UPDATE: post #154 I'm at a loss, really, I just cant' believe a parent can have so little regard for a child's safety - Page 5 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#121 of 160 Old 06-09-2009, 12:43 AM
 
OGirlieMama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 1,900
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Question for the people who take their kids out when the kids get fussy while driving: who's driving the car? Are you telling me you drive with a fussy, crying (nursing?) infant on your lap? If so, wouldn't this increase your likelihood of getting in an accident, because of the distraction? I nearly blew through a red light this afternoon because I was distracted by my yelling 3-year-old in her carseat on the way to a doctor's appointment. I can't imagine if I'd been holding her (I know, you probably don't do that with a 3-y.o., but even a tiny baby is rather squirmy and distracting, no?) I really don't understand the mechanics here.

Betsy, mama to beautiful, strong MZ twins Lillian and Kate, born 11 weeks early on January 10, 2006.
OGirlieMama is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#122 of 160 Old 06-09-2009, 01:10 AM
 
Amylcd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,808
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
The point is, a lap/shoulder belt on a 2, 3, or 4 year old IS a lap belt, since the shoulder belt is so far off correct positioning it's worthless.
This is true. Even with a backless booster, the shoulder belt cuts across my 2 year old's forehead. (something i tried recently to see if my friend could possible be using a shoulder strap with her baby - she lets her almost two year old sit in a backless booster with just a lap belt)

knit.gifMom of Many  jumpers.gif

Amylcd is offline  
#123 of 160 Old 06-09-2009, 01:23 AM
 
an_aurora's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Palmer, AK
Posts: 6,401
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by no5no5 View Post
The only evidence that deals with kids two and up in lap & shoulder belts indicates that it is just as safe, if not safer.
No, the evidence shows that a lap/shoulder belt provides some more protection than nothing, but that a car seat provides more (as evidenced in the studies above, where a car seat reduces death by 54%, and a lap belt reduces death by 33%--thus, a car seat reduces death over seatbelts by 21%). That's not "just as safe, or safer".

CPST & mom

an_aurora is offline  
#124 of 160 Old 06-09-2009, 01:46 AM
 
vbactivist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,122
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by OGirlieMama View Post
Question for the people who take their kids out when the kids get fussy while driving: who's driving the car? Are you telling me you drive with a fussy, crying (nursing?) infant on your lap? If so, wouldn't this increase your likelihood of getting in an accident, because of the distraction? I nearly blew through a red light this afternoon because I was distracted by my yelling 3-year-old in her carseat on the way to a doctor's appointment. I can't imagine if I'd been holding her (I know, you probably don't do that with a 3-y.o., but even a tiny baby is rather squirmy and distracting, no?) I really don't understand the mechanics here.
My husband has usually been the driver Sometimes my dad, or mom, or sister. Occasionally a friend.
vbactivist is offline  
#125 of 160 Old 06-09-2009, 01:59 AM
 
finn74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: new jersey
Posts: 44
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
when i was little, my mom used to make a bed for me on the floor of the front passenger side..she swears today its the safest spot in the car in case of accident
finn74 is offline  
#126 of 160 Old 06-09-2009, 02:26 AM
 
oceanbaby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 11,167
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Golden View Post
Disney is about 30 minutes away from Orlando airport...down a major highway.
I'm not at all trying to defend their decision, but the trip from JFK into Manhattan seemed like 20/30 mins, involved a freeway, and we had no carseat. Was I comfortable with this decision? No. Would I preferred to have had a carseat? Yes. But it's the decision we made at the time, and it was in no way because we have little regard of our child's safety.

My dad is a huge safety freak. Like, it's his mission in life that no child will ever get hurt on his watch. But more than once he tried to convince me that I didn't need a carseat for the kids. It just wasn't on his radar as important. He believed in driving safe cars and being a good driver. That wasn't enough for me, but his regard for their safety was just as high as mine.

