Rear-facing till age 4?

There's a thread about rear-facing in SY and it mentioned it's now recommended to keep kids rear-facing until 4 years old. :blink: OK, I just heard about keeping them RF until age two, after my girls turned two, and I can see that, if you can do it. We turned them at 13 months. At the time, we knew 20 lbs/ 12 months was the guideline, they were like 24-25 lbs, we had to take the carseats out for some reason at the time, and decided to put them back in FF. Now, Caleb is a small fry, so we decided to keep him RF longer, he's probably not even 20 lbs yet. I imagine he can stay comfortably RF till age 2.

OK, but age 4? I just don't see how in the world that's possible? How can they be comfortable? How do they tolerate sitting backwards? Can they climb into the seats themselves? Maybe the girls are just huge, but I can't picture it.

 

My girls' feet would be up to the head rest...that's impossible...can you imagine! They must think that kids' legs don't grow!

 

I had never heard of this, so I did some snooping around online and it looks like this is a European recommendation. However, we all know the Europeans are far ahead of us on implementing safety mechanisms! I really can not imagine having my boys rear-facing even at this age. However, I am sure that when I was a kid, people never could have imagined restraining their toddlers the way we do now. I traveled in "car seat" which was little more than a glorified bucket as a baby. Maybe it (RF till 4, not the bucket! :lol: ) IS safer, and we'll see this become the norm in time? I don't know. I'm not turning our car seats around, though.

 

I think it's just the "safest possible option" -- if you think about it, it would be safer for adult passengers to ride backwards, too. Yeah, legs would be scrunched up, but in theory it's preferable to break a leg than a neck in an accident.

I get it, but that's also like saying we'd be healthier if we walked around in bubbles. True, but...at some point, you gotta choose practicality over the safest possible option.

I think everyone has a different comfort level at where the line is on this...I admit I'm a little crazy about rear-facing as long as possible, because it's just my thing. But I'm lax in other areas where others might be much more careful.

 

I just can't imagine how uncomfortable my girls would be now at 3.5 being rear facing. There's no way that they could sit comfortably. And I wonder how much hip damage or lower back damage they might sustain due to having scrunched up legs that may cause them to limp for the rest of their lives. I can't imagine the possibility of them sustaining any other type of bodily damage at 3 to 4 could be any worse at forward facing versus rear-facing. I'm just seeing my girls with their feet placed on the seat and me having an impact and their knees going right into their face because of them being rear-facing. Then there's all kinds of facial damage, possible hip damage, ankle and foot damage, it just seems a nightmare. I don't know...who knows what the safest way is, I guess I would have to see how it would work.

 

Rachel, there is a lot of info on this page if you're interested -- scroll to the bottom for various links. There is even a page of pictures of older kids rear-facing -- it DOES look weird, but I think they mostly just sit cross-legged.

http://www.kyledavidmiller.org/pages/4209/Car_Seat_Safety:_Rear-facing_is_safest.htm

 

Thanks for the link...I just finished watching those videos and I must say that my opinion has changed. Thanks Becca!

 

I know that they are selling car seats that have higher weight limits for RF. We turned J & B at 2 1/2 years old, after B kept getting car sick in trips more than 20 minutes.

We have the Marathons which are rated to 33lbs, B is getting close, J isn't.

I'm glad we were able to keep them RF as long as we did and I felt so guilty for turning them around - but I didn't think we could turn one and not the other. I have to say it's much easier to have them FF.

 

I know it's safest, there is no doubt in my mind it is. Breaking a leg, have your legs squished, etc. are minor injuries (if any) compared to breaking a neck or back. Having said that, I turned mine around at 16-17 months, also because of practicality and the better fit with 3 across. Somehow I can't imagine but it's being done, more and more in the States, and e.g. in Sweden it's very very popular. Mine are still in harnassed seat, including my 5 year old. Mine are 2y9m and already past the rear facing weight limit. Most 4 yo won't make it rear facing (it's usually 33-35 lbs).

I think if for starters, all kids under 4 should be in a harnassed seat (and not a booster), that's still not the case. I've read plenty of stories (also on here) about 3 yo in boosters, or worse backless boosters, while there is plenty of evidence (including tragic deaths) showing that no child under 4 should be in a booster (as recommended by the AAP). One step at a time ...

