News Alberta booster seat activism

We have a new minister of transportation in the province, and based on a conversation I had with somebody within AORP, now is the time to write letters and send them to the minister.

Luke Ouellette is no more and he was the one who didn't want booster legislation.

So let's start a letter writing campaign. Post on facebook, mommy groups, twitter, etc - let's get us a booster law once and for all!

Ray Danyluk
Legislature Office
#204 Legislature Building
10800 - 97 Avenue
Edmonton, AB T5K 2B6

I've been told that one letter which is actually printed and snail mailed to their office is weighted higher than an email because they know that of the many people who feel strongly, very few actually write. So this will be most effective if you can print your letter, sign it, then mail it.

Points to consider for your letter:

- Albertan kids deserve the benefit of child passenger safety laws that provide the same degree of protection as other provinces.
- Seat belts are designed to fit adults. A lap belt is designed to fit the 6yr old dummy at minimum, while the shoulder-belt in the backseat is designed to fit a 5th percentile female dummy.
- Children who don't fit the seatbelt properly often tuck the seatbelt under their arm or place it behind their back which increases the risk of injuries.
- Legislation creates awareness of the importance of something - some people only pay attention when something is made law.
- We know seatbelts save lives. We also know that seatbelts are designed to fit adults. Children whom are too big for child restraints but too small to have the seatbelt fit properly are an under-protected group right now who are subject to serious internal injuries including abdominal injury and paralysis.

I'm sure you guys can come up with other details/comments/etc to include. Feel free to share your letters with everyone if you'd like, but please don't copy each other's letters. Letters carry more weight when they are unique and yet have a common theme. :thumbsup:

Oh - here's an email address: Transportation.Minister@gov.ab.ca

If you're able to though, it's better to print your letter and mail it since it carries more weight that way. (I learned that from one of my technician students who used to work in a government office. )

The other day I was asked if it was true AB has no booster law. I explained yes, and further explained our proper use clause.

And the basis of the conversation?

Just turned 4 yo who rides in nothing because she is 40lbs.

My explanation on proper use was simple and brief. Not difficult to understand.

The response I got?

"so it's fine unless I get caught?... It would be law already if booster seats were that important I think"

Sigh.

And they drove off, and that child will never see a booster unless it becomes LAW.



Write those letters, folks. Doesn't need to be a long or elaborate. Just a few minutes of your time, and a $0.60 (?) stamp.

I'm done my letter, just some final proofreading and minor editing left to do.

How are others doing?

BTW - I'm also sending a copy to the premier and my MLA. I've done some digging to come up with the proper format for addressing the premier and the minister and this is what I've come up with:


Premier Alison Redford
307 Legislature Building
10800 – 97 Ave NW
Edmonton, AB T5K 2B6

Honourable Ray Danyluk, Minister of Transportation
204 Legislature Building
10800 - 97 Ave NW
Edmonton, AB T5K 2B6

Are there any published studies online about the benefits of booster seats? And while we're at it, maybe making a law to keep kids rf to at least 2??? I'm assuming there have to be a few.... As a former government employee who used to do environmental scans, I know that if we include some actual data instead of just our own opinions it will carry more weight.
Just a thought.

Unregistered said:

Are there any published studies online about the benefits of booster seats? And while we're at it, maybe making a law to keep kids rf to at least 2??? I'm assuming there have to be a few.... As a former government employee who used to do environmental scans, I know that if we include some actual data instead of just our own opinions it will carry more weight.
Just a thought.

Click to expand...

I have cited some data from a study that was done by the Alberta Occupant Restraint Program. I've also cited the standard size of person the rear seat lap/shoulder belts are designed to fit.

Seatbelt syndrome is well documented. Here is a Canadian study http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2529446/?tool=pmcentrez#__trans-abstractid644234

METHODS
Canadian paediatricians and paediatric subspecialists were surveyed monthly through the Canadian Paediatric Surveillance Program. Children younger than 18 years of age who were restrained in motor vehicles at the time of a collision, with abdominal or thoracolumbar spine injuries, were included. The children may have been restrained in child safety seats, booster seats, or two- or three-point seat belts.

