"what about her legs? Isn't she going to be uncomfortable?"

I flubbed this answer (re RF 11 month old in a Scenera) at our end-of-tech class event yesterday. I was like "she doesn't know anything different... kids are more flexible... she'll put her legs here or here... safety matters more..." I didn't alienate the parent or anything, I just didn't go for one talking point and sounded all over the place.

So what do y'all choose to say to that, at an event, in the heat, while trying to cut a noodle and not your leg?

With a 1 year old like that, I usually just point out that my own 3 year old is still rear facing and is completely comfortable with his legs crossed or propped on the seat. And if they ask the "won't their legs break" in a crash question I usually say that a crash severe enough to break a RF child's legs would almost certainly break the neck of a FF 1-2 year old child. And then they get the point.

The talking to parents gets easier, you learn very automatic answers that just kind of pop out even when your brain is distracted lol. That said, I occasionally still have those moments, where you are like 'Whoa, there was def a better way to say that.'

There are a couple techniques that have helped me, the automatic answer being one of them. A second is reading and reciting stuff over and over here on the board (Wendy is a great example of this.) A third is to be proactive... If you know there are questions patents will ask, answer them when your brain can focus on them instead of when you are distracted.

For me, it might go something like this: "Ok, your daughter is still under a year, so we're going to put her seat in rear facing. (Talk a bit about seat itself, ie, this seat can stay rf to 40" and 40lb our when her head comes within an inch of the top.) You might have heard the old school of thought which said kids can turn around at a year. The current recommendation is actually to stay rf to at least age two, or better yet the limits of the seat. The reason we recommend this is because kids' spinal columns can stretch further than the spinal cord can before it snaps, which can lead to whats known as internal decapitation. Lots of people are worried about kids' legs, but they're actually more likely to break ff than rf... rf they draw up towards the child on a crash, whereas ff they kick out in front of them and can strike the vehicle interior."

That takes care of a lot of the common questions, and also tends to tender comfort as a logistical question rather than an objection, since they are usually on board with erf. It's easier then to answer, "My kids haven't ever been bothered by lack of leg room... If you look at how they play on the for they sit in all kinds of weird positions anyways. They actually tend to prefer rf - in fact - we rf to the limits of my seats, so I just turned one little guy around shortly before his fourth bday. About a month after I turned him, he got really mad at me and asked why he wasn't rf anymore. I told him he was too big, and besides I thought he wanted to sit ff? and he said, "But I didn't realize how much I could SEE when I sat backwards!"

I know thats a long-winded answer but it's where I've found my best rhythm. If I can anticipate questions, then I'm less likely to get caught offguard and botch an answer because I'm distracted and fumbling for the right words.

A lot of it is just practice. I'm still learning (been cert a year) and will definitely have that moment where I kick myself because there was def a more effective way to get my point across. The good news is, most of the time I am critical of myself because I know there's more/better to be said, but allthe parents know is what I *did* say, and that's enough info for them to understand why it's important.

If parents bring up the 'uncomfortable' aspect of RF legs, I will respond with how children alway sit/play/read/etc with their legs bent at all kinds of funny angles and how they are more flexible than we are as adults.

If they bring it up as a worry for the child's legs breaking, I explain that leg injuries are more common in FF children.

Selective words.

I always try to start with a confirmation of their perception, so I don't give them the impression it's a stupid question when I explain. So I'll say "You know, I used to think the same thing..." and later add "You're right, I doubt many adults would be comfortable like that, but..."

And my kids are actually comfy resting their legs on the seatbacks--like putting your feet up on the coffee table is more comfy than having them just hang on then floor.

Defrost said:

I always try to start with a confirmation of their perception, so I don't give them the impression it's a stupid question when I explain. So I'll say "You know, I used to think the same thing..." and later add "You're right, I doubt many adults would be comfortable like that, but..."

Click to expand...

Yes, I find in general working with parents this is huge. I actually often point out that before I became carseat-saavy, my seats were part of the 90% that were misused, although I was certain I was part of the 10% that were correct. I apply the same thing to ERF, boostering longer, etc -- anything that most parents find strange, which I also initially reacted to like, "Um... ok then..." until I learned the *whys.* I've found that parents and caregivers are less resistent when they don't feel like their concerns are being ignored or brushed aside, and when they are being identified with by the person teaching them.

I usually say something along the lines of:
"My four and a half year old is still rear facing on road trips. He actually prefers it. The nice thing about having an older child with the ability to answer questions with a little clarity is that I was able to ask him a simple question: why? His answer is quite helpful...he said that he prefers to rear face because he's more comfortable. His legs don't go tingly. He can eat easier without his food falling on the floor. He's sitting in a recliner and can sleep easier. And the DVD player is set up for rear facers to keep my 2 year old from screaming the entire trip!"
Then I go into the safety aspects and try to demonstrate how the movement of the rf seat supports the child's head and spine in a collision using a doll and an infant seat (just because it's easier to manipulate).

I just posted an article I found that may help.

http://www.car-seat.org/showthread.php?p=1766581#post1766581

Thank you all! I'm going to practice a quick paragraph before I do an event again. My brain is just swimming with information and in the moment I don't prioritize well. So practicing out loud ahead of time sounds kind of insane, but not that hard and will probably help. Everyone in the class thought I was insane anyway, the few times I gently suggested that the AAP did not want children rear facing "up to" age 2, but rather, "at least until age 2." Even the instructors thought I was nuts to hear the difference there. But the books were updated in 10/2010 and still have the old 1 and 20 quotes everywhere. Next year we'll hope it changes.