Australia says higher weight limit harnessed seats are less safe? [Archive] - Car Seat.Org - Carseat, Vehicle & Child Passenger Safety Forums

Jwebbal

07-23-2008, 05:50 PM

I am looking for a convertible seat for my baby and would love some advice. I would like a higher weight limit seat, but am concered about some articles I read.

I have found three new to NZ market seats that harness to
higher weights

1. Brio Zento - harnesses rearfacing to 25kg
2. Evenflo Triumph advance lx rear to 15.8kg forward to 22.6kg
3. Compass Tru-fit rear to 16kg forward to 29kg

There are also two interesting articles out there about front facing
harnessing that say that the reason NZ - Australian seats don't typically
harness over 18kg is because the harness actually increases the risk of head
- neck injury over a certain weight. Australian safety standards include
side front and several other angle testing and apparently the Britax seats
like Regent and Husky don't pass them.

This is one excerpt from the Brio site: To meet the stringent T-standards
only very low forces are allowed on neck, head and spine. The Swedish
National Research Institute have, on several occasions, conducted crash
tests with heavier children restrained with a 5-point harness and compared
with a correctly positioned lap/diagonal belt in a good booster seat. Tests
have shown that the forces on head/neck/spine are greater when a heavy child is restrained forward facing in a 5-point harness, especially in a frontal
impact. The 5-point harness basically restrains the body too abruptly,
resulting in excessively high forces on the neck/head region.

A correctly positioned lap/diagonal belt with a little more give has been shown to distribute the forces over the torso, lessening the injuries to head/neck.

BRIO's intention was also to certify the Zento forward facing in the harness
to 25 kg. This was to appeal specifically to international markets where
rear-facing for longer is not yet established and where there are increasing
calls for higher harnessing weights forward facing. The testing of the BRIO
Zento showed no exception to previous findings. While a 5-point harness can
give better protection in a side or rollover accident, statistics show that
frontal impacts are the most common and therefore the recommendation of 18kg
for forward facing in 5-point harness remains. If your child exceeds 18 kg
but is younger than four years of age we strongly recommend you keep your
child rear-facing in the 5-point harness. Do not be tempted to turn your
child forward into a booster position too early.

SO I'm wondering if any of you have experience with any of these seats and
could offer an opinion. We have to travel to a car seat tech person and are
planning to go and get them to install each and try them out but I'm leaning
towards the Zento at the moment.

abacus2

07-23-2008, 07:08 PM

Assuming it's true that the forces are greater on the head/neck for a heavier child in a harnessed seat than a booster, are these increased forces enough to make the over-all risk of serious injury greater? And what about the problem of a young, heavy child not staying properly positioned in a booster? A 25kg RFing seat is fabulous; I would jump at the chance to have one of those.

snowbird25ca

07-23-2008, 08:19 PM

This is a topic that has been described in some depth before, and there is no general consensus on the topic. One person who posts here has had in depth discussions with somebody who works on child restraint crash test in the Swedish National Institute.

Sweden is very clear in it's recommendation that children go from rf'ing at 4yrs old straight to a booster. This in in seemingly direct contradiction to the current North American trend of extended harnessing.

I have multiple thoughts...

- kids are able to rf past 40lbs in Swedish seats, so most kids actually make it to 4yrs old rf'ing.
- because of the side impact crash testing standards, the boosters are designed differently - does the difference in design affect how well a booster protects in all types of collisions? Perhaps the seatbelt geometry creates a variance too?
- car safety is something that most people are very conscious of in Sweden - has this created an environment where 4yr olds are more aware of the importance of sitting still in their booster so are less likely to be out of position?
- frontal impact collisions are most common statistically in North America as well, however, do our proportions of frontal compared to side impact and roll-over compare to Sweden's? If ours are 40% and Sweden's is 76%, then clearly that changes the balance of risk...

The issue with a 40lb 4yr old in a booster is really that they aren't mature enough to stay in position the whole trip every trip. It's not that having a 40lb child in a booster is dangerous - it's that most 4yr old kids simply aren't able to stay in position, and not being in the right position at the moment of impact is what kills and injures kids.

I don't think there's an easy answer to the issue - Sweden's injury data regarding children injured in collisions is impressive, and would lead to the belief that there is no inherent danger in their current practices. However, I don't believe that data can be transferred straight across due to the above stated differences and questions. We know that most 4yr olds in North America can't maintain a proper position in the vehicle when using a booster seat, and that makes a harnessed seat the safest choice for here.

