News New European research - kids should RF up till four years

TerisBoys

Well-known member
If I was the parent of the child in the Century booster, I'd probably sue after I'd been educated on what happened. :(

/so thankful she will never think a booster at 3 is acceptable

Nevermind that the harness on the Century booster was completely mis-routed. IMO, that child's lucky to have just fractured her collarbone.
 
ADS

joolsplus3

Admin - CPS Technician
That page with the century combo seat confused me, too...it was the kid in that misrouted century that did WELL in the crash, it was the kid in the cosco used as a booster that did poorly :( (and there's another seat that's mislabeled on another page, they call it a Century 3000, but it's obviously a Touriva with an overhead shield)
 

ShumNum

Senior Community Member
You know the parts of the study where an infant seat failed (well the child was critically injured/killed) and they say something to the effect of, "in europe it is not acceptable to install an infant seat with a lap belt alone."
Are they saying the infant seats didn't have the shoulder belt properly routed? If so, in the USA, isn't it mainly the lap portion of the belt that secures most infant carriers when installed without the base? I haven't done an install of an infant carrier without the base in a long, long time, so maybe I'm just forgetting something obvious as it relates to shoulder belt placement...

Also, I didn't see any mention of LATCH/isofix...I guess because most of the cars were older??
 

TerisBoys

Well-known member
And the 4mo? infant ejected from the bucket was in a 3pt. I just don't see a baby being ejected from a 5pt.

It was a Joyride to boot - which had the old style thread the harness through and loop it back over to lock adjustor. I'm betting it was either a) not tight enough or b) not threaded properly on the back.

The back of that Cosco OHS where the belts pulled through - SCARY.
 

joolsplus3

Admin - CPS Technician
You know the parts of the study where an infant seat failed (well the child was critically injured/killed) and they say something to the effect of, "in europe it is not acceptable to install an infant seat with a lap belt alone."
Are they saying the infant seats didn't have the shoulder belt properly routed? If so, in the USA, isn't it mainly the lap portion of the belt that secures most infant carriers when installed without the base? I haven't done an install of an infant carrier without the base in a long, long time, so maybe I'm just forgetting something obvious as it relates to shoulder belt placement...

Also, I didn't see any mention of LATCH/isofix...I guess because most of the cars were older??

WRT the infant seats and lapbelts...they are saying they were properly installed, and they were still was dangerous. Our seats don't require the shoulderbelt be wrapped around the back (the Combi Connection does have the option, and the Gracos have the same plastic tab as they do on EU versions on the back to hold the shoulderbelt, but no instructions allowing it here).

I guess the cars all were too old for LATCH :eek:
 

serabi

New member
Nevermind that the harness on the Century booster was completely mis-routed. IMO, that child's lucky to have just fractured her collarbone.

That page with the century combo seat confused me, too...it was the kid in that misrouted century that did WELL in the crash, it was the kid in the cosco used as a booster that did poorly :( (and there's another seat that's mislabeled on another page, they call it a Century 3000, but it's obviously a Touriva with an overhead shield)

Sorry, I meant the Cosco booster. I thought it was a Century? I must have misread.

Either way, it was the booster seat that was being used for the 37lb 3 year old where the child died at the scene that would make me want to sue...
 

*HH*

New member
Have you seen this about those poor children in the UK? It makes me want to cry, how many needs to die before they do something?

In six of the eight accidents the research team judged that the child would have survived had they been seated
in a suitable rearward facing car seat. The agees of these children ranged from five and three-quarter months to just under
four years old.

In the remaining two cases the protection offered by a rearward facing seat would have been compromised
by additional loading from luggage in the boot area and gross roof intrusion into the seating position.The children in these accidents were aged seven months and one and a half years old.
 

BookMama

Senior Community Member
I DO think it's worthwhile to note that most of those U.S. crashes involved major misuse. Century combo with the harness routed incorrectly, a 1YO in a shield booster (I will give them the benefit of the doubt and say that the crash may have been long enough ago that sheld boosters were still generally acceptable for the 3YO), infant seats with harnesses (probably) in slots that were too high, recalled and expired seats. And of course there were probably the usual misues of seatbelts not locked, loose harnesses, etc.

If these children had been restrained properly, according to U.S. minimums, I bet most of them would have had much better outcomes than they did. :twocents:

Edited to add: I'm not saying that the conclusions of the study are wrong - clearly RF is better - but I think it gives the U.S. a really bad rap, more than we deserve.
 

joolsplus3

Admin - CPS Technician
I DO think it's worthwhile to note that most of those U.S. crashes involved major misuse. Century combo with the harness routed incorrectly, a 1YO in a shield booster (I will give them the benefit of the doubt and say that the crash may have been long enough ago that sheld boosters were still generally acceptable for the 3YO), infant seats with harnesses (probably) in slots that were too high, recalled and expired seats. And of course there were probably the usual misues of seatbelts not locked, loose harnesses, etc.

If these children had been restrained properly, according to U.S. minimums, I bet most of them would have had much better outcomes than they did. :twocents:

Edited to add: I'm not saying that the conclusions of the study are wrong - clearly RF is better - but I think it gives the U.S. a really bad rap, more than we deserve.

