Is this possible?

ConnorsMommy · Sep 23, 2010

One another group that I am on, a mom posted saying that her and her son were in a serious collision where they were rear ended on the highway by a car going 95 mph. She said that she hit her head on the seat and her airbag went off. She said that her ERF son was knocked unconscious and is now in critical condition at the hospital. She said that the police officer who responded told her that because of the physics involved, her son would have been fine if he was FF.
If this story is true, I feel sad for the family and what they are going through. The mom said she blames herself for keeping her child RF longer, resulting in his serious injury.
At the same time, some details of her story do not make sense. For example, airbags do not deploy in rear-end collisions. Second, I remember another story about a family that was in a serious rear-end collision, hit while at a complete stop by someone going 65 mph and the RF child was fine. I know that there are some collisions that result in serious injury no matter which way the child is facing.
What do you think about this story? I still strongly believe in ERF, but if this story is true, it can cause some people to question the safety of ERF.

wendytthomas · Sep 23, 2010

Was the car newer? In an impact objects move toward the point of impact. So in this case her son would have reacted like a frontal collision, and she would have slammed into the back of her own seat. If she's in a newer car with advanced airbags, I could see the sensor going gaga and setting off the airbag. Especially if she was pushed into something.

Luckily, serious rear collisions account for only 2-4% of crashes. Not zero, as she found out, but keeping him rear facing would have protected him in the other 96-98% of crashes he was likely to face. We play the odds here. We cannot protect every child in every instance. Kids and babies will die. Some crashes are unsurvivable. Some are freak crashes. And some are just sad. In this one instance yes, he would have been better off forward facing. Forty nine other times out of fifty he would have been better rear facing.

I hope he recovers.

Wendy

glockchick · Sep 23, 2010

Do you know if the seat the baby was in had any type for rebound control?

I hope the little boy recovers as well.

Sarah62008 · Sep 23, 2010

In addition to what the PPs said, was the seat installed properly? And was the child restrained properly?

The odds of a child being injured RF instead of FF are so small that it's safer to keep kids RF.

skylinphoto · Sep 23, 2010

Its a risk everyone takes when they get on the road. She was doing the best she knew to do (and we all know to do) and thats all you can do. Sometimes the odds are against you.

andre149 · Sep 23, 2010

How sad! I too would be a little concerned about her convincing other people not to ERF because of her experience... but in reality the majority of crashes are front/side impact, and he probably would have been much more seriously injured if he had been ff and that had been the case.

Hope he recovers quickly!

LuciaBella · Sep 23, 2010

That's horrible. You know, it's possible that she might be playing up the dramatics a little bit, not to be insensitive.

95mph?? Wow, that's very fast. I'm sure even if he was forward facing, he still would incur injuries. Being in a crash where someone is going 95mph hardly results in people walking away.

I hope he gets better.

Traquy · Sep 23, 2010

I guess my life is bucking the odds. I've been in 3 accidents in my life and in all three I was rear ended, 2 fairly serious the other very minor. My husband has, to my knowledge, only had 2 accidents also both rear enders (one the hit-ee, one the hitter). Apparently people driving around us didn't get the memo about the side/front impact statistics. Just making the same point. Even with our history I still suggest ERF to people.

christineka · Sep 23, 2010

ShannaLeah said:
Do you know if the seat the baby was in had any type for rebound control?

No. The child was in a dorel seat.

The poster has added some vague pictures. One of the deployed air bag and one of the ditch. (No vehicle.) Apparently she was hit and slid into the ditch. The poster also created a new account just today. Apparently she was such a big troublemaker about erfing that she had her previous account deleted and so had to make a new one today to share her story about how erfing wasn't the safest in this particular circumstance.

Athena · Sep 24, 2010

Traquy said:
I guess my life is bucking the odds. I've been in 3 accidents in my life and in all three I was rear ended, 2 fairly serious the other very minor. My husband has, to my knowledge, only had 2 accidents also both rear enders (one the hit-ee, one the hitter). Apparently people driving around us didn't get the memo about the side/front impact statistics. Just making the same point. Even with our history I still suggest ERF to people.

I've been rear ended a few times too. Honestly, until reading it fairly recently (maybe even here?), I had no idea those weren't the most common types of collisions. They seemed to be so common. Reading this now, I'm trying to convince myself I'm doing the right thing, but given my experience and the fact that my 2 yo is RF, I'm feeling really anxious right now after reading about this.

Wiggles · Sep 24, 2010

It's not that rear-end collisions are the rarest, according to my understanding.

It's that SERIOUS rear-end collisions are the rarest, making up only 4% of SERIOUS collisions.

Sure, you get into a fender-bender where someone rolls forward at the stoplight, your kid gets jostled. That's what MOST rear-end collisions are.

Whereas the serious ones, the ones that result in emergency services being called out and roads being closed, are more than likely NOT rear-end--they're more likely to be frontal, frontal offset, side-impact or rollovers.

Which would you rather have your kid have more protection against? A little jostling or being spun 75 feet across the freeway and through a guardrail?

wendytthomas · Sep 24, 2010

Remember that only half of rear enders are rear collisions. The guy hitting you just had a frontal collision.

