Will FFing tethers be the next extended harnessing?

LC2003 · Jul 11, 2015

No one hate me - this is a real question based on having bought car seats for 11 years and watching the best practices change.

When my older kids were still in car seats, there was a big push to keep them in harnessed seats until they didn't need a car seat at all. I bought 4 Radian XTSLs and I had a huge 85th percentile 9 year old still in a five-point harness. I was doing the car-seat.org safest thing.

Now the consensus is that as long as a child is mature enough to sit still and over 40 lbs, a HBB is just fine and a five-point harness adds nothing to their safety. I have a 7 year old in a HBB at the point at which her older siblings would have still been in their Radians.

The current thing seems to be that FFing tether for five-point combination seats - people saying they would turn their 5 year old RFing rather than have them ride in a FFing seat without a tether. And yet not all cars have tethers at every seat where a car seat might go.

So, in five more years, will this need for a FFing tether also fall by the wayside? What makes the need for a FFing tether any more sure or definite than the former need for extended harnessing? I am seriously asking - what data is this based on, and is it any more reliable than the data used to justify and promote extended harnessing?

thepote · Jul 11, 2015

It's the difference between the head striking something in front of it or not. There's tons of data and required tests on that. Not so much with EH vs booster with older kids.

Kecia · Jul 11, 2015

I'm not sure where this new tether mantra comes from but I think it's one of those "I don't get out much in the real world" kind of thing that we see from some online techs and advocates who ummm... don't get out much in the real world. Lol. I'm not trying to be mean when I say that but some people just seem to exist in this utopian alternate reality where everything has to be perfect and ideal 100% of the time. That just doesn't happen in "real life".

Obviously we want to promote tether usage and if a tether anchor is available for that seating position we always want to use it if we have a FF seat. But tethering isn't always possible. Retrofit hardware is getting harder and harder to come by and there are many newer vehicles with 3rd rows that either don't have tethers at all or don't have them in the positions that people need to put their kids in.

Unless the CR manufacturer mandates tethering in certain circumstances (like some seats require it if the child weighs more than 65 lbs.), I'm not going to tell a parent with an old pre-tether vehicle that they have to buy a new seat so they can turn their 4 year old back RF. That would be absurd. Nor am I going to suggest that they move the child to a booster if they have a perfectly good harnessed seat that the kid still fits in.

Tethering is ideal, of course - but ideal isn't always possible. We shouldn't lie to parents and tell them it's required unless it's actually required. As Kerry Chausmer stated so eloquently in the June edition of CPS Express and also at her speech at Lifesavers, "don't let perfection be the enemy of good."

We know that tethering reduces overall head excursion but we don't know how that translates in any particular real-life situation. Is an untethered Britax Frontier CT just as safe as a tethered Radian outboard in the 3rd row of your 2011 T&C minivan for your 5 year old who weighs 46 lbs and is 43" tall? I have no idea. And until they come up with a 46 pound, 43" dummy and start crash testing it with these seats in the 3rd row outboard position of a 2011 T&C we won't know anything definitively.

Parents need accurate and judgement-free info from reliable sources. I challenge anyone who says that you cannot use a FF harnessed seat if you don't have a tether to show me a reliable source (e.g., CR manufacturer, vehicle manufacturer, NHTSA, AAP, IIHS, National CPS Board, UMTRI, CHOP, etc.) to back up that claim. We don't get to make stuff up because we think that's how it should be. I don't get to decide tomorrow that all babies over 6 months old need to ride more upright in a convertible seat that is tethered Aussie-style. Period. End of story. That's not how this works.

Like the OP, I've seen the pendulum swing back and forth over the last 15+ years and I find those trends interesting. I call it the "psychology of the boards" (which now includes facebook). Perhaps, as tether usage rates increase and CR designs improve crash protection for FF children we may find that the differences in protection between RF and FF for kids over 24 months are not so great anymore. If that happens we are likely to see the pendulum swing back in the other direction. Maybe the side-impact test protocol that NHTSA is working on will highlight how much better a harnessed seat protects when compared with a booster in this type of crash and parents will run to put their older kids back into a 5-point again. Maybe load legs on FF seats will become the norm and we won't rely on tethers anymore to reduce HE. Only time will tell!

Mary_Ann · Jul 11, 2015

Its not a trend. It's simply illegal here in Canada to have an untethered FF car seat, period.