Edit to add: I guess what I'm saying is that even though I agree with using carseats (and I never took my kids out, we always pulled over) it would be nice to see titles of posts like this saying something like "Oh, I'm so worried that this child could get hurt" rather than "how could they have so little regard for her safety."
oceanbaby is offline  
#127 of 160 Old 06-09-2009, 09:09 AM
 
no5no5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,557
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by an_aurora View Post
No, the evidence shows that a lap/shoulder belt provides some more protection than nothing, but that a car seat provides more (as evidenced in the studies above, where a car seat reduces death by 54%, and a lap belt reduces death by 33%--thus, a car seat reduces death over seatbelts by 21%). That's not "just as safe, or safer".
That's the most damning evidence (the other studies you provided found only a 5-11% difference), and it is about kids one and up in a lap-only belt. I know your contention is that it is physically impossible to use a lap and shoulder belt with a small child, but I have yet to see actual evidence of that. And as I wrote earlier, the fact that they lumped one year olds in with the kids two & up makes these results inapplicable to the two & up crowd. So this piece of evidence exists, but it is not evidence about kids two and up riding in lap & shoulder belts.

(Oh, and in case anyone cares, I'm not at all sure that one should obtain the difference between percentages by simple subtraction. I'm doing it that way only because I don't know any better.)
no5no5 is offline  
#128 of 160 Old 06-09-2009, 09:56 AM
 
sunnymw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: SWGA
Posts: 2,282
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by finn74 View Post
when i was little, my mom used to make a bed for me on the floor of the front passenger side..she swears today its the safest spot in the car in case of accident
Ironically, in an accident, this is the most dangerous place to be. I believe the most common major injury in accidents is front passenger side leg injuries? Because it all crumples? Someone else here have that stat--I don't remember where I heard it.

Sunny coolshine.gif: gun toting, retired breastfeeding, car seat loving, guitar playing, home birthing and schooling mama to Jakob (10.06), Mikah (07.08) and Korah (07.11). uc.jpg 

sunnymw is offline  
#129 of 160 Old 06-09-2009, 10:48 AM
 
an_aurora's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Palmer, AK
Posts: 6,401
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by no5no5 View Post
I know your contention is that it is physically impossible to use a lap and shoulder belt with a small child, but I have yet to see actual evidence of that.
I'll take a picture of my 2 and 4 year olds in seatbelts and you can judge how well they fit in them

Also, I just wanted to repost this quote that I had posted earlier:

Quote:
Finally, a recent analysis of children 2 through 5 in crashes indicates that those in seatbelts are 3.5 times more likely to suffer moderate to severe injuries, particularly to the head, than those in child restraint systems
That seems pretty damning, it excludes one year olds, and it's talking about a lap/shoulder belt

CPST & mom

an_aurora is offline  
#130 of 160 Old 06-09-2009, 12:06 PM
 
Cinder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Denver, Colorado
Posts: 1,526
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by no5no5 View Post
Some of the evidence indicates that car seats are safer for very young children. I don't think that there is clear or conclusive evidence. If we are talking about "buying" it, I have shelled out the cash for multiple car seats. I also don't think that there is clear or conclusive evidence that lap & shoulder belts are as safe or safer. There is some evidence that they are. The only evidence that deals with kids two and up in lap & shoulder belts indicates that it is just as safe, if not safer. That evidence is not conclusive. It's only one piece of the puzzle, the rest of which apparently does not yet exist. The only reason I posted on this thread to begin with is because I felt, given the lack of conclusive evidence and the fact that experts disagree, that condemnation of parents who make an unpopular decision is inappropriate. I am not trying to convince anyone to switch to seat belts.

Regardless, I agree that we have reached the point in this conversation where we should agree to disagree. I do appreciate your providing me with a great deal of information, which I found truly interesting. I believe in critical analysis and I was trying to engage in it to the best of my abilities, but I am sorry that this conversation was so frustrating for you.
I'm still confused on why were are considering an economist an expert on child seats...

Jillian wife to Ryan and mommy to Janelle Ashlynn (9/09/2002), Kincaid Chance (3/29/2004), Travis Neil (8/13/2007) and River Anderson (5/02/2009).
Cinder is offline  
#131 of 160 Old 06-09-2009, 12:38 PM
 
katiesk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Alaska
Posts: 1,932
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
I guess what I'm saying is that even though I agree with using carseats (and I never took my kids out, we always pulled over) it would be nice to see titles of posts like this saying something like "Oh, I'm so worried that this child could get hurt" rather than "how could they have so little regard for her safety."
i agree with this.

Katie
katiesk is offline  
#132 of 160 Old 06-09-2009, 12:49 PM
 
JD5351's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,275
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by finn74 View Post
when i was little, my mom used to make a bed for me on the floor of the front passenger side..she swears today its the safest spot in the car in case of accident
Yikes...I'm not sure about the passenger side, but I got in a car accident a few years back, and my foot, ankle and leg got broken when I got hit head on. The passenger side didn't look much better.

