LATCH stands for Lower Anchors and Tethers for CHildren. It’s the next generation of child safety.
It’s a pair of metal anchors located in the seat bight, plus a top tether anchor located somewhere behind the vehicle seat. Combined, these anchors were to make installation of carseats much easier than using seatbelts. With me so far?
Problem is, at least in the USA, we made a lot of concessions to automobile and child restraint manufacturers when the system was implemented. For example, the anchors are often hard to find or access. Also, rigid LATCH isn’t required, as it is with ISOFIX in Europe. Center and third row seating positions may not have anchors at all. High weight limit seats are not considered. This last issue has become a big problem, due to the rapid proliferation in carseats with 5-point harnesses now rated above 40 pounds in the USA and *Canada.
The rules, many of which are unwritten for the typical parent, are so absolutely crazy that certified child passenger safety technicians need a 200-page reference manual to help understand it. The average parent or caregiver? They don’t even know about the rules or manual in the first place! Thus, misuse happens. It’s no wonder that parents who do know about it are so confused, they simply choose not to deal with it.
Let me explain. No, there is too much. Let me sum up: In 2014, new federal standards, subject to petitions of the final rule, will require carseats to have another label. This label will limit the use of lower anchors to a maximum weight for a child. This child’s weight limit printed on each carseat, plus the weight of the carseat, must be 65 pounds combined, or less. Thus, for any child seat that weighs over 25 pounds, it cannot be used with the lower anchors once the child is above 40 pounds (or less). Clear as mud?
Adding to the confusion, these new federal requirements do not directly affect top tether anchors, the other component of LATCH. Nonetheless, many automobile manufacturers are still currently limiting top tether anchor use to the same combined 65-pound [child plus carseat] weight, even when a seatbelt is used for installation. A few still limit use to a 40- or 48-pound child weight. That means that if you own any of these automobile makes (and you may need that 200-page manual to know which ones!), you should no longer use the top tether above this limit. Still following me?
Of course, it is the tall and heavy kids that need top tethers the most in order to reduce head excursion, the source of severe head injury risk! So, this is a major conflict in what we know about crash dynamics and something that could put older kids at risk. All this leads to the following questions:
Q: Weight limits, really? Is LATCH so unsafe that it has such low weight limits? Is it even safe near the limits?
A: Fair points. I’ve seen no data indicating that overloaded anchors are resulting in severe injuries. If they do become unsafe at some weight, it’s not clear what weight that is or if the known benefits outweigh unknown risks. Low limits may indeed cause parents to question the integrity of the system. Lacking any public data, these limits may seem arbitrary. Regardless, parents should follow the ratings on the labels of their carseat and in their owners manuals, if any. This often leads to confusion when published limits can’t be found or if they conflict with each other. Unfortunately, CarseatBlog is placed in a position where this is the best answer we can give to parents.
For certified technicians, if both manuals are not in agreement for a higher weight limit, or when no guidance is provided, the standardized training curriculum says you should advise parents to discontinue use of lower anchors and/or tether use for a child heavier than 40 pounds. (R10/10. Ch. 6, Page 82)
Q: If I keep my kid rear-facing to 2 years and beyond, is it even worthwhile to use LATCH forward-facing for the limited time they will remain under the LATCH weight limit?
A: Probably not. If you transition a child to a forward-facing seat after 2-years of age as recommended, a seatbelt installation is probably the best choice now, unless you cannot get a secure fitment for some reason. The lower anchors are a suitable backup method for forward-facing seats used below the anchor limits. Unless, of course, you’re installing in a center seating position, where you need that 200-page manual to know if you can even use lower anchors there!
Q: I know I can use a seatbelt instead of lower anchors, but I’ve been told top tethers are a vital safety feature. Are top tethers no longer safe, either? If not, what is the alternative?
A: There is no conventional alternative to a top-tether for use with a 5-point internal harness. Personally, I would not want my own 7-year-old son, who is nearly 60 pounds, to ride in a 5-point harness without a top tether. Unfortunately, as a certified technician, I cannot advise other parents to use a top tether beyond any published or default weight limits. There are always exceptions, but it appears we are being forced to recommend that most children above 4-years and 40 pounds, who cannot use a forward-facing internal 5-point harness along with the top tether for any reason, probably should be transitioned to belt-positioning boosters using a 3-point lap/shoulder belt.
