or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Natural Living › Family Safety › Rear Facing vs Forward Facing carseat
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Rear Facing vs Forward Facing carseat - Page 2

post #21 of 65
Thread Starter 

Thank you for all the feed back. I understand the need to keep the LO rear facing as long as possible but I'm just curious about the LO's legs being squished when they remain RF as they start to grow. Our DS is still RF but his legs seem to be really scrunched up! Are there not concerns about that aspect of being RF?

post #22 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by mamatalks View Post

Thank you for all the feed back. I understand the need to keep the LO rear facing as long as possible but I'm just curious about the LO's legs being squished when they remain RF as they start to grow. Our DS is still RF but his legs seem to be really scrunched up! Are there not concerns about that aspect of being RF?



I think you'll find that there are zero (or very few?) documented cases of extended rear-facing children suffering broken legs, and even if they did, a broken leg can be fixed much more easily than the sort of injury that can occur when FF'ng too early -- in small children with still developing spines & necks, I think risking a broken leg is better than risking a broken neck if you have the choice, within the limits of your seat, or the seats available to you :)

 

DS is FF'ng now, he's over 4 (and 2lbs away from legally boostering in our area, but he doesn't know that, and I'm not going to tell him!), but he STILL sits with his legs up much of the time, or sprawled to the sides ... I don't think the 'dangling down the front' would be more comfy than the support of RF'ng.

post #23 of 65

Broken legs are common injuries in forward facing children who are involved in accidents.  Their legs (and arms) are flung with considerable force into the seat in front of them or the door to the side of them.  This is not a risk when RF.

post #24 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by mamatalks View Post

Thank you for all the feed back. I understand the need to keep the LO rear facing as long as possible but I'm just curious about the LO's legs being squished when they remain RF as they start to grow. Our DS is still RF but his legs seem to be really scrunched up! Are there not concerns about that aspect of being RF?

my kids either cross their legs, have them over the sides or prop them up on the seat back. neither of the two older ones (4 years old and 2 years old) have complained. they've just done whatever works for them and they don't know any different!
post #25 of 65

DD iust turned 3 and is still RF.  She is very tall for her age, but we still have 6 or so months in her complete air.  We are good on weight for a long time.

post #26 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by mamatalks View Post

Thank you for all the feed back. I understand the need to keep the LO rear facing as long as possible but I'm just curious about the LO's legs being squished when they remain RF as they start to grow. Our DS is still RF but his legs seem to be really scrunched up! Are there not concerns about that aspect of being RF?



No, there are no legitimate concerns or risk in regards to legs for an older rear facing child.  Some convertibles offer a lot of leg room (The First Years True Fit, the Sunshine Kids' Radians, the Graco My Ride 65 and the Safety First Complete Air are all good examples).  And some seats offer really poor or limited legroom (Britax and Recaro convertibles).   

 

If you have an average to large child, or a very complainy child, you might want to invest in a seat that fits legs better than the Britax or Recaro convertibles.   However, it is *not* a safety or development concern in the least.  

post #27 of 65
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maedze View Post





No, there are no legitimate concerns or risk in regards to legs for an older rear facing child.  Some convertibles offer a lot of leg room (The First Years True Fit, the Sunshine Kids' Radians, the Graco My Ride 65 and the Safety First Complete Air are all good examples).  And some seats offer really poor or limited legroom (Britax and Recaro convertibles).   

 

If you have an average to large child, or a very complainy child, you might want to invest in a seat that fits legs better than the Britax or Recaro convertibles.   However, it is *not* a safety or development concern in the least.  


Thank you! I was wondering if it might be our carseat that was just not allowing for some much needed leg room. We have a britax! Maybe we'll look into getting a different seat if the complains start coming. thanks.gif

 

post #28 of 65


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SynEpona View Post

I don't think the 'dangling down the front' would be more comfy than the support of RF'ng.


i agree, in fact, i think it's probably more uncomfortable.  i think it would cut off the circulation.  just turned my 4-year-old dd around to forward facing and i hate to see her legs dangling there.  i prefer it when she props them up against the passenger seat.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by galincognito View Post

my kids either cross their legs, have them over the sides or prop them up on the seat back. neither of the two older ones (4 years old and 2 years old) have complained. they've just done whatever works for them and they don't know any different!

 

yeahthat.gif
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mamatalks View Post

 Maybe we'll look into getting a different seat if the complains start coming. thanks.gif

 

 

i doubt it will.  mine never complained.