I think I'd feel safer in the trunk..lol
JD5351 is offline  
#133 of 160 Old 06-09-2009, 12:54 PM
 
no5no5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,557
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by an_aurora View Post
I'll take a picture of my 2 and 4 year olds in seatbelts and you can judge how well they fit in them

Also, I just wanted to repost this quote that I had posted earlier:

That seems pretty damning, it excludes one year olds, and it's talking about a lap/shoulder belt
I put my 3-year-old in a seat belt yesterday and I honestly did not see a significant difference between how she fit and how I fit. The shoulder belt was not uncomfortable for her. I suspect it may be different for different cars, but seemed fine. Not that I think the way something seems is the best way to judge its safety.

Yes, that study does exist. And I think it is valuable information. The reason I excluded it is because I could not determine whether it was talking about lap & shoulder belts or just lap belts. If I missed the place in the study where it actually says lap & shoulder belts, then that is my mistake. Even if it was just about lap & shoulder belts, there would merely be two competing studies. Regardless, it is not conclusive evidence.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cinder View Post
I'm still confused on why were are considering an economist an expert on child seats...
Oh, well, I consider him an expert in statistics, which is the nature of his study. If he had done a study where he looked at children and judged their injuries and compared them to other injuries, I would certainly not consider him to be an expert. But I think economists are, by and large, better trained at statistical analysis than most doctors are. And given that his study is nothing but a statistical analysis of data points others have collected, I do consider him to be an expert. I hope that clears it up.
no5no5 is offline  
#134 of 160 Old 06-09-2009, 01:07 PM
 
Amylcd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,808
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
I put my 3-year-old in a seat belt yesterday and I honestly did not see a significant difference between how she fit and how I fit.
Your three year old must be tall. My 7 year old is just now fitting correctly (with a backless booster), and she is the size of an average 9 - 10 year old.

knit.gifMom of Many  jumpers.gif

Amylcd is offline  
#135 of 160 Old 06-09-2009, 01:18 PM
 
TheGirls's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Central NY
Posts: 1,622
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by no5no5 View Post
Oh, well, I consider him an expert in statistics, which is the nature of his study. If he had done a study where he looked at children and judged their injuries and compared them to other injuries, I would certainly not consider him to be an expert. But I think economists are, by and large, better trained at statistical analysis than most doctors are. And given that his study is nothing but a statistical analysis of data points others have collected, I do consider him to be an expert. I hope that clears it up.
Why is your point of comparison doctors? No one on here is trying to use doctors as experts. "better than a doctor" still doesn't make one an expert....

It's great that you're questioning the rigour of these studies, but it does seem as though you're questioning all the details of the analysis done by the NHTSA, while giving the very poorly done study done by this economist you saw on youtube a pass.

As for his crash tests, we have no inkling of how he did them, so you're just taking him at his word that the conclusion should be that seatbelts are just as safe as child seats. Also, for something like crash tests, the results need to be reproduced by an independent source before they "count". It's called reproduceability, and it is absolutely critical for a scientific test. A non-reproduceable test or study is hearsay.

Also, while I agree that "common sense" changes, physics does not. Physics tells me that more surface area restraining a child is better. Until someone comes out with a quality study that indicates otherwise (and the results of that study are reproduced a second time by an independent source).

ribbonrainbow.gif: mamas to one DD (5/08) and two DS's (11/9/10 @ 35wks)
blogging.jpgnocirc.gifdelayedvax.gifgd.gif1pump.giftoddler.giffamilybed2.gifcd.gif
TheGirls is offline  
#136 of 160 Old 06-09-2009, 01:18 PM
 
Cinder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Denver, Colorado
Posts: 1,526
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by no5no5 View Post
I put my 3-year-old in a seat belt yesterday and I honestly did not see a significant difference between how she fit and how I fit. The shoulder belt was not uncomfortable for her. I suspect it may be different for different cars, but seemed fine. Not that I think the way something seems is the best way to judge its safety.

Yes, that study does exist. And I think it is valuable information. The reason I excluded it is because I could not determine whether it was talking about lap & shoulder belts or just lap belts. If I missed the place in the study where it actually says lap & shoulder belts, then that is my mistake. Even if it was just about lap & shoulder belts, there would merely be two competing studies. Regardless, it is not conclusive evidence.



