The "What is safest" question

Another thread got me thinking...

If we have RF tethered seats because it is added safety.

If we have SIP protection for added safety.

If we have EPS foam for added safety.

then why is the following not true?

We have 3 seats, say, an EFTA (no RF tether, no SIP wings), a BLVD (RF tether, SIP wings), and a Signo (no RF tether, SIP wings). Assuming that the fit of the child in each seat is appropriate/comfortable/etc, and the seat is installed correctly, why are we not "allowed" to say that any one seat is a safer option than any other? Why would a BLVD not be safer than the others (given the criteria mentioned)? If the options on the seat are designed for added safety, why would a seat w/o those features be deemed "as safe as" the BLVD?

I understand that all seats have to meet minimum standards, but people don't come here looking for seats that meet the minimum standards...they come looking for the *safest* option that they can manage (whether financially, car-space wise, children's health issues/size issues/whatever). Shouldn't we be able to make it clear to them what the crash test data say on these seats?

Thoughts?

Raechel

Momof4Girls said:

Another thread got me thinking...

If we have RF tethered seats because it is added safety.

If we have SIP protection for added safety.

If we have EPS foam for added safety.

Click to expand...

Because none of those things have been PROVEN to add to the safety of the seats.

Sure we should be able to say that--but only if the data supports that. And the fact is, we are not privy to enough test data to be able to say anything definitive about rear-facing tethers and side impact protection wings and EPS foam.

like the others said, there just isn't data to support that. or at least, we don't have access to it. Also, those seats are different in ways beyond the three things you mentioned. If it was the exact same shell, harness and LATCH or seatbelt configuration, you could probably make some educated guesses, but that's not the case. Even the MA and BLVD are different beyond the SIP and harness system. Is the BLVD safer if your child is constantly leaning his head forward of the wings to look out? How about how the headpiece pushes some children's heads forward or if it's a pain putting him in around them so you rush through and don't get a proper harness fit? Is a tethered rf Britax safer than an untethered one? I'd like to think so, but some data suggests that may not always be the case.

Like is so often the case when choosing what carseat to use, there is no absolute answer.

There must be data in support of using EPS foam and RF tethers, like the others said though we just don't have access to it. However Europe has been putting EPS lining in their seats for quite some time and we know that in Sweden/Scandanavian countries their RF quite often tether, so I'd say that there is data that (for lack of a better word) "proves" that these things are beneficial, we just don't have it to prove it to anyone on here.
That said, speaking as a tech I couldn't possibly say "X seat is better and so much safer then XX seat so don't get XX!" all seats pass the minimum standards so they're all "safe". I can talk about features of seats,pros and cons and how they compare/match up to other seats on the market. However unless a seat was so quite obviously dangerous it would otherwise probably be innapropriate for me to say X is better then XX mostly for the fact that emotions and "guilt tripping" can come in to it. You really don't want to make people feel bad and as if they aren't doing the best or getting the best seat they can for their child. People love their kids and sometimes I think if they feel they don't get the latest and greatest seat with all these features sometimes I suppose they can feel a bit bad about it and to be honest techs are here to educate and encourage proper/correct use of seats, we're not shopping guides LOL.

The safest seat in the world would be worthless and dangerous if it didn't fit the child, fit the car, or was so complicated that the parents quite buckling it (for example) and just did the chest clip. It would also be worthless if a parent saved their carseat money for six months to be able to afford "the safest seat," while their child rode in an expired carseat that had been in a crash already.

Really, it's splitting hairs. "Safest" is a very relative term!

I think there's also some degree of liability in recommending a particular seat as The Safest. What if something happened to a child in that seat and the parents came to you and said 'You told me it was the safest but it wasn't because of so-and-so...'. And like Skaterbabs said, there are other differences: both the EFTA and the Signo have deeper shells which *may* protect the torso better. And to play devil's advocate, crash tests are done straight on - either frontal, rear, or side-impact. But what about a diagonal-type of crash followed by a roll, where the child's head comes forward but goes back at a strange angle so as to get stuck out/against the wings of the BLVD? See, you can drive yourself crazy by "splitting hairs" over all of this. What may be safe in one crash may not be in another, or vice versa. A child could be hurt in any carseat given the right circumstances of the crash. :twocents:

That's why I said all things being equal (great install, great fit, etc).

And, this may be an unpopular statement, but it goes back to my beliefs in personal responsibility, but it doesn't seem like anyone here is concerned about hurting people's feelings about ERF, why should we tiptoe around other safety-related features? I mean, nobody "makes" people feel guilty for buying a 15 y/o clunker, when they could have bought a Volvo (fill in the blank with top-end, high-safety ranking vehicle you like)?