I live in Québec, where our cars usually don't survive more than 15 years because of the rust (abrasives on the roads in winter). It means that every car has top tethers or can be retrofited. Unfortunately, I still see a lot of untethered CS, in cars equipped with TT anchors. It is plain misuse.

Kecia · Jul 11, 2015

Mary_Ann said:
Its not a trend. It's simply illegal here in Canada to have an untethered FF car seat, period.

Good point, Mary Ann! Thanks for bring that up. However, I do believe that the OP was referencing recommendations being made to parents in the U.S. where tethering is not required in our federal standard and all CR are expected to pass with and without tether.

TechnoGranola · Jul 11, 2015

Kecia said:
Unless the CR manufacturer mandates tethering in certain circumstances (like some seats require it if the child weighs more than 65 lbs.)

Any idea how this is playing out with the newer regulations in the USA? Not much point in requiring s tether over 65# if almost every manufacturer says their tether can't be used after 65#.

LC2003 · Jul 12, 2015

Kecia said:
I'm not sure where this new tether mantra comes from but I think it's one of those "I don't get out much in the real world" kind of thing that we see from some online techs and advocates who ummm... don't get out much in the real world. Lol. I'm not trying to be mean when I say that but some people just seem to exist in this utopian alternate reality where everything has to be perfect and ideal 100% of the time. That just doesn't happen in "real life".

Obviously we want to promote tether usage and if a tether anchor is available for that seating position we always want to use it if we have a FF seat. But tethering isn't always possible. Retrofit hardware is getting harder and harder to come by and there are many newer vehicles with 3rd rows that either don't have tethers at all or don't have them in the positions that people need to put their kids in.

Unless the CR manufacturer mandates tethering in certain circumstances (like some seats require it if the child weighs more than 65 lbs.), I'm not going to tell a parent with an old pre-tether vehicle that they have to buy a new seat so they can turn their 4 year old back RF. That would be absurd. Nor am I going to suggest that they move the child to a booster if they have a perfectly good harnessed seat that the kid still fits in.

Tethering is ideal, of course - but ideal isn't always possible. We shouldn't lie to parents and tell them it's required unless it's actually required. As Kerry Chausmer stated so eloquently in the June edition of CPS Express and also at her speech at Lifesavers, "don't let perfection be the enemy of good."

We know that tethering reduces overall head excursion but we don't know how that translates in any particular real-life situation. Is an untethered Britax Frontier CT just as safe as a tethered Radian outboard in the 3rd row of your 2011 T&C minivan for your 5 year old who weighs 46 lbs and is 43" tall? I have no idea. And until they come up with a 46 pound, 43" dummy and start crash testing it with these seats in the 3rd row outboard position of a 2011 T&C we won't know anything definitively.

Parents need accurate and judgement-free info from reliable sources. I challenge anyone who says that you cannot use a FF harnessed seat if you don't have a tether to show me a reliable source (e.g., CR manufacturer, vehicle manufacturer, NHTSA, AAP, IIHS, National CPS Board, UMTRI, CHOP, etc.) to back up that claim. We don't get to make stuff up because we think that's how it should be. I don't get to decide tomorrow that all babies over 6 months old need to ride more upright in a convertible seat that is tethered Aussie-style. Period. End of story. That's not how this works.

Like the OP, I've seen the pendulum swing back and forth over the last 15+ years and I find those trends interesting. I call it the "psychology of the boards" (which now includes facebook). Perhaps, as tether usage rates increase and CR designs improve crash protection for FF children we may find that the differences in protection between RF and FF for kids over 24 months are not so great anymore. If that happens we are likely to see the pendulum swing back in the other direction. Maybe the side-impact test protocol that NHTSA is working on will highlight how much better a harnessed seat protects when compared with a booster in this type of crash and parents will run to put their older kids back into a 5-point again. Maybe load legs on FF seats will become the norm and we won't rely on tethers anymore to reduce HE. Only time will tell!

Thank you! You wrote so eloquently exactly the kind of answer I was looking for. I also believe that there is a "psychology of the boards" and people who focus on any one issue can become extreme on that issue, whether that issue be politics, car seats, or circumcision. For example, I started out very AP and natural parenting, and have become more moderate on almost every issue. My 4th child RFed forEVER, and yet I doubt I will do that with my 5th child.