 

I do have them in the Radian 80's, even though they could move to boosters pretty soon, but I like having them in a 5 pt harness. I do wonder if extended RF is easier to do in Europe because (I'm assuming here, from my limited knowledge of Europe), that car trips are not as long and not as frequent.

 

I am one of those moms that still has there 2 yr olds RF and I was one who responded to the SY thread and I also did the research when they were 1yr old and decided to keep them Rf. As for how long I'm not sure but I'm with Becca34 its just one of my things and if I can safely keep them RF until 4yrs old then I will

 

Becca, thank you for that wonderful link!

As I have said before R and E are still rear facing at 3 1/2 and will continue to do so until they reach the limit of their Marathons (they are right at 30 lbs.) I am not trying to tell anyone what to do with their child just to answer the questions and comments that they could not possibly be happy or comfortable rear facing. Truthfully, they are happy rear facing and don't have any problems with their legs. Most kids will sit criss cross with their legs when they sit on the floor and R and E do the same in their car seats. Sometimes they will stretch their legs up the back of the seat to the head rest and they are happy with that too! They climb into their car seats by themselves and get their harness straps on then I check them, buckle and tightened and away we go. Yes, it is more difficult for the front seat people to have the car seats still rear facing but we deal with it because our comfort is trivial compared to their safety of their developing spinal columns. We (adults in the family) are average size but if we were tall people then we would have to weigh the risk of injury to ourselves being too close to the dash board versus the risk to the kids. We feel that we have at least given their spinal columns a good chance to develop and mature. In a perfect world we would all be rear facing-lol!

Whether you choose to rear face or forward face is your decision but please remember the most important thing is to make sure the seat is properly installed and the harness straps tightened every time. If the seat is not installed correctly or the straps not used correctly then it doesn't matter if your child is rear or front facing.

As Mom2SofieAndTwins said "One step at a time."

 

We turned the girls around for good after a year. My girls are so tall they grew out of their carseats high limits rather fast. Jazz had been out of the height for rear facing for quite a while

 

We turned the girls when they were 20lbs and PAST the height limit on our seats--it was not safe.

They were about 18 months old.

We just switched to backed boosters since they past the FF height on the 5 point carseat--they 'barely' made the weight (30lbs)

Our Pedi was ok with it since if they were too tall-- neck damage could get severe.

 

OMG!!!!! My girls are tiny!! Addison just now weighs 20 pounds and they have been forward facing for a while I feel So guilty and lucky that nothing has happened! Thanks for posting this!

 

I turned my kids at 16 months once Abby finally reached very close to 20 lbs...it certainly made the screaming stop during my 40 minute commute...and I feel no guilt...and would never turn them back around after they've been forward facing...they are still in a 5 pt booster seat (Graco Nautilus) which will take them until they're 8 and get out of the boosters...

quite frankly if we went by weight limits only my daughter would probably be rear facing till she goes to the prom!

 

We too are rear-facing at 28+ months. I will go as long as I can this way. I am worried we will hit the height constraint before the weight constraint (DS is 27 lbs and DD is 28 lbs). They don't seem to mind being rear facing so far...

Sotto

 

We turned ours around on their first birthday because they were both over 20 pounds. If I had read info about RF before the turned around, I would have kept them RF for much longer. At 3, having been FF for 2 years now, I don't think I'll turn them around.

 

Please don't take this personal (it's more something general I often hear and you just mention it again), but I have heard many times that when pedi's say it's OK, people go with that. First of all, they're not certified car safety technicans, and second the AAP recommends keeping them harnassed until 4 years of age.

Next to that, my oldest outgrew the Britax Marathon height wise a little past her 3rd birthday. She was 21 3/4 at birth and always has been in the 95% for height. She also has a long torso. However, these days there are so many seats (some harnass / booster options) with high top slots that there is absolutely no reason to put a child under 4 in a booster.

 

Mine too (both of them)! They are actually pretty close to outgrowing their seats by height, but not even remotely close to the weight limit. I am going to get Graco Nautilus seats next and they'll be in those until they are out of car seats/bootsters/etc. They have to more than double their current weight to get to 65 pounds.

I turned mine forward facing around 20-21 months.