Thoughts? I'm really not trying to ruffle feathers, just some things that have jumped out at me, reading this message board.

Raechel

AdventureMom said:

I think there's also some degree of liability in recommending a particular seat as The Safest. What if something happened to a child in that seat and the parents came to you and said 'You told me it was the safest but it wasn't because of so-and-so...'. And like Skaterbabs said, there are other differences: both the EFTA and the Signo have deeper shells which *may* protect the torso better. And to play devil's advocate, crash tests are done straight on - either frontal, rear, or crash. But what about a diagonal-type of crash followed by a roll, where the child's head comes forward but goes back at a strange angle so as to get stuck out/against the wings of the BLVD? See, you can drive yourself crazy by "splitting hairs" over all of this. What may be safe in one crash may not be in another, or vice versa. A child could be hurt in any carseat given the right circumstances of the crash. :twocents:

Click to expand...

:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

But there is compelling evidence (crash test videos, studies, real concrete data) that ERF is safER, while there is not compelling evidence that proves certain features make a certain seat safER. It's comparing apples to oranges, IMO. It makes intuitive sense, yes, and I'm convinced enough that I want certain features for my own child's seat(s), but I won't make anyone else feel bad for choosing a seat without those features. I also wouldn't make anyone feel bad for not choosing to ERF a child, either, for the record. I firmly believe in presenting all the facts and information possible, but it does absolutely no good to "guilt-trip" someone into action.

Momof4Girls said:

it doesn't seem like anyone here is concerned about hurting people's feelings about ERF

Click to expand...

It's true that some folks here are much more blunt than others, and it's true that some folks here come across as extremely militant regarding ERF and/or EH, to the point of hurting feelings or guilt-tripping or fear-mongering, but I wouldn't go so far as to infer that no one here is concerned with hurting feelings. Many of us feel that it does nothing but harm our cause to come across as judgmental, holier-than-thou fearmongers. Most of us here recognize the value of a calm, balanced approach.

Momof4Girls said:

why should we tiptoe around other safety-related features? I mean, nobody "makes" people feel guilty for buying a 15 y/o clunker, when they could have bought a Volvo (fill in the blank with top-end, high-safety ranking vehicle you like)?

Click to expand...

Technicians are taught never to recommend a specific seat. We are supposed to repeat that all seats are tested and pass specific standards, so all are equally safe. Some have different features that may make them easier to use or harder to use for a person, some have different designs that may fit better or worse in certain vehicles. It's definitely a liability thing, based on the fact that we have no concrete evidence proving one seat is safer than another. We do have proof that facing the rear is safer, however. See how it's apples to oranges?

Momof4Girls said:

That's why I said all things being equal (great install, great fit, etc).

And, this may be an unpopular statement, but it goes back to my beliefs in personal responsibility, but it doesn't seem like anyone here is concerned about hurting people's feelings about ERF, why should we tiptoe around other safety-related features? I mean, nobody "makes" people feel guilty for buying a 15 y/o clunker, when they could have bought a Volvo (fill in the blank with top-end, high-safety ranking vehicle you like)?

Thoughts? I'm really not trying to ruffle feathers, just some things that have jumped out at me, reading this message board.

Raechel

Click to expand...

Hmmm. I guess because everyone has a different opinion about what is the safest. For example with the vehicle issue you mentioned, not everyone will think a new high-end car is necessarily safer (even if it may be). And folks have different reasons for buying different cars even with the same budget - gas mileage, safety, aesthetics, comfort, performance, carpooling, brand loyalty, reliability, etc. Same goes for seats. Some folks think one is safer, while someone else likes another one better, etc.

In the end, putting folks on the defensive does't usually convince them to see things your way, KWIM? I'd rather have someone listen to correct CRS usage advice than to get turned off because I insulted the seat they bought.

I wasn't suggesting insulting seats already purchased. I have just seen people come in here, saying, "I have xyz child and need a new seat. Can you recommend one for me? Money is no object. (or, under $200, or under $100, or whatever). Is it not then appropriate to inform on different safety features etc, as we would on a vehicle or something like that?

I can see the liability issues (rec'ing a seat as the safest seat available, then a child dies in an accident in that seat, etc).

Is the data not available at all from other countries, with different standards?

FWIW, I consider comfort to be a safety factor, simply because of the happy child, focused driver factor. The more comfortable my kids are, the less screaming I get from the backseat

As dh keeps pointing out to me, "The number 1 safety feature of the vehicle is the driver! All else is secondary."

The only time I could see "insulting" a seat as being acceptable is to tell a parent of an expired, OHS, crashed, whatever seat (of any brand/kind/whatever) that that seat is dangerous etc.