Wendy

Adventuredad · Sep 24, 2010

Sounds like a terrible accident. Collisions from the rear account just like Wendy said for a very low percentage of the total. I normally say "around 5%" but this will vary a little bit.

Collisions from the rear are also the least severe since both cars are normally going in the same direction and collisions are often at low speed.

We do know that rear facing children in a collision from the rear are as safe or safer than forward facing. Benefits are of course huge in frontal and side impact collisions but it's never an disadvantage to ride rear facing.

I'm a little doubtful of the speed being 95 mph. How fast was she going? 95 mph is way beyond what's survivable in normal cases. Frontal collisions above 50 mph are for example difficult to survive, children who sit rear facing do have a great chance of surviving though.

We aim to protect children in car seats well regardless of speed but it's important to look at statistics to see what a "normal" accident looks like. 95% of all injuries in car accidents take place at 31 mph or less.

pepsicola · Sep 24, 2010

Here is the thread:

http://community.babycenter.com/post/a24406451/erf_tragety...im_so_broken?cpg=1&csi=2215013375&pd=-2

aeormsby · Sep 24, 2010

I'm not on BBC much at all anymore. But looking at that thread (just the 1st couple of posts) if she was driving normal highway speeds (assuming 65mph) and was hit by someone going 95mph it's essentially the same as being stopped and getting hit by someone going 30mph. I didn't see the pictures, but I can't imagine an accident on the interstate like that and not hitting anything else - the other movements as a result of the accident could cause more injuries than the initial impact - like how did she come to a stop?

I agree with others that have said you can't protect for every situation, it's just not possible. You do what you can to keep every one as safe as possible, and ERF is the best way to do that in the car.

TXAggieTech · Sep 24, 2010

Rest of the thread is a few dozen pages pondering if she is a troll or not.

SafeDad · Sep 24, 2010

Wiggles said:
It's not that rear-end collisions are the rarest, according to my understanding.

It's that SERIOUS rear-end collisions are the rarest, making up only 4% of SERIOUS collisions.

Sure, you get into a fender-bender where someone rolls forward at the stoplight, your kid gets jostled. That's what MOST rear-end collisions are.

Whereas the serious ones, the ones that result in emergency services being called out and roads being closed, are more than likely NOT rear-end--they're more likely to be frontal, frontal offset, side-impact or rollovers.

Correct. Rear-enders are not uncommon overall, as most of the injuries are whiplash related. Some serious, some not-so-serious. It's when you count fatal and life threatening injuries that rear-enders account for only 5 to 10 pecent of those crashes, depending on the statistics you use.

wendytthomas said:
Remember that only half of rear enders are rear collisions. The guy hitting you just had a frontal collision.

Wendy

For statstics that track the type of crashes, head-ons are counted as one frontal incident, not two. Rear-enders count as one rear impact, not a frontal and a rear.

Admin · Sep 24, 2010

We recently had another thread of this type, discussing an incident posted in public on another forum. As long as the incident is posted in public elsewhere, it's generally fine to discuss it in public here.

As a general reminder to all participating in this thread, please refrain from making accusations or personal comments regarding those involved in the crash in public here, as it reflects poorly on Car-Seat.Org and our community. If you have doubts about the events or parts of the story, please find a way to debate them in a polite manner.

lenats31 · Sep 24, 2010

ConnorsMommy said:
One another group that I am on, a mom posted saying that her and her son were in a serious collision where they were rear ended on the highway by a car going 95 mph. She said that she hit her head on the seat and her airbag went off. She said that her ERF son was knocked unconscious and is now in critical condition at the hospital. She said that the police officer who responded told her that because of the physics involved, her son would have been fine if he was FF.
If this story is true, I feel sad for the family and what they are going through. The mom said she blames herself for keeping her child RF longer, resulting in his serious injury.
At the same time, some details of her story do not make sense. For example, airbags do not deploy in rear-end collisions. Second, I remember another story about a family that was in a serious rear-end collision, hit while at a complete stop by someone going 65 mph and the RF child was fine. I know that there are some collisions that result in serious injury no matter which way the child is facing.
What do you think about this story? I still strongly believe in ERF, but if this story is true, it can cause some people to question the safety of ERF.

If that had been a frontal collision with the boy in an FF seat, he would have been killed on the spot.

Now the question wether or not his seat was tethered pops up. I would like to know that too.

Lena

equilibrium · Sep 24, 2010

Can someone help me understand? Perhaps I am tired. I am learning about the benefits of ERF etc. And the statement a few times that in say *this* incident, it would have been "better" if the child was FF. Is this because (as someone mentioned earlier) that things fly towards the pt of impact? There is a lot of discussion about the risk, minimizing it by ERF for statistics purposes-I understand that aspect. I am trying to understand why the effects were worse by RF in *this* situation (ie/the physics). I appreciate any help. Sorry for my silly questions!

Is this possible?

New member

Admin - CPST Instructor

New member

Senior Community Member

New member

New member

LuciaBella

Guest

New member

New member

Well-known member

New member

Admin - CPST Instructor

New member

New member

New member

Active member

CPSDarren - Admin

Admin - Webmaster

New member

New member

Car-Seat.Org Facebook Group

Sponsors

Forum statistics