Keep kids rear facing till age 4 message hits the mainstream media - Page 3

[Polliwog]

Originally Posted by geekgolightly

Please do not let your kids hang their legs over the sides. If you are t-boned in a crash, their legs are gone.

Do you have any research that supports that? Are you a carseat safety tech?

[chickabiddy]

I am not aware of any data that supports the claim that "legs are gone" in a side-impact crash; however, some crashes are severe enough that injury is unavoidable. In a side-impact crash, a rear-facing carseat protects the head, neck, and spine far better than a forward-facing carseat. I know it doesn't feel good to decide which parts of your child should be at risk, but if I had to make the choice, I'd choose to protect the head/neck/spine.

[sunnymw]

Originally Posted by Polliwog

Do you have any research that supports that? Are you a carseat safety tech?

:


I can see it being a problem IF, say, they had their one leg all the way between the seat and the door AND were T-boned on that side. Of course, still not as bad as the leg injuries you'd get FFing

[geekgolightly]

Originally Posted by Polliwog

Do you have any research that supports that? Are you a carseat safety tech?

I'm an RN and just finished a trauma nurse core course (TNCC) n which we discussed child safety and they touched on this.

[alegna]

Originally Posted by geekgolightly

I'm an RN and just finished a trauma nurse core course (TNCC) n which we discussed child safety and they touched on this.

Hmmm, I'd like to see some data to support that. As mentioned, over the sides while rf is still safer than ff.

-Angela

[geekgolightly]

Originally Posted by chickabiddy

I am not aware of any data that supports the claim that "legs are gone" in a side-impact crash; however, some crashes are severe enough that injury is unavoidable. In a side-impact crash, a rear-facing carseat protects the head, neck, and spine far better than a forward-facing carseat. I know it doesn't feel good to decide which parts of your child should be at risk, but if I had to make the choice, I'd choose to protect the head/neck/spine.

Why does this have to be a choice? Protect the legs and the head/neck/spine. Talk with your kids about keeping their legs off the sides of the car seat. It's safer. There are huge vessels in the legs; this isn't a matter of protecting a leg from a simple fracture.

[chickabiddy]

You're right; it doesn't have to be either-or. But kids who are still young enough to be RFing often don't have the best impulse control, and I would still prefer to take the chance that their legs might be in the "wrong" position at the moment of impact than to have them FFing.

[alegna]

Originally Posted by geekgolightly

Why does this have to be a choice? Protect the legs and the head/neck/spine. Talk with your kids about keeping their legs off the sides of the car seat. It's safer. There are huge vessels in the legs; this isn't a matter of protecting a leg from a simple fracture.

I really don't see this as terribly dangerous. Unless I see some research to support this, it's merely a theory of what possibly *could* happen.

Dd used to hang her legs over, I don't recall her being able to get them over to the degree that would endanger major vessels.

-Angela

[geekgolightly]

Originally Posted by alegna

I really don't see this as terribly dangerous. Unless I see some research to support this, it's merely a theory of what possibly *could* happen.

Dd used to hang her legs over, I don't recall her being able to get them over to the degree that would endanger major vessels.

-Angela

If her knee is out on the side and she's in a bad t-bone collision, then she can exsanguinate within a matter of minutes. Look, I hate to be so graphic, but it was actually brought up as a question to the director of surgical trauma at our hospital. He supported rear facing seats but warned us that this was going to start to be a problem. And when I came in this thread and saw people were doing exactly this, I spoke up. If you don't want to talk to your kids about it, that's your business, but it would be wise to do so.

The likelihood of being in a major collision are low, and a t-bone is only one type of collision, but as you're concerned enough to promote and use ff seats before most Americans have even heard about it, I assume that you would want to consider this as well.

[Mommybree]

Originally Posted by geekgolightly

If her knee is out on the side and she's in a bad t-bone collision, then she can exsanguinate within a matter of minutes. Look, I hate to be so graphic, but it was actually brought up as a question to the director of surgical trauma at our hospital. He supported rear facing seats but warned us that this was going to start to be a problem. And when I came in this thread and saw people were doing exactly this, I spoke up. If you don't want to talk to your kids about it, that's your business, but it would be wise to do so.

This sounds to me like a doctor talking about a topic he knows nothing about. Everybody is worried about legs rear-facing when they first hear of it, but there is absolutely no data to show that legs are being injured in rear-facing seats. In fact, the data shows that forward-facing kids are at risk for leg injuries. If this were really an issue, then we would have data from both here in the United States, where there are kids who do rear-face beyond 1 year, plus data from Sweden, where the kids have rear-faced for decades.

Also, forward-facing kids' legs are right up against the side of the car with no shell protection in many seats. I've heard of broken legs, but not exsanguination from leg injuries to forward-facing kids. Is that something commonly seen with forward-facing kids? Because if the concern is no shell protection for legs, then we would be seeing this type of injury with forward-facing kids as well.