I would personally choose a seat with the highest rf'ing limits. If you can get your kiddo to 5yrs old, it may really be fine to go straight to a booster depending on his/her maturity & weight. But at the very least, I'd want to get the most time rf'ing possible. Then buy a HWH seat if maturity/size/age is an issue once the rf'ing seat is outgrown. :twocents:

Adventuredad

07-25-2008, 02:19 PM

Snowbird summed up the issue well. The Swedes recommend going from rf at around 4-5 years of age to a belt positioning booster. Recommendations are AGAINST ff harnessing at that age. As mentioned, this has been discussed at length here before. The Swedes have an amazing safety record using booster but I find the key being that most kids start using the booster at much higher ages than in US.

Reasons for recommending against ff harnessing are the neck injuries. Unfortunately, many people are fooled by the Youtube video showing harnessed older kids sitting almost still in a crash and believing this is ideal. What many believe is a strength is actually the greatest weakness.

When parents have seats which can be used ff harnessed for older kids, like a Britax two-Way, the recommendation is to instead use a booster or the internal set belt.

I totally agree with these recommendations although the key is age of the child. Many kids go from a ff car seat to a booster way too early, which is terrible. The injury stats in Sweden are amazing but i find the key again being the age of the children. They mostly sit rf until 4 years of age and then go to a nice booster with side impact protection.

unfortunately, most countries don't offer children to sit f for as long as the Swedes which complicate the issue further. For a child 5 years of age, like my son, I prefer a good booster but would say being harnessed instead is about as safe. Sometimes better, sometimes worse.

skaterbabscpst

07-25-2008, 03:21 PM

I, on the other hand, do not believe that a four or five year old belongs in a booster at all. The brain synapses governing impulse control haven't even started to develop yet.

My own daughter will be in a harness at all times for at least another six months, and then will ONLY use a booster when riding with her grandmother who has seatbelts that lock at the restractor. She'll be five in October.

lenats31

07-25-2008, 04:40 PM

The main issues regarding child restraints in Australia are:

Early graduation from Rf to FF - the minimum recommended age for ff is 6 months and 8 kg! Maximum RF weight limit is 12 kg RF. But too many turn their children before the maximum has been reached and are unaware of the benefits of extended rearfacing, because of these recommendations.

Then there is early graduation from toddler seat to booster seat, which is due to the weight limits of the seats.

then there is incorrect installation.

These issues exsist in Europe to some extend too.

But they hardly exsist in Sweden, because of the higher weight limit RFíng seats. They close these gaps, and minimize all early graduation issues. Plus that they are much more likely to survive serious crashes than children in FF tethered seats like those in Aus. simply due to the direction the children ride in as well as the twin tethering and foot props.

Another thing is that European - with the exception of two seats and Australian car seats do not have the chest clip!

Lena

Adventuredad

07-26-2008, 03:44 AM

I think it's important to look at statistics and safety records when discussing this, not only personal opinions. There are many parents who believe ff at 9 months, booster use at 12 months, and not using a restraint at all, are perfectly safe even though that's incorrect. Personal opinions can really mess up car seat safety.

The Swedes have proven that booster seats are phenomenally safe when used by 4 year-ish old and up. Most experts in Sweden disagree with the opinion that a 5-year old isn't ready for a booster and they have stats that support their claim. The exception would be if a child has special needs or for some other reason can't sit in a booster. Also remember that the safety stats for kids also includes serious injuries and not only fatalities which experts here often point to when discussing why booster use is preferred.

I've said this before and I'll mention it again, I personally think harnessing and booster use from 4-5 years and up are about as safe. I have the option of choosing and I choose a booster. Others might prefer harnessing. But I object to the idea that harnessing is much safer for older kids. It's not proven and there are no comparative tests done between the two methods. And according to experts I've spoken to, it's way too complicated, costly and unnecessary to even attempt testing of this kind.

Many people mention that "harnessing is safer and going straight to a booster goes against what people in US are taught". US has a horrible safety records regarding traffic fatalities and injuries. Most trust people/nations/experts who have proven that their solutions over many years far more than others. Looking closely at countries with good safety records and see what they do is in my opinion a good start. China giving advice on democracy is not very credible, many see the car seat advice in US about the same.

