Mumsnet on Jeremy Vine tomorrow talking car seat legislation - your views please!

[carriemumsnet]

Hi all

We've been called by Jeremy Vine show to talk about new car seat legislation. Their interest was sparked by this article from the Times

There will be a govt minister and an 11 year old reluctant to return to his booster. Would love to hear your views so I can pass them on.

Do you think they should have introduced a law?
Do you think it's enforcable?
Have you seen the leaflet and is it clear to you what you need to do?
Are you worried about persuading your child that they have to go back into a car seat?

Thanks in advance

If it helps save lives I think it's a great idea.

There was some anti-feeling when seat belts became compulsory but now its second nature to belt up when you get in the car. If parents are swayed by the use of baby and toddler seats I don't see how they can argue with this legislation if the facts are correct.

It should be easy for parents to enforce the use, never mind that your child doesn't want to, you're the boss, they either use the seat or walk - end of!

Whether it's enforceable in law is another matter. As has been pointed out mobile phones are still used by irresponsible drivers and there are still some loons out there who refuse to belt up!

I also thought this was already the law and was surprised it wasn't. I haven't seen any leaflets but have just seen posters in windows of various shops flogging booster seats.

It's not a problem for us as my dd is only 2.

My BIL also has flamesparrow's problem, can't afford a new car and is unsure how he's going to ferry his kids around. Personally I suspect some law breaking will occur in his case.

oh I did not realise there was an age as well
Phew!

DS had outgrown a booster by age 8 as it turned out...

PS - Jeremey, I LOVE YOU

Oooh - You're right multitasker! "The New Law for Children over 3 and up to EITHER 1.35 metres in height, OR the age of 12

Children over 3 and up to 135 cms in height or the age of 12 MUST use a child restraint,with very few exceptions.In the Front Seat

The child MUST use the correct child restraint.

In the Rear Seat

The child MUST use the correct restraint, where seat belts are fitted.

There are three exemptions, where a child in this category does not have to use a child restraint. In each case the child MUST use the adult belt instead. They are -

1. in a licensed taxi or private hire vehicle;

2. if the child is travelling on a short distance for reason of unexpected necessity;

3. if there are two occupied child restraints in the rear which prevent the fitment of a third."

afriend of mine is 22 and due to medical condition, she is only 4ft 9 - she drives her own car, yet under legislation - she is supposed to sit on a booster - cant be easy to drive sitting on a booster now surely

with regards to CHILDREN yes, up to age 11 is necessary

Aha - so can have a child in the middle of neccessary - would rather not though, as obviously want any children I carry to be completely secure.

I am in favour overall, but think this is easier for a parent of younger children, my oldest it three.
Can see that there are some anomalies, but thats laws for you, always going to annoy some one. As a society we just have to abide by laws even if we do think they are wrong or silly, or over the top

Bad law - totally unenforcable as it is written. I'm pleased that it clarifies the position for younger children, so that all under 3s must be in a car seat, but the arbitrary let out for older children just weakens it to the level of "guidance" rather than "law", so why not just have it as strong guidance. No different from weaning guidelines.

My only thought is that it must be gold to the makers of booster seats. As well as a seat for my 8 year old I have had to buy 2 booster seats for the times when we share the school run/after school clubs and so have lots of other parents. Otherwise they have to take the booster seat to school with them.

Isn't it time car manufacturers started addressing the way car seats and seatbelts work in cars so they can be used by anyone?

The minister in charge went on TV to say it would not be enforced, he saw it as some sort of reminder. That's direct from the interview he did for the BBC. That is not atypical of his party who like to "send a message" rather than actually do stuff.

If you believe that car seats save kids lives, then it should be enforced, with proper penalties.

It's pathetically easy to enforce.
You send some traffic wardens and "community" police to stand at traffic lights and near schools.

You give them video cameras on tripods, point them at the traffic and fine everyone who breaks this law. Proper fines. Define proper fines as increasing them until 99.9% of people videoed are belted up. You could do mobile phone using drivers at the same time.

