car seats on airplanes -- why I think it is a big deal

[Anonymous]

Can you wear your baby in a bjorn while you're buckled into your seat?

[Anonymous]

Op, thanks for telling me to go off and google the facts about # of children injured due to turbulence--so helpful. Honestly, I think you should too so that next time you get on your soapbox you have some actual info (besides faa's official position, of course they have to say that to cover their butts) to support what you're saying.

Most of us didn't have carseats as babies/kids and yet we survived. Obviously some kids didn't, which is why they changed the rules. Having a lap baby isn't an automatic death wish.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I fly with a lap child because it's safer and easier than driving. I've considered the risks, and I don't consider this risky enough to warrant the expense of paying for a seat.

Me too. OP, I have extensively researched the risks and I understand them--really I do! They are very very small. If we had to pay for a seat for our infant, many times we would drive instead--which is far more dangerous. So I prefer to fly with him on my lap.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14557157

[Anonymous]

Wow, OP, I'm an airline executive and while I appreciate your position, you are incorrect in your guess that airlines lobbied against mandatory use of carseats. I will provide some links for your education.

"Airlines Seek Rule Requiring Child Restraints"
February 23, 199

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1990-02-23/news/9001160140_1_restraint-seats-airlines-faa


"The National Transportation Safety Board wants parents to buy a separate plane ticket for infants and then to strap them into the plane seat using a car seat.

Currently, kids under the age of 2 fly free because they can sit on a parent's lap.

The NTSB said it's impossible for a parent to hold on to their child during a crash and that an infant could become a dangerous projective.

The Federal Aviation Administration and the Air Transport Association, which represents the air carriers, agree with the NTSB. But, in 2004, the FAA decided not to require families to buy an airline seat for infants because they believed the increased cost would force money conscious travelers to drive instead of fly, putting the children on the more dangerous interstates -- causing more deaths than it may save."

source:

http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/NTSB-Wants-Infant-Air-Travelers-in-Car-Seats-111621889.html

For parents, here is an honest and factual look at the issue in a fairly unbiased way - this includes information about the real risks of turbulence, etc, as well as how best to deal with less-than-knowledgeable airline employees when it comes to using your carseat on board:

http://otoh.org/opal/carseat.html

For people who still don't believe, please watch the videos:

http://www.ntsb.gov/safety/children.html

And one more concise article:

http://travel.usatoday.com/experts/mcgee/story/2011/03/Readers-respond-on-flying-with-lap-children/44356510/1

[Anonymous]

Wow, regardless of whether or not children should be in car seats on airplanes. this post is full of unsupported assertions regarding the motivations of the FAA and airlines.

Airlines have lobbied the FAA to allow children under the age of two to ride as lap children. Why would they do this? The answer is money. When a family adds a child to it, flying becomes more expensive when another seat is needed. So airlines "allow" you to have your child as a lap child for the first two years of the child's life so that you get used to flying with your child rather using another mode of transportation (driving). Their thinking is if you get to do it free for two years, you won't mind the expense when your child is older than two. The airlines know it isn't safe, but they want to keep you as customers. They want you to experience the ease of flying (although flying with a lap child isn't really easy) so that you'll want to continue to do it.

.

[Anonymous]

My son also screamed whenever he was in a carseat. In the car, fine-- but I don't think a plane full of people would have enjoyed the screaming. He flew as a lap child about 20 times.
If losing one's grip on the baby is really the concern, they should change the rules to allow parents to wear their babies in a sling, Ergo, mei tai, etc during take off and landing. This should help keep the baby from becoming airborne, and the crushing risk you'd have in a car should not be there.

[Anonymous]

If losing one's grip on the baby is really the concern, they should change the rules to allow parents to wear their babies in a sling, Ergo, mei tai, etc during take off and landing. This should help keep the baby from becoming airborne, and the crushing risk you'd have in a car should not be there.

Can you not do this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

If losing one's grip on the baby is really the concern, they should change the rules to allow parents to wear their babies in a sling, Ergo, mei tai, etc during take off and landing. This should help keep the baby from becoming airborne, and the crushing risk you'd have in a car should not be there.

Can you not do this?

Nope. Many flight attendants wont care, but some will ask you to remove the infant from the carrier. Even lap babies

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If losing one's grip on the baby is really the concern, they should change the rules to allow parents to wear their babies in a sling, Ergo, mei tai, etc during take off and landing. This should help keep the baby from becoming airborne, and the crushing risk you'd have in a car should not be there.

Can you not do this?

