Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Mom Confessions Mom Confessions

AAP finally changes carseat requirements

Posted by Anonymous   + Show Post
http://shine.yahoo.com/parenting/aaps-new-car-seat-guidelines-change-rear-facing-booster-rules-2466904.html

About time. Your doctor will now start telling you to RF to two.
Posted by Anonymous on Jun. 14, 2013 at 12:29 PM
Replies (131-139):
Fazed
by on Jun. 16, 2013 at 3:38 PM

"I wonder how protective you are of your kids when it comes to predators or kidnappers? Do they wear bike helmets? All things that aren't nearly as likely to happen to them."

Does not relate to the topic.

Quoting Anonymous:

Sure that's it, I can't read. *sarcasm*

The things I mentioned did relate to the conversation and I have explained twice how they were comparisons and how logically they apply to the conversation.


Quoting Fazed:

LOL, no. 

Maybe you can't read... I clearly said I can pull other shit t hat doesn't relate into the arguement too. 


Quoting Anonymous:

LoL, no.



Drugs are not the more dangerous than cars. Nice try though. Your logic is severely lacking.



See, things like child abductions by strangers are extremely rare. Yet people worry about their children being abducted. They worry so much they don't allow their children outside alone until their teen years.



Yet when it comes to cars, its fine to not do what is considered safest because they simply do not see how cars are so dangerous. Yet they are. And ff after one and twenty is more dangerous than rear facing them longer.



Using the drugs argument would only work if drugs killed more kids than car accidents do. And they don't.





Quoting Fazed:

Okay, so listen to everyone. 

In that case, I hope you don't give your kids any drugs. Because those are mor likely to kill them or harm them then ff a carseat at one and 20lbs.

See, I can pull other things that can harm kids into the topic too.

Quoting Anonymous:

Do you have any idea how many kids were not fine? How many kids died and still do? The numbers speak for themselves.





Car accidents are the number one killer of children under 12.





Rear facing IS safer. Always, its 500% safer.





I wonder how protective you are of your kids when it comes to predators or kidnappers? Do they wear bike helmets? All things that aren't nearly as likely to happen to them.








Quoting Fazed:

To each their own, and I say shove your over protective recommendation. :)

Quoting MommaGreenhalge:

Okay, the "we did it this way and were just fine" argument isn't evidence. It's an untested theory. And long legs don't make rear facing dangerous. There has never been a documented case of broken legs due to rf. The reason this is being recommended is because rear facing car seats greatly reduce spine and neck injuries, which is important because kids' spines are not fully formed until closer to 5. So "going overboard" is when you see a 7 year old still rf.











Quoting Fazed:

What if you have a tall kid who's feet don't have room to rf? Wouldn't that make in unsafe, and more dangerous? Also, my evidence is in the fact that mom's have ff for a long time and children are fine and have been fine through accidents. Not to mention the fact that our parents were taken home as infants on the seat of a car with NOTHING to secure them in. They also made it fine. Now I'm not saying to not secure your child nor saying it's okay. Just that it's a fact and has happened. 

I'm all for safety but it gets a bit extreme sometimes. Air bags for example have smashed more collar bones in accidents when t he person would have had No injury. 

Quoting MommaGreenhalge:

Evidence to back this up?














Quoting Fazed:

Having your kid rf until two is not any safer then ff. In some cases it's more dangerous. 

Quoting Anonymous:

Yeah! Screw them for trying to give you the tools and information to stop your child from dying in a car accident!







Quoting Fazed:

Then can suck it. That's complete and utter bullshit. 





























sheramom4
by Ruby Member on Jun. 16, 2013 at 3:41 PM



Quoting Anonymous:

What 5 year old is only 42 inches? all of his FRIENDS were 42 inches at 3, and some of them arent tall for their age. My son is always messuring two-three years older than he. He just turned 6.

Quoting hautemama83:

Your one year old was the size of a five year old?

Bullshit.