Anyone who is harnessing their kids at an older age are doing just fine and I would not advice anyone to switch to a booster. The safety differences, if any, are relatively small.

Jwebbal

07-26-2008, 03:54 AM

Okay, now I am really confused. What does this warning mean for Regent owners?

http://www.childrestraints.co.nz/documents/Britax_Bulletin.pdf

Adventuredad

07-26-2008, 04:40 AM

It means don't believe everything you see and hear and also that car seats not certified in a specific country are technically illegal to use.

They are talking about one of the many misconceptions parents get from watching Youtube videos and drawing irrational and often incorrect conclusions. I don't know which video they are talking about but it's true that a harnessed child might be better off in some accidents. In other accidents a booster would be better. But this is impossible to know ahead of time since we can't determine when to have a serious accident.

If a seatbelt malfunctions or is released like in this case, which is incredibly rare, it's not much to do. In this video, the seatbelt was apparently released and the conclusion was that the child (and all children) would be safer in a harnessed seat than in a booster. That's true at a young age, say 2 or 3, but not for older children.

I know parents are very confused about this, I get emails and questions about it all the time. Harnessed older kids are just fine but it's not safer than a child in a booster seat. Unfortunately, parents look at various youtube videos and get all the wrong ideas.

I know the EU and US crash tests are similar, I don't know anything about the Australian tests but there are some Aussie experts here who surely know. Usually, it's illegal to use a seat which hasn't been certified in a particular country. It's illegal to use a EU certified seat in US and vice versa (some special rules apply when visiting and for military personnel). Using a US seat is Australia would be illegal. Personally, if it meant much higher safety I wouldn't care but that's not an official recommendation.:whistle:

Jessie78

07-26-2008, 07:51 AM

Get in contact with CRS about this. She knows heaps about Aussie and NZ carseats etc, and will be able to help you out. :)

I personally don't take Aussie recommendations as gospel, seeing as they seem to think it's fine to FF from 6 months. No thanks!
You can only use Aussie seats over there too, so the Brio etc won't be available to you. :(

MomToEliEm

07-26-2008, 07:56 AM

lenats31

07-26-2008, 12:59 PM

There is one thing tough,

I remember that a mom in Australia vent to the States just about 2 years ago, and brought back three Regent seats. She wanted her son to remain harnessed due to autism.

Two of the Regent seats were privately crash tested IN Australia. The seat was approved for use in Australia for this family only. The mom paid the entire thing out of her own pocket - 1800 AUS dollars.

I don´t know exactly what crash tests two of the seats were put through - the regular ones or specific ones.

I bought a Römer/Britax Kidfix (ISOFIX HHB booster) about two weeks ago. DD is only in the Regent on long road trips. Mostly she sits in the Multi-Tech when her brother is not in the car. All other times, she is in the Kidfix, which isn´t often.

Lena

skaterbabscpst

07-26-2008, 01:54 PM

arly1983

07-26-2008, 05:18 PM

The age range with the highest death and injury rate isn't the group in five-point harnesses. It's the group that should be boostered and aren't, or should be harnessed and aren't. It's 4-12 year olds that are most likely to be injured, which tells me that these kids would benefit from being harnessed (under age 6) or boostered (6-12.)

I am not trying to argue either point. Really. Just following with interest.

But as far as 4-12 year old being the highest death and injury rate. I don't think we can conclude from that information that 4-6 yr olds are safer in a harness vs. a booster when it is not that common to even see a five/four yr old in a booster in the US which is where the data was gathered. The only way you conclude that was if the data were broken down to death/injury rate in subgroups of who was boostered and who was in nothing.

fyrfightermomma

07-26-2008, 07:48 PM

This is one topic that really confuses me. I just don't understand it....really I don't!

We say that a 4 year old here does not have the maturity to sit properly in a booster. Doesn't happen till age 6 or later. So they won't sit properly and need to be restrained.

However, in other countries, their 4 year olds do just fine in boosters and they have impecable safety records in those countries. This is a country that rear faces longer than any other, has fewer deaths than any other. I just find it hard that to believe that a country as safety conscious would not harness as long as possible, if it was safer.

Which is making me really start to doubt the whole harness vs booster thing in our country(for older kids, not younger kids) Even with 4 year olds in boosters there, they have an extremely low rate of death from MVA's. Here we have a huge # of deaths, but are those deaths the 1 year olds FFing, or the 3 year olds in boosters, or the 4 year olds in boosters?

