Okay, let me start at the beginning....
About a little over a year ago when we switched our DD from her baby bucket seat to a convertible I took the car and carseat to our local police department to have a tech install it. Well, I ended up in a "discussion" with the officer because he told me that after my DD hit the 1 year/20lb mark I would have to turn her around when her feet touched the seat or else she could break her legs in a crash . Well, I of course disputed his claim and informed him that her feet touching the seat was not a valid reason to turn her, that if I had to choose injuries I would prefer broken legs to a broken neck. He then stated he wanted my "proof" so I ended up printing off all this info I found on the pros of extended rear-facing and sent it to him :thumbsup:.
Fast forward to the present. We just got our now 18 month old DD a new convertible and I took it to a different local police department (I called the previous one I went to and it's the same guy doing it so i decided to go somewhere else). DD was sick the day of the appointment and napping when I left so she stayed home. Well, the officer/tech saw that I had installed it rear-facing and asked how old my child was. When I told him she was 18 months he gave this not sure that's a good idea look. He then asked her weight and I responded "only 22lbs". He then asked if I "wanted to keep her rear-facing as long as possible" again with that not sure that's a good idea look and tone in his voice. I said a firm "YES!".
I was surprised that I got that kind of response AGAIN for wanting to keep my DD rear-facing. Aren't techs taught that rear-facing to the rear-facing limits of the seat is best?
About a little over a year ago when we switched our DD from her baby bucket seat to a convertible I took the car and carseat to our local police department to have a tech install it. Well, I ended up in a "discussion" with the officer because he told me that after my DD hit the 1 year/20lb mark I would have to turn her around when her feet touched the seat or else she could break her legs in a crash . Well, I of course disputed his claim and informed him that her feet touching the seat was not a valid reason to turn her, that if I had to choose injuries I would prefer broken legs to a broken neck. He then stated he wanted my "proof" so I ended up printing off all this info I found on the pros of extended rear-facing and sent it to him :thumbsup:.
Fast forward to the present. We just got our now 18 month old DD a new convertible and I took it to a different local police department (I called the previous one I went to and it's the same guy doing it so i decided to go somewhere else). DD was sick the day of the appointment and napping when I left so she stayed home. Well, the officer/tech saw that I had installed it rear-facing and asked how old my child was. When I told him she was 18 months he gave this not sure that's a good idea look. He then asked her weight and I responded "only 22lbs". He then asked if I "wanted to keep her rear-facing as long as possible" again with that not sure that's a good idea look and tone in his voice. I said a firm "YES!".
I was surprised that I got that kind of response AGAIN for wanting to keep my DD rear-facing. Aren't techs taught that rear-facing to the rear-facing limits of the seat is best?