Quoting Anonymous:

Damn sucks for my child at 1 he was 40 pounds and 42 inches, which is why I didn't RF when he was pass one in fact he was 10 months old when I switched him because the seat I had was 35 pounds and the ONLY RF model at the time of his birth with a higher RF was $350 which was a NO to me. I grow giants and it pisses me off, right now he is 6 and 54 inches, and yet because of damn CAR SEAT NAZIs that only think of the average child, he has to be in a booster til he is 8!!!! REALLY HE IS GOING TO BE PUSHING 6 FEET by then, I was 6 foot by 10, his sperm donor was 8 inches taller than me.


Now I hope I don't have another tall baby because RF them until two will REALLY SUCK!!!!


My middle DD was only 42 inches at 7. She is very very tiny. She is now 54" at 11 1/2 and still tiny. 


Anonymous
by Anonymous 22 on Jun. 16, 2013 at 3:46 PM
Lol, you failed compare and contrast in 3rd grade didn't you?

They absolutely relate to the topic of car seat safety as a comparison that points out double standards people have with statistics and the likelihood of the worst happening.

And it brings up the topic of media influence in our fears as parents.




Quoting Fazed:

"I wonder how protective you are of your kids when it comes to predators or kidnappers? Do they wear bike helmets? All things that aren't nearly as likely to happen to them."

Does not relate to the topic.

Quoting Anonymous:

Sure that's it, I can't read. *sarcasm*



The things I mentioned did relate to the conversation and I have explained twice how they were comparisons and how logically they apply to the conversation.





Quoting Fazed:

LOL, no. 

Maybe you can't read... I clearly said I can pull other shit t hat doesn't relate into the arguement too. 


Quoting Anonymous:

LoL, no.





Drugs are not the more dangerous than cars. Nice try though. Your logic is severely lacking.





See, things like child abductions by strangers are extremely rare. Yet people worry about their children being abducted. They worry so much they don't allow their children outside alone until their teen years.





Yet when it comes to cars, its fine to not do what is considered safest because they simply do not see how cars are so dangerous. Yet they are. And ff after one and twenty is more dangerous than rear facing them longer.





Using the drugs argument would only work if drugs killed more kids than car accidents do. And they don't.








Quoting Fazed:

Okay, so listen to everyone. 

In that case, I hope you don't give your kids any drugs. Because those are mor likely to kill them or harm them then ff a carseat at one and 20lbs.

See, I can pull other things that can harm kids into the topic too.

Quoting Anonymous:

Do you have any idea how many kids were not fine? How many kids died and still do? The numbers speak for themselves.







Car accidents are the number one killer of children under 12.







Rear facing IS safer. Always, its 500% safer.







I wonder how protective you are of your kids when it comes to predators or kidnappers? Do they wear bike helmets? All things that aren't nearly as likely to happen to them.











Quoting Fazed:

To each their own, and I say shove your over protective recommendation. :)

Quoting MommaGreenhalge:

Okay, the "we did it this way and were just fine" argument isn't evidence. It's an untested theory. And long legs don't make rear facing dangerous. There has never been a documented case of broken legs due to rf. The reason this is being recommended is because rear facing car seats greatly reduce spine and neck injuries, which is important because kids' spines are not fully formed until closer to 5. So "going overboard" is when you see a 7 year old still rf.














Quoting Fazed:

What if you have a tall kid who's feet don't have room to rf? Wouldn't that make in unsafe, and more dangerous? Also, my evidence is in the fact that mom's have ff for a long time and children are fine and have been fine through accidents. Not to mention the fact that our parents were taken home as infants on the seat of a car with NOTHING to secure them in. They also made it fine. Now I'm not saying to not secure your child nor saying it's okay. Just that it's a fact and has happened. 

I'm all for safety but it gets a bit extreme sometimes. Air bags for example have smashed more collar bones in accidents when t he person would have had No injury. 

Quoting MommaGreenhalge:

Evidence to back this up?

















Quoting Fazed:

Having your kid rf until two is not any safer then ff. In some cases it's more dangerous. 

Quoting Anonymous:

Yeah! Screw them for trying to give you the tools and information to stop your child from dying in a car accident!








Quoting Fazed:

Then can suck it. That's complete and utter bullshit. 




































AnastasiaKorsh
by on Jun. 16, 2013 at 3:48 PM
That's cool. They also recommend circumcision.