If the majority of deaths here are from early FFing or kids too young for boosters (under age 4) that really does not prove harnessing is safer at a later age than boostering.

I wish they could release that type of stats. If the majority of deaths are from younger kids in boosters, and not in the over 4 category....then we don't really have an argument. Do we honestly have proof and stats to say that over the age of 4 a child is safer in a harness?? Or is it just another form of restraint that is JUST as safe as a booster

I am just playing devil's advocate here. I just think other countries with awesome safety records, who rear face their kids to age 4 or beyond....I think I might be more inclined to listen to them. They havent had a huge spike in deaths in 4-5 year olds in boosters I assume. They probably don't have the deaths in the 1-3 year category because most are probably still RFing.

I just have been thinking alot about this lately. I don't understand why our kids for some reason "can't sit properly" in a booster at age 4, yet theirs are just fine......

help me out here :)

QuassEE

07-26-2008, 10:20 PM

snowbird25ca

07-26-2008, 10:47 PM

I have a Swede for a father, and a Brit for a mother...and I have to say...their parenting styles differ completely from your average American parent (of their same age)... American parents are more reactive and less pro-active. My parents were also safety conscious to the point of *paranoid*..{I was in a carseat until *2*, in the 70s!!} I think we can add parenting styles to the mix of other variables we just cannot account for in statistics alone.

-Nicole.

I'm in complete agreement, and I suspect that that is the differentiating factor in the 4yr olds in Sweden seemingly being safe in a booster while 4yr olds here don't sit still.

I think kids who have it engrained in them from birth the importance of safety, and just a different society in general, may have the maturity to sit properly in a booster. And it's possible that the different boosters they have there make it more likely for a child to stay in position.

I stand by my opinion that it's not that a booster is dangerous for a 4yr old 40lb child who can sit still properly, it's that most 4yr old kids can't sit still properly, and that's pretty easily verified just by watching kids in the backseat. ;)

(On a somewhat related note, I wonder if incidence of autism and ADD/ADHD are similar? Maybe our kids are more "on the go" then their kids?)

QuassEE

07-26-2008, 11:00 PM

(On a somewhat related note, I wonder if incidence of autism and ADD/ADHD are similar? Maybe our kids are more "on the go" then their kids?)

That's not something we can really say, one way or another.. The Americans use the DSM-IV-TR (an APA publication), and the Europeans use the ICD-10.. It's like speaking two different languages, with some overlap here and there.. :) Not to mention, beyond potentially differing diagnostic criteria, there are different methods of reporting disorders. I know California (where I'm from) has been great at reporting instances of spectrum disorders, but other states really fall short unless kids are receiving some sort of assistance (Head Start, etc). I'm sure the same goes in Europe. You can't even take representative random samples from populations because of the whole "autism pockets" thing... Again--no real answers, just more questions.

-Nicole.

skaterbabscpst

07-26-2008, 11:29 PM

I am not trying to argue either point. Really. Just following with interest.

But as far as 4-12 year old being the highest death and injury rate. I don't think we can conclude from that information that 4-6 yr olds are safer in a harness vs. a booster when it is not that common to even see a five/four yr old in a booster in the US which is where the data was gathered. The only way you conclude that was if the data were broken down to death/injury rate in subgroups of who was boostered and who was in nothing.

Not really, because you can compare the 1-3 year olds who are harnessed to the 4-8 yos in boosters (we DO have the stats now), and the 4-8 yos in seatbelts.

CRS

07-27-2008, 04:51 AM

I own and sell the Brio Zento - how do you intend on trying one? Are you coming to New Zealand? If you'd like to know anything I'd be glad to help :)

Adventuredad

07-27-2008, 04:51 AM

If a harness is unsafe for anyone over a certain weight/height, why do race car drives wear a harness instead of a seatbelt? I am sure the racing industry wouldn't want to put there drives at risk by using an unsafe harness method.

In other countries, do they wear a harness or just use a seatbelt to hold them in?

Race car drivers are often (always?) older people, not toddlers or 5 year olds with neck and bone muscles which are far from developed. There is a world of difference between a 5 year old and a 20 year old in body development.

lenats31

07-27-2008, 05:06 AM

Hi,

Well, I live in Denmark, and many of you know this already.