Low top-tether limits effectively contradict the AAP guidelines for toddlers and preschoolers that recommends, “All children 2 years or older, or those younger than 2 years who have outgrown the rear-facing weight or height limit for their car seat, should use a Forward-Facing Car Seat with a harness for as long as possible, up to the highest weight or height allowed their car seat’s manufacturer.” That’s a big rock and a very hard place that parents and technicians have been put between!
Q: What good will LATCH be, anyway?
A: Lower anchors remain a good option for most infant and rear-facing seats. They are also popular for securing some belt-positioning boosters into vehicles, since boosters do not have the same LATCH weight limits as 5-point harnesses. That is because it is the seatbelt that restrains the booster child directly, rather than the internal harness.
Q: Aren’t all the companies who invested a lot of R&D into rigid LATCH and other cool LATCH systems going to be burned by this? If LATCH is not very useful for forward-facing seats with a harness, why require LATCH at all?
A: Good questions! I suspect there won’t be much LATCH innovation in the future, with the possible exception of rear-facing only seats. And, yes, it would be simpler for everyone if LATCH was required just on rear-facing only seats, given the 2014 labeling. This would also save cost and weight on forward-facing seats, where LATCH will now have limited benefit. It would be simplest for parents to to know that LATCH could be used to the maximum weight rating of any carseat. Actually, parents wouldn’t even have to know this, because it would be common sense.
This was the promise of LATCH a decade ago:
Today, we have insanity. The system implemented over a decade ago in order to make carseat installations much easier has actually become far more complex than using a seatbelt. The lack of cooperation and action among manufacturers, regulators and major organizations has left us with such a mess that it’s not even clear why we really need LATCH at all. Personally, I was a big supporter of LATCH when it was introduced over a decade ago, after my first child was born. Hopefully, it can live up to its promise in another decade. For now, perhaps the best guidance on the topic is this: Use a seatbelt!
Did you know? If you own a select Chrylser vehicle or other vehicles with a 65-pound combined limit, you must discontinue rear-facing use of LATCH around 32 pounds for the Graco Smart Seat or about 29 pounds for the Clek Foonf. By 2014, that means many kids will never be able to use the great rigid LATCH system on the Foonf, because they will be above the mandated weight limit once they turn forward facing after 2-years old. 🙁
*Please note that top tether use is required in Canada, as they have different requirements than in the USA.
Done!
Can someone please put in the above article that TT use is MANDATORY in Canada regardless of what is stated in the LATCH manual. I can NOT share this article until that is put in there, as parents could be pulled over and receive a ticket for not having the TT attached.
I’m sooo confused about this tethered issue. I have a Britax Marathon 70. I have been looking into the new Frontier or Pinnacle 90. So, per the new information, I should use the seat belt to secure the car seat without the tether. But, now I’m not sure what to do…should my 5yr old (50lbs) not even be in this car seat or new one I’m considering? Because of what you said “it appears we are being forced to recommend that most children above 4-years and 40 pounds, who cannot use a forward-facing internal 5-point harness along with the top tether for any reason, probably should be transitioned to belt-positioning boosters using a 3-point lap/shoulder belt.” I’m a nurse and my child’s safety is utmost to me. I want to do what is safest, but I don’t see how the booster with the car belt is the safest for him if he’s moving around and not “under” the belt at times. And if these are the recommendations, what is the point of the manufacturing these new 5-pt harnessed 90lb limit car seats???
Henrietta, thank you for the great points. My question would be in regard to the parents you mention who do not pay attention to the child being seated properly and staying put. Consider that these are the same parents who tend to have major misuse with a 5-point harness carseat, as we all know that the vast majority of carseats have at least some form of misuse.
The risks may depend greatly upon whether or not the harnessed seat is correctly installed and used. Head injury due to excursion into a pillar or other hard interior surface is the big risk to older kids in a harness. Without that top tether to reduce head excursion, you’d want to make sure that carseat is very securely installed and correctly used, especially in regard to the harness being tightly fastened on the child. For a technician or advocate, perhaps this is not a major issue, but for the average parent, it definitely is. Booster seats do tend to be much easier to use.
Unfortunately, as far as I know, we have almost no published studies with data comparing 5-point harness seats (tethered or untethered) to boosters as far as the risk of injury or fatality for kids over 4 years old in North America. For my own child, I would use the top tether whenever possible. When advising the average parent, I’d probably have to recommend a booster in many of these circumstances, given the crazy predicament in which we technicians have been placed by the powers that be.