 

 

post #29 of 65

My 6 year old still RF thumb.gif

post #30 of 65

Until the limits of your seat! For DS that was 2.5. For DD it will be a LONG time (she is 19 months and about 22 lbs and her seat goes to 45 rear-facing)

post #31 of 65

Also, my DS never complained about it being uncomfy UNTIL I turned him FF. Now his legs fall asleep sometimes.

post #32 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by KaliShanti View Post

Also, my DS never complained about it being uncomfy UNTIL I turned him FF. Now his legs fall asleep sometimes.


As a short person, I am far FAR more comfortable with my legs up, cross legged, whatever than with my legs down.  While I'm not short enough that my legs dangle in most chairs, its usually a stretch.  Dd is 2 1/2 and tiny but she still seems to have PLENTY of leg room in her Britax RFing.

post #33 of 65

DS is three, big for his age, and happily RF in a Sunshine Radian with a weight limit of 40 or 45 RF.  I have no plans to move him FF anytime soon although I haven't met anyone IRL who has kept their kid RF past a max of 18 months. 

post #34 of 65

There are also height limits to rear-facing, not just weight limits. For anyone using the Complete Air to rear-face a "tall" child, I saw this link a few days ago, in which the makers of the Complete Air emphatically state that the rear-facing limit is 40 inches. http://guggiedaly.blogspot.com/2011/06/safety-1st-clarifies-complete-air.html

post #35 of 65

I turned ds1 around 18 months. That was over 8 years ago, though and I was a weirdo for keeping him rearfacing past his first birthday. Had a hard time getting a seat that would even go rearfacing past 20lbs. Ds2 was a bit older, but pretty sure he was still under 2. That was a little over 4 years ago. Ds3 is 2 1/2 and I think he's pretty much outgrown his seat RF. I have a Radian, but it doesn't fit in my mom's car RF so unless we can mange to get our own vehicle, I'm going to have to turn him soon. (will have to double check how close he is to outgrowing it height wise next time I can install it). I'd like to keep him RF longer, but I can't shell out for another seat. We don't even have a car and I have 5 car seats and will probably still need an infant seat for a few months unless a)baby is bigger than N was & fits in a convertible or b)we don't go anywhere in a car until the baby fits in a convertible

post #36 of 65

dd is 18 months and a peanut, so chances are she'll never outgrow her seat! haha. i don't have any plans to move her ffing with the exception of when #2 comes along, IF we still have our current car and IF we still have the same trouble getting a rfing seat behind the drivers seat that we did last time. i don't think we can fit two convertibles rfing in our car... however, we're in canada so have a smaller selection of seats available. 

post #37 of 65

ds turned ff on his 3rd birthday. He is 36 lbs now and ff in an alpha omega. He *can* still ride rf in some seats but at 3 (now almost 4 )yrs old I'm comfortable with him ff. dd is still rf in a scenera and I don't think she'll be turning any time in the remotely near future....she only weighs 19 lbs!  my SO's family actually thought it was illegal to have her backwards, lol. But we're in texas where it appears that half the population has never even heard of using car seats in the first place so I just smile and ignore. (Actually I do that for a lot of things). My 3 yo niece is in a backless booster. She never sits in it properly and unbuckles herself constantly. It's a good reminder to me of why even if they fit sizewise (which she doesn't, anyway) or even if it's legal, kids should stay harnessed and out of booster seats as long as possible.

post #38 of 65

DD1 is 2.5 and I'm guessing we have another 3 or 4 months rf-ing.  She's pretty tall and most of it is torso so finding a new rf-ing seat once she reaches the limits of this one might not be possible.

post #39 of 65

I haven't seen anyone else here mention this, but we had to turn our daughter to FF when she was just 18 months old, because she was so sick in the car.  It was at the point where she threw up on every drive.  We saw the doctor and the naturopath about it, but couldn't give her any relief.  Once we turned her from RF to FF, she was completely better.  Has anyone else had that problem with their LO?   Our 14-month-old is RF and having no problems though, so we'll keep him that way until he outgrows the seat!  

 

I also have to agree with all the posters having trouble fitting the RF seat behind the driver - impossible in our small car!  And even now, with the RF seat behind the passenger, there is barely any leg space and the person in the front has to be crammed against the dash to fit in.  I sure wish the cars/car seats could be better designed!

post #40 of 65

i dont even know how tht makes sense. 
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by yamilee21 View Post

There are also height limits to rear-facing, not just weight limits. For anyone using the Complete Air to rear-face a "tall" child, I saw this link a few days ago, in which the makers of the Complete Air emphatically state that the rear-facing limit is 40 inches. http://guggiedaly.blogspot.com/2011/06/safety-1st-clarifies-complete-air.html



 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Family Safety
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Natural Living › Family Safety › Rear Facing vs Forward Facing carseat