I don't think it's necessarily a bad idea to encourage kids to keep their legs within their seats' shells while rear-facing, but I doubt that that doctor had crash test data or real world crash injury data to support such a statement.

[mbhf]

I don't think geekgolightly is saying people should FF their kids to protect their legs, just that there is also a major risk to having the legs hanging over the side while RF. she has made no argument against ERF that I've seen.

[Mommybree]

Originally Posted by mbhf

I don't think geekgolightly is saying people should FF their kids to protect their legs, just that there is also a major risk to having the legs hanging over the side while RF. she has made no argument against ERF that I've seen.

I understand that, but there is still no evidence to support the statement that kids will bleed out from leg injuries while rear-facing with their legs not protected within a seat's shell. Legs outside a carseat shell would be damaged in forward-facing seats as well because most seats do not have shell protection for legs forward-facing. I'm just saying that if there was a risk to legs being outside of seat shells, then we would already see it both with kids rear-facing and forward-facing. There would be no spike in exsangunation via leg injuries if there aren't such injuries to begin with.

[mommy2maya]

I find it so amusing that so many people go on and on about how great Europe is about rearfacing, when it is not all of europe. It is Sweden. Most other european countries, including England, where this study came from, most babies from 9 months on are forward facing, because high weight rearfacing seats are simply not available. Also, the highweight rearfacing seats in sweden are designed differently than rearfacing seats in USA.

[mommy2maya]

oh and the seats sit back from the seat bight, which also helps with rearfacing of big kids,. (the erf seats in sweden)

[Delicateflower]

How much movement happens in a crash? In the test videos I've seen, limbs fly around wildly. If their legs started out over the side, where would they be once the door was touching their seat? They would fly towards the door no matter where they started, wouldn't they? And how far sideways can they go? I know my children's RF seat has straps over the tops of the thigh, not around the hip, so they can't get their legs very wide apart at all.

Legs outside a carseat shell would be damaged in forward-facing seats as well because most seats do not have shell protection for legs forward-facing.

But to crush them the seat in front would have to meet the back seat, and that's a lot harder to do than for the door to meet the side of the seat, isn't it?

[Mommybree]

Originally Posted by Delicateflower

But to crush them the seat in front would have to meet the back seat, and that's a lot harder to do than for the door to meet the side of the seat, isn't it?

I was referring to the legs being close to the door with no shell on the side of them to protect them in a T-bone accident. I sorry I'm not being very clear.

[JayJay]

I would also be very hesitant in allowing the dangling of legs. I can totally see how a T-bone would impact a car, my mother having been in several accidents. Honestly, I do believe rear facing is a great idea, but would definitely want something like the link to the Swedish site had on it - those larger rear facing seats really float my boat

[alegna]

I agree- limbs fly ALL over in a crash... A leg would have to really be wedged between the door and the seat to stay there- and kids couldn't get it there to start with.

I think we're guessing here. I would be interested in seeing even one case report of this actually happening.

-Angela

[Ironica]

Originally Posted by MomOf3boyz

I saw the news piece as well and wasn't as thrilled. I agree with the others concerned for the child's comfort and in my DS 3's case worried about hip displacement (He already has hip issues). Even the child in the segment couldn't get into the seat and decently place his legs, I know because I was watching to see what the little guy did. I know that for babies it's bad to put them in jumpers or baby bjorns where their hips are forced to be in an unnatural position for a prolonged period of time. If a child is scrunching to fit their legs while they sit in a car for a prolonged period of time I don't see a major difference. Yes a child could try to move their legs in the seat, but it wouldn't be an easy or natural movement.

Hip dysplasia is almost unheard of in cultures that consistently wear their babies, because baby's legs are usually in "froggie" position, with the knee level with or above the hip. This is a position that supports proper hip joint development, and is contrasted with the "parachute" leg-dangling of Snugl-type carriers and jumping toys.

In a rear-facing carseat, infants typically rest their legs with the knees out, in a modified version of this "froggie" position. By age three or so, they've probably started crossing their legs, putting them up against the seat back, or (gasp) dangling them... but they're also well past the age where hip joint malformations are likely to emerge.

A carseat isn't the *best* device for reinforcing proper hip joint development (and that's yet another reason why using baby buckets 18 hours a day isn't the greatest plan), but I don't see how RF or ERF is going to increase the risk of hip dysplasia.

[DahliaRW]

Originally Posted by alegna

I agree- limbs fly ALL over in a crash... A leg would have to really be wedged between the door and the seat to stay there- and kids couldn't get it there to start with.

I think we're guessing here. I would be interested in seeing even one case report of this actually happening.

-Angela

I have seen LOTS of reports of ffing kids dying or being seriously injured from neck injuries when ffing too young. I have yet to see ONE of a serious leg injury from side-impact while rearfacing.