I’m with Pixels on the issue of a tethered vs. non-tethered harnessed seat. If I have to pick b/t booster or non-tethered harnessed seat, my decision would depend on the child’s age and maturity (and weight, of course). For example, my 4.5 yr old is booster-trained..but he is only 4.5…if we have friends riding w/us, he sometimes forgets and leans out of position. If I have a choice, I’ll put him in his harnessed seat, even if there’s not a top tether, b/c at least he’ll be in the seat! If he were 6 or 7 and more mature, I’d probably choose to booster him in the absence of a top tether anchor. Normally, I would recommend that a kiddo stay in a harnessed seat till age 6 or 7 when possible. My 4.5 yr old normally rides in an Evenflo Secure Kid 300 harnessed. For most kids I know, they are not ready to be in a booster seat at age 4 and 40 lbs, most esp b/c many parents are not paying enough attention to them sitting properly and are not teaching them to stay put.
Hi Pixels, I have been looking for this data for some time. The best I have is informal conversations with those familiar with crash testing and the updated requirements. Do you have a link to any results with conclusive testing for the 10-year old dummy in various untethered harness seats vs. a belt-positioning booster? Or, preferably, any conclusive real-world studies or statistics from the USA for kids above 4 years, 40 pounds, showing the risks of an untethered harness system to be lower than a booster? I’m told that with the new dummy requirement, a number of products will not likely pass the new test without a tether as they will not have satisfactory head excursion performance. I’m sure there will be exceptions, but I am not likely to trust exceptions as a rule, when a safe, time-tested alternative exists. Studies from CHOP and other organizations have proven belt positioning boosters to be extremely effective for kids above 4 years old and 40 pounds, not only in testing but in the real-world as well.
Anyway, perhaps this will not ultimately be the case in 2014, so this is only speculation for now. Regardless, I won’t be placing my son in an untethered 5-point harness, lacking data showing it to be a safer mode of travel than a belt-positioning booster. Of course, everyone is entitled to their opinion and we do greatly appreciate any published evidence to the contrary! Otherwise, the point where we do end up having to actually recommend that a child move to a belt positioning booster seat depends on the final outcome of the 2014 regulations and what the auto makers and child restraint manufacturers do in response with their top tether limits. As it is right now, I suspect the best practice advice from a number of organizations may be changing as a result as well.
There is absolutely NO reason to recommend that a child move to a belt positioning booster seat simply because the seat can not be tethered.* Head excursion limits for a booster and for an untethered harnessed seat are identical. Using a tether when one is available is safer than not using a tether, but not using a tether means not using a tether, whether the child’s primary mode of restraint is seat belt or harness.
* I am speaking of in the US. Canada requires tether use.
Hi Doris, it is extremely confusing. Sadly, the powers that be don’t seem to realize this, don’t care, or simply find it too difficult to change so that it is more sensible for parents. Diono is one company that did make an effort. They claim that their current models equipped with SuperLATCH, like your RXT, can be used with LATCH all the way to the harness rating (80 lbs. for the RXT) in almost any vehicle made since 2005. The problem is that auto manufacturers may have conflicting information, if they print any limit at all in the vehicle owner’s manual. At the moment, especially since you are currently outside the USA and thus the “CYA” mentality prevalent here for companies and organizations, you should at the very least continue to use the top tether whenever possible with a 5-point harness! As we have discovered in this fiasco, what is safest for the child is not necessarily what is touted for parents here by manufacturers, government and other organizations, at least with the absence of any public data on the subject!
The new labeling requirement may indeed change the maximum LATCH limit for 2014 Diono Radians with the new label, if the final rule stands in its present form. This should not directly affect existing Radians made prior to the new label requirement. Your choice will be whether to follow Diono’s SuperLATCH limit or Mazda’s limit for lower anchors and/or top tethers, if any is found in your manuals. In the past, Mazda has said to follow the limits indicated by the carseat owners manual. If that is still the case, you would then be fine to continue to use both lower and top tether anchors to the limit given by Diono. This could change in the future, of course, especially as 2014 approaches we may see some manufacturers back-track to lower limits, but hopefully not! We applaud all the automobile manufacturers that currently defer to the child restraint manufacturer for LATCH limits.