 

I agree with keeping kids in a 5 point harness as long as possible. We switched to a booster earlier this year when the boys were 5.5.

However, I do have issues (ummm, maybe better said concerns) with the organization in the link. I know they started talking about car seat safety after the tragic death of their son, who died when the seat belt failed and he was thrown from the car (he was in a booster). So they started advocating for keeping kids in 5 point harnesses up to the maximum weight on the seat (as much as 80 lbs). But that won't resolve the safety issue of kids ages 4+ who are restrained by only a seat belt, even in a 5 pt harness. We have a Radian 65, that specifically states that past 4? lbs (I can't remember, but it might be 48 lbs), you cannot use latch anymore. The seat should instead be secured with the seat belt. Voila! Again, you're relying on the seat belt to secure the child. Additionally, those high weight seats were never meant to secure children 7,8 or 9 years old. I suspect higher weight limits are partially a result of parents looking for a 5 pt restraint for husky kids. I know that we only graduated to a booster when the middle buckle started cutting into their crotches, causing serious discomfort. And we were more than 20 lbs below the weight limit for the Radian! There is no way they could have used that seat until 65 lbs.

 

Cathy, I agree with what you're saying (in Kyle's case / link) the seat belt actually failed ... if that fails, what can you do? However, there are also very similar stories and in their case the seat belt did not fail but an adult seat belt is not made for kids' organs. They can protect us, but not very young children because the impact of the seat belt on/into their body is enormous.

This video shows the major difference between a harnass and a booster (front is booster): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2kO8AxKbrM&feature=related.

This is a similar tragic story of a 3 yo in a booster: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2LFo8vVi04 and this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G59s3PjcntQ&feature=related

Sofie is now 5 years and 4 months, still happily in a Radian. She weighed 48lbs the other day, she's tall ... I'll keep her in for another year, then one of my twins' Marathons will expire, and will move the larger twin into the Radian ... and get a good booster for my oldest.

This is interesting too (I am pretty sure it's Swedish), the difference between rf and ff ...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fKIeExpDLDA&feature=related

 

If we want to go this far, why not demand the auto industry use the technology that they already have in hand, to install sonar systems in all vehicles that break automatically when it senses an collision coming?

 

Melissa, I read a similar comment after one of these articles "Why don't they just make minivans with the rear seats facing backwards?" I'm just really having a hard time picturing a 3-4 year old sitting RF and being at all comfortable.

 

What about side impact? In the end a child needs to be properly restrained, no technology in the world is going to avoid children dying in car accidents. It's the responsibility of the parents to properly educate themselves, and buy the proper seat and install it correctly. And it will never be enough, but we have to do the best we can ...

 

Franca, I agree that a 3 y/o shouldn't be in a booster. We kept the boys in 5 pt harnesses until after their 5th birthday. (And we lived in South America until last summer where our car seats received many, many stares - as the family rode by on a motorcycle with the 2 y/o sitting between the parents and the mother holding the newborn in her arms :gah: )I would have stayed with the Radian, but the buckle cut into their groin. They cried in pain. It looked like the buckle was pushing against their penis and testicles. None of the seats that harness to a higher weight gave them enough room to sit comfortably. So we reluctantly moved them to boosters.

I just take issue with advocates of extending use of 5 pt harnesses that do not point out that latch is only safe until about 45 lbs. So if you do plan to harness past that weight, you must secure the seat with the seat belt.

 

We're the "weird" folks who still RF well past 2. Honestly, I just get mad that US manufacturers don't make car seats that will safely RF past the mid 30lb range. J's right over 30 lbs now, so we're getting close. If I had the seats that would allow it, I'd definitely be RFing the boys until they were 4! They don't care one bit that they RF, and they're pretty tall little guys. They just sit cross legged, let their legs hang over the sides of the seat, or even stretch them out up the back of the car's seat. Every time I *think* about FFing them, I get the crash test images in my head and know there's no way I can do it until we HAVE to. Honestly, I think they're happier RFing since they can't lose their toys into the floor. Everything stays within reach!