I will admit, I'm a Britax fan. I had high hopes for the Recaro seats, however, hearing all sorts of wonderful things about them. However, I am hesitant about the made in China thing, as well as all the sneaky things that have gone on with them. Buying a made in the USA seat is of huge importance to me...and could be argued a safety consideration (given all the stunts with the made in China and the "quiet recall" on the Recaros and whatnot).

Another just my :twocents: but the following statements are not the same thing to me:

"All car seats have to meet minimum safety standards."

and

"All car seats are equally safe."

I do not believe those are always true...any more than it is true to say that the Ford Escape and Ford Escape Hybrid both meet minimum gas mileage standards, therefore all Ford Escapes have equally good gas mileage.

Anyway, just some thoughts.

Raechel

I may be the odd one out here but when asked by people I know out in public which seat I would recommend, unless they tell me they're on a super tight budget I will never ever say a scenera. If has nothing to do with cosco or their recall practices, I just feel if you can afford a nicer seat you should. I would rather someone buy a evenflo titan or gasp even a 3 in 1 because I think they're a better seat with more safety features.

I think it is wrong to base all decisions on price and what is a better deal money wise. If they would rather buy a nice comfy seat now, with full knowledge that they're going to have to buy a hwh seat later, what's the big deal? If they want to spend $200 on a primo viaggo knowing that its not going to last them as long as other seats on the market but want the sip protection who are we to poo poo that and tell them they should get a ss1, otherwise they're wasting their money.

I don't recommend seats that I wouldn't use myself and having had a scenera and a comfortsport I think they're horrible seats. I've had an AOE and really liked it and would love to have a primo viaggo. Am I willing to spend that much on a seat that I know isn't going to last that long, no, but that doesn't mean there aren't people out there with money to burn that are willing to. :twocents:

Just another thought. What if you worked at a school as a vice-principal and therefore your comments about the school/teachers were seen as somewhat "official" and representing the school as a whole, especially when made to the community. All teachers in your school were okay in that they met the minimum standards for learning and children did learn and progress in their classes. You could not go around and say, "So-and-so is the best 1st-grade teacher". Several problems would arise:

1- that teacher may be the best for some kids but not others
2- you would get in major trouble with the school district for making comments like that
3- your credibility for being able to remain objective would take a dive

Same here. First of all, most of us can't agree on which seat is the safest anyway... We all have our favorites, but all seats do all meet minimum government standards. To say anything different would be a disservice to the public and also make us all look unreliable. "Tech A told me to buy a Britax." "Well, Tech B said a Recaro was safer." "Oh, Tech C said to get a EFTA." Then we all look like we're going in a million different directions and none of us seem like we know what we're talking about, see?

As a tech, I honestly believe that a seat used correctly will save a child's life. Period. Evenflo, Graco, Recaro, Britax, whatever.

Okay, I think I've said about all I can say on this topic - LOL! It really is a thought-provoking topic...

My simple answer to this question would come from page 107 of the CPS training manual:

What is the "BEST" Child Restraint?
* The one that fits your child
* The one that fits your vehicle
* The one that you will use correctly every time

Click to expand...

The only thing I might add to that is * The one that meets your family needs

scatterbunny said:

Sure we should be able to say that--but only if the data supports that. And the fact is, we are not privy to enough test data to be able to say anything definitive about rear-facing tethers and side impact protection wings and EPS foam.

Click to expand...

What about the many years of released Swedish data? We can certainly extrapolate safety data for tethering at the very least. Have they done any studies on SIP and EPS foam yet?

Wineaux said:

What about the many years of released Swedish data? We can certainly extrapolate safety data for tethering at the very least. Have they done any studies on SIP and EPS foam yet?

Click to expand...

Their data for tethering can't actually be directly extrapolated because I believe they also employ rebound bars or something like that with their seats. Plus their cars are designed differently. Our cars in the US don't have a standard place for tethering a rf'ing car seat.

EU seats do have to meet SIP standards. But for all we know, most seats available in the US would meet those. Just because the BLVD has wings, doesn't mean it's going to perform better than the MA or Triumph.

It comes down to this - we can't say there's a safest seat because there is no such thing as safeST. We can't see the inside of a parents vehicle to know if a seat will be compatible. We can't see how the child fits in the seat. We can't know if the parent is going to find the seat easy to use properly every time.

What if we decided seat "A" is safest and told everybody that. So mom or dad go out and buy seat "A" because it's the best. Mom & dad can only get a so-so install, as it ends up kiddo doesn't have much growing room, and they can't work the harness adjuster to get the last little bit of slack out... But it's ok - it's the safest seat, surely the harness must be good enough the way it is. They sure as heck wouldn't want to settle for 2nd best just because they had trouble tightening the harness and were barely able to get the seat installed.

