new ff minimum?

If your seat says 20, and your law says 20: 20.

If your seat says 22, and your law says 20: 22. (Proper use)

If your seat says 20, and your law says 22: 22. (Law)

If both say 22: 22. (Proper use AND Law)

{Existing seats are not retroactively required to comply...that would be like when implementing DRLs and airbags in all cars, expecting somebody to update their 1930s vehicle to comply.}

-Nicole.

snowbird25ca said:

I'm going to get kind of technical on here, just because while it's a very slight difference, it's important to know just in case a parent does decide to get in to the technicalities with you. :thumbsup:

There are no federal laws on how a child is transported. Traffic laws are set by the provinces, and basically the only role that the federal government has is to tell provincial governments that they have to have a law applicable to something. Even then, I'm not super clear on the technicalities of the feedback loop that exists.
...

Click to expand...

Thanks for explaining all that, because it is indeed clear as mud. Just for the record - I did know those details already. Barb taught part of my course. :thumbsup:

This really is semantics, but as I understand it CMVSS 213 is a standard within the Motor Vehicle Restraint Systems and Booster Seats Safety Regulations that go with the Motor Vehicle Safety Act and it is the "law". Just because it applies to the actual seats and what manufacturers are allowed to put on the shelves doesn't change the fact that it is law and has (or will have) a direct impact on when children can FF. Based on that I have no qualms about telling people that there is a "new law" about how long they have to RF their children. Just because most of the provinces need to play catch up that doesn't change the fact that this is the law and it will apply to all new seats and how caregivers use those seats. :twocents:

With regard to the provinces, what I've heard is that there is some head scratching at TC about the fact that this federal law for seat standards is inconsistent with most provincial laws for seat use and how and when that will resolve itself because this is the first time that the federal law has been stricter than the provincial ones. Just what I heard. :shrug-shoulders: Don't get semantic on me for my wording in that sentence.

sparkyd said:

With regard to the provinces, what I've heard is that there is some head scratching at TC about the fact that this federal law for seat standards is inconsistent with most provincial laws for seat use and how and when that will resolve itself because this is the first time that the federal law has been stricter than the provincial ones. Just what I heard. :shrug-shoulders: Don't get semantic on me for my wording in that sentence.

Click to expand...

LOL, no I won't get semantic on you on that one. I've had a conversation with someone in AB actually - we're still distributing stuff saying 20lbs. Apparently our law "doesn't need to be changed" because of the way it's written. Our government sucks - to be mild with my words, in their unwillingness to protect children and review laws that are instrumental in keeping our kids safe. We don't have a booster law yet because 'Albertan's don't like to be told what to do.'

Uh-huh. Yet we have no trouble telling people to wear bike helmets or seatbelts or use carseats in general - you would think the law might include correct minimums and booster use.

So yeah, AB is one of the heel draggers and given how things seem to go here, we may see 22lbs show up 5 yrs from now. *sigh*

Just a side note on this. Why the bug fuss about 2lb? Is there usually a long time span between 20lb and 22lb for most kids? I know for my dd, she went from 20lb to 23lb almost overnight.

amelia222 said:

Just a side note on this. Why the bug fuss about 2lb? Is there usually a long time span between 20lb and 22lb for most kids? I know for my dd, she went from 20lb to 23lb almost overnight.

Click to expand...

Because for some kids, that can mean months more rearfacing at an age where it is of greatest importance. 50th percentile girl hits 20lbs at 10.5m old, but doesn't hit 22lbs until 13.5 months.

Wow I didn't realize that! Thanks.

tiggercat said:

Because for some kids, that can mean months more rearfacing at an age where it is of greatest importance. 50th percentile girl hits 20lbs at 10.5m old, but doesn't hit 22lbs until 13.5 months.

Click to expand...

Yup. Really, every little bit helps. Plus it isn't just the weight. The new standard also includes that a child must be walking unassisted. That doesn't change much for kids that walk at 10 months, but lots (most?) kids aren't walking totally independently until past a year, so that keeps them rear-facing that much longer. And really, tying something like that to a developmental milestone makes way more sense than weight or age.