 

I know ... even here in China ... it's nothing compared to the States. I see 2 yo in regular seatbelts without boosters. I understand what you're saying. I believe 4 yo is the absolute minimum and after that you have to try the best you can. I am hoping Sofie makes it a little longer, but understand the crotch issues ... luckily Sofie doesn't have a "p" ... ! Mine are all secured with seatbelts since the car we drive here doesn't even have LATCH (8 yo car). Luckily, distances on the island are small, very few high ways and days go by I don't use the car. Again, we're doing the best we can, in every situation. However, that doesn't mean that there are no alternatives for 3 yo ... they don't have to be in a booster ...

 

There is a difference between having a kid secured directly by a seat belt and a kid secured in a 5pt harness secured by a seat belt though. In the second case, if the seat belt malfunctions, nothing will prevent the child from being ejected. In the second case, the car seat will still be attached to the seat belt, and the child will still be protected by the 5pt harness.. even if it's not much, it's still much better.

Our car doesn't even have latch so we have to use the seat belt anyway...

About the Radian, I had no idea that the buckle could be a problem! That stinks. Hopefully by the time my kids outgrow their marathon (they're still rear facing at 18 months and will be until they outgrow it) there will be better options out there.

 

In the last few months a number of seats have come on the market with higher than 35 pound rear facing limits. Here are the ones that I know of:
1) The Graco My Ride rear faces to 40 pounds, though it doesn't have a particularly tall shell, so some tall kids may not make it that far.
2) The Safety First Complete Air rear faces to 40 pounds. It has a taller shell than the Graco.
3) Any model of Radian manufactured Sept. 2008 or later rear faces to 40 pounds. Radians havee nice tall shells.
4) And within the next month or two, the newest(seats manufactured after Sept. 2009, I *think*) Radian 65s and 80s are supposed to rear fact to 45 pounds. This will still have the tall shell.

Just remember The Radian does take up a ton of front-to-back space in the car, so anyone considering it for rearfacing probably should try it in their car first. With most seats, you are allowed to install them slightly more upright for older rear-facing kids, but the Radian can be very difficult to install more upright than the 45 degrees required for young babies. With a more upright install, (30 or 35 degrees) older kids are a bit more comfortable, and the adults in front can move their seats farther back.

 

Also, the TRUEFIT carseat RF until 40-45lbs (can't remember exactly) and forward faces to 65lbs. That's what I bought my son, who is still rear-facing at 14 months and he weighs the same as his 2.5 yr old sisters. I turned them FF a few months ago, and they still BARELY fit the minimum FF requirements. I reluctantly moved them due to spacing issues with 3 convertible carseats. We had to start using the 3rd row, and try as I might, I COULD NOT get their carseats to fit RR in the 3rd row.

I could probably keep those 2 RR until they went to College anyways, based on their height AND weight! LOL They are teeny-meenies, and like I said, their brother who is 18 months YOUNGER weighs the same and is only an inch shorter than them.

When they WERE RF, they would just cross their legs up and were fine. That was in the Cosco Scenera convertible. The TrueFit leans back way more so my son will be pretty comfy for a long time to come...

Just Personal opinion, but I will keep mine in 5-point harness as long as I can (or until they graduate HighSchool, whichever comes first! LOL)

And to be quite honest, mine, just based on height alone (I am pretty short and they seem to be following my footsteps) they will never fully qualify to sit in a seat w/o a booster, at least according to the AAP recommendations. But at some point we just gotta let it go.. They can't be in a booster seat when they're 15.


What I saw at daycare the other day though just made me want to cry. Here in VA, the state law is to have a child in a child restraint until they are EIGHT (yes, 8) years old. I saw a barely 2 year old get in a van and sit in the front seat with NO seat belt, let alone any type of child restraint device.... I just looked at her mother, as she watched us tackle all 3 of our kids into their convertible carseats, and wondered how a parent could be that irresponsible. I almost wanted to go and GIVE her one of our 'extra' (for our 2nd car) carseats, thinking she just couldn't afford one... but then thought it wasn't my place to say anything, and just turned a blind eye.

 

Natasha- this is really good info!! Thanks for sharing! I'm glad manufacturers are wising up! Unfortunately, we orginally bought radians, but they didn't fit RF in our car. So we had to go w/ the Marathons, which of course only go to 35 lbs. Our guys are also pretty tall- 95% for height, but I'll have to look into the others- of course, if I were to go that route, that would mean convincing DH to buy two more carseats after shelling out $500 for the MAs!!!