Do you see the problem? Even IF there was a seat that was absolutely the safest, there is absolutely no way to know if it would be the safeST for that particular family & vehicle. As such, it is doing families a disservice to say any seat is safeST.

Are there features that I personally look for in a seat? Yes. EPS foam is something I want my seats to have. Aside from that, ease of use & fit to my kids is what I care about.

And just to play devil's advocate, what if it turned out that rf tethering was a risk, and that SIP did absolutely nothing? What if the seat we called safest based on what we perceive as safety features, didn't perform best in the measurements that matter most? For as much as we tend to not recommend the 3in1 seats, their downward rotation #'s for higher weight kids in rf'ing tests that were last published by NHTSA were better than Britax. If I had to pick a seat to call best, I'd pick the seat that exceeded standards the most... wouldn't it be a surprise if it was a plain jane scenera that fit that bill... (like I said, playing devil's advocate because we don't know...)

The fact of the matter, is that there is no such thing as one specific seat that is safeST for everyone. It doesn't exist. And with that in mind, we can only rely on all seats meeting the same minimum standards and discuss features of seats and the basics of fitting child, fitting vehicle, and used correctly every trip. And that's really all that matters. If it's a $40 scenera chosen because it's cheap, or a $300 britax, they are both safe seats. There is really no reason to think otherwise. :twocents:

It seems to me that the carseat that:

*fits the car
*fits the child
*is used and installed correctly every time

... is the MINIMUM level of safety. Not the "safest carseat." The minimum.

There are many seats that could fit the bill for the above three criteria, for most people to choose from. For any given person with the average child and the average car, I'd guess there are probably at least 10 different current U.S. models that would fit the car and the child and could be reasonably expected to be used correctly. Of course, special cases such as pickup trucks and unusually heavy children can narrow the list, but in general there is still a choice to make between models. And among those models, there are often some that can be used for more best practices than others. For example:

- The Combi Zeus Turn only rear-faces to 22 lbs. Alternate convertibles, such as the Cosco Scenera or the Recaro Signo, rear-face to 35 lbs, making them safer seats for use between 22 and 35 lbs (assuming the latter are actually used RF, and the seats are not outgrown by height, of course).

- The Britax Diplomat, Cosco Scenera, Combi Zeus Turn and Recaro Young Sport, among many others, only harness to 40 lbs. Combination seats such as the Young Sport may also be described in deceptive terms such as "22-80 pounds," when they can only be used as a booster after 40. Alternate seats, such as the Radian or Regent (65 and 80 lb. weight limits), allow the benefit of 5pt. harness use much longer (again, assuming the seats are not outgrown by height).

- For tall, thin children, seats with tall shells for RF and tall slot heights for harnessing FF are safer than seats with lower height limits.

- Overhead shield seats, such as the Cosco Scenera non-5pt, and carbeds (such as the Cosco Dream Ride, which goes up to 20 lbs. and is not marketed exclusively for special needs) are not as safe. Period.

So you don't need to go into areas of controversy like RF top tethers and sidewings and EPS foam to contend that one model of seat is safer than others. A Scenera 5pt installed RF is safer than a Recaro Young Sport for a 22lb. 18-month-old. The Graco SafeSeat 1 is safer than a carbed or an overhead-shield RF Scenera for a 19lb. 6-month-old. The Britax Regent is safer than the Graco TurboBooster for a 45lb. 4yo.

Of course, it is extremely frustrating when parents try to substitute "the best seat" for the best practice. It would be much better to spend $49 on a Scenera, and RF to the limit, than to spring for a Marathon and then turn FF at 22lbs. and 1 year. But a seat like the Turn doesn't even give the option of best practice.

Kaylee18, you're absolutely right. That's why it's imperative to know a child's age, height and weight, the vehicle and the budget before even getting into what seat choices might be good options for a particular situation. A seat that one family might deem safest for their situation might be completely unsafe for someone else. That's why, even though I'm a tech, I don't feel bad about giving out seat recommendations. I don't endorse one or two specific seats or brands, I make sure to include options in all price ranges and from most manufacturers because I firmly believe there is no "perfect" seat or "best" brand. It is totally dependent on the situation.

The only seats I consistently shun and discourage folks from buying are those that are consistently difficult to install and use properly and/or seats that have extremely short top slots and short seat shells (because they're usually outgrown so early). If someone has already bought a certain seat I don't immediately say they should return it unless it's inappropriate for the child's age/size. Instead I shed some light on the issues they might encounter with the seat and focus on helping them install it and use it properly. If they like the seat and can use it properly and it fits the child and vehicle properly, it's a safe seat.