Oh, well, I consider him an expert in statistics, which is the nature of his study. If he had done a study where he looked at children and judged their injuries and compared them to other injuries, I would certainly not consider him to be an expert. But I think economists are, by and large, better trained at statistical analysis than most doctors are. And given that his study is nothing but a statistical analysis of data points others have collected, I do consider him to be an expert. I hope that clears it up.
Ohh well, I don't think doctor's should be considered experts on child seats either! But I would trust a CPST over both a doctor and an economist.

Jillian wife to Ryan and mommy to Janelle Ashlynn (9/09/2002), Kincaid Chance (3/29/2004), Travis Neil (8/13/2007) and River Anderson (5/02/2009).
Cinder is offline  
#137 of 160 Old 06-09-2009, 03:00 PM
 
no5no5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,557
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGirls View Post
Why is your point of comparison doctors? No one on here is trying to use doctors as experts. "better than a doctor" still doesn't make one an expert....
Point taken. But I will also note that economists are routinely considered experts on safety issues. It's uncomfortable to think about, but every day, in almost all of our activities (electrical safety, food safety, building safety, traffic safety, medical safety, etc., etc.), we make judgments (or our government makes judgments for us) about how much risk is acceptable to save/earn a certain amount of money. One of the jobs of economists is to figure out how much money we spend on relative amounts of safety. I definitely do not think this study is outside of the general expertise of an economist.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGirls View Post
It's great that you're questioning the rigour of these studies, but it does seem as though you're questioning all the details of the analysis done by the NHTSA, while giving the very poorly done study done by this economist you saw on youtube a pass.
I will admit that have been feeling fairly defensive since I first posted that I thought his speech was fairly convincing (and it was the only research I had ever heard/read about on the subject), and I felt that I was totally attacked. Perhaps that is why I seem biased. But I really have been trying to be fair. I feel that I am arguing on the side of Levitt's study being possibly correct, and at least something to consider, and a valid differing opinion, and I have felt that others have been arguing that I should utterly disregard everything he says, and that I am crazy/ignorant/ridiculous for even thinking about it.

Perhaps I haven't been too clear, and I admit that I entered into this discussion with some naivete about how my initial post would be received, but I thought Levitt was saying was that there is no conclusive evidence that car seats are better than lap & shoulder belts for the 2 & up crowd. So, since that's a negative statement, I feel the burden of proof should be on those saying that there IS conclusive evidence.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGirls View Post
As for his crash tests, we have no inkling of how he did them, so you're just taking him at his word that the conclusion should be that seatbelts are just as safe as child seats. Also, for something like crash tests, the results need to be reproduced by an independent source before they "count". It's called reproduceability, and it is absolutely critical for a scientific test. A non-reproduceable test or study is hearsay.
No, hearsay is me telling you what someone else told me the study says without you going to the source to find out for yourself. And just because it hasn't been reproduced does not mean that it is non-reproducible. I would love to see an attempt to reproduce it, and if the attempt failed I would certainly consider that to be important evidence. It is my understanding--and I don't have personal knowledge of it, so I can't be certain--that he offered to release all of his data to other researchers. I don't know whether that has been done or not or whether anyone has even asked for it. I have not seen where anyone has made an attempt to reproduce his crash tests.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGirls View Post
Also, while I agree that "common sense" changes, physics does not. Physics tells me that more surface area restraining a child is better. Until someone comes out with a quality study that indicates otherwise (and the results of that study are reproduced a second time by an independent source).
I don't know. I guess it depends on the part of the body the surface area is on. I wouldn't imagine a restraint that covered the abdominal area only, even if it covered more surface area, would be better. I also wonder how much of the surface area of the straps is actually intended to be part of the restraint mechanism. I gather that the part that goes across the abdomen is not intended to be part of the restraint (because my understanding is that when it does function as part of the restraint it can cause very serious injuries).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cinder View Post
Ohh well, I don't think doctor's should be considered experts on child seats either! But I would trust a CPST over both a doctor and an economist.
I would trust a CPST to know and explain the talking points that they were taught. I wouldn't trust a CPST to perform or analyze scientific research on the relative safety of restraints. That's just not in their purview.
no5no5 is offline  
#138 of 160 Old 06-09-2009, 04:27 PM
 
Dacoda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Lubbock
Posts: 4
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
...and as far as I know, you will get a ticket, no matter how far you are going if you don't have a child restraint system in your car. Even if you are just renting it.
Dacoda is offline  
#139 of 160 Old 06-09-2009, 05:11 PM
 
chickabiddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 3,433
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by no5no5 View Post
I also wonder how much of the surface area of the straps is actually intended to be part of the restraint mechanism. I gather that the part that goes across the abdomen is not intended to be part of the restraint (because my understanding is that when it does function as part of the restraint it can cause very serious injuries).
No substantial part of the harness should be on the child's abdomen. If it is, the carseat does not fit properly (and it's why 3yos should not ride in adult seatbelts!). The lap belts should be low on the hips and thighs.

