Quote:
Originally Posted by I-Hate-Hulse
After reading up on the swedish experience with rear facing kids until they're 4-6 years old I figured I'd wait as long as I can. The stats make it clear that RF is the safest way to go - period.
Our 35lb son is still rear facing. We have a extended rear facing seat (Diono) and bucket seats in the 2nd row so the backrest can be set so his legs aren't too squished. He's not complaining because he doesn't know any better...
Admittedly, extended rear facing might not be practical in some cars/SUV's due to space limitations.
|
while the crash test dummy data shows lower impact forces with extended rear facing in 1-2 year olds. I know when I looked there was no data on 4-6 year olds in rear facing seats. I'd be intereseted to see that if that exists now.
The other thing that doesn't exist is any data that shows that in the transition to extended rear facing that it as a policy reduced injuries. Is this decision such an insignificant one that it gets lost in the noise of car accident data?
So while the crash test data does show reduced forces And that should correlate into reduced injuries we may be at the point in the risk profile that it doesn't make a meaningful difference.
It's kind of like booster seat militancy. The data does not exist to show that differences in injury rates of children within jurisdiction with different booster seat laws are statistically significant.