1st Time Booster Concerns

Like most moms as a 1st time booster, I've researched on whether to booster DD1 who is now 5, 44.5" and 44 #. She's been begging to booster for a while and this past week, I purchased an Evenflo Big Kid HBB for her on sale. Well, she LOVES it! The fit is great for both her and the vehicle. She sits still in it and is mature enough to be in a booster.

My concern (and I know it's an ongoing debate on this forum) on whether it's as safe as harnessing.

Then, while researching boosters, I came across this on Consumer Reports: Emphasis added by me

Keeping kids harnessed longer

Like the latest infant and convertible seats that allow larger children to remain rear-facing longer for safety reasons, the newest models of combination/toddler-booster seats allow larger kids to stay in a five-point harness longer (rather than their moving on to the vehicle's three-point safety belt). That's because some models of toddler booster now have harnesses that can secure higher-weight children (those weighing more than 40 lbs.). Children are safer when using the full five-point harness in a forward-facing seat, as the harness spreads the crash forces more evenly over the child's body and better retains the child in a crash than the three-point seat belts installed in vehicles. Now parents may not have to make that transition quite so soon. The newest models of toddler-booster seats now have harness limits of 65 lbs. or more. Previously, most toddler-booster models had harness limits of 40 lbs. Our latest toddler booster seat Ratings (available to subscribers) are for seats in both categories—seats with harness weight ratings of 40 lbs., and seats with harness weight ratings greater than 40 lbs. All of the models we tested convert to belt-positioning booster car seats.



Safety first

Don't be in a rush to transition your child to the next child seat type. Each step forward may actually prove to be a step backward in terms of overall safety.
A rear-facing child restraint is safer overall than a forward-facing restraint.
A harnessed forward-facing child restraint is safer overall than a booster seat.
A booster seat used to position a vehicle's belt across a child's body is safer overall than using vehicle belts alone until a child is about 4 feet 9 inches tall and can fit the vehicle's seat and belt correctly, and remain that way for the duration of the trip.

Those findings by CR make my stomach turn into knots.

And I turn CR articles about carseats into litter for my cats to use. They're about that useful.

If you'd like, see if you can write CR and ask them to back their claims up with studies. Either their own (and have them release numbers to show their information), or other studies. I'll bet you $5 nothing comes of it. Because there AREN'T any, and if CR has done their own, then they need to get them peer reviewed and confirmed by someone else, because they've been completely faulty in the past.

Wendy

I just sent them an email:

Greetings Consumer Reports. This question is in regard to the article entitled "Toddler Booster Seats" found in this link: http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/...ster-combination-car-seats/overview/index.htm

I'm a 1st time Booster mom and have been conducting research on whether booster seats are as safe as harness seats. My daughter is currently 5 and fits very well in the Evenflo Big Kid high back booster that I just purchased for her. I noticed that the article states twice that harnessed seats are safer than booster seats. Do you have any data/studies reflecting this conclusion for children 5 and older? I realize that young children 3 and less should be in a 5 point harness due to size, maturity, and often maintain continuous movement in the seat; however, I would assume that an older child (like 5 or 6 and older) who has a good fit in the booster, weighs over 40 pounds and sits still while in the booster would be protected as well as if he/she was in a harnessed seat. If there are studies reflecting the opposite--that harnessed seats offer more protection for older children (5 and older), please inform me so that I can put her back in a harnessed seat. I thank you for your time.

Wonderful. I hope they respond. I have studies that show that kids under five are more likely to have head injuries in a booster, and I've heard that kids under 40 pounds are at more risk of submarining. However, beyond five years and 40 pounds, I know of no studies that state anything one way or the other. It'd be nice if CR answered this question for us, but in all honesty, given their track record, I don't know that I'd believe what they said.

Wendy

I don't really have anything helpful to add -- honestly, I just wanted to let you know that you're not alone in your concerns. I am very, very comfortable with my choices to RF as long as possible and booster as long as possible, but even with access to as much knowledge on the subject as I have, I am very iffy on the harness-to-booster transition.

Your research turned up one school of thought -- perhaps the prevalent one -- that kids should harness as long as possible before moving to boosters. That's a bit archaic, not because it's NOT safer, but because it came about when most seats went to 40lbs, and we wanted to stretch kids in those seats as long as we could (rather than moving them to boosters right at 30lbs.)

Now, in the land of 65, 70, 85 & 90lb harnessed seats, it's a little bit murkier. Is it safer, for the reasons you mentioned -- crash forces are spread out? It might be, it is absolutely possible. We get the "race car drivers ride in 5pt harnesses" a lot around here -- which is legitimate, except for the fact that they have an additional head-restraining device, which kids in carseats don't have the luxary of having.