Carseat-checking (CPST) and WAH mama to a twelve-year-old girl.
chickabiddy is offline  
#140 of 160 Old 06-09-2009, 05:24 PM
 
TheGirls's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Central NY
Posts: 1,622
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by no5no5 View Post
I don't know. I guess it depends on the part of the body the surface area is on. I wouldn't imagine a restraint that covered the abdominal area only, even if it covered more surface area, would be better. I also wonder how much of the surface area of the straps is actually intended to be part of the restraint mechanism. I gather that the part that goes across the abdomen is not intended to be part of the restraint (because my understanding is that when it does function as part of the restraint it can cause very serious injuries).
My point, exactly. A lap belt goes directly across the belly on a person who does not have adult hip structure. A shoulder belt would go directly across the neck on most children. A harness goes across the shoulders, chest, and hips (ie the strong bits....) distributing the forces...

ribbonrainbow.gif: mamas to one DD (5/08) and two DS's (11/9/10 @ 35wks)
blogging.jpgnocirc.gifdelayedvax.gifgd.gif1pump.giftoddler.giffamilybed2.gifcd.gif
TheGirls is offline  
#141 of 160 Old 06-09-2009, 06:34 PM
 
DahliaRW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Near the beautiful Cascades!
Posts: 6,584
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Fwiw, I remember riding in the seatbelt at about 5 and putting the shoulder part behind my back because it was so uncomfortable digging into my neck. I also remember it bothering my stomach (I was very sensitive and still am to things that press on my stomach). I was slightly short for my age and skinny, but I don't see how on earth a child, say under 4 to be conservative, could possibly fit properly in a seatbelt. And even then I doubt it.

Happily married to my dh, mama to ds1 (01/2005), ds2 (07/2007)  and dd (07/2009).
DahliaRW is offline  
#142 of 160 Old 06-09-2009, 11:29 PM
 
MacKinnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: The Great Lakes State
Posts: 3,820
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I have thought and thought about this thread, about the turn this discussion has taken... There are two separate issues, one, the idea that car/booster seats do not provide a level of safety that is any better than a seat belt after age 2, and that it is reasonable to occasionally unbuckle your child in a moving vehicle.

no5-- you have been given many, many links to statistics that prove our point, that car seats and boosters ARE safer than a seat belt alone. If you truly continue to doubt this, I would strongly encourage you to contact a crash test facility near you. Granted, I live in Michigan, where cars (use) to run our economy. I live within 35 miles of two major crash test facilities. Call your local Safe Kids group, see if they or someone, could get you into see a crash test and talk to a bio-med engineer. I can promise you, that 15 minutes of conversation with a bio-med, working in a crash test facility, would explain to you what we are clearly failing to explain. YOU might be interested in this debate, and able to sustain this as a theoretical debate while still restraining your child within the purvue of the law. HOWEVER, what frightens me is how many lurkers are thinking, "Oh, well then, I KNEW those boosters were crap, now I'm not going to bother." We have fought for years to get boosters legislated, and now they are in 45 states, and people like Levitt undermine the message, in a way that is not theoretical. It's dangerous, and it costs children their lives.

Secondly, this idea that unbuckling, for a while, is OK because it does not constitute "immediate and certain death" angers me incredibly. It IS this attitude that is responsible for the roughly 50% of children that die unrestrained in crashes every year. How many of those parents thought, just this once it would be OK? Just this ride it would be fine? Nothing is likely to happen withing the neighborhood, on the way to the store, etc. You do not have the luxury of knowing that this time it will be OK. This could be the time it's not. It appears you are prepared to take that risk, for your child's sake, I hope that you are that fortunate. Many, many others, are not.

