... to wonder why more people don't buy rear-facing car seats for children over 1 year?

[FrozenNorth]

Sorry if this has been discussed before, but I'm just curious as to why I'm the only one amongst my acquaintances to have bought a rear-facing car seat that should fit my DD up to the age of 4 years?

I realise that the government guidelines / laws don't say much about the fact that it's far safer to stay rear-facing beyond the initial group 0 seat, but a few minutes' internet research and a couple of crash-test videos on YouTube were enough to firmly convince me that it's the way to go. In Sweden it's recommended to rear-face your child to the age of four.

So, if you chose to forward-face your child at an earlier stage, what was your rationale? I know, for instance, that the rear-facing seats may not fit in smaller cars. They tend to cost more and they are harder to get hold of. Not a single large store (e.g. Mothercare, Halfords etc.) in the UK sells them.

In case anyone's interested in the evidence behind rear-facing vs forward facing, here's a few links:

Why consider rear-facing?

Safety benefits

The British Medical Journal recommendations

Buyers' guide and list of UK retailers selling rear-facing seats

YouTube video showing crash test footage

Sorry about all the links. This is something I feel really passionately about and I feel so angry that major UK retailers don't supply the safest possible seats for our children.

[bibbitybobbityhat]

How do you put a four year old in a rear facing car seat? Where do their legs go?

[runnybottom]

I think you have answered your own question. They are expensive, unavailable, don't fit many cars, and nobody knows about them.

[OTTMummA]

yes where do their legs go?

[dinkystinky]

All of the reasons above and also - in our case - DS1 used to get horrifically car sick when in a rear facing car seat - every time he went in the car there would be vomit. As soon as he moved to forward facing (at 14 months) the carsickness went.

[FrozenNorth]

They cross them, like in this picture:

Four year old in rear facing carseat

One of my concerns, albeit a lesser one compared to paralysis / death, was whether this increased the danger of them breaking their legs in a collision, but apparently not:
Where do their legs go?

[EldonAve]

I think the manufacturers are happier with the status quo

Why sell one seat from 0-4 years when you can sell two - a baby one and a 9mths - 4 years one?

[OTTMummA]

im not sure, my son has very long legs and at 2yrs old is already as tall as the 3-4 yr olds in his nursery.
I wouldn't feel comfortable sitting like that for a long journey would you?

[Coldhands]

The legs crossed thing looks very uncomfortable and wouldn't do well for anything other than short jouneys.

[lilmissmummy]

That is really interesting, I didn't know that they existed and now I too am confused about why they are not available!

off to look into rear facing car seats aged 0-4 for baby due in Oct!

[OTTMummA]

oooh, DINKYSTINK- i get travel sick when i have to sit backwards on a train lol.
Its horrible, headaches and nausea, i prefer to stand until a forward seat becomes available.

[bibbitybobbityhat]

Yes, I can just imagine my dc when they were four years old happily sitting still in that position on our regular 2 to 3 hour drives to visit relatives.

Or 5 hours down to Devon? No problem .

[lilmissmummy]

Found a very interesting website with stockist list for anyone who is interested www.rearfacing.co.uk/buyersguide.php

[BigWeeHag]

Because they are about a million pounds.



I wanted to get one, I really did. Equally, I wanted to get DS1 a seat with a harness that fits bigger kids. But they are very, very expensive. So that's why, in my case.

[StayingDavidTennantsGirl]

Coldhands and OTTMumma are right about it looking very uncomfortable for a child to sit like that for any length of time. Not to mention the fact that the poor child will only be able to see a small bit of window where the world will be going backwards, and the back of the seat - that is not going to lead to happy journeys - in my experience, bored children will whinge and moan, and the journey will seem 10 times longer for everyone.

[heading4home]

I can see the safety issue, but carsickness was the first thing that came to my mind. I feel ill just thinking about going backwards in a car, why would I subject my children to it?

[StayingDavidTennantsGirl]

And is it just me, or does this seem like advertising? It seems a little strange that someone would have all those links and pictures at their fingertips. Either that or it is some sort of a campaign, and in either case I would rather be told.

[FrozenNorth]

Fair enough, I see your points. I'd also find the car sickness hard to deal with.

Think EldonAvenue also has a point - there's a lack of customer demand / awareness round the seats, so why would manufacturers bother if they can get away with not offering them.

lilmissmummy - sounds good

I promise I'm not on commission or anything .. just co-ordinating a letter writing campaign to Mothercare and similar and wondering what people's main issues of concern about a rear-facing seat would be.

[SloanyPony]

Not for us thanks. Rear facing may be safer, but our car and our car seats are very very safe indeed.

I think its great that you have one though and I'm pleased to hear it works for you.

[booyhoo]

is this spam?

[FrozenNorth]

Promise it's not advertising! I have the links saved on my computer because I used them to work out which car seat to buy my DD. I'm not promoting any particular retailer at all - that's why I haven't mentioned where I bought my DD's car seat.

[cleanandclothed]

I think there are two main reasons why people don't buy them - you don't see them in mainstream shops, and they do restrict the ability of the seat in front to recline/move back.

I agree with you that they are the safest way for an child to travel. DS has one (it was his 1st birthday present from me and DH - not too expensive - £200). It fits in our Golf fine, and I did have a range of seats to choose from. DH is 6'6'', so it means he drives if we both want to sit in front, because he doesn't fit in the seat in front of the car seat. But minor inconveniences are worth it for the increased safety (although I hope it will prove unnecessary, obviously).

As for uncomfy - I think it would be tricky to put a 2yr old, who has been used to front facing into a rear facing seat, but when they have never known anything different I don't think there is a problem. I hope it will last DS (who is tall like his Dad) until around age 4.

[wb]

It may sound a bit feeble but frankly my two were sooo bored in back facing seats til one, it was a positive relief to turn them round. What on earth would a 2/3/4 year old do on car journeys with only the back seat to look at?

[lilmissmummy]

I personally think it is really interesting and surely f you put a child in a rear facing car seat from birth then they wont know any difference?!

I would much rather have my child survive a crash than feel sick in the car. However I wouldn't swop my teeny 5 year old into a rear facing car seat now (even though she is under the height and weight limit) as she is used to a forward facing car seat.

I was also quite surprised to see that a lot of British manufacturers export their rear facing car seats because they have been advised that the British markets are not interested in them (without given the choice!)

[FrozenNorth]

Sorry again if anyone felt preached at / like I was selling something. I agree with Cleanandclothed that it would probably lead to screaming to change the direction of travel for a child that's always gone forward. DD doesn't know any different, and seems to like looking out of the rear windscreen. It's a bit of a faff to transfer the seat between vehicles though.