That's all they are though, recommendations.
quickbooksworm
by Ruby Member on Jun. 16, 2013 at 3:51 PM

Is this a troll post?  Because your one year old was the same size as my child at age 5 and I'm really doubting the validity.


Quoting Anonymous:

Damn sucks for my child at 1 he was 40 pounds and 42 inches, which is why I didn't RF when he was pass one in fact he was 10 months old when I switched him because the seat I had was 35 pounds and the ONLY RF model at the time of his birth with a higher RF was $350 which was a NO to me. I grow giants and it pisses me off, right now he is 6 and 54 inches, and yet because of damn CAR SEAT NAZIs that only think of the average child, he has to be in a booster til he is 8!!!! REALLY HE IS GOING TO BE PUSHING 6 FEET by then, I was 6 foot by 10, his sperm donor was 8 inches taller than me.


Now I hope I don't have another tall baby because RF them until two will REALLY SUCK!!!!



erinsmom1964
by Gold Member on Jun. 16, 2013 at 3:53 PM

UMMM your a bit late.  My DD is is over 4 her pedi told us that over 3 years ago so ...............Unfortunately not all DRS are great...or even good or keep up with recommendations that is why you should only talk to a CERTIFIED carseat tech about car seats.  i mean you wouldn't want a GP is you had heart problems?  You wouldn't ask your mechanic about your pace maker.  Pedi are jack of all trades master of none with kids. 

erinsmom1964
by Gold Member on Jun. 16, 2013 at 3:55 PM

Yeah cause my DD is at the very top of the charts and still didn't reach 42 until 3 yrs of age...She is 4 and 2 months and 45 inches and I have NEVER in real life met a child taller than her that is her age or younger.  Like that with all 4 of my kids and not one was 42 inches at 1.  hell i wasn't even on the charts and wasn't that tall and i became 6'2 at 13

Quoting quickbooksworm:

Is this a troll post?  Because your one year old was the same size as my child at age 5 and I'm really doubting the validity.


Quoting Anonymous:

Damn sucks for my child at 1 he was 40 pounds and 42 inches, which is why I didn't RF when he was pass one in fact he was 10 months old when I switched him because the seat I had was 35 pounds and the ONLY RF model at the time of his birth with a higher RF was $350 which was a NO to me. I grow giants and it pisses me off, right now he is 6 and 54 inches, and yet because of damn CAR SEAT NAZIs that only think of the average child, he has to be in a booster til he is 8!!!! REALLY HE IS GOING TO BE PUSHING 6 FEET by then, I was 6 foot by 10, his sperm donor was 8 inches taller than me.


Now I hope I don't have another tall baby because RF them until two will REALLY SUCK!!!!




erinsmom1964
by Gold Member on Jun. 16, 2013 at 3:57 PM

Sorry that isn't true at all they do not recommend routine circumcision. Also they are not the only ones who recommend RF 2 plus years but i can tell from your tone that you know better than all the real life experts whos life work is to study these things ...so bully for you and your kids!!

Quoting AnastasiaKorsh:

That's cool. They also recommend circumcision.

That's all they are though, recommendations.


AnastasiaKorsh
by on Jun. 16, 2013 at 4:38 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/27/health/aap-circumcision-recommendation


http://www.aap.org/en-us/about-the-aap/aap-press-room/pages/New-Benefits-Point-to-Greater-Benefits-of-Infant-Circumcision-But-Final-Say-is-Still-Up-to-parents-Says-AAP.aspx

they stop short of recommending it because they know decisions like this should be left up to the parents. But they stand behind that the benefits of circumcision out weigh the risk.

This is the same with car seats. What they offer is guide lines, they however acknowledge that parents have the choice to decide.

and way to make assumptions, my child rf'd until he was a month shy of two and SO got a mustang where his seat no longer even fit rear facing, unless no one was riding passenger side.


Quoting erinsmom1964:

Sorry that isn't true at all they do not recommend routine circumcision. Also they are not the only ones who recommend RF 2 plus years but i can tell from your tone that you know better than all the real life experts whos life work is to study these things ...so bully for you and your kids!!

Quoting AnastasiaKorsh:

That's cool. They also recommend circumcision.



That's all they are though, recommendations.


Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)