News Anyone have a link for me?

After seeing this report on the news this morning: http://www.fox11online.com/dpp/news/local/green_bay/dot-stresses-importance-of-child-safety

I contacted the station on their FB page to complain about the use of the word MUST when talking about who NEEDS to be RF and FF and such. Because it gave the impression that at 1 and 20 a child MUST flip forward, and at 4 and 40 a child MUST be boostered.

I got a response back that they were not incorrect because they took their wording straight from the WI DOT's website and they linked this page: http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/safety/vehicle/child/laws.htm

Sure enough. No wonder so many people around here think that not only is it safe to flip at 1 and 20 and change and 4 and 40 but they think it's unlawful to ERF or extended harness! Boo!

So anyways, I'm in the process of writting back to both the news agency and the WI DOT. But I'm looking for a page to link to that supports changing the wording. That highlights that each step to the next car seat is a step down in safety. Maybe something that also allows people to see that it is not unlawful to excees the DOT's recommendations but actually safer. Anyone got anything that comes to mind?

NHTSA doesn't recommend forward facing until age 4 if the child still fits rear facing http://www.nhtsa.gov/Safety/CPS

Here is an easy to understand flier from the NHTSA that might work:
http://www.nhtsa.gov/DOT/NHTSA/Traffic Injury Control/Articles/Associated Files/4StepsFlyer.pdf

Again, a misinterpretation of the actual law, which is found here:

https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/347/III/48

Actual wording, if this works:

(as) A child under the age of 8 years who is being transported in a motor vehicle shall be restrained as follows:

347.48(4)(as)1. 1. If the child is less than one year old or weighs less than 20 pounds, the child shall be properly restrained in a rear-facing child safety restraint system, positioned at a designated seating position in a back passenger seat of the vehicle if the vehicle is equipped with a back passenger seat.

347.48(4)(as)2. 2. Subject to subd. 1., if the child is at least one year old and weighs at least 20 pounds but is less than 4 years old or weighs less than 40 pounds, the child shall be properly restrained as provided in subd. 1. or properly restrained in a forward-facing child safety restraint system, positioned at a designated seating position in a back passenger seat of the vehicle if the vehicle is equipped with a back passenger seat.

347.48(4)(as)3. 3. Subject to subds. 1. and 2., if the child is at least 4 years old but less than 8 years old, weighs at least 40 pounds but not more than 80 pounds, and is not more than 57 inches in height, the child shall be properly restrained as provided in subd. 2. or properly restrained in a child booster seat.
347.48(4)(as)4. 4. Subject to subds. 1. to 3., if the child is less than 8 years old, the child shall be properly restrained as provided in subds. 1. to 3. or properly restrained in a safety belt approved by the department under sub. (2).
347.48(4)(b) (b)

So, in conclusion, the actual law states if they are over 1 and 20, but under 4 and 40, then they shall be properly restrained as provided in subd. 1. (rear facing in the back seat) OR properly restrained in a forward-facing child safety restraint system, etc....

Please point this out to the tv station. They most likely just need to revise their "easy reference" info.

Thank you so much all of you I sent all links to the news station on their FB page, and contacted the WI DOT about their content. As you mentioned, Jennifer, the law has been changed here, but the WI DOT admitted that they are slow in updating the website. I am hoping that they will do so a little more quickly now that it has been brought to their attention that the news is relying on that for their own information. I have not yet gotten a second response from the WLUK about the new amendments to the law. I'll let you know if I hear back at all