Click to expand...

Twenty-eight children, between two and 16 years of age, with injuries compatible with seat belt syndrome were reported in Canada between September 2003 and August 2005. Although 12 children were younger than eight years of age, only one was restrained in a booster seat and only four of the older children were properly restrained with a three-point seat belt. Twenty-four children had abdominal injuries. Of these, 18 had stomach and/or intestinal injuries and 11 had solid organ injuries. Twelve patients had a spinal fracture, including only five Chance-type fractures. Seven patients presented with paraplegia, and none of them recovered.

Click to expand...

Now, only 6 of the children in this study were restrained in lap/shoulder belts, 1 was in a misused booster with the belt behind the back, and the remainder were in lap-only belts which are known to have a higher risk of injury - specifically for Chance-type fractures than lap/shoulder belts. So it's not surprising that there is a lower percent of children in lap/shoulder belts in this study. However - it's also possible that the lower number of children in lap/shoulder belts who were injured was due to the fact that many provinces have booster seat legislation and boosters were being used by some people back then.

There were other limitations in the study obviously - only participating centres reported data and children injured and treated by a doctor who wasn't participating wouldn't have been included in the statistic.

However, we know that booster seats position the seatbelt to fit a child's body properly. We know that seatbelts are designed to fit adults. And there are a multitude of studies out there about the benefits of booster seats. The absence of injury to any child who was in a properly used booster seat also says something.

I just pulled that study as an example though. None of the above is what I used, I used specific data on the number of children who were "legally" restrained by Alberta law but had seatbelt positioning that could cause serious injury and/or death.

The particular study I quoted was done in Alberta and since it's observation of Alberta children it makes it more relevant for the purposes of the letter. It demonstrates that parents aren't spontaneously choosing to use booster seats, and that kids who aren't in booster seats have a poor seatbelt fit. I didn't put it in my letter so as to reduce the length of it, but 95% of kids who were secured in booster seats were properly restrained with a good belt fit etc. For comparison - and what I did include in my letter along with a few more specifics, only 33% of the kids who were "legally" allowed to be in just a seatbelt were correctly restrained with an appropriate lapbelt fit and the shoulder belt across the chest. A full 60% were classified as having catastrophic misuse - ie placement of the belt that could cause serious injury or death in a collision.

Injury prevention within the province has long supported booster seat legislation, but the old minister was against it despite all the data he had been presented with and the other provinces who either already had it or developed booster legislation during the time he was in office. It's possible with the change in office that booster legislation might come on it's own - but hopefully the letters will push the issue to the forefront and make it happen sooner rather than later. And if it's not something that would've come up on it's own, then hopefully a bunch of letters will start some discussion. If the minister turns to the provincial program that they fund for occupant safety, they will hear that they support a booster seat law. So it's really just a matter of telling the government that it matters to the public and getting the government to bring forward legislation.

(Sorry for the delay in reply, I typed most of it yesterday afternoon but had to go to work before I finished.)

eta: I would support a law with an actual minimum ff'ing weight limit like 30 or 35lbs (would be hard pressed to go higher since there are still a few seats which stop at 30lbs and anything which is going to be a financial burden to parents and require the replacement of otherwise good seats isn't something that seems like a good idea to me.) Alberta law right now does not have a minimum to ff other than what the manufacturer of the restraint provides. From what I have been told, Alberta law isn't specific on the minimum age and weight etc because they don't want to have to change the law every time standards change. I don't see standards changing for quite some time again now though, so I would hope that they'd consider putting in a minimum - however, anything lower than 30lbs right now would be a disservice and some kids do hit 30lbs before a year. So that's an area that would be very difficult to change the laws on - I think in the case of rf'ing a lot of it is advocacy and explanation of crash dynamics is what it will take. I think in many ways we face less social challenges when it comes to the babies and toddlers because parents are often more protective of that age group than they are of the 6 and 7 year old kids, so they may be easier to reach when a child is younger vs. when they're older...

Bumping this up. My letters are in the mail - who else has sent them off?