BUT, we have a Britax Regent for dd. The primary reason that we got it, is because she may be autistic and currently going through tests for Autism Spectrum Disorder. We don´t know for sure that this is it. But what we DO know is that she has sensory motor skills difficulties.

We did try her in a booster seat prior to getting the Regent. However, that was not a pretty sight. She was all over the back seat. Put the seatbelt under her arm, lie down on the back seat etc. and could not understand why she couldn´t do that. Sarah only "hears" one part of a sentence. The rest goes down the drain.

She sits nicely in a booster seat now, and so we got her a regular booster like the one Adventuredad´s son has. Ours is with ISOFIX. We still use the Regent, but that´s on long road trips. This is because we are still unsure, how long she will sit nicely in her booster.

Most of the time, she uses Mathias´s seat when he is not in the car.

Lena

Adventuredad

07-27-2008, 09:32 AM

The US safety stats for kids are horrible but I also feel the stats are worse not so much because of what kind of car seat use. Unrestrained kids are a big problem. I think it's very interesting to discuss this issue of booster vs. harness but in the big picture it doesn't really mater. Both are very safe and kids, when properly restrained, will do just fine.

I have a Swede for a father, and a Brit for a mother...and I have to say...their parenting styles differ completely from your average American parent (of their same age)... American parents are more reactive and less pro-active. My parents were also safety conscious to the point of *paranoid*..{I was in a carseat until *2*, in the 70s!!} I think we can add parenting styles to the mix of other variables we just cannot account for in statistics alone.

Swedish parents aren't any better than others but the safety thinking is kind of built in because of constant reminders from media, government, and other organizations. My parents had me rear facing as a bay in 1967 which I think is impressive. It's really fascinating to see the contrast. Very few parents here (Sweden) discuss car seats the way done here. Everyone gets an infant seat, then a rf seat until 4, and then a booster. It's default thinking, it's so obvious that parents barely discuss it. I think this makes a huge difference in he long run but it also take a long time to built up this kind of attitude towards safety.

I feel the largest secret of Swedish safety is percentage of kids who are restrained. 95% are restrained, maybe not always in the best possible way but still travel with some kind of protection.

Which is making me really start to doubt the whole harness vs booster thing in our country(for older kids, not younger kids) Even with 4 year olds in boosters there, they have an extremely low rate of death from MVA's. Here we have a huge # of deaths, but are those deaths the 1 year olds FFing, or the 3 year olds in boosters, or the 4 year olds in boosters?

It's a very interesting discussion and you make a great point. Harnessed or booster at 5 years old offer great protection. I don't have the US stats to back this up but I feel like many parents are placing their kids in boosters way too soon. I don't think the problem is 5 year olds in boosters dying or being severely injured, it's 1, 2, and maybe three year olds.

I would love to see crash stats comparing harnessed kids with boosters in similar crash situations. I don't think we would see much of a difference in fatalities but experts here constantly point out neck injuries are greater in harnessed seats. A comparison like this is impossible and probably also kind of irrelevant in the big picture but it would be interesting anyway.

They probably don't have the deaths in the 1-3 year category because most are probably still RFing.

In 2007, two (2) kids died in car accidents aged 1-4 years old. If I remember correctly, one of those drowned because the car ended up in water and the other one got crushed by a huge semi-trailer. So rf is great and I think the Swedish safety strategy is working well. But I think the most important thing is for kids to be restrained in a seat, any seat is better than nothing. And seat belt is also better than nothing although not desired.

BUT, we have a Britax Regent for dd. The primary reason that we got it, is because she may be autistic and currently going through tests for Autism Spectrum Disorder. We don´t know for sure that this is it. But what we DO know is that she has sensory motor skills difficulties.

I totally agree harnessed may be preferred in situations like these. I also think some parents forget to kind of "educate" their kids about how to sit. Most just fasten the seatbelt and don't care about how the kids sit. A booster is fairly useless if the arm is over the seatbelt or the child is laying down.

Jacks

07-27-2008, 12:39 PM

They are talking about one of the many misconceptions parents get from watching Youtube videos and drawing irrational and often incorrect conclusions. Harnessed older kids are just fine but it's not safer than a child in a booster seat. Unfortunately, parents look at various youtube videos and get all the wrong ideas.

