child safety restraints in automobiles
Have you guys seen these PSAs on TV lately that are telling parents they should put their children in car seats if they're under 4'9" (57" or 145cm) tall? In some cases, it seems more than a recommendation and basically sends the message that "if you're a good parent, you'll follow this rule."
I thought it was a bit pushy at first until I discovered that approximately a dozen states in the US have enacted laws that require parents to put kids under 57" in car seats. In fact, a law with this exact stipulation was put into effect in the state of Washington this month and has been followed by PSAs like this one on YouTube.
Most of the states with these laws appear to limit the height restriction with age; specifically, they allow children over the age of eight to ride in a vehicle as an adult regardless of their height. However, it appears that other states are simply requiring that anyone under the height of 57" ride in some form of child restraint seat. And, what's more, many experts are saying that height is such an important factor in the severity of an auto injury that children under 57" should ride in a car seat regardless of their age up to the age of 10 years.
This is where I call bullshit. It's embarrassing enough to be in second or third grade and to be seen in a car seat, but to be approaching junior high and to still have to ride in one even though 90% of your peers haven't in years?! Lame.
Even if it weren't lame, doesn't it still seem like an excessive solution anyway? If children -- even pre-adolescents -- are at such great risk when riding in automobiles, then why doesn't the government just change the seat belt manufacturing regulations? Because that's the main problem: seat belts are designed and mounted to strap in an adult, not a child. And, after all, I can't imagine adjustable belt feeds could cost any more than those gimmicky, track-mounted, motorized seat belts.
In the end though, it still seems to be much ado about nothing. The last time I rode in a car seat was so long ago that I have no memory of it even though I'm still relatively young. I have also never known or even heard first hand accounts of children who were injured in a car accident because they were only wearing a seat belt. Of course children have been injured in this sort of scenario or else this debate wouldn't exist in the first place, but is injury so significant and wide spread a risk that we as society need to start strapping our kids in like they're going up on the space shuttle?
Obviously, all infants, toddlers and preschoolers should ride in car seats, but as far as I'm concerned, once a child is beginning elementary school it's time to cut the umbilical. And if a kid is about to finish elementary and their parent is still putting them in a car seat then the parent needs to seek therapy because they've turned into a helicopter parent... which, if you didn't know, is the worst thing a parent can become next to an incestuous molester.
Correct.
Totally ghey.
I thought it was a bit pushy at first until I discovered that approximately a dozen states in the US have enacted laws that require parents to put kids under 57" in car seats. In fact, a law with this exact stipulation was put into effect in the state of Washington this month and has been followed by PSAs like this one on YouTube.
Most of the states with these laws appear to limit the height restriction with age; specifically, they allow children over the age of eight to ride in a vehicle as an adult regardless of their height. However, it appears that other states are simply requiring that anyone under the height of 57" ride in some form of child restraint seat. And, what's more, many experts are saying that height is such an important factor in the severity of an auto injury that children under 57" should ride in a car seat regardless of their age up to the age of 10 years.
This is where I call bullshit. It's embarrassing enough to be in second or third grade and to be seen in a car seat, but to be approaching junior high and to still have to ride in one even though 90% of your peers haven't in years?! Lame.
Even if it weren't lame, doesn't it still seem like an excessive solution anyway? If children -- even pre-adolescents -- are at such great risk when riding in automobiles, then why doesn't the government just change the seat belt manufacturing regulations? Because that's the main problem: seat belts are designed and mounted to strap in an adult, not a child. And, after all, I can't imagine adjustable belt feeds could cost any more than those gimmicky, track-mounted, motorized seat belts.
In the end though, it still seems to be much ado about nothing. The last time I rode in a car seat was so long ago that I have no memory of it even though I'm still relatively young. I have also never known or even heard first hand accounts of children who were injured in a car accident because they were only wearing a seat belt. Of course children have been injured in this sort of scenario or else this debate wouldn't exist in the first place, but is injury so significant and wide spread a risk that we as society need to start strapping our kids in like they're going up on the space shuttle?
Obviously, all infants, toddlers and preschoolers should ride in car seats, but as far as I'm concerned, once a child is beginning elementary school it's time to cut the umbilical. And if a kid is about to finish elementary and their parent is still putting them in a car seat then the parent needs to seek therapy because they've turned into a helicopter parent... which, if you didn't know, is the worst thing a parent can become next to an incestuous molester.
Correct.
Totally ghey.