Kecia
Admin - CPST Instructor
I don't want to derail the Diono recline adjuster thread but my last comments there got me thinking about this...
We all have some strong cps-related beliefs and certain changes or new concepts are harder for us to accept than others. I know quite a few cps techs and instructors who are still desperately clinging to old ideas about things because they just can't accept the new info for whatever reason (ie, handle positions on infant seats, the concept of "cocooning", grippy shelf liner, etc.)
Even though most of the advocates here have embraced the new schools of thoughts on such matters, we all still have our prejudices. For example, some people hate the mighty tite so much that they can't bring themselves to trust the similar device built into the new Summer Infant Prodigy.
I'm going to ask each of you to ask yourself which theoretical/hypothetical change or new info would be hardest for you to accept. And how would you handle it? Could you find a way to come to terms with it?
For me the perfect example is the belief that rear-facing is almost always going to be superior to forward-facing in a crash. Last year the Kiddy folks were heard boasting claims that their FF energy-absorbing impact shield technology was actually safER than rear-facing. Most of us dismissed their claims because we believe so passionately that RF is almost always preferable to FF, especially for infants and toddlers. But what if they're right? What if they prove (and Euro crash data backs it up) that 12 month olds fare better outcomes in most crash types if they are FF in one of these types of CRs. Could you accept that?
What other scenarios would you have a hard time with and how would you deal with them?
We all have some strong cps-related beliefs and certain changes or new concepts are harder for us to accept than others. I know quite a few cps techs and instructors who are still desperately clinging to old ideas about things because they just can't accept the new info for whatever reason (ie, handle positions on infant seats, the concept of "cocooning", grippy shelf liner, etc.)
Even though most of the advocates here have embraced the new schools of thoughts on such matters, we all still have our prejudices. For example, some people hate the mighty tite so much that they can't bring themselves to trust the similar device built into the new Summer Infant Prodigy.
I'm going to ask each of you to ask yourself which theoretical/hypothetical change or new info would be hardest for you to accept. And how would you handle it? Could you find a way to come to terms with it?
For me the perfect example is the belief that rear-facing is almost always going to be superior to forward-facing in a crash. Last year the Kiddy folks were heard boasting claims that their FF energy-absorbing impact shield technology was actually safER than rear-facing. Most of us dismissed their claims because we believe so passionately that RF is almost always preferable to FF, especially for infants and toddlers. But what if they're right? What if they prove (and Euro crash data backs it up) that 12 month olds fare better outcomes in most crash types if they are FF in one of these types of CRs. Could you accept that?
What other scenarios would you have a hard time with and how would you deal with them?