And to both of you, 16 years ago this July my sister nearly died in a crash on a beautiful sunny day, on a short drive to our Grandma's house. A drive my mom had done a thousand times, rarely saw traffic, and certainly never saw a crash. Rural, but paved, roads. She was 7, and not in a booster. My mom swerved to avoid a car in her lane as she crested a blind hill and hit a tree. My sister had a cerebral hematoma, a skull fracture, and emergency brain surgery. Had she been in the back seat, in a booster, she most likely would have walked away. But she nearly died. And if you think my mom doesn't question that decision, to let her be in the front, in a belt only, on a regular basis, you are wrong. Her choice nearly cost my sister her life. My sister lives her life wondering how her traumatic brain injury has effect her memory, her school performance, her LIFE. My mom is having yet another surgery this fall, a hip replacement at 54, 16 years later, because of damage related to her injuries (over 40 broken bones).

This is NOT a theoretical debate. If your life hasn't been touched by the serious injury or death of a child in a car crash, or by a crash that could have been fatal, you are very, very lucky. If your life has been touched, then you realize that this is life or death. For real. It's not about economics, or being 10 minutes late because you had to stop to nurse the baby. It's not about scare tactics or a false fear, it is reality. Car crashes are the leading cause of death for everyone ages 1 to 44 in the US. Depending on the year, 3 to 6 children die EVERY DAY in cars, and typically, around half of those are totally unrestrained.

This isn't about choosing organic vs. traditional, or co-sleeping vs. crib, breast vs. bottle. There is real, honest data, born out tragically year after year, that this is THE major life and death issue facing our children, every single day. I just wish parents and caregivers could realize this BEFORE it is their tragedy.

sleepytime.gifC.- WOHM, CPST Instructor, and all around busy Mama to  blowkiss.gifA.- 02/04, bouncy.gif I. 01/07,babyf.gifE. 09/10 and

stork-suprise.gif expecting the surprise of our lives Fall 2012!
 

MacKinnon is offline  
#143 of 160 Old 06-10-2009, 09:50 AM
 
no5no5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,557
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ilovemyavery View Post
no5-- you have been given many, many links to statistics that prove our point, that car seats and boosters ARE safer than a seat belt alone.
: Look, perhaps you think that the only or the best way to prove a point is to say over and over that there is a ton of evidence that clearly shows that you are right. But when the evidence you provide either is off-point for one reason or another, or hasn't been reproduced, or there are significant flaws in the methodology, and someone calls you on it, I think it is inappropriate to just keep saying that there is a ton of evidence that clearly shows that you are right. I am never going to be convinced by mere assertions, no matter how forcefully they are made. If you want to talk about the specific statistics in the specific studies and why you think they prove your point, fine. We can do that--it is what I have been trying to do all along--even though I am honestly getting tired of saying the same things over and over. If you aren't interested in discussing the studies, fine. Just say you think there is conclusive evidence, but you recognize that I don't, and we can end this conversation. But why you would just repeatedly insist that you are right and have proved it without bothering to explain why or even consider my viewpoint, is totally beyond me. I just don't understand it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ilovemyavery View Post
If you truly continue to doubt this, I would strongly encourage you to contact a crash test facility near you. Granted, I live in Michigan, where cars (use) to run our economy. I live within 35 miles of two major crash test facilities. Call your local Safe Kids group, see if they or someone, could get you into see a crash test and talk to a bio-med engineer. I can promise you, that 15 minutes of conversation with a bio-med, working in a crash test facility, would explain to you what we are clearly failing to explain.
That's an interesting idea.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ilovemyavery View Post
YOU might be interested in this debate, and able to sustain this as a theoretical debate while still restraining your child within the purvue of the law. HOWEVER, what frightens me is how many lurkers are thinking, "Oh, well then, I KNEW those boosters were crap, now I'm not going to bother." We have fought for years to get boosters legislated, and now they are in 45 states, and people like Levitt undermine the message, in a way that is not theoretical. It's dangerous, and it costs children their lives.
Ideas are dangerous, that is true. But I daresay I have not persuaded a single person to stop using child seats or boosters. And, for what it's worth, I think your point--which apparently is that if you cannot prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that a change is both necessary and safe, that you should never mention the possibility of a change--is shockingly dogmatic and authoritarian. Heck, if we can't trust people (who were heretofore following the law) to stop following the law because they read a few posts on an internet forum indicating that perhaps the foundations for the law are not well-supported, maybe we shouldn't let them make any of their own decisions at all.
no5no5 is offline  
#144 of 160 Old 06-10-2009, 02:30 PM
 
MacKinnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: The Great Lakes State
Posts: 3,820
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by no5no5 View Post
Just say you think there is conclusive evidence, but you recognize that I don't, and we can end this conversation.
Ok- I feel that we have presented you with conclusive evidence. And I'm struggling to see your perspective but I recognize you disagree. I don't feel that I am just "asserting" anything, we have provided you with many links, to many other data sources.


