Tech question...

[Emmas Mom]

I've seen the video with the crash test done on forward facing car seats vs. rear facing car seats. I believe the crash test was a vehicle that rear ended another or hit a stationary object (front end collision). So, naturally in a front end collision the rear facing car seat will be safer because the impact would send the baby forward first, then backwards. I get that. Here's my question, if you were rear ended, the force of the impact would send a rear facing baby forward first (towards the rear of the vehicle)...wouldn't that be just as dangerous to the baby since the impact is the reverse of the one in the video?? If you were rear ended, wouldn't a forward facing seat be "safer" since your baby would go backwards (into the seat) first & then forwards? I'm just confused on the whole rear facing vs. front facing issue. I should add I work in claims for an auto insurance company & a good 90% of the collisions I see are rear enders...hence my dilemma! TIA!

[Joolsplus2]

Here's a slightly more technical page about rearfacing (than the link in my sig), and I'll see if I can find the author (cpsdarren) to answer any other questions http://www.car-safety.org/rearface.html

I wonder why you get so many claims for rearenders? What about all the frontals that are the ones causing the rearenders? I'm not doubting you (more just thinking out loud....), but it seems to ME there are a lot more rearenders than the statistics seem to indicate, too!

:)
Julie CPS Tech and mom to 2 in seats
http://www.cpsafety.com/articles/RFAlbum/SarahMA.aspx

[Emmas Mom]

Thanks for the quick reply. I know what you mean, for every rear end there has to be a front end. I don't see a high percentage of accidents with car seats in the vehicles, maybe the "rear enders" have just had more car seats than the "front enders" that I've dealt with personally?? I don't know. I am going to read up on the link you sent. Everyone in my family seems to be so "excited" for DD to be able to face forward (she's right at 20 lbs) & I keep saying I'm not switching her. Besides, she seems perfectly happy rear facing (though I'm the "bad" Mommy with the baby view mirror! ;) ) I just need some more info for the "others"! lol Thanks! :)

[CPSDarren]

Rear end crashes are fairly common, though I've never seen a 90% figure anywhere before. Fortunately, most rear-enders are not severe. Most injuries are from whiplash to adults and older kids who did not have adequate head restraints,and that rarely applies to kids in harnessed child seats.

Severe rear-enders and those with fatalities are between 5-10% of all crashes, depending which statistics you find. That is the main reason we choose to increase the protection for frontal, frontal offset and side impacts. Rear-facing seats are safer in those crashes, and they tend to be much more severe.

Darren
www.seatcheck.net

[amp]

This is PRECISELY the argument my DH gives anytime he tries to get me to let him FF. I think there is definitely some truth to it and I am sometimes almost swayed by the arguement. That said, I have managed to keep him RF still, but I don't know how much longer I can keep it that way. I think Darren has a point. Rear enders are pretty common, but not necessarily the most fatal or the most likely to cause injury when up against front end collisions. Good point!

[Emmas Mom]

Maybe they just give me most of the rear end collisions?? Who knows.

Good info on the severity of rear end impact vs. front end impacts. Maybe with the site link & that info they'll get my point. In the end I outvote them all anyway...I'm the Mommy! They can't argue DD's safety with me. :)