Well it’s all changed in the last 15 years then. I remember not getting a rear facing seat (baby sized) in a brand new Mark 5/6 golf that I’d borrowed from a colleague. Panic, as she had my car….

I can appreciate the safety reasons, but the key is to drive carefully with your family in it. Managed to do that all my life, look out for dangers etc.

I see new mums at work really stressing about a little snow, yes we had the same years ago – I keep my gob shut, as the small cars actually get through snow the best. Lass at work is a mess that she has a Panda. I’m thinking it’s better than your colleague’s, that’s also due to give birth, with her fat tyred, 2WD SUV…

I have to laugh, and my kids aren’t that old, but the new mum/dad ‘stuff’ has got insane.

I agree – I just don’t get the practicalities of it in a typical small UK car.

Aye, well it’s horses for courses I suppose. If your child doesn’t fit in such a seat, what can you do? It worked out for us for our elder two, and I’m happy that it did, but I didn’t mean to imply criticism of families for whom rear-facing doesn’t work. As with all parenting choices, you do what you deem to be best for your family.

It is interesting, though, that there is such a big difference between the UK and Scandinavian countries in this regard. I’m by no means an expert, but I understand that rear-facing until 4 or 5 is just “what you do” in Sweden, and they don’t seem to struggle with it. Are their cars much bigger than ours, perhaps?

We tried a few, or rather the poor under paid Mothercare Saturday girl did.

The ranged from ‘maybe for a few months but then she won’t fit’ in my car (Seat Exeo Estate) to ‘not a snowballs chance in hell’ in my wife’s Ibiza.

This was a few years ago when they announced the new regs and the ones available were all the swivel ones with MASSIVE bases, I’d hope they’re better now, because back then it seemed you needed a massive (no doubt 4×4) car to fit the new massive £500 car seat. They all all seemed to have these massive chest cusion restrains as well, Daughet hated those.

Anyway, she’s over 4 now so I just throw her in the back and tell her to go limp if we crash.

Sorry, bit late to this thread – we used rear facing for our eldest until he was 4 without problems. Our youngest is 3.5 and big (21 kg and tall for his age) and is also rear facing. He doesn’t complain about being uncomfortable, even on long trips. We use a Britax Römer 2 Way Elite, which is only available from:

https://incarsafetycentre.co.uk/product/2-way-elite-cosmos-black/

It’s a bit of a pig to install, but is good up to 25 kg and fine once fitted (provided that you want to leave it in). It hasn’t interfered with using the front passenger seat. The only problem has been that it’s a faff to clean the cover if little Jimmy has just drunk a litre of juice at a party and decides not to bother waiting to get home for a wee.

Whether you go rear facing or not might depend on circumstances – for the same child we use a high back booster in our other car, but he only travels occasionally in that between nursery and home which is all 30 or 40 limit, plus we need to take the child seat out from time to time (e.g. to get bikes in when going out with the eldest). We feel that there is enough evidence though that rear facing is safer, so we use that most of the time.

The enormous chest cushions are the attempt to make forward facing seats better. The rear facing seat don’t have them, in general.

The swivelling ones are often enormous: it’s a result of the choice to get a swivelling one, not the rear-facing-ness.

The legs bent thing isn’t an issue. It might cause a fuss if you try to put a three year old who’s used to going forward facing into a rear facing seat, but not because it isn’t possible, just because kids have opinions!

Thanks for the info on what seats have been able to accommodate older children. It will be useful for the future.

…and that future is pretty much now 🙂

I’ve not learnt Swedish or German but have managed to read quite a lot about rear facing vs front facing. I’m convinced rear facing as long as possible is best.

I’d just like to counter this….

I have to laugh, and my kids aren’t that old, but the new mum/dad ‘stuff’ has got insane.

Rear facing being found to best is hardly new. A paper was published in BMJ 10 years ago that concluded:
-Rear facing seats are safer than forward facing seats for children under 4 years old
-Parents and guardians should be advised to keep young children in rear facing seats for as long as possible

This was a study of studies, collating the data from them. It was published in the section specific to promoting and reviewing change in practice.

Came across this via Facebook:

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/lucky-mums-stark-car-seat-16191878

But a paramedic and a traffic officer told Cara, 34, that if Albie had been front facing, it would have been “a very different scenario” – severe spinal injury or even internal decapitation where the spinal cord is severed from the force of the impact.

Photo are here:
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10102849750843871&id=61007167

There is debate on the post about why a rear facing seat was more effective in a rear end shunt. There is one definite thing to note on this though. The rear of the car crumpling under the impact has pushed the backs of the rear seats forward. As the seat was rear facing it was not against the seat back like a forward facing one would be. I believe this did save the child from more severe injury.

Some people are debating whether a rear facing seat would have been any different to a front facing seat, had there not been this ingress into the passenger area (cell?). The rear shunt would push the stationary car forward. The shunted car then hit another stationary car. In this final impact, rear facing would be safer, as it would be the seat back and not a harness that slowed/stopped the child. However when the car was initially shunted, it would initially be similar to if the child was front facing in a forward travelling collision (but not quite the same as reversing, rear facing into a solid object). People are debating which of these two impacts had the greater force on the child. We only have the evidence that overall the child was relatively unharmed and that the forward facing driver had some injury. So perhaps rear facing was the safest for the child, even without the crumpling ingress at the rear.
I’d certainly not discount the opinion of a Police traffic officer lightly (I believe it was a Police traffic officer as a Highways Agency traffic officer would not be involved on an incident on an urban road).

Anyone wondering about the child seat, it’s an Axkid Minikid and we bought one recently. My son seems very comfortable in it. A good seat regardless of the way it faces.

Yes we did with eldest (till 3yrs 10mnths) and will for youngest. We have a Besafe izi. Child just bends their legs (The seat shape promotes this anyway). The seat does take a large amount of room, we have it behind the passenger to give the driver the room. There is enough room in the front passenger seat for me at 6’2″ (Golf).

hang on…..are…..you…..me???

This is EXACTLY the same as us. I’m 6’2 and have ours in a Golf…

I can’t see how a rear facing seat is better for a rear impact like that. In a properly fitted front facing seat there’s no reason there’s have been any spinal injuries at all. The reason rear facing is safer is because shunts from behind are rarer and less severe (on average) than frontal collisions

We’ve just moved our 32 month old from from rear to front facing (Britax swivel seat) to make things more sociable and to keep him entertained on longer journeys. He never complained about being squeezed in before despite being tallish. The one advantage of our car (Vauxhall signum) is that the stretched rear means there’s plenty of room for him to be rear-facing behind 6’2 me in the driver’s seat. The rest of the car is crap.

@pook. Spooky, not a black golf as well is it?

@5lab I’d imagine in a lot of rear impacts a (more) substantial (either because cars were moving or because hit car is punted into something that doesn’t move) frontal impact follows the initial contact.

I can’t see how a rear facing seat is better for a rear impact like that

I don’t think we can definitively say front facing is better either. There are two impacts, one when the car was shunted and then a final one when the shunted car hit the car in front. The forces act in different directions in both impacts. There are variables to consider, e.g. how soon after the rear shunt was the front collision? If the front collision occurred very shortly after the rear shunt, then it might be that the final impact was worse, or vice versa. Here I’m thinking, how much time the child would have to accelerate/decelerate in each direction?

In this exact case though, the boot crumpled into the back of the rear seats and pushed them forward. This would mean some of the rear impact forces would have been directly transferred to a forward facing seat. As the child’s seat was rear facing it was away from the rear seat backs. Hence in this exact case, rear facing was better. I think this is why the Police came to the opinion they did.