Quote:
And, for what it's worth, I think your point--which apparently is that if you cannot prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that a change is both necessary and safe, that you should never mention the possibility of a change--is shockingly dogmatic and authoritarian. Heck, if we can't trust people (who were heretofore following the law) to stop following the law because they read a few posts on an internet forum indicating that perhaps the foundations for the law are not well-supported, maybe we shouldn't let them make any of their own decisions at all.
My point is most certainly NOT that you shouldn't mention change. I posted the link about how Levitt himself feels that we should be looking at change to the system and is not trying to argue for parents to stop using restraints.

Look, for you, this is a theoretical argument online. For me, this is my job, this is my every day life. I try to convince parents that what they have heard from places like this is not correct because of X, Y and Z. Levitt and his points are just not born out in the crash data, data analysis and many studies conducted by many other organizations including NHTSA. Their pediatricians aren' t up on the current recommendations, their MIL's advice is wrong and out of date.

I am an educator, it is my JOB to try to teach people about things that they are under or mis-informed on. So yes, I am passionate about this. And no, I don't really think parents should make un-informed decisions that could effect their child's lives, that violate the law in 45 states, because an ECONOMIST has interpreted statistics differently than the rest of the child passenger safety, bio-med engineering, crash test studying world. I'm leaving work in a few to go to a crash lab, I WILL ask about their interpretations of the Levitt's "data" and if you PM me, I can put you in touch with a bio-med engineer, who is a certified CPST Instructor, who could possibly provide you with the kind of technical information that you are looking for.

However, I feel that the burden of proof is really not on us, although we have tried to convince you, the burden of proof is on Levitt's side, because his data is the clear anomaly.

sleepytime.gifC.- WOHM, CPST Instructor, and all around busy Mama to  blowkiss.gifA.- 02/04, bouncy.gif I. 01/07,babyf.gifE. 09/10 and

stork-suprise.gif expecting the surprise of our lives Fall 2012!
 

MacKinnon is offline  
#145 of 160 Old 06-10-2009, 03:03 PM
 
no5no5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,557
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I am bowing out of this conversation, because it seems clear to me that I am no longer getting anything out of it and neither is anyone else. I disagree with many of the points you made, but I have already made all my points and I don't want to make them again. Before I go, I do want to respond to this:

Quote:
Originally Posted by ilovemyavery View Post
Look, for you, this is a theoretical argument online. For me, this is my job, this is my every day life.
One of the reasons I like the idea of moving away from car seats is because of how often they are misused and how dangerous they can be if they are misused. So I want to thank you for helping parents to use car seats correctly and for helping them to see how important it is to use them consistently. I understand that. And I understand how incredibly frustrating it must be when someone blunders into your neck of the woods and starts spouting ideas that seem to conflict with what you teach. It has never been my intention to interfere with the work of the car seat safety folks. I would not drive with my 3-year-old DD in just a seat belt and I would not condone others doing so. (I just wouldn't condemn them for it either.)
no5no5 is offline  
#146 of 160 Old 06-10-2009, 11:18 PM
 
MacKinnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: The Great Lakes State
Posts: 3,820
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by no5no5 View Post
One of the reasons I like the idea of moving away from car seats is because of how often they are misused and how dangerous they can be if they are misused. So I want to thank you for helping parents to use car seats correctly and for helping them to see how important it is to use them consistently. I understand that. And I understand how incredibly frustrating it must be when someone blunders into your neck of the woods and starts spouting ideas that seem to conflict with what you teach. It has never been my intention to interfere with the work of the car seat safety folks. I would not drive with my 3-year-old DD in just a seat belt and I would not condone others doing so. (I just wouldn't condemn them for it either.)
I want to thank you for this statement. I didn't mean to be impatient or confrontational, and IRL, I have had this debate with many people. I usually enjoy a good debate, especially one when I can back my point. I talked with the folks at the crash lab today, they were talking about variables, and indicators, and how Levitt mis-interpreted the blah-blah-blah. It went above me, but essentially, he was using an economics intepretation of bio-med data, and not reading the supposedly small variables correctly. I really can't site it all back, I'm not an bio-med!