Won't happen of course because it won't make as much money as easily as speed cameras or parking fines.
I've not seen the leaflet, but our kids always travel in car seats. And yes we've had a crash where if he hadn't been strapped in properly DS would have been badly hurt.

I don't worry about persuading my kids. Firstly we have programmed DS1 that it is important, so that the time we forgot to do up the straps he became quite upset and we felt bad.

If they throw a strop, then there is the normal set of sanctions varying from ignoring their protests to loss of privileges.

What we need is strongly branded chairs for boys. Why not ones with labelled "Thunderbird Crash Couch" ? Lots of black and yellow, maybe with pictures of rockets and explosions. Maybe a Disney princess girls seat ? Pink fluffy designer seats ?

Actually you could cross an MP3 player with one of these quite cheaply, and have a seat that played their music and kept them safe. Unless you want to be ripped off by Apple, you can by a decent MP3 player for 15 quid. An obvious variation is to stick on one of those irritating little electronic games which will both keep the child quiet as well as happy and safe.

Unfortunately legislation, properly enforced, is the only way to make some people realise the dangers and need to protect their kids. It is often a case of "I'm a good, safe driver"/"only drive locally"/"was fine when I was a child without one" but fact is you cannot allow for other drivers, most accidents take place near home and traffic is much denser than 20 years ago.

Will be difficult to enforce since there are too many woolly areas such as if a 3rd seat won't fit in the back and definition of "occasional" and "emergency" journeys. On the spot fines are all very well but they are not generally well used for other offences so we do not have a culture of deterrence by them unlike other European countries. I suspect those who flaunt the current laws regarding child restraints, mobile phones, speed limits will just continue as they are or plead ignorance.

Not seen an official leaflet and think publicity should be more evident through schools, doctors/hospitals and dvla (since the driver is going to be accountable). Places like Mothercare advertising are all very well but a) they stand to make money from it and b) those who are least likely to be using seats now, ie. those with kids aged 5 and over, no longer shop there to see the publicity.

My kids - aged 8 and 5 - have always used carseats so no difficulty persuading them now. It varies for their friends though and many in ds' class may well already be the minimum height for doing without.

Issues which this law and the manufacturers have failed to address in the run up to this legislation (and it has been in consulation for a number of years) are that many cars have a lap belt in the centre rear seat which is incompatible with boosters and very unsafe for children and that you need narrow based seats to fix 3 across the rear of even a modest family car let alone a small (more economical and "green") one. It is a cop out to allow a 3rd child to use the lap belt only.

btw the Times article last weekend (Body and Soul Sept 9th, summary here ) didn't even show the child correctly belted into his booster on the cover, let alone a happy child !

The Jeremy Vine prog must have scoured the land to find an 11-yr-old under 4ft 5ins. (Most reach that height by 9) Unless the researchers don t understand the new rules either.

if i had the pictures of my car accident, at slow speed, collisions with a 32 tonne LGV, and i could show the 11 year old the mess of my neck where the seat belt was resting, he would go back in the booster. 2.5yrs on, still in pain.

my kids will be staying in those boosters for as long as possible.

My 9 year old grew out of her booster about a year ago (she is approx 143 centimetres) but I kept her in it until she basically couldn't fit anymore. And if she did still need a seat she'd be in it, no question.

Most of her school contemporaries were not in them from reception onwards and lots used to also sit in the front seat

So I have no problem with this legislation, think it is good.

in the orgignal article thought he photot a of a rther cute chubby cheeked boy, the car seat was wrongly fitted

arf

otherwise fab article

Do you think they should have introduced a law?

I think that the evidence for under 3s is probably copmpelling, but haven't seen anything that convincing for seat-belt related injuries (not saying they don't happen, just not clear quite how many lives will be saved/injuries avoided). Have to say that a lot of the data I have seen indicates that certain car seats are much safer than others, so wondering whether in fact they're getting the right message across at all. In other words i'm not sure which risk they're trying to cover - is it purely seat belt positioning (in which case are backless bosters that much use at all, and wouldn't it be better to change the required safety standard on car seats), or is the concern general crash injuries (in which case again different types of seat will have different profiles. From what I've seen loads of parents are just going out buying the cheapest booster. If that was the objective then it would have been just as cheap to hand them out at school without introducing a new law.

