Thanks for the PM's
Good advice by Papooses and Snowbird. We're talking about two different things. First, front seat vs. rear seat for a
REAR FACING CHILD WITH DEACTIVATED AIRBAG
The statement of a ff child in rear being safer points to extremely poor information. It's difficult to be more wrong than that even when trying.
A rf child in the front seat is as safe or safer than the rear, that includes the middle rear as well. This has been proven many years ago and is no longer even debated among car seat researchers. I know many point to different statistics but people often get things mixed up. Most stats include ff kids as well in front seat. Again, it's only a rf child with deactivated airbag which is as safe or safer in front. Not kids in boosters, ff kids in car seats, older kids, etc.
Saying one doesn't trust foreign data is IMHO very unintelligent. A lot can be learned from others, good and bad things. I've learned a lot knowing about bad habits, such as Germans often ff at 9 months or many US parents ffing early on. I think it's also a good point to at least consider the opinions of those who do well in certain areas. US is not a leader in car seat usage or research so I think it's a good idea to also look in other places for more information. There is always something to learn......
Swedes do well with car seat usage/research but suck in other areas. I think it would be very shortsighted not learning from many things US does far better just because data/information is foreign.
I don't see how this data would be available in US since it's discouraged and airbags often can't be tuned off. Isn't it also illegal in some states? If no one uses the front sweat, how could data be available?
Front seat is a very good place from a pure crash test standpoint but there are also other factors which makes the front a very good place for a child. The dashboard offer excellent protection from frontal collisions, it's true that side impact collision is slightly better in middle rear though.
Researchers have shown the front is a good place many years ago and companies are not shy to say the same. Britax and Volvo say this on their websites and so does brands and testing facilities as well. Below you wll find a few public quotes which all say the same, the front seat is a good place for a rf child with deactivated air bag:
From Britax:
Statens Väg och Transportforsknings Institut (VTI) och Nationalföreningen för
Trafiksäkerhetens Främjande (NTF) utför krocktester och granskar svårt krockade bilar.
De anser att en bilbarnstol som placeras bakåtvänd i framsätet har en bra placering.
From Folksam (large insurance company very involved in car seat research)
Sätt barnet bakåtvänt
Risken att små barn dödas eller skadas svårt är 5 gånger större i framåtvända stolar än i bakåtvända. Det visar både vår egen och andras forskning.
Säkrast är att åka bakåtvänt i framsätet med urkopplad krockkudde.
From VTI (Crash test facility which is among the highest refgarding in the world. Crash testing of car seats since 1960's)
Ur krocksäkerhetssynpunkt finns flera fördelar att ha barnet i framsäte utan krockkudde. Skaderisken är något lägre vid en frontalkrock om barnet sitter i en bakåtvänd stol lutad mot instrumentpanelen, jämfört med en bakåtvänd bilbarnstol i baksätet lutad mot framstolens ryggstöd.
From BeSafe (well respected car seat manufacturer in Europe. Their seats constantly win the "best in test awards")
Placeringen av bilbarnstol i främre eller bakre passagerarsätet är likvärdig ur krocksäkerhetssynpunkt. Däremot medger framsätet oftast större benutrymme, vilket gör att barn kan åka bakåtvänt högre upp i åldern. Därför ska vi så långt som möjligt tillgodose föräldrarnas krav på tillgänglighet till såväl främre som bakre passagerarsätena.
From Vägverket (NHTSA over here)
Ska barn sitta i framsätet eller baksätet
Baksätet är som regel säkrast – om man bara ser till riskerna vid en krock. Men det gäller inte för barn i bakåtvända bilbarnstolar. Under förutsättning att passagerarkrockkudden är avstängd finns ingen skillnad i krocksäkerhet mellan fram- och baksätet.
From Folksam, Insurance company involved in research
Var är det säkrast att sitta?
I fram- eller baksätet?
Under förutsättning att krockkudden
är avstängd, är det ingen större skillnad
säkerhetsmässigt mellan fram-
och baksätet.
From Volvo:
Var i bilen är det bäst att babyn sitter?
I en Volvo är alla platser lika säkra, det beror mer
på andra omständigheter var du placerar babyn.
From Vägverket (NHTSA over here):
(Newborn to 9 months):
Fram eller Baksätet?
Babyskyddet placeras bakåtvänt i fram eller baksätet. För den som är ensam vuxeni bilen är det oftast tryggast att ha det lilla barnet brdvid sig i framsätet. Krockkudden på passagerarplatsen ska då vara urkopplad.
From VTI: (one of the most respected crash test facilities in the world. Crash testing and advocate of rear facing since 1965)
Rent allmänt anses dock placering i framsätet gynna trafiksäkerheten jämfört med att föraren skall försöka kontrollera ett krånglande barn i baksätet.
--------
I'm sorry about the text being in Swedish. There are several translation tools available but I would not trust them too much. The text above all say the same thing, front seat is very safe
Front seat is as safe or safer than the rear for a rf child. It's a fact and it has been proven by research and usage.
Except for pure crash testing there are other factors which make front seat a good place:
1. Rear facing FAR longer: Parents are often worried about bent legs and think it's uncomfortable for children. Using the front seat means much more leg space for a child and many parents therefore rf for a year of more LONGER. THis makes large difference in safety. Like Snowbird says:
In fact that is partly why they encourage rf'ing in the front seat in Sweden - higher likelihood of a parent keeping a child rf'ing longer which they know is so much more safe.
2. Flexible placement: It's easier to make sure all kids are properly restrained in a car when one is being able to sue the front seat. This applies to larger families and problems such as "3 across" are easier to solve
3. Communication between parent and child: Research has shown that a parent is far less focused when a child is sitting in the rear.
Most parents forget about liability. Open the manual of a Swedish rf seat and instructions for install are right there. Most cars also have "d-rings" on bottom of floor, making front seat installs easy. If the front seat was dangerous you can just imagine the financial exposure. If front seat was not safe and a child broke a finger they would be sued into bankruptcy.
Front seat is very safe for a rf child but that doesn't always make it a good idea. As you know most cars in US can't disable airbags. Research have shown that many parents make mistakes when being able to turn airbags on/off with a key/switch. If crash testing is safe but usage turns out to be poor, then this might not be a good place for children in US which is surely one of the reason why airbags are not allowed to be turned off. Another one is the liability and the legal system. It creates large problems due to crazy lawsuits and it's not even advisable to talk much about safety since it can lead to dangerous liability issues regardless of circumstances.
Keeping a child rf i front or rear really doesn't matter much. What does make a large difference is ff or rf. Are you sure the poster didn't mean to compare ff in the front or rear seat......?
Over a million car seats have been used in Sweden since 1965. So far, not one single child has been killed in a correctly installed rf car sat in a frontal collision. (except drowning in a river etc). Considering that a large percentage of families keep kids up front there would be clear signs it's anot a good place after using front seat since 1965. Research instead show the opposite, front seat is very safe.
I think it will be tough to win this one without looking at research from other countries. It makes no sense to look for US data since it must be very limited.
Have a nice weekend!