How strict are you with 13+ requirement for front seat?

[Anonymous]

Wow. Pretty big teens you've got.

Mine is not sitting in the front seat anytime soon, with his current height and weight...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was 5'3" at 12 and wore a 8.5 shoe. How can that be too small for an airbag?

Sounds like you were big enough. The guidance is at least 5' tall and I forget if there's a weight minimum. I sat in the front seat in the 80s, as did my brother, but neither of us would qualify today.

Age is a requirement too because of bone density, that's why the minimum is 13 years despite height and weight.

What minimum? Don't think there is a law in Maryland.

[Anonymous]

I would only allow it if there are no other options, which sounds like the situation and with parental permission. Move the seat all the way back to get the furthest away from the airbag.

[Anonymous]

My son was sitting in the front seat regularly by 11 years old. Most of his friends started at 10.

Nobody but the DCUM follows these strict car seat "rules" -- that are really only guidelines.

[Anonymous]

My 11yo is 5'3" and over 100 lbs. he is bigger than his physician so he sits in front if he wants to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My 11yo is 5'3" and over 100 lbs. he is bigger than his physician so he sits in front if he wants to.

The issue isn't just about being bigger, there is far more to it.

[Anonymous]

Because I know what can happen when a child's ribcage is crushed by an airbag, teens don't sit in the front seat until they are learning to drive unless there isn't enough room in the back. Even with lack of room, I still wouldn't have a child under 13 in the front, or a teen who didn't meet the minimum recommended height and weight.

[Anonymous]

I've always thought age limits were ridiculous - it should be based solely on weight and height. Same with the whole rear-facing infant seats. The recommendation is rear-facing until age 2, but our kids were always far too big to remain rear-facing after about a year. They were just big babies and it made no sense to try and squeeze them in backwards, so we turned them around at that point. Age means nothing - it's size that is important.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Because I know what can happen when a child's ribcage is crushed by an airbag, teens don't sit in the front seat until they are learning to drive unless there isn't enough room in the back. Even with lack of room, I still wouldn't have a child under 13 in the front, or a teen who didn't meet the minimum recommended height and weight.

Boy, terrible idea, helicopter parent! You learn a lot about driving by sitting in the FRONT!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

My son was sitting in the front seat regularly by 11 years old. Most of his friends started at 10.

Nobody but the DCUM follows these strict car seat "rules" -- that are really only guidelines.

Why hello stoopid.

[Anonymous]

It's a black and white rule in our family. Please ask the other kid's parents; they may be ok with it (which ends your dilemma) or they may definitely not be (in which case it was especially good that you asked).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I've always thought age limits were ridiculous - it should be based solely on weight and height. Same with the whole rear-facing infant seats. The recommendation is rear-facing until age 2, but our kids were always far too big to remain rear-facing after about a year. They were just big babies and it made no sense to try and squeeze them in backwards, so we turned them around at that point. Age means nothing - it's size that is important.

Actually age is very relevant. For example, even one-year-olds who are the size of two-year-olds still have the loose ligaments of one-year-olds.

"This best practice [of rear-facing until two] results from the need to support the young child's posterior torso, neck, head, and pelvis and to distribute crash forces over the entire body. Developmental considerations, including incomplete vertebral ossification, more horizontally oriented spinal facet joints, and excessive ligamentous laxity put young children at risk of head and spinal cord injury. Rear-facing CSSs address this risk by supporting the child's head and preventing the relatively large head from moving independently of the proportionately smaller neck."

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/127/4/e1050.full

[Anonymous]

On the occasion I have to have 4 kids in the car, I will allow my oldest to ride up front. I think it has only happened once or twice. She is ten.

In our circle of friends/parents, I think I am pretty conservative. I regularly see 8 year olds in the front seat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because I know what can happen when a child's ribcage is crushed by an airbag, teens don't sit in the front seat until they are learning to drive unless there isn't enough room in the back. Even with lack of room, I still wouldn't have a child under 13 in the front, or a teen who didn't meet the minimum recommended height and weight.

Boy, terrible idea, helicopter parent! You learn a lot about driving by sitting in the FRONT!

You bolded the wrong thing, PP. It's the crushed ribcage, not the front seat observation to learn driving, that's critical.

[Anonymous]

Just an fyi...Its not a law anywhere, It a safety guideline. Its posted on most cars right there on the visor.