Who is the "least protected" child?

[mom2pjs]

A FF 3yo 30# or a RF 2 week old 8# infant carrier? There was a bit of disagreement at a checkpoint today. The senior tech/CPSI argued that the infant was smaller therefore less protected during a side impact so we put the toddler outboard and the infant center. We agreed that the least protected child in the most protected position.... but who is considered the least protected in this case?

 

[TXDani]

There tends to be some disagreement between some techs on this issue. *I* believe the most protected child is the one who is rear facing...so in this case it would be the newborn. So the newborn would go outboard and the forward facing child would go in the center.
Most techs on this board follow the rf'ing child is the most protected but the instructors in my CPS class also thought that the oldest was the most protected.

 

[jen_nah]

Like Danielle stated this is a disagreement between many techs. Several of us techs/instructors disagree too. They feel a newborn is the least protected so they are "more" fragile. Really it's going to be a parental decision in most cases and in most vehicles will will be hard to get 2 side by side. You are going to have to make a best judgement call as it will be a case by case bases.

 

[mom2pjs]

Her logic seemed ok that in a side impact the side forces are the same on both seats and with intrusion the larger body stands a better chance whether FF or RF, and other than this website I had nothing to argue with. Is there any real solid info anywhere that I can reference? The parents instinct is usually to protect that tiny infant. And what I hate to see here or anywhere is the mixed message to the parents. I tell the parent we put the FF toddler in the center and the infant outboard and the next tech says it's the other way, or worse yet there is a crash and some expert witness disagrees with who the "least protected" is. I can explain the crash dynamics and let the parents choose, but they always want guidance and this mixed message thing is BS. And in this case the 2 seats installed fine side by side.

 

[TXDani]

No there is no solid data you can look at to support either logic. If there were this "debate" woudn't exsist because in the CPS community we follow data first and logic second.
The reason many techs feel a rf'ing child is safer is because in a crash the child will remain in the seat. Where a ff child will fly forward and when that child is thrown forward they are not protected by anything...but the rear facing child is always contained within the sidewalls of their seat.
The ultimate solution in this case would be to turn the 30lb child back rf'ing and put him outboard and put the rf'ing infant in the center.

 

[mom2pjs]

The ultimate solution in this case would be to turn the 30lb child back rf'ing and put him outboard and put the rf'ing infant in the center.

LOL
Yes except I thought the FF seat was a good compromise to the way he arrived.... unrestrained in the front seat....

 

[sixboys]

In the opinion of you techs, would a FF seat with side impact wings, such as a Recaro or Britax with TSIP, make a difference in this situation?

 

[jen_nah]

In the opinion of you techs, would a FF seat with side impact wings, such as a Recaro or Britax with TSIP, make a difference in this situation?

It would help the situation and help parents in that touch choice. Also vehicles with SIAB will help too. So, There is a lot to look at in every situation.

 

[jen_nah]

No there is no solid data you can look at to support either logic. If there were this "debate" woudn't exsist because in the CPS community we follow data first and logic second.
The reason many techs feel a rf'ing child is safer is because in a crash the child will remain in the seat. Where a ff child will fly forward and when that child is thrown forward they are not protected by anything...but the rear facing child is always contained within the sidewalls of their seat.
The ultimate solution in this case would be to turn the 30lb child back rf'ing and put him outboard and put the rf'ing infant in the center.

I agree 100% with Danielle. If there was data the debate would be gone as we would follow that data and have backing to prove it to parents. Again, This is just one of those tough calls. You explain to that this is a debate in our field and explain your opinions with what factual information you have and let them make the final call.

 

[sixboys]

It would help the situation and help parents in that touch choice. Also vehicles with SIAB will help too. So, There is a lot to look at in every situation.

Thanks, jen_nah. I was sort of thinking the same thing.

 

[abacus2]

In general RFing children are more protected than FFing children, but I personally couldn't bring myself to put my tiny newborn outboard. Once she was a couple months old, I switched my kids so she was outboard and felt good about it. If/when I have a third child they will probably have to be outboard from the beginning (unless we are able to upgrade vehicles before they arrive), but I won't like it.