Question Middle vs side for forward facing carseat only.

I just bought my 14 month a Recaro ProSport combination carseat. It can only be used in forward facing position. Should I install it in the middle back or side back seat of my car? I have a 2010 honda pilot and per the manual of the car any location in the back will work for a carseat. I currently have my daughter in chicco infant carseat in the middle back, which she is about to grow out of. I figured I would keep her in the middle with her new "big girl" carseat until a babies r us employee told me that a forward facing child shouldn't be in the middle b/c in event of car accident an object could come through the wind sheild hitting the middle passenger. Now I'm lost and don't know where to put her carseat......Help. and yes I realize rearfacing is best until age 2, but the carseat I've chosen is only forward facing. Thanks .

That's insanely bad information you got from BRU. Sitting in the middle is bad 'when you aren't restrained', because your body doesn't even have a chance to hit the seatback to stop forward motion. When you ARE restrained, it's the safest place, because you are furthest from point of impact, should you be in a side crash.
14 months is really way too young to be forward facing, is there any way you can return the Recaro, or can you find it in the budget to buy something cheap, like a Cosco Scenera or Evenflo Triubte, to rearface more to the best practice minimum of two?
If there's nothing that can be done to convince you of the extreme safety benefits of rearfacing, then I would very much recommend leaving that Recaro in the middle, if the install is tight enough, and top tethering it (top tethering adds a great deal of safety to young forward facers), and of course using the harness properly (no heavy coats on, slots at or above the shoulder, snug harness, chest clip at armpit level).

Return the Pro Sport and get a rear facing convertible. A child that young needs to be rear facing.

Here's why:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sssIsceKd6U&feature=youtube_gdata_player"]YouTube - Rear facing vs forward facing position in the car[/ame]

Yep. Return the seat and get a good convertible. Don't take advice from BRU employees alone. Check it out first. There are some with Techs that know but a lot of them don't know anything about seats.

Get a good convertible. RF her she is way too little to be FF. The new standard is to RF to 2 years.

I agree with the other ladies return the recaro and get a good convertable....14 months is REALLY young to be FF...there are some really great seats out there and as long as your child can RF its the safest way for them to travel!

Thanks. I get it, I really do, but if it's soooo much safer for kids to remain RF until 2 yrs then why is the law still 1 yr and 20 pounds? It's very confusing. And if I return my combination seat and get a convertible, does this mean I will be having to get a separate booster down the road?

Unregistered said:

Thanks. I get it, I really do, but if it's soooo much safer for kids to remain RF until 2 yrs then why is the law still 1 yr and 20 pounds? It's very confusing. And if I return my combination seat and get a convertible, does this mean I will be having to get a separate booster down the road?

Click to expand...

Laws are minimum standards, not what's safest. Smoking is legal, and that's obviously not healthy or safe, so using a law as a point of reference for safety isnt going to help you

Its actually safer for kids to remain RF until *at least* age 2, and plenty of convertible seats will allow you to RF until past 2 and then harness until your child is ready for a booster. By that time, your LO will be about 6 years old and there will be newer and better boosters out there. Keep in mind that a good booster might only cost you $50, so dont get hung up on needing to buy a separate one later.

Unregistered said:

Thanks. I get it, I really do, but if it's soooo much safer for kids to remain RF until 2 yrs then why is the law still 1 yr and 20 pounds? It's very confusing. And if I return my combination seat and get a convertible, does this mean I will be having to get a separate booster down the road?

Click to expand...

Well, there's two things to consider here. How the government machine works, and how physics work.

Here's the physics side of the equation:

Everybody knows that there are gaps in an infant's skull so that the brain can grow. What most parents don't realize is that the whole spinal column is set up the same way. Every vertebrae in their neck and back has three gaps covered with connective tissue so that they do not form a complete circle. This allows the pieces of bone to get wider as the spinal cord gets bigger around.

A car seat that is rear facing will move with a child in a crash and his head and neck are supported by the car seat shell. Basically, the car seat acts as a back board/stretcher.

When a child is forward facing and his head whips forward and side to side in a crash, this connective tissue can let the pieces of bone in the neck stretch up to two inches. The spinal cord itself can only stretch about a quarter of an inch before it snaps.

These gaps in the bone BEGIN to close up around age one, and complete the process at around age six. A one year old is safER ffing than a newborn, because the head is not as large in proportion to his body, but the bone structure itself is no more mature, so the risk to the spine is still really significant.

And here is where the law comes in:

Years ago the 1 year recommendation for ffing was decided on because, at the time, that was the size of child the car seats on the market could reasonably accommodate. We had no choice but to take the risk of ffing before the neck had developed, and there would have been no value in writing a law that was impossible to buy the equipment to follow.

We have car seats today that can keep a child rfing for much longer and protect their spines longer. What we don't have is the money to go about changing laws that typically encounter great opposition in the first place (It took 5 years to pass the booster seat law here in CA because a certain individual in the state capital opposes seat belt laws for all passengers). With the economy the way it is right now, our representitives have bigger priories than changing a law that benefits people that are 17 years away from being able to vote.

Unregistered said:

Thanks. I get it, I really do, but if it's soooo much safer for kids to remain RF until 2 yrs then why is the law still 1 yr and 20 pounds? It's very confusing. And if I return my combination seat and get a convertible, does this mean I will be having to get a separate booster down the road?

Click to expand...

I think part of the problem is that the laws take a long time to catch up with current research. I'm sure you'd agree that it isn't safe for a 3 year old to ride in just an adult seat belt right? In Florida, children only have to be in any type of child restraint until 3 years old. Legal yes, but not safe at all. Current research shows that it is much safer for children to be RF to a minimum of 2 years old, and preferably to the limits of the seat, but the laws haven't caught up yet. Sweden has been keeping children RF until 4 yrs old (or older) for 30 years. Its not the law, but people just know it is safer. They have very few children die in car accidents annually.
Physics doesn't care what the law says!

While the laws may or may not mention rear facing (my state does not, and most do not), the AAP has said since 2002 that children should face the rear to the maximum limits of the *convertible* carseat. You skipped that step.

It's up to 500% safer to rear face from one to two years.

http://carseatblog.com/5168/why-rear-facing-is-better-your-rf-link-guide/

Wendy