This issue is personal for me, as my old Kia Sedona had 4 LATCH positions, which I loved for the flexibility when I had 4 kids in Radians, though I grew to loathe the car for its constant need for repairs. Now I love my Toyota Sienna, but the 3rd LATCH position offset in the 3rd row is annoying. However, my kids are mostly older, and in a few months to a year, my 4th child will be ready for a HBB, leaving only the baby in a convertible seat, and it will be a non-issue. Were my kids younger, I would be super aggravated by this.

katymyers · Jul 12, 2015

TechnoGranola said:
Any idea how this is playing out with the newer regulations in the USA? Not much point in requiring s tether over 65# if almost every manufacturer says their tether can't be used after 65#.

According to all the limits listed on the seats themselves those only apply to the lower anchors. I have yet to see a seat that said to discontinue use of the top tether when the lower anchor limit is reached.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

TechnoGranola · Jul 12, 2015

katymyers said:
According to all the limits listed on the seats themselves those only apply to the lower anchors. I have yet to see a seat that said to discontinue use of the top tether when the lower anchor limit is reached.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Really? I thought the LATCH manual said it applied to both. I know we've had discussions on here about it before.

Kecia · Jul 12, 2015

TechnoGranola said:
Really? I thought the LATCH manual said it applied to both. I know we've had discussions on here about it before.

Nope. Our new LATCH limits apply only to lower anchors. Tethers are exempt. Thank God!

http://carseatblog.com/26600/cps-tech-talk-an-in-depth-look-at-new-latch-limits/

Brigala · Jul 12, 2015

More and more cars are deferring to the CR instructions for top tether limits. Usually retroactively.

I think GM is the only major holdout? Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

seb3244 · Jul 13, 2015

Kecia said:
We don't get to make stuff up because we think that's how it should be. I don't get to decide tomorrow that all babies over 6 months old need to ride more upright in a convertible seat that is tethered Aussie-style.

Is this a thing? Like is this safer for babies older than 6 months?

LISmama810 · Jul 13, 2015

seb3244 said:
Is this a thing? Like is this safer for babies older than 6 months?

Possibly. The more upright a child is rear-facing, the less downward rotation there is, which can be safer in terms of kids not ramping up or hitting their head on the vehicle interior. Aussie tethering also prevents downward rotation and reduces the resulting rebound. Would I lose sleep over either one? No.

ketchupqueen · Jul 13, 2015

If a child already has a seat they fit in rf and there is no TA my recommendation is to rf. That's totally different than telling parents to go buy a new seat.

Frankly with cars getting smaller and smaller and seats getting bigger i feel the untethered head excursion standard is no longer reasonable. I applaud the work NHTSA is doing to evaluate allowing car seats to require tethering at all times and improve tether access.

LC2003 · Jul 13, 2015

LISmama810 said:
Possibly. The more upright a child is rear-facing, the less downward rotation there is, which can be safer in terms of kids not ramping up or hitting their head on the vehicle interior. Aussie tethering also prevents downward rotation and reduces the resulting rebound. Would I lose sleep over either one? No.

Then my RFing Coccoro with Euro belt routing and RFing tether is super-safe for my preemie.

Brigala · Jul 14, 2015

ketchupqueen said:
Frankly with cars getting smaller and smaller and seats getting bigger i feel the untethered head excursion standard is no longer reasonable. I applaud the work NHTSA is doing to evaluate allowing car seats to require tethering at all times and improve tether access.

I agree although I think they'll need to come up with either a solution or an exception for older vehicles which no longer are having retrofits made.
I'd prefer a solution to an exception.

And I'd change the requirements for new cars to require anchors or at least available retrofits for all rear seating position

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

lgenne · Jul 14, 2015

Brigala said:
And I'd change the requirements for new cars to require anchors or at least available retrofits for all rear seating positions

Amen to that!

Easiest change, if not the safest on an immediate timeframe: require all new vehicles to have tether anchors in all rear seating positions (and throw in some requirements about them actually being usable, ie not half an inch from the seat back) and make tethering required when an anchor is available.

Will FFing tethers be the next extended harnessing?

LC2003

New member

thepote

New member

Kecia

Admin - CPST Instructor

Mary_Ann

New member

Kecia

Admin - CPST Instructor

TechnoGranola

Forum Ambassador

LC2003

New member

katymyers

Active member

TechnoGranola

Forum Ambassador

Kecia

Admin - CPST Instructor

Brigala

CPST Instructor

seb3244

New member

LISmama810

Admin - CPS Technician

ketchupqueen

CPST and ketchup snob

LC2003

New member

Brigala

CPST Instructor

lgenne

New member

Car-Seat.Org Facebook Group

Sponsors

Forum statistics