In 2011, the American Academy of Pediatrics changed their rear-facing recommendations to age 2 or until the highest rear-facing weight or height limit of the child restraint has been reached. Shortly after, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration also changed their policy to show that rear-facing is safest for kids up to the limits of their rear-facing carseats. While the two policies aren’t quite in line with each other as far as limits go, what’s clear is that at the very least, kids should stay rear-facing to age 2.
It’s been 6 years now since those recommendations changed and I’d say most parents have heard of them. Some want to stick their heads in the sand and pretend like they didn’t hear them because they want their kids to see them eat their mom snacks or because they think their kids’ legs are twisted up and uncomfortable, and for others, it’s truly a new discovery. We have 4 states—New Jersey, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, California—where it’s the law that children must stay rear-facing until at least age 2, and 5 other states where bills have been proposed in state legislatures to make it formal. This is real.
So, manufacturers, what’s the problem?
Caregivers are getting conflicting messages and it’s confusing the bejeezits out of them. I know—how could this possibly be confusing when we have a 6 year old recommendation and even laws coming out to enforce the safety aspect of rear-facing? It seems clear-cut.
First, I want to say manufacturers have been giving us great seats lately. Really awesome seats! I can’t think of a better time in the last 17 years that I’ve been in carseats that I’ve seen such a great selection and if I had a kid in a carseat, I’d probably be switching them out on a daily basis. The manuals have improved so much too! Sections have been reorganized, color-coded, and written at a lower grade level so you don’t need to have a graduate level college degree to understand it.
Let’s get into the confusion by talking about these awesome infant seats on the market (technically we’re supposed to call them rear-facing only seats). They go to 35 lbs. or 40 lbs. and can hold kids who are no longer infants (see why we’re supposed to call them rear-facing only seats?). A mom who has a 30 lbs. 32” 19 mo old may think that her son is big enough to go straight into a Graco Nautilus because the box on the forward-facing only Nautilus says it fits children in a harness from 20-65 lbs. (and, after all, it’s “the last car seat you’ll ever buy”). There’s no mention on the side of the box, or in the manual, that the Nautilus is not an appropriate carseat for a child under age 2. Besides, after a caregiver has gotten a carseat home and unboxed is not the time to read in the manual that the carseat is not an appropriate model for their child.
Graco isn’t the only manufacturer. Dorel (Safety 1st, Cosco, Maxi-Cosi, Eddie Bauer), doesn’t put age recommendations on their packaging and in fact, rescinded their stance on rear-facing to age 2 that they had on several convertible models (it’s complicated). Evenflo is in the process of converting their line to an age 2 minimum for forward-facing, but that takes time to trickle down; they say it should be completed by this summer. Britax is the only manufacturer currently with text on the side of their combination seat (harness seat that converts to booster) boxes that says the seat has an age 2 minimum.
I’m not asking for much. A simple “Recommended for ages 2+” on the side of the box next to the weight limits on every combination seat would cover it. It doesn’t change the company’s overall philosophy or policy and would let caregivers clearly know the seat isn’t appropriate. Similarly, convertible seat packaging could have wording on the side next to the weight limits that says, “Recommended for ages 0-2+, 5-40 lbs.,” “Recommended for ages 2+, 20-65 lbs.,” and so on.
Labeling on the sides of restraints has improved so much in the past several years. Wording has been simplified and bright colors are being used. It’s time to make text on the boxes practical so parents aren’t stuck buying inappropriate carseats that could put their children at risk.
Booster manufacturers need to get on board as well! I know several have made age 4 the minimum, but there is at least one manufacturer with NO minimum age at all! I have had parents tell me that they chose a high back booster for their 3 year old because the box said it was safe. Parents assume the car seat manufacturers would not put unsafe recommendations on their seats.
Yes! Oh my goodness I feel so bad for parents who get home with a brand new seat and then find out it has to go back to the store. Plus after they find out the minimums on the box aren’t the safest option they ask “well if it isn’t safe, why in the world do they say it’s OK?”
Preach it, sister!
Parents often feel free to ignore the age 1 on their seats because 9 months is close enough and it’s a BIG 9 month old. If the seat said 2 I’d like to think at least that wouldn’t happen.
And manufacturers say they don’t want to conflict with state laws- but legislators say they don’t want to conflict with manufacturers. We could go in circles several years more or manufacturers could step up rather than being dragged into it over the next 10 years as state laws finally catch up to what by then will be likely outdated recommendations.
I believe in this argument quite strongly. I also believe that Graco needs to step it up on better marketing –the turbo is marketed to 3yrs old, then “4 yrs old for big kids”. I call BS on that. No 4 yr old is big kid or mature enough for a booster. And why would they market so many new all-in-one seats and clones, but still not raise the turbo minmum age? Money, greed. But they’re the car seat company, they have the cpst experts, surely they should know better than to encourage the public that 3 is an ok age? That I’ve seen has failed, it gives some folks the idea a car seat is a birthday present, or boosters are great for the 3rd birthday onward. Or even worse, starting a 2 yr old in a booster a few weeks before turning 3. SCARY. Graco and Dorel need to get their shit together and wake up –it ain’t 1998 anymore so raise your freaking standards. When marketing to age 3 minimum, it plays into ignorant consumers, but when the age limit is 5 or 6 universally across all brands, it will make consumers more aware of the rules of car seat safety, and could even save some lives. Btw, Graco needs to discontinue the ClassicRide/ComfortSport/Ready2Grow bc I’m seeing too many orders of these at my warehouse job. Theyre not safe anymore compared to the new seats.
It’s so hard to work as a tech in a store, ad all I talk is best practice, which is in direct contrast to so many of the boxes, if they say anything at all. Sigh.
I believe that the Turbobooster is switching to a 40lb minimum on its high back booster! That will help a little at least.
Switching to 40# does not “help” — it provides fewer options for those of us who want their light weight kids out of a harness by the time they are in grade school. Age limits help, car seat safety has way more to do with bone maturity and maturity in general than arbitrary weight and height requirements.
There are plenty of kids who won’t hit 40# until they are 8 or 9 years old. I am a mother of this child, and I planned to buy turbobooster for him, now I will be likely going with the Chicco (more $$$) because graco changed a STICKER.