Would you participate in this carpool?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nope. Would you allow more kids than seat belts?

Who says there are more kids than seatbelts?

OP asked if she could fit four children under 13 in her car. The answer is no since she only has three rear seats. I was wondering if any of the PPs would be willing to break another safety rule like they are with the front seat age limit.

[Anonymous]

I'd be fine with it. My 11 and 12 yr olds occasionally ride up front when needed. The issue, IMO, is size not age. My kids are both 5'4", bigger than several of my adult friends so I don't feel they are unsafe in the front. A couple of my DS's 12 yr old friends are taller than 5'7" and I routinely see them riding in front with their parents.

I do think it's best that the driver's kid sit up front, unless that child is on the small side, in which case they should clear the front-seating with that kid's parent.

[Anonymous]

Oops PP.

"Although some children under the age of 13 may seem as big as an adult on the outside, they are not an adult on the inside. The hip bones are not fully developed (all the way to the pointy top part) until 12-13 years of age. It is the pointy, angled area on the front of developed hips that keeps a lap belt low and snug. On a child with rounded, relatively soft hips, the belt will “ride up” onto the abdominal cavity during an MVC – even if the belt starts in the right place! This shift of the lap belt’s proper position increases the risk of injury to abdominal organs.
The development of the breast bone (sternum) is even more inconsistent. Mature, stable breast bones can be seen as early as 11 years old. Full development, however, can be seen as late as 17 years old. Without a mature skeleton, a child is at increased risk of injury and death in the event of a MVC.
Until a child has a mature skeleton, the protection provided by seat belt restraint is not as optimal as an adult. Period."

http://kckidsdoc.com/back-seat-until-13-why-your-pre-teen-should-get-the-back-seat.html

[Anonymous]

Full development, however, can be seen as late as 17 years old. Without a mature skeleton, a child is at increased risk of injury and death in the event of a MVC.
Until a child has a mature skeleton, the protection provided by seat belt restraint is not as optimal as an adult. Period."

So you recommend a 5 point harness for a 16 year old? (except if he is actually driving of course).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oops PP.

"Although some children under the age of 13 may seem as big as an adult on the outside, they are not an adult on the inside. The hip bones are not fully developed (all the way to the pointy top part) until 12-13 years of age. It is the pointy, angled area on the front of developed hips that keeps a lap belt low and snug. On a child with rounded, relatively soft hips, the belt will “ride up” onto the abdominal cavity during an MVC – even if the belt starts in the right place! This shift of the lap belt’s proper position increases the risk of injury to abdominal organs.
The development of the breast bone (sternum) is even more inconsistent. Mature, stable breast bones can be seen as early as 11 years old. Full development, however, can be seen as late as 17 years old. Without a mature skeleton, a child is at increased risk of injury and death in the event of a MVC.
Until a child has a mature skeleton, the protection provided by seat belt restraint is not as optimal as an adult. Period."

http://kckidsdoc.com/back-seat-until-13-why-your-pre-teen-should-get-the-back-seat.html

PP with an 11yo who is taller than me: the passage above makes sense - kids are at greater risk of injuries in car accidents than adults because their skeleton is still developing. (Presumably the elderly are also at greater risk, right, due to osteoporosis or other conditions that cause skeletal deterioration?) But the passage above relates solely to the effectiveness of seat belts; it says nothing about front vs. back seat, so I'm not sure how it relates to this discussion.

I'm pretty neurotic about all this stuff - we were in a bad car accident and I know that properly installed seats saved my kids from even a scratch. I kept my giant in a booster until the state-mandated age of 8yo, even though he had exceeded the height and weight requirements long before that. But the idea that an appropriately sized tween or teen cannot ride in the front is just silly.

[Anonymous]

I would follow the law, and make sure the parent of the biggest kid is fine with the arrangement.

I would also make sure everyone was clear that my own pipsqueak was not allowed to sit in the front.

[Anonymous]

Yes.

