Canadian Paediatric Society & FF Minimums

[shauburg]

With the latest AAP recommedations (http://www.car-seat.org/showthread.php?t=78758, I wonder if the Canadian Paediatric Society (CPS) will follow suit.

Last November I e-mailed the principal author of this CPS position paper - http://www.cps.ca/english/statements/IP/IP08-01.htm. Given that is was written in 2008 (after the late 2007 studies came out stating the RF until age 2 is 5x safer), I wanted to know why there was little emphasis placed on the importance of "extended" rear facing.

Her response was:
"You are absolutely correct in that rear facing should be the preferred seating position until the infant/toddler has outgrown the Ht and wt limits as outlined by the manufacturer of the restraint system. We will certainly make this point more strongly in future revisions and hopefully manufacturing will adapt to facilitating seats for this purpose in North America. The AAP statement on this issue also does not address this particular point and recommends 1 yr and 20 lbs for changing to forward facing. In our partnership with them, I will also be sure to pass your comments along."

So now that the AAP has changed their recommendations, I'm hoping the CPS will too. In fact, maybe I will e-mail her back and ask her!

[TechnoGranola]

Let us know when/what you hear back.

[April]

It would be SOOOOO nice to have a "credible" source to give parents to support the argument for ERF. And what I mean is that so many parents think "we" are nuts and that their pediatricians know everything. So at least we could say, "Here, read what the pedis say."

We were just talking about this in the CDN chat last night. I'm not holding my breath, but it sure would be nice if CPS would jump on the bandwagon.

[sparkyd]

This was published a year ago, right around the same time I became aware of ERF: http://www.caringforkids.cps.ca/keepkidssafe/CarSeatSafety.htm

I have a friend that works at CPS and I asked her why they wouldn't put more emphasis on RF past a year and she said it is because so many people turn their kids FF before they even reach the minimums. They felt the need to empahsize the minimum so that people will at least get that far.

I still find that to be a very unsatisfying answer, but she is a good friend (and one that turned her son FF as soon as he met the minimum because he screamed all the time RF :thumbsdown: ... I wish I had known more then so I could have suggested some things to try before resorting to FF), so I never argued with her about it beyond my initial questions. Now that I'm certified and not merely a kooky car seat zealot (;)), I'm hoping she might turn to me to ask questions with #2 that was just born in February. I'd already like to take the harness covers off his Peg seat and tighten it more... but I know enough to keep my mouth shut and wait until my opinion is requested in this case. :o

[tcottawa]

Now that I'm certified and not merely a kooky car seat zealot (;))

Hmm, some people take that I'm certified as evidence that I'm a kooky carseat zealot...:whistle:

[sparkyd]

Hmm, some people take that I'm certified as evidence that I'm a kooky carseat zealot...:whistle:

Yeah, good point. I guess I should have said "...not merely an unqualified kooky car seat zealot..." ;)

[mommycat]

Yes, now we can be considered as Certified Kooky Carseat Zealots. I do hope we get some updated recommendations.

[shauburg]

So now that the AAP has changed their recommendations, I'm hoping the CPS will too. In fact, maybe I will e-mail her back and ask her!

So I did just that and this is what she said:
"Yes we are aware of the revised (AAP) recommendations and would be planning for our (CPS) statement to be tabled at our winter 2010 mtg, I believe that is when it is next up for review. However, we do have a mtg in June of this year, and thereby our earliest opportunity to discuss with the committee if we wish to proceed differently"

They will keep me posted, so there is hope yet, but it may take a while!