Nope. Many flight attendants wont care, but some will ask you to remove the infant from the carrier. Even lap babies

Airline person here. Using those devices places baby in the "crush zone." I'm airline exec from above. If you go to the NTSB link I sent you, you'll see a video simulating what would happen if severe turbulence took place with baby in a bjorn / moby / ergo /etc. While it does prevent baby from flying through cabin, it's just as dangerous, if not more dangerous, to have them stuck in the adult's "crush zone."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If losing one's grip on the baby is really the concern, they should change the rules to allow parents to wear their babies in a sling, Ergo, mei tai, etc during take off and landing. This should help keep the baby from becoming airborne, and the crushing risk you'd have in a car should not be there.

Can you not do this?

Nope. Many flight attendants wont care, but some will ask you to remove the infant from the carrier. Even lap babies

Airline person here. Using those devices places baby in the "crush zone." I'm airline exec from above. If you go to the NTSB link I sent you, you'll see a video simulating what would happen if severe turbulence took place with baby in a bjorn / moby / ergo /etc. While it does prevent baby from flying through cabin, it's just as dangerous, if not more dangerous, to have them stuck in the adult's "crush zone."

Also, I just wanted to say that when I first had kids, I really couldn't understand why that wasn't safer, because with my moby, baby was almost part of me. But basically your body gets pretty badly flung around during super severe turbulence. I've since been on a flight like that, where the aircraft was dropping hundreds of feet over and over again and getting shot back up by air currents and I could see exactly what they meant by the crush zone. Your body folds up with your body going backward and forward, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I just totally remember the first flight we took with our baby who was about 3 months at the time. We were going to CA to visit Grandma. We brought on our carseat and installed it in the plane, then placed dd in there to be safe. Then dd started to cry and cry and cry. The attendant came up to me and said she felt so bad my baby was crying, and that I should hold her and comfort her. I was like well Hell yeah, I want to comfort her, but isn't it safer for her to be in the carseat. And the attendant just repeated how bad she felt listening to my baby cry. So I took my baby out of the carseat, and ever after had her as a lap child. In the car seat, she cries. In my lap, she is happy. So I agree with you on the carseat issue, but my baby didn't.

I'd have reported the flight attendant. It's not her call.

[Anonymous]

Agree totally with you, OP. Not only is it a question of safety, but also of common courtesy to other passengers. No one wants to be sitting next to you and your lap baby, I assure you. (And this is coming from a mom with a baby, and we fly.) I've always bought a seat for the baby, and I also got one of those FAA-approved car seats, although that was somewhat of a pain in the ass to drag around with us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Also, I just wanted to say that when I first had kids, I really couldn't understand why that wasn't safer, because with my moby, baby was almost part of me. But basically your body gets pretty badly flung around during super severe turbulence. I've since been on a flight like that, where the aircraft was dropping hundreds of feet over and over again and getting shot back up by air currents and I could see exactly what they meant by the crush zone. Your body folds up with your body going backward and forward, etc.

Kid or no kid, this flight sounded AWFUL! I hate flying- probably would've had my head btwn my legs, kissing my butt goodbye.

Btw, I would take a car seat with me. My best friend's husband is a pilot (now with Southwest, previously United) and he always insisted his kids ride in a car seat when flying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, I just wanted to say that when I first had kids, I really couldn't understand why that wasn't safer, because with my moby, baby was almost part of me. But basically your body gets pretty badly flung around during super severe turbulence. I've since been on a flight like that, where the aircraft was dropping hundreds of feet over and over again and getting shot back up by air currents and I could see exactly what they meant by the crush zone. Your body folds up with your body going backward and forward, etc.

Kid or no kid, this flight sounded AWFUL! I hate flying- probably would've had my head btwn my legs, kissing my butt goodbye.

Btw, I would take a car seat with me. My best friend's husband is a pilot (now with Southwest, previously United) and he always insisted his kids ride in a car seat when flying.

Yes, it was. Worst flight I've ever been on and I have flown an average of 3x a week for the past 20 years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, I just wanted to say that when I first had kids, I really couldn't understand why that wasn't safer, because with my moby, baby was almost part of me. But basically your body gets pretty badly flung around during super severe turbulence. I've since been on a flight like that, where the aircraft was dropping hundreds of feet over and over again and getting shot back up by air currents and I could see exactly what they meant by the crush zone. Your body folds up with your body going backward and forward, etc.

Kid or no kid, this flight sounded AWFUL! I hate flying- probably would've had my head btwn my legs, kissing my butt goodbye.

Btw, I would take a car seat with me. My best friend's husband is a pilot (now with Southwest, previously United) and he always insisted his kids ride in a car seat when flying.

Yes, it was. Worst flight I've ever been on and I have flown an average of 3x a week for the past 20 years.

Though I should say that while that was the worst turbulence I've ever experienced, I've definitely been on many flights where I wouldn't have been able to hang onto a baby.