[Anonymous]

When we started a carpool in 6th grade, first with one kid and later with the other, no one in the multiple families involved ever thought to bring this up. Whoever was driving had their 11 year old sit in the front and did not think anything of it. I don't want to take crazy risks with my children's' safety but this does not seem like it would be one.

It always surprises me to realize that there are things that people are concerned over that never even occurred to me as a possible area of concern.

[Anonymous]

Yes

[Anonymous]

The seat belt issue has to do with hip development and possible abdominal injuries. Because it's soft tissue, injuries can happen quickly and be irreversible. If the child can't sit correctly in the belt, they need a booster, and for some that may mean at 11 or 12.

Front seat riding is a separate issue. The impact of the airbag can seriously harm a teen due to the sternum not being as strong as it is in a healthy adult, and it can kill a younger child. However, the likelihood is that a healthy teen will not die from an airbag deploying as long as the teen is wearing the belt correctly and is positioned correctly in the seat. The main issue, in my opinion, is that the front passenger seat is the deadliest seat in a crash; there's a reason it's been known as the deadman's seat. The steering wheel protects the driver, but the dash is too far away for it to be protection, and it just gives more room for the airbag to deploy. For safety, kids in my car ride in the back unless they are driving. If anyone's going to be in the deadman's seat, it'll be me, and there's zero chance that it would be a preteen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oops PP.

"Although some children under the age of 13 may seem as big as an adult on the outside, they are not an adult on the inside. The hip bones are not fully developed (all the way to the pointy top part) until 12-13 years of age. It is the pointy, angled area on the front of developed hips that keeps a lap belt low and snug. On a child with rounded, relatively soft hips, the belt will “ride up” onto the abdominal cavity during an MVC – even if the belt starts in the right place! This shift of the lap belt’s proper position increases the risk of injury to abdominal organs.
The development of the breast bone (sternum) is even more inconsistent. Mature, stable breast bones can be seen as early as 11 years old. Full development, however, can be seen as late as 17 years old. Without a mature skeleton, a child is at increased risk of injury and death in the event of a MVC.
Until a child has a mature skeleton, the protection provided by seat belt restraint is not as optimal as an adult. Period."

http://kckidsdoc.com/back-seat-until-13-why-your-pre-teen-should-get-the-back-seat.html

So when would you say is a good age? Should we start giving kids X-rays to see if they are mature enough to sit in the front?

[Anonymous]

The seat belt issue has to do with hip development and possible abdominal injuries. Because it's soft tissue, injuries can happen quickly and be irreversible. If the child can't sit correctly in the belt, they need a booster, and for some that may mean at 11 or 12.

Did you have your 11 or 12 year old use a booster seat??

[Anonymous]

We did a car pool with 5 kids starting in 3rd grade. The kids had a blast and it was worth whatever risk might be associated with a crash.

[Anonymous]

I let my average-sized 11-year-old sit in the front seat when I'm driving short distances at low speeds (e.g., 10-minute drive to school, to a friend's house etc), but never on any road where the speed limit exceeds 30 mph. My husband and I are both excellent drivers. I would not feel comfortable having my son sit in the front seat with anyone else driving.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The seat belt issue has to do with hip development and possible abdominal injuries. Because it's soft tissue, injuries can happen quickly and be irreversible. If the child can't sit correctly in the belt, they need a booster, and for some that may mean at 11 or 12.

Front seat riding is a separate issue. The impact of the airbag can seriously harm a teen due to the sternum not being as strong as it is in a healthy adult, and it can kill a younger child. However, the likelihood is that a healthy teen will not die from an airbag deploying as long as the teen is wearing the belt correctly and is positioned correctly in the seat. The main issue, in my opinion, is that the front passenger seat is the deadliest seat in a crash; there's a reason it's been known as the deadman's seat. The steering wheel protects the driver, but the dash is too far away for it to be protection, and it just gives more room for the airbag to deploy. For safety, kids in my car ride in the back unless they are driving. If anyone's going to be in the deadman's seat, it'll be me, and there's zero chance that it would be a preteen.

It's about the airbag which is why there were no age limits when we were growing up.