I am beyond confused. I came across this article because my child is currently reaching 40lb weight limit and I was all sold on a Diono Radian RXT for our 2009 mazda 5. So with all that I read I am still confused. So what I gather is I cannot use the latch system with this particular car seat with my 39.5 lb child pretty much? Also Can I use the tether or no? Is this type of car seat even safe then for my 4 year old? Should i be looking into a regular booster then??? I love overseas in Italy because we are Us military here..and there is not any place I can take my car/seat to be checked out or properly fitted. Someone help me..so confused.
I would like to invite NHTSA to revisit the reason why LATCH was created in the first place, and the injury reduction risk that they expected to see – not just from increased likelihood of correct use, but due to eliminating seatbelt configurations which were known to better protect adult occupants but worsen the performance of child restraints.
Yes, part of the justification for the expense of the introduction of LATCH was partially due to compatability of seatbelt systems. They did specific study and injury risk assessment on vehicle seatbelt systems with buckles which were forward of the bite.
The truth is this: Forward of the bite vehicle seatbelts haven’t disappeared. Misuse of vehicle seatbelt systems hasn’t disappeared. Technicians in the field can probably testify that on an overall level, there are less mistakes made with the LATCH system than with the seatbelt system.
The answer isn’t to limit the use of LATCH – the answer is to make sure that it can withstand the weights of children and their child restraints.
I’ve talked to a number of firms who do crash testing of child restraints, and all of them have indicated that the anchors on their test bench are made strong enough to not deform under whatever the test method and weight of the dummy might be. We *KNOW* how to make lower anchors that are the correct spacing and size AND how to have them be strong enough to repeatedly exceed the 65lb combined weight limit under more extreme testing than what FMVSS requires.
This is the answer that parents are owed: Why are you catering to the auto industry and limiting the use of the very system which you introduced with intent of saving lives due to decreased misuse and improved performance of child restraint systems? If you want to standardize it, why not standardize to a weight limit that will make a child + seat weight irrelevant and inconsequential to everyone. Say 120lbs which would take in to account even the high 80lb weight limits that US seats have at times. Then parents wouldn’t have to worry, technicians wouldn’t have to worry, carseat manufactuers wouldn’t have to worry – even vehicle manufacturers wouldn’t have to worry.
Why is the burden of this falling on the parents and carseat manufacturers instead of the auto manufacturers who are ultimately responsible for making sure their vehicles are safe for families to ride in? I don’t know about everyone else, but I’d pay an extra $50 or $100 for a car with the knowledge that that car was going to safely restrain my entire family for as long as I wanted it too.
I have many more thoughts, but I’ll stop here as I’ve gotten long winded already. I just hope that at some point some common sense prevails and somebody stops to remind themselves of why the cost of LATCH was justified in the first place, and if they’re going to limit the use of LATCH, then they need to standardize seatbelt systems to better accomodate child seats. I’m guessing allowing anchor use to a higher weight would be much less expensive than redoing vehicle seatbelt geometry and trying to find one that was suitable for car seats and for seatbelt passengers in the back seat…
I hadn’t seen the rigid latch either. Thanks for sharing that. Is this compatible with all vehicles? I have to install in one for which the latch anchors are hidden deep, down there and it’s hard to get the other Britax latch buckles attached. I’m wondering if the rigid latch works on those. Thanks.
Given the number of Canadians who frequent the forum/blog, could you add to the TT answer that using the TT with any FFg harnessed seat (whether installed by UAS/LATCH or seatbelt) is still required in Canada. Thx
For me, the real issue here is not whether these new guidelines are reasonable, scientifically based, or even true – we’ve gone well beyond that argument. As techs it is not our job to make decisions for parents. We simply help parents understand the information they already have in their vehicle owner’s manuals and in their car seat owner’s manuals. We do not teach them our opinions or tell them what to do; everything we say can be shown to them in their own owner’s manuals. Adding a level of information that is extremely difficult for most parents to obtain, which is not included in their owner’s manuals, makes CPSTs the “gatekeepers” of this information. Aside from the fact that I did not sign up to be a “gatekeeper,” the whole concept is unethical. What other product is sold without vital information about that product freely available to the purchaser? Car seats are not prescription medications, CPSTs are not doctors, and that 200-page-manual isn’t a pharmacist. Anyone who owns a vehicle or a car seat has a right to this information, and no one should be forced to seek out a “gatekeeper” in order to obtain that information.
