Forward Facing child seat in the front?

the_manchine

Hope this hasn't been covered before, but nothing obvious turned up in a search.

My wife has seen a forward facing child seat (the one before they go into a booster) in the passenger seat of cars quite a few times recently.
This isn't something that I'd have thought was advisable or even legal? Also assuming that the airbag has been disabled

crosstownk

This might help......

http://www.rsa.ie/publication/publication/upload/Nat_Safety_in_Cars.pdf

Personally, I'd be in favour of putting younger children in the rear of the car.

BostonB

What about a 2 seater car?

Seth Brundle

If you have a 2 seater car then the issue doesn't arise. However, statistically children are safer in the rear where rear seats are available!
As for the airbag being disabled - I wouldn't bank on it. If I were a dealer I wouldn't do it for fear that it would come back and haunt me!

crosstownk

crosstownk wrote: »

This might help......

http://www.rsa.ie/publication/publication/upload/Nat_Safety_in_Cars.pdf

Personally, I'd be in favour of putting younger children in the rear of the car.

I'm surprised at this leaflet actually, it says the option of using an adult seatbelt is only available from 4 years old - that's completely wrong now, you have to have a proper child restraint up until 11 years old, EU law. It could be an out of date leaflet so I wouldn't use it as a good guideline.....

Look, the simple fact is that everyone knows it's safer to put children in the back of the car, the airbag issue only applies to rear facing seats as the airbag would force the baby seat into the passenger seat, crushing the baby.

Common sense should always prevail, but unfortunately some people don't seem to have any of that!!!

Seth Brundle

Grainne C wrote: »

I'm surprised at this leaflet actually, it says the option of using an adult seatbelt is only available from 4 years old - that's completely wrong now, you have to have a proper child restraint up until 11 years old, EU law. It could be an out of date leaflet so I wouldn't use it as a good guideline.....

IIRC a booster seat bringing the child up to the proper seatbelt height is allowed e.g. most of these on Tony Kealy's site

kbannon

kbannon wrote: »

IIRC a booster seat bringing the child up to the proper seatbelt height is allowed e.g. most of these on Tony Kealy's site

yeh but the wording on the leaflet is quite vague, it doesn't actually point that out in the first sentence, it makes it sound like it's an option to use a booster seat, but it's not, it's the law, and so it should be.

BostonB

kbannon wrote: »

If you have a 2 seater car then the issue doesn't arise. However, statistically children are safer in the rear where rear seats are available!
As for the airbag being disabled - I wouldn't bank on it. If I were a dealer I wouldn't do it for fear that it would come back and haunt me!

Well if its ok in a 2 seater...

Lots of cars have an airbag that can be turned off by the user.

it's not that it's ok in a 2 seater - its just that you've no other choice!
Your kid wouldn't have much chance in a 2 seater anyway if a nice range rover decided you were in its way.... statiscally a child is safer in the rear of the car. I'm pretty sure there are laws on the hight of a child sitting in the front anyway. And yes, while the laws may change for a two seater, the law also states that if there are no seatbelts in the rear of the car (in a classic car for example) it's ok for a child to travel unbelted - doesn't make it safe!!!!

L1011

kbannon wrote: »

If you have a 2 seater car then the issue doesn't arise. However, statistically children are safer in the rear where rear seats are available!
As for the airbag being disabled - I wouldn't bank on it. If I were a dealer I wouldn't do it for fear that it would come back and haunt me!

Dealer? Any car I've had with an airbag has had a switch in the glovebox for the user to turn it off. Admittedly that doesn't cover a large range of marques!

BostonB

Grainne C wrote: »

it's not that it's ok in a 2 seater - its just that you've no other choice!
Your kid wouldn't have much chance in a 2 seater anyway if a nice range rover decided you were in its way.... statiscally a child is safer in the rear of the car. I'm pretty sure there are laws on the hight of a child sitting in the front anyway. And yes, while the laws may change for a two seater, the law also states that if there are no seatbelts in the rear of the car (in a classic car for example) it's ok for a child to travel unbelted - doesn't make it safe!!!!

If a range rover hits you, and your in an average 4 seater, micra or golf sized car (or any car for that matter) your going to be worse off. If something hits you from behind or side on, you won't be safer in the back. Theres been a few tragic accidents over the past few years, where kids were killed in the back and the people in the front were ok. You could be an a 2 seater commercial jeep. You might be in a hatch back and need to fold the back seats to carry a load. What then?