I wonder how many of the RF seats (in Sweden) were used wrong? Probably at least almost (just?) as many, but the errors couldn't counteract the overall safety of just being RF in a sturdy (not the plastic yogurt cups that passed for infant seats for decades here...) seat...
I'm just guessing, too :twocents:

Obviously the answer is to keep plugging along doing what we are doing: Encourage RF to the limits of the seats we have, and encourage proper use of the seats we have. (I guess we could write a lot more letters to people in power to give us higher weight RF seats and better FF seats, and mandatory top tethering, too :thumbsup:)
 

*HH*

New member
Obviously the answer is to keep plugging along doing what we are doing: Encourage RF to the limits of the seats we have, and encourage proper use of the seats we have. (I guess we could write a lot more letters to people in power to give us higher weight RF seats and better FF seats, and mandatory top tethering, too :thumbsup:)

And send them this report ;) That might help.

I am interested in seeing a report between 5 point harness and high back booster fastened with the cars seatbelt. Because in Sweden(and they are experts on this field) they say that one should RF for as long as possible then go over to a high back booster seat. Here it is recommended to stay harnessed as long as possible, am I right? But here in the USA one haven't got the choice to have the child RF up till 4 yrs or maybe even longer before turning the child FF, as we have here in Norway/Sweden. But here one also wants to keep the child harnessed in a 5 point seatbelt longer than 4 or?

Because in Sweden they say that with a child FF in a 5 point harnessed seat the strain on the child's head and neck increases in a crash or even just when one steps a bit to hard on the brake. The 5 point belt holding the shoulders back and the force of the impact is moved up towards the child's head.

With the cars 3 point seatbelt there is a better interaction between the belt and the car seat and also the child, a softer stop(that was not the word used but I do not know the words English equivalent) of the child's body, and the force of the impact spreads over the entire upper body, not just the head and neck.
 

joolsplus3

Admin - CPS Technician
I think that 'the body must ride with the head' idea is catching on here. Britax and Sunshine Kids have strips that 'rip out' under frontal crash force so that the shoulders do move more with the head, taking lots of force off the neck and chest.

But for the most part, I don't think there really is overwhelming evidence that kids are suffering great neck injury in FF harnessed seats. Yes, there were those in this study, there was also gross misuse and lack of top tethers, which had a lot more to do with the injuries than just the fact of FF harnessed alone.

Given the lack of data proving that older kids are endangered by FF harnessing, I'll keep recommending it and practicing it (I'm not cynical enough to believe that Britax is just out to make a buck off my being sucker enough to buy a HWH harnessed seat, I think they really do think it's the safest option).

I still love this study, I'm posting the link to your blog everywhere :)
 

safeinthecar

Moderator - CPS Technician
It was a Joyride to boot - which had the old style thread the harness through and loop it back over to lock adjustor. I'm betting it was either a) not tight enough or b) not threaded properly on the back.

I also noted that in this case the vehicle ("88 Jimmy) would have needed a belt shortening clip to correctly install a child seat. Without on the seat could have easily whipped to the side so hard that it threw the child sideways out of the harness.
 

*HH*

New member
I think that 'the body must ride with the head' idea is catching on here. Britax and Sunshine Kids have strips that 'rip out' under frontal crash force so that the shoulders do move more with the head, taking lots of force off the neck and chest.

But for the most part, I don't think there really is overwhelming evidence that kids are suffering great neck injury in FF harnessed seats. Yes, there were those in this study, there was also gross misuse and lack of top tethers, which had a lot more to do with the injuries than just the fact of FF harnessed alone.

Given the lack of data proving that older kids are endangered by FF harnessing, I'll keep recommending it and practicing it (I'm not cynical enough to believe that Britax is just out to make a buck off my being sucker enough to buy a HWH harnessed seat, I think they really do think it's the safest option).

I still love this study, I'm posting the link to your blog everywhere :)

Are you talking about older kids now or?

The force inflicted on the childs neck in a frontal will be five times greater in a FF seat then in a RF seat. It is a fact that if it had been possible it would be safest for everyone in a car to sit RF not only for the children.

Misuse is a problem, but that dosen't mean that if the seat had been properly installed that it is any safer than a RF car seat properly installed.
 

joolsplus3

Admin - CPS Technician
Of course we are all safEST rearfacing! But there's no real evidence that older kids (the ones who are too heavy or tall to rearface) are in danger in harnessed seats, despite the neck stresses measured in crash tests.
:)
 

Car-Seat.Org Facebook Group

Forum statistics

Threads
219,656
Messages
2,196,896
Members
13,530
Latest member
onehitko860

You must read your carseat and vehicle owner’s manual and understand any relevant state laws. These are the rules you must follow to restrain your children safely. All opinions at Car-Seat.Org are those of the individual author for informational purposes only, and do not necessarily reflect any policy or position of Carseat Media LLC. Car-Seat.Org makes no representations as to accuracy, completeness, currentness, suitability, or validity of any information on this site and will not be liable for any errors, omissions, or delays in this information or any losses, injuries, or damages arising from its display or use. All information is provided on an as-is basis. If you are unsure about information provided to you, please visit a local certified technician. Before posting or using our website you must read and agree to our TERMS.

Graco is a Proud Sponsor of Car-Seat.Org! Britax is a Proud Sponsor of Car-Seat.Org! Nuna Baby is a Proud Sponsor of Car-Seat.Org!

Please  Support Car-Seat.Org  with your purchases of infant, convertible, combination and boosters seats from our premier sponsors above.
Shop travel systems, strollers and baby gear from Britax, Chicco, Clek, Combi, Evenflo, First Years, Graco, Maxi-Cosi, Nuna, Safety 1st, Diono & more! ©2001-2022 Carseat Media LLC

Top