Along the lines of Kecia’s “ignorance is bliss” comment, clearly most parents know nothing of this, but what about techs who don’t either? My old coalition leader was very current on matters like this, so it was easy to have a unified front. I just moved to a new area and have no idea what the coalitions are like. Do they have LATCH Manuals? Do they read CPS Express? Will these techs have any idea of the recent vehicle changes to LATCH, the impending legislation, or how that will affect things? (Which brings me to another issue: as techs certified by SafeKids, we should not have to rely on a separately purchased third-party source for this info. SafeKids needs to provide the info to us, and NHTSA needs to provide it to parents. If vehicles change their limits, it needs to be part of a well publicized recall. These entities are relying on US to do way too much of the dirty work.)
Insanity! Tough for a tech to understand, impossible for the average parent.
So confusing! I am using a Graco Nautilus as a high back booster. I have it tethered. Is that right? Also, I don’t have LATCH, but is it true you can LATCH the Nautilus and use the seat belt in booster mode?
I feel as though we have taken a huge leap backward with this ruling. I find it laughable that, “The purpose of the label is to reduce consumer confusion about using lower LATCH anchorages, and to ensure that forces generated by the child and CRS in most crash conditions do not exceed the lower anchors’ design limits.” What this label is doing already is increasing customer confusion. The whole purpose of LATCH was to simplify carseat installation, to make it easier for parents to safely install their child’s carseat. Instead what happened was something that was just as confusing as seatbelts and led to as many mistakes. I’ve been shaking my head so much lately my kids are wondering what they’ve been doing wrong! Pfft.
Is there anything we can do? Anyone we can call? Storm the steps of NHTSA? This will put our nations children at undue risk, seriously!
Wow. This is such a mess. It almost makes another tick in the feather for having my certification expire. That’s a big mess and a big lawsuit waiting to happen…I know we “document, document, document” but even when you try, sometimes people make mistakes, and with the LATCH manual now “supersized” to accomodate all the idiocincracies of each manufacturer/model/make/year, it just leads to a big ol’ mess.
“…thank you so much for bringing up such a painful subject. While you’re at it, why don’t you give me a nice paper cut and pour lemon juice on it?” -Miracle Max
Seriously, the mess has now deteriorated into a debacle. Normally I look forward to the newest edition of the LATCH Manual but this latest version just makes me want to cry. No offence to the writers and editors of the LATCH Manual. It’s not their fault and I know they work hard to bring us the most current information on the subject. I appreciate all their time, effort, expertise and dedication – but I almost wish I was one of those CPS Techs who had never owned a LATCH Manual. Ignorance, in this case, would be bliss.
Yeah I have always used the seat beat cause I knew the use of Latch was limited. I don’t even have it in my car (old car owner). I keep thinking it must be easier then the seat belt install but my son is in a Radian and already 35 pounds so I think he is beyond the use of Latch anyway.
Tulipmom, it is still confusing. In 2014, assuming the current rule stands as-is, each carseat will have a new label. That label will limit the use of lower anchors to a maximum child’s weight and this limit will vary from one carseat to the next.
It just so happens that the maximum child’s weight that will be printed on the carseat label, plus the weight of the carseat, will have to total 65 pounds combined, or less.
They decided that it was the combined weight that was needed for the limits, but did not want to have parents deal with the weight of the carseat itself. So, again, the printed number as it stands right now will be the maximum weight of the child only and will be specific to each model of carseat. As long as you follow the new label that will be on your carseat in regard to the maximum weight for your child, you don’t have to worry about what the carseat weighs.
So, a lighter carseat would presumably allow kids to use the lower anchors to higher weights than if you had a heavier carseat. For example, no problems using LATCH all the way up to its 40 pound harness limit on a light Cosco Scenera! A heavy Diono Radian, on the other hand, may be limited to half its 80 pound harness limit, despite having SuperLatch:-( Okay, so it’s still confusing!
“This child’s weight limit printed on each carseat, plus the weight of the carseat, must be 65 pounds combined, or less.” So it’s from the carseat weight limit, not the weight of the child? That’s the part that’s really confusing me!
Oh wow. I have never even seen the solid latch system. I know that every time I have to change any of my seats around I wish they were solid and can’t figure out why they aren’t. I mean, our seats are all steal framed and bolted in. Why are our kids seats not?
The whole thing is a mess and yes, I could see it taking another decade to be straightened out.
You did work a ”Princess Bride” quote in there, though, which is always awesome.