What an interesting discussion. I know crash test videos on Youtube (or anywhere else for that matter) aren't the end all be all in terms of determining the safety of extended harnessing VS. booster seats. I do believe that several of those crash test videos specifically show what would happen to a child's body during a 30 mph accident while restrained in a booster, seatbelt and 5 pt. harness.

There are so many factors to consider...the safety features of each vehicle, ease of use and proper installation and the ability of the child to sit properly in whatever seat they are in at all times. Also, the vehicles on the roads here in the US tend to be MUCH larger than the vehicles on the roads in Europe. I don't know...if my 4 yo DS and I are in an accident in my little Passat Wagon even at 30 mph with say a HUGE Chevy Surburban, I think I'm going to feel much safer with him in a harness than a booster.

Adventuredad

07-27-2008, 12:50 PM

I agree that a harnessed child SEEM to be much safer in one of those youtube videos. The child barely moves and everything looks great. The booster child moves and it looks horrible. But what looks like the greatest strength of the harness seat is also the greatest weakness. The force on the neck is tremendous. Most people don' realize this simple fact, it's not always desirable for a child to remain almost still in a high sped crash. Things aren't always what they seem.

That's why these videos often give parents the wrong ideas about car seat safety. and i agree with you, it's a very interesting subject and I love that fact we can discuss it even though many of us have different opinons.

What an interesting discussion. I know crash test videos on Youtube (or anywhere else for that matter) aren't the end all be all in terms of determining the safety of extended harnessing VS. booster seats. I do believe that several of those crash test videos specifically show what would happen to a child's body during a 30 mph accident while restrained in a booster, seatbelt and 5 pt. harness.

There are so many factors to consider...the safety features of each vehicle, ease of use and proper installation and the ability of the child to sit properly in whatever seat they are in at all times. Also, the vehicles on the roads here in the US tend to be MUCH larger than the vehicles on the roads in Europe. I don't know...if my 4 yo DS and I are in an accident in my little Passat Wagon even at 30 mph with say a HUGE Chevy Surburban, I think I'm going to feel much safer with him in a harness than a booster.

scatterbunny

07-27-2008, 02:00 PM

Someone once posted bone development photographs from a human osteology textbook, showing the different stages of bone development in the spine. The spine fuses sometime between 3-6 years old, and presumably at that point the neck is strong enough to withstand crash forces forward-facing. I think ideally we'd rear-face to age 4-6 and then harness if the child isn't mature enough to sit in a booster, or longer, if the parent feels it's safer (tiny vehicle/low crash scores, etc.).

I really think if we were seeing injuries to the necks of older kids in harnesses, we should be hearing about it, wouldn't we?

I go back and forth on this. H moved to a booster at 4 years old because her Husky didn't install well in my new (to me) vehicle. She did not do well at all on trips longer than about 10 minutes, even though we began booster-training at not quite 4 in her dad's truck (she was 40 pounds at 3y4mo). We got another harnessed seat and kept her harnessed 95% of the time until she turned 6.

I also think some parents forget to kind of "educate" their kids about how to sit. Most just fasten the seatbelt and don't care about how the kids sit. A booster is fairly useless if the arm is over the seatbelt or the child is laying down.

That is an important point to reiterate. :thumbsup: I think most US parents aren't as safety-conscious as they should be, and pass that attitude on to the children. If I hadn't ever let my daughter ride in a booster for short trips from ages 4-6, how would she have done in her booster full-time at 6? Probably not very good, I'm assuming, since the freedom of movement the booster allows would have been brand-new. She would have been testing her limits on long road trips, and that would not have been good. But the 5-10 minute trips that we did in the beginning, the constant education on car safety over a period of months and years, made all the difference, and she's a wonderful booster-rider.

Still, after the chat with Sarah Tilton from Britax and Dr. Laura Jana awhile back, I was again convinced of the benefits of extended harnessing. H rides in a harness on any road trip (basically, any time we leave the county, any trip longer than about 20 minutes one-way), and if the harnessed seat is installed in the vehicle, she generally will choose it over her boosters. In my little vehicle (Ford Focus) I worry seriously about side impacts, rollovers and instrusion into my vehicle in a crash. The less my child's body moves out of the shell of her seat, the better...the less chance there is of her body coming into contact with the vehicle interior, or a part of the vehicle crashing into ours.

skaterbabscpst

07-27-2008, 03:52 PM

Mama!