On the flip side, there's a school of belief on the other side of the pond -- Sweden, where we get our beloved RF stats from -- that using a booster is actually safer. They claim it to be safer even for little kids (say, 3yos,) so feel free to take as many grains of salt as you need with it -- we obviously have different feelings in America. Maybe their 3yos are more mature, I don't know. Anyways, that school of belief is essentially that FF harnesses restrain kids at both shoulders, and in a collision, the head is allowed excessive forward movement -- putting lots of stress on the neck. On the other hand, in a lap-shoulder belt, the head, neck and spine rotate together around the diagonal shoulder portion of the belt, eliminating that stress on the neck.

Truthfully -- I can't tell you which school of thought is correct. We don't have any studies comparing the two, not for older kids. It's part of the reason my ideal restraint situation is to RF kids until kindergarten age, and then turn directly into a booster -- it's my chicken way out of picking a side on the debate. But I can also tell you that in my own vehicle I have boostered a 4yo, FF harnessed a 4yo (who had outgrown RF) and a 5yo (who hadn't,) as well as put a booster-ready 6.5yo back in a harness for convenience reasons.

I think we'd ALL love to see a study that puts some numbers on it, particularly for early elementary kids. But until we get that, it ends up being Momma's intuition. I feel like -- for booster-ready kids, in a well fitted booster seat -- they're probably about equal, but unfortunately we really don't have a quantifiable answer for you. I promise you're not the only one who would like one.

Carrie_R said:

It's part of the reason my ideal restraint situation is to RF kids until kindergarten age, and then turn directly into a booster -- it's my chicken way out of picking a side on the debate.

Click to expand...

Too funny!! I like your way of getting out of picking sides . Thank you so much for your reply--it was very well written.

You're welcome. I know I tend to be wordy sometimes. Glad it made sense!

So I'm going to play devil's advocate here...

How many average consumer report parents are going to read those statements about keeping children in a harness and think about trying to keep their child harnessed until they are 6, 7, 8 years old or older?

What if the way consumer reports made the statement gets parent to not think about putting their 2 or 3 or 4 year old in a booster seat? What if it gets parents beyond looking at the minimums on boosters (i.e. 3y and 30lbs or sometimes just 30lbs) and gets them to think about using the seat at least a couple of years longer?

With as many kids who are overweight, this information might help some parents realize that they have options besides putting their 40lbs 3yo in a booster seat.

I do think it could be worded better to get parents to try to keep their children in a harness seat until 5 or 6 years old when they are mature enough to sit properly. I'm not sure that most parents want to read about the controversy about whether a harness or booster seat is safer for a child over 5 or 6yo, but it would be nice if parents realized that a booster seat is not a safe option for a 3yo.

Melanie

Jan06twinmom said:

So I'm going to play devil's advocate here...

How many average consumer report parents are going to read those statements about keeping children in a harness and think about trying to keep their child harnessed until they are 6, 7, 8 years old or older?

What if the way consumer reports made the statement gets parent to not think about putting their 2 or 3 or 4 year old in a booster seat? What if it gets parents beyond looking at the minimums on boosters (i.e. 3y and 30lbs or sometimes just 30lbs) and gets them to think about using the seat at least a couple of years longer?

With as many kids who are overweight, this information might help some parents realize that they have options besides putting their 40lbs 3yo in a booster seat.

I do think it could be worded better to get parents to try to keep their children in a harness seat until 5 or 6 years old when they are mature enough to sit properly. I'm not sure that most parents want to read about the controversy about whether a harness or booster seat is safer for a child over 5 or 6yo, but it would be nice if parents realized that a booster seat is not a safe option for a 3yo.

Melanie

Click to expand...

I don't think you are playing devil's advocate. I think some parents need to hear that harnesses are safer to avoid potentially putting a 2 or squirmy 3 year old in a booster.

As a mother, I think we all want what is considered safe for our children. Then we learn of a safER option. And then we look for the safEST option. When researching booster options for my 5 year old, of course I want her safe, safER, safEST. If someone claims that harnessing her is the safER or safEST option, then I want to see the data. If it's the safEST, then I'll switch her w/ no problem back her EFTA.

I feel like the harness is safer if the kiddo won't stay positioned in the booster. Hannah and Brett have to be reminded, I won't lie to you. Especially Brett, who's 7.5 and a really mellow kid, can't keep his head in the head place. He's always leaning out to talk. They both outgrew the Nautilus harness this past summer, and DD is not interested at all in continuing to harness at their age. They harnessed until 7 and 8.5.

cookie123 said:

I feel like the harness is safer if the kiddo won't stay positioned in the booster. Hannah and Brett have to be reminded, I won't lie to you. Especially Brett, who's 7.5 and a really mellow kid, can't keep his head in the head place. He's always leaning out to talk. They both outgrew the Nautilus harness this past summer, and DD is not interested at all in continuing to harness at their age. They harnessed until 7 and 8.5.

Click to expand...

This is true. The debate of harness vs booster only applies to kids who can safely sit in a booster. If the child cannot sit in a booster safely then a harness is a better choice.