?'

It's easier for the child to get out of seat in a forward facing seat. The OP is talking about children of an age who are able to do this.

I don't particularly care anyways - my kids are ten. And the chances of a child in a car seat strapped in properly being killed in an accident are low.

I bow out of the hysteria worry that's always caused by carseat convos.

I don't think it would be fair to force people to use rf. My daughter is 9 months and will shortly be moving to a ff. She has never been in a ff but does kick up a terrible fuss in the car seat when she is not sleepy and spends her whole time with her neck craned round the side of the seat looking at me. So not only is she making lots of distracting noise but she has her neck in an unsupported position if there is an accident. Although rf may be simpler in theory I don't think this is true for all babies and I can't wait to get her into ff - I will be able to drive without having to endure screams and remembering the words to her nursery rhymes and she will have appropriate support without craning her neck.

fwiw, I think you should vote no. Yes, on education and incentives to make and market them, so that the costs come down. But no to forcing it.

None of mine liked rear facing from about 2 months onwards. And as bigger children I think would have made my driving life hell. However, I have read into it, and do agree it is safer. But that said, I think it's about education and access rather than more things that we must do iyswim

For those of you saying you can't fit 3 rf seats so the law can't be forced. What about the law we have now where all under 11's have to be in a seat? It does state that if there isn't room for 3 seats then you can legally carry one without a seat, usually the oldest. So that gets rid of one of your arguments there. Thisisyesterday I am assuming you meant get a bigger car not child. You wouldn't have to do this for 3 kids in rf seats, you would just have to fit 2 in.
I do see how it can cause problems with space but if these seats become more common then they might be able to make them to fit more cars

And I have no difficulties lifting my 3 year old into her rf seat. She can climb in and out quite easily and we have a large KIA which is high to get in. A rf seat is a lot different to a 0stage seat

suchprospects... why would it be a bigger problem?

if you can't fit 3 seats in you can't fit 3 seats in surely? doesn't matter what way they face.
my point is that sying kids have to be in rear-facing seats is actually no different than saying they have to be in car seats full stop.
it isn't suddenly making people unable to have the family they want.

for what it's worth, i couldn't fit 3 forward facing seats across the back of my mum's car. but i CAN fit 2 forward and one rear-facing. so i would argue that they are easier to get in than some FF seats... it all depends on the car and the seats that you have.

"And the chances of a child in a car seat strapped in properly being killed in an accident are low."

sadly, you couldn't be more wrong.

by the by, ds2 and ds3 also HATED being in their infant carriers, but were fine in a bigger rear-facing seat. I think they just didn't like being low down.

a big ERF seat is generally higher up and the child can see out of the windows etc etc.

Another one whose first child (now 2.8) screamed continually and was sick while in a rear facing infant seat. The second she went forward facing she was fine. She just wanted to see us I think. She could see out in her RF seat as it had a high base so I don't think that was the issue.

Also on very long journeys she gets bored and the only thing that keeps us sane and safe on the road is for whichever one of us who is in the passenger seat to be able to reach back and pass her a toy, a sticker book, a water bottle, or just to chat, sing and smile if she's getting shouty. If we HAD to put her in a rear facing seat I'd probably never be able to drive anywhere safely.

DS doesn't seem to care about being rear facing. Different child, so we'll probably keep him rear facing as long as possible.

Wouldn't work in a 2dr hatchback though and if the EU is also serious about encouraging people to buy smaller, more efficient cars then this needs considering...

In summary, I'd vote NO to enforcement.

thisisyesterday
When I was looking for stage 1+ car seats there were narrower forward facing seats than there were rear facing. When I spoke with sales people about this they said it was because the rear facing seat design required greater width, but I doubt many sales people actually know a great deal about industrial design so I not sure how true that is.

Fitting seats seemed to depend a lot on the models of seat and car, but being able to alternate rear facing/forward facing seems to be good way of getting three seats in when things are really tight. So, for instance, in some cars people who have a baby in a rear facing stage 0 seat can get that seat in with forward facing stage 1+ seats, but not rear facing ones.

We would have gone rear-facing if we could have afforded to, hopefully one day we will do. Maybe if it becomes legislation then the price will come down. (before anyone gets on my case about money well spent, the difference was £80 to £280, we didn't have the spare £200 at the time of buying.)

OP Did you vote? Any chance you could update us on how you voted and what influenced you?