07-27-2008, 03:53 PM

For me, my dd is tall, very thin, and not sturdy at all. If she were a huge hunk of a kid with a muscular build and bigger bone structure, I might not be so uncomfortable with her boostered at almost 5. But i just think about her frame size and shudder.

This conversation has really educated me, btw. I love reading about statistics and impact of crash on the child in real world terms.

Adventuredad

07-27-2008, 04:45 PM

I really think if we were seeing injuries to the necks of older kids in harnesses, we should be hearing about it, wouldn't we?

Maybe, maybe not. To study injuries in such detail tremendous amount of resources must be dedicated. There are 40 000+ deaths each year and I can't even image the amount of injured people. Traffic studies/solutions/education is far from a priority in US so I'm not so sure neck injuries would be such a ig deal.

If we were actually seeig such injuries you might have a point, but there is no data to support this claim.

The whole point with the Swedish booster recommendation is to decrease neck injuries while still keeping the kids safe. Researchers here are noticing neck injuries in their research and therefore making this recommendation. Also see above, I'm not so sure about detailed injury stats.

Things aren't always what they seem. I was discussing ff vs. rf issues with someone on another forum a while back. This person was apparently "knowledgeable" and said ff should definitely be allowed from 9 months in Australia since there was no downside. She mentiond Australian research shows not one single toddler has ever received neck injuries while ff. That their researchers must be on crack is another story I guess.

scatterbunny

07-27-2008, 04:49 PM

She mentiond Australian research shows not one single toddler has ever received neck injuries while ff.

I've heard this, too. Could this be because the seats are tethered FF? I've heard that theory kicked around a bit.

joolsplus3

07-27-2008, 06:48 PM

Ah, no neck injuries 'in the absence of head contact with the vehicle interior' is the other part of that statement (paraphrased). They contend that the top tether prevents head contact well enough to prevent most injury. That ANEC study that we've just seen does seem to show that is wrong, however.

CRS

07-27-2008, 07:58 PM

I've heard this, too. Could this be because the seats are tethered FF? I've heard that theory kicked around a bit.

I think their "stats" are a load of *cough* sorry forgot what I was saying.. I was quite alarmed (and a little upset to be honest) at a customer I had the other day. She is/was a nurse and was adamant that her child would be rear-facing for as long as possible due to the amount of injuries she saw with children that most likely could have been prevented had they been rear-facing. Which is alarming to me, because those kinds of injuries are virtually never heard of, much less reported in the media.

Adventuredad

07-28-2008, 02:45 AM

Regardless how a child is restrained ff, or even rf, it's impossible to not have some neck injuries. Are we really to believe that in tens of thousands (hundreds of thousands?, don't know how far back it goes) there was not one single little neck injury? That's laughable and goes against all logic and everything that researchers have been working on for the past 40 years.

Maybe rear facing is all an conspiracy by the governments, like in that other thread about breast feeding which was very entertaining. You are all aware that breast feeding is a massive conspiracy to cut down on cost of formula to the less fortunate, right?!:whistle:

lenats31

07-28-2008, 02:28 PM

I've heard this, too. Could this be because the seats are tethered FF? I've heard that theory kicked around a bit.

Sorry, but Standards Australia is like a scratched vinly record. Their researches regarding child seat safety hit this conclussion all the time since the 1970ies.

I am in no way critizing you - not at all - just these statements, because they come from St. Aus.
I think there are lots of "coughs" in the statement regarding no neck and head injuries to children in FF seats - espcially now that I read nurses see the complete opposite. The laws of physics are the same all over the world.

Lena

sparkyd

07-28-2008, 04:23 PM

If a harness is unsafe for anyone over a certain weight/height, why do race car drives wear a harness instead of a seatbelt? I am sure the racing industry wouldn't want to put there drives at risk by using an unsafe harness method.

I just wanted to point out that head and neck injuries are a HUGE concern for race car drivers and that most of them (all of them in the big series) wear something called a HANS device (head and neck support device) to minimize the risk. It is like a horseshoe that goes around the neck and over the shoulders. The shoulder belts go on top of that to secure it to the driver, and the helmet is attached to the device in the back with two tethers. It keeps the head from whiplashing forward when the body is being held back by the belt. This is a major innovation in safety for race car drivers.

More info if you're interested:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HANS_device

Maybe helmets and HANS devices will be the next big thing in car seat safety, eh? ;)