Need videos/links on importance of 5 pt harness for one/two year old

A friend of mine has two little girls, 4 and 2 (today). For the last month, I've noticed at preschool drop off, she moves the little one to the big one's booster for the drive home and back to pick up (a few miles). I need advice on how to approach her, and videos/links to send her. She's otherwise a good mom, which is why this is so baffling to me!

"SAFETY FOR THE GROWING CHILD
– EXPERIENCES FROM SWEDISH ACCIDENT DATA"


http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/esv/esv19/05-0330-O.pdf

Purpose of the study:

This study examines accident data with
Volvo cars in Sweden to evaluate child safety
with respect to age, size and impact situation
(including impact severity in frontal impacts);
identifying optimal restraints as well as potential
areas needing more attention. A total of 3670
children, aged 0-15 years, involved in car
crashes 1987-2004 were selected from Volvo's
statistical accident database

Findings: A tendency of higher injury risk was found
when the growing child switches from one
restraint to another, i.e. when the child is at the
youngest age approved for the restraint. Thus,
the total injury-reducing effect would increase if
all children were to use the child restraint system
most appropriate for their size and age. The
challenge is to spread information as well as
enhance design to encourage everyone to use the
appropriate child restraint system and to use it
correctly.

Direct your attention to page 7-8--mentioning a 2 year old in a booster.

:

Head and Face Injuries in Frontal Impacts
In Figure 14, head and face AIS is plotted for
EBS vs. age and stature for forward-facing
children in frontal impacts. As can be seen, EBS
has the largest influence on AIS 2+ injuries. The
two-year old (using lap/shoulder belt and
booster) with head AIS 6 sustained acombination of fatal head injury and cervical
spine fracture at EBS 50mph.

The injury distribution for
children is similar to that for adults. .... The exception
for this is the typical combination of fatal head
and neck injury for the smallest forward facing
children, as exemplified by the 2-year old at EBS
50mph, which occurred without head impact.

page 10: in Conclusion......the two-year
old forward-facing child (in a lap/shoulder belt
and booster) sustaining the combination of fatal
head injury and cervical spine fracture typically
illustrates the vulnerability of the neck and head
for small children in forward-facing boosters.
This child's five-year old sister, sitting next to
him in the rear seat (using the same type of
restraints), sustained no injuries. This two-year
old would have been better protected in a
rearward-facing CRS.


Also Anne's pamphlet: https://6546297149313326491-a-18027...hSiVlqBaXmbpYYCckE=&attredirects=1&revision=1

Here is another related threads w/ great video suggestions: belle's gift and others: http://www.car-seat.org/showthread.php?t=146249

I haven't read the whole article yet (I'm going to), but what was the purpose of only testing Volvos?

StillThankful said:

"SAFETY FOR THE GROWING CHILD
– EXPERIENCES FROM SWEDISH ACCIDENT DATA"

https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.2365779662381.2126435.1187092818&type=1&l=ace056e792

Direct your attention to page 7-8--mentioning a 2 year old in a booster.

:

Head and Face Injuries in Frontal Impacts
In Figure 14, head and face AIS is plotted for
EBS vs. age and stature for forward-facing
children in frontal impacts. As can be seen, EBS
has the largest influence on AIS 2+ injuries. The
two-year old (using lap/shoulder belt and
booster) with head AIS 6 sustained acombination of fatal head injury and cervical
spine fracture at EBS 50mph.

The injury distribution for
children is similar to that for adults. .... The exception
for this is the typical combination of fatal head
and neck injury for the smallest forward facing
children, as exemplified by the 2-year old at EBS
50mph, which occurred without head impact.

page 10: in Conclusion......the two-year
old forward-facing child (in a lap/shoulder belt
and booster) sustaining the combination of fatal
head injury and cervical spine fracture typically
illustrates the vulnerability of the neck and head
for small children in forward-facing boosters.
This child's five-year old sister, sitting next to
him in the rear seat (using the same type of
restraints), sustained no injuries. This two-year
old would have been better protected in a
rearward-facing CRS.


Also Anne's pamphlet: https://6546297149313326491-a-18027...hSiVlqBaXmbpYYCckE=&attredirects=1&revision=1

Click to expand...

cathleencastle said:

I haven't read the whole article yet (I'm going to), but what was the purpose of only testing Volvos?

Click to expand...

Not sure about that either.

The volvo bubble? Like Britax??? Best safest... You know.. other than that I can not think of one reason.

Baylor said:

The volvo bubble? Like Britax??? Best safest... You know.. other than that I can not think of one reason.

Click to expand...

Could be.

Reading further...
"A dataset of children in Volvo's statistical
accident database is analyzed. Crashes involving
Volvo cars in Sweden in which the repair costs
exceed a specified level (currently SEK 45 000)
are identified by the insurance company Volvia
(If P&C Insurance). Photos and technical details
of the cars (e.g. damage) are sent to Volvo's
traffic accident research team. The owner of the
car completes a questionnaire (shortly after the
crash) to provide detailed information about the
crash and the occupants. Injury data is gathered
from medical records and analyzed by a
physician within Volvo's traffic accident
research team. Injuries are coded according to
the Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS, AAAM
1985). This forms the basis of Volvo's statistical
accident database."

Could be they only had access to Volvo's database, or other manufacturers didn't compile as thorough information. It has me questioning the external validity of the study, however. The results aren't as generalizable as I would prefer. It seems to be a decent study from what I've read so far, but there are many other variables not accounted for.

And DUH! The study was conducted by Volvo. If it was a snake, it woulda bit me.