I'm sensitive on this this week, one of my volunteer CPST's and all around fabulous police officers is in critical condition in ICU, due to a car crash. I just opened the door to a car at a car seat check to find an 18 month old sitting on the floor in the back. I'm just getting jaded, I guess. Sometimes it feels like too big of a battle to fight.

Anyway, thank you for your appreciation and recognition of my perspective. I can see your desire to have a clear understanding of the facts at hand, and I do agree that with a consistent 80 to 90% misuse rate, something needs to be made easier.

sleepytime.gifC.- WOHM, CPST Instructor, and all around busy Mama to  blowkiss.gifA.- 02/04, bouncy.gif I. 01/07,babyf.gifE. 09/10 and

stork-suprise.gif expecting the surprise of our lives Fall 2012!
 

MacKinnon is offline  
#147 of 160 Old 06-11-2009, 02:22 AM
 
an_aurora's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Palmer, AK
Posts: 6,401
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
That study that I quoted twice DID specifically state it was about lap/shoulder belts, which is why I mentioned that specifically when you said you couldnt find any info about l/s belts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by no5no5 View Post
One of the reasons I like the idea of moving away from car seats is because of how often they are misused and how dangerous they can be if they are misused.
Again, the 54% safer statistic is real-use data, not perfect use. It takes into consideration the 70%+ misuse rate, and determines that even given misuse a car seat is still safer.

CPST & mom

an_aurora is offline  
#148 of 160 Old 06-12-2009, 01:51 AM
 
no5no5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,557
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by an_aurora View Post
That study that I quoted twice DID specifically state it was about lap/shoulder belts, which is why I mentioned that specifically when you said you couldnt find any info about l/s belts.
Okay, I know I said I was done with this thread, but I decided to go back and check to see if I missed something. I hate it when I miss things, but I feel compelled to check and to admit it when I am wrong. I was not able to access the full text of the study you quoted without paying a hefty fee and the abstract doesn't indicate that it is only about lap & shoulder belts, but I did find another study (one I think you'd like) discussing your quoted study and specifically saying that it did not distinguish between lap belts and lap & shoulder belts.

Anyway, in trying to find a way to access the full text of the above study, I stumbled across a new study undertaken by two public-safety-expert, non-economist types. They wrote:

Quote:
We estimated seat belts to be as effective as safety seats in preventing death for children aged 2 and 3 years.
Of course, they found that child safety seats were more effective for children younger than 2, and they recommend the use of car seats. So it sounds like Levitt's study did have some reproducibility after all, eh? (But I am not sure that they separated lap & shoulder belts from lap belts. )

But really, I'm done with this thread. I've been losing sleep just thinking about all these kids in car crashes. I don't know how y'all do it.
no5no5 is offline  
#149 of 160 Old 06-12-2009, 09:02 AM
 
Mandynee22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Cape Cod, MA
Posts: 1,271
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kim Allen View Post
I know of a CPS worker (which her MIL is also the head of the CPS office) who does not strap her kid in the seat. I see her almost everyday driving through town ( she always is exceeding the speed limit) and does not think twice about it. thats lets you know how cps is around here also. She also would drop him off at daycare (which my mother worked at) at 10:00am and he had not had a diaper change since the night before and was always filthy!!! but thats another story!

A friend of mine did foster care up until a few months ago. She went to pick up a 2 1/2 year old boy. The social worker installed a booster seat into the car for the toddler using the seat belt and top tether... it was so loose I literally picked up the seat and moved it and she had the top tether just wrapped around the back seat headrest. The car was a a 2008 so it had anchors and tether and the social worker has a toddler of her own. There was NO EXCUSE for that, IMO. I reinstalled the seat

Monther of Riley (11), Andrew (4) and Victoria (7 months)
Mandynee22 is offline  
#150 of 160 Old 06-12-2009, 09:19 AM
 
chickabiddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 3,433
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by no5no5 View Post
But really, I'm done with this thread. I've been losing sleep just thinking about all these kids in car crashes. I don't know how y'all do it.
I am not trying to rehash the debate, but I do it because I believe (and IMO for good reason) that properly used car crashes DO save kids' lives, and if I can help teach people to use car seats properly, and in some cases help them obtain the seats, it's worth it.

Carseat-checking (CPST) and WAH mama to a twelve-year-old girl.
chickabiddy is offline  
Reply

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off