The only reason the stats say your safer in the back is because most bad accidents happen from the front so the further you are from the impact the better. So the middle would be better then the side etc.

From the OP query is it advisable or legal, its depends on the situation. Popping down the shops is one thing. Going a long distance down the country would be another.

BostonB

BostonB wrote: »

If a range rover hits you, and your in an average 4 seater, micra or golf sized car (or any car for that matter) your going to be worse off. If something hits you from behind or side on, you won't be safer in the back. Theres been a few tragic accidents over the past few years, where kids were killed in the back and the people in the front were ok. You could be an a 2 seater commercial jeep. You might be in a hatch back and need to fold the back seats to carry a load. What then?
.

sorry to rain on your parade chicken pie but you're preaching to the wrong person here, my two kids were killed by a truck, they were in the back, I was in the front, barely a scratch, the statistics are still there though and I would still never sit my little girl in the front unless I had no other choice......

BostonB

Sorry to hear that Grainne.

I'm just making the point its playing the odds, which your devastating story illustrates. I wouldn't put a mine in the front if I'm goign any distance or travelling on big fast roads. But if I was just going around the corner, on quiet slow roads, then I might take the risk.

Seth Brundle

BostonB wrote: »

Lots of cars have an airbag that can be turned off by the user.

Lots of cars don't have that switch!

BostonB

kbannon wrote: »

Lots of cars don't have that switch!

I didn't say there otherwise one of ours doesn't and the dealer wouldn't touch it either. The other car only has a driver side airbag. A switchable one would be something I'd look for in the next car I'd buy though. Next car is likely to be a 5/7 seater so hopefully not an issue anyway. I know of someone with 11 kids I wonder what they do.

BostonB

BostonB wrote: »

Sorry to hear that Grainne.

I'm just making the point its playing the odds, which your devastating story illustrates. I wouldn't put a mine in the front if I'm goign any distance or travelling on big fast roads. But if I was just going around the corner, on quiet slow roads, then I might take the risk.

well see that's the mistake alot of people make! but you just never know whats around that corner do you? your own sentence points out the danger "take the risk" that says enough in my opinion, why take a risk with your children at all? presumably you would still have them in a correct child restraint though, even if they were in the front? I really do hope so.....

BostonB

If I didn't want to expose them to risk, I don't think I'd ever leave the house. Even thats not safe at times. But I take your point.

well look, I am talking from experience here, imagine if my children had not been in car seats? I would never have forgiven myself. By not taking any risks with their safety I gave them the best possible chance, unfortunately being hit by an articulated truck going 100kph meant they had no hope, but at least I can live with myself knowing it was not my fault. The whole "it would never happen to me thing" - well, you could be the best driver in the whole world and off you go down your quiet little road and all of a sudden you go around a bend and there is a boy racer coming towards you, or a learner driver who has lost control of the car, nothing you can do about it except hope to god you have yourself and your kids belted properly. Not trying to have a go here but it bothers me so much when I see people being arogant enough (not pointing the finger at you at all boston just generalising) to think they're invincible.....

BostonB

I assumed you weren't talking about me as I never suggested ""it would never happen to me thing" but knowing the odds but making an informed decision. Like me choosing to cycle through the center of town this morning.

BostonB

BostonB wrote: »

I assumed you weren't talking about me as I never suggested ""it would never happen to me thing" but knowing the odds but making an informed decision. Like me choosing to cycle through the center of town this morning.

but I bet you wouldn't cycle on a dark road without some sort of high vis vest or a light on your bike - cos that'd just be silly - get my point?

BostonB

Grainne C wrote: »

but I bet you wouldn't cycle on a dark road without some sort of high vis vest or a light on your bike - cos that'd just be silly - get my point?

Not really. Putting a child in the front is relatively low risk. Whereas your example (in my opinion) is a far higher risk. They are not the same level of risk.

Victor_M

There was a thread along the same lines recently, something like 70% of all fatal accidents occur as frontal or side frontal impacts.

I have to agree with Grainne here, some situations are completely out of your control and all you can do is strap yourself and your kids in as best you can, and leave the rest to fate and statistical odds.

sk8board

kbannon wrote: »

Lots of cars don't have that switch!

ask discussed here recently, surprisingly the family friendly Opel Zafira doesn't have the passanger airbag switch.