Do you think it is enforcable?

No. I'm still waiting for the mobile phone laws to be enforced. But I do know that I can get done if I eat an apple whilst driving.

Have you seen the leaflet and is it clear to you what you need to do?

Haven't seen the leaflet but have read the websites.

Are you worried about persuading your child that they have to go back into a car seat?

N/A - mine were still in. But ds1's friends were always surprised that I made them travel in a booster (basically it is the only way of turning my passenger airbag off, and there was no way either of my children would be sitting in the front).

Oh, I'm confused now. Does my 9 year old who is way over 135cm need one or not?

Do you think they should have introduced a law?

Yes I do. It is there for a very good reason - to save chldren from being killed or injured in case of a crash, Everyone things it won't happen to them, but sadly children are killed way too often because of not being properly secured in cars.

Do you think it's enforcable?

Sadly no. I think people will flaunt it and I don't think there is any easy way for the police to monitor it and catch offenders. There are too many get out clauses and exemptions.

It meeds to be the parents taking responsibility for their own children. Sadly some don't seem to want to.

Have you seen the leaflet and is it clear to you what you need to do?

Not seen the leaflet. I think the whole law has been very poorly advertised, and I actually don't think I have seen any campaign prior to it going law at all. It needed a hard hitting advertising campaign on TV, cinemas, newspapers, magazines, etc.

Are you worried about persuading your child that they have to go back into a car seat?

My little one is only 4 so no applicable. However, the answer is simple - no car seat, no car ride. IMO the adult is in charge here. The child might not like it, but he or she wouldn't be that impressed with horrific injuries or death either I imagine.

Tinker, legally no.

Thanks serenity

I think it's fine to ask parents to have carseats in their cars BUT what if I get on a train with my two young children to go and stay with their grandparents for a week - should they too be forced to shell out for booster seats? Incidentally, for me this wouldn't be an issue, happily my parents would do this and are financially able to, but what about families that are already strapped for cash. Or what if my car breaks down and I need a hire car for a week but my car seat doesn't fit properly?

The law's a good idea in principle, in practice I'm not sure, I'd prefer to see cycle helmets made compulsary.

My Ds are 8.6 and 6.9 respectively. They both use booster seat, even though the 8 year old is the height of an average 10 year old, and before this legislation came out, it was always our intention to keep them both on their booster seat until they were at least 11, or 12.
My older Ds has children in his class who don't use booster seats and seem to jump around over the seats, and yet DS1 has never once commented on why he is still in his seat. He just accepts it, and even refuses to go with his grandparents for "a quick run in the car to the shop" if his seat isn't availiable.

However i wasn't aware of this legislation until i read it on mumsnet ages ago, and have been making all my CM parents aware of it as some of them seem to be unaware of it.
I think they will have problems enforcing it, and Dh is a military policeman and he said they aren't sure how they are going to enforce it with service dependants coming onto base, as technically they can't "do" anything as far as civilians are concerned

Thanks for this thread, I've just emailed details of the new laws to my school, and requested that they send out a memo to all parents 'reminding' them of the changes. I only hope it sinks in. We have a lot of car travellers due to the nature of the school, and I'm always shocked at the lack of restraints in some cars. The confusion on this thread also shows how bad the publicity has been, especially considering we've been discussing this issue on MN for at least 18 months If we can't get it straight, what chance have Mr and Ms Average got?

TBH I have no real anticipation that anyone will get done for having inappropriate restraints, except as an add on charge after an accident but if it makes parents reconsider their current arrangements surely that's got to be a step in the right direction? It might not be as good as it could be, but that doesn't make it all bad. I do acce

Your Ds sounds like mine Tinker, legally =mine doesn't need one as he is just over 135cm, however he shall be staying in it. Although he is tall he is also very skinny, so still fits in it, and an adult belt just doesn't look right on him anyway