Am I overreacting? Car seat issue

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:MB here, whose parents (unfortunately) sometimes communicate too much directly with the nanny. I think you just need to correct position of the seat, stress your requirements to the nanny and move on. Here is rationale:

A. If you allow direct contact between grand parents and the nanny, you can't control what is said, and you can't blame the nanny for not distinguishing between your wishes and your MIL. No matter how much you tell the nanny that YOU are the boss, what is nanny supposed to do when MIL might "suggest" something, and how is nanny to know that MIL doesn't speak for you, especially if you are on a long trip? We had several instances when my mom would tell nanny "let's do X", nanny might say "well, I don't think MB would want me to do X", and my mom would say "don't mind MB, she is young, X is definitely better". You can't blame the nanny for doing X in this situation.

B. In terms of how car seats are installed in nanny's car, you can't have an expectation, that she will never remove the car seats to have extra room in her car for weekends/after hours. If you don't trust the nanny to correctly install the car seats (and I wouldn't trust my current nanny, for example), you need to either provide your own vehicle for kids' transport, or inspect the installation every Monday, or whenever car seats are moved.

C. The only reason this can be raised to a written warning situation, if you repeatedly stressed to the nanny that she is not to FF your DC AND that she is to ignore all MIL "suggestions" and any MIL's opinions regarding raising kids. If none of those thing was stressed before, sorry, you can't blame the nanny.

And by the way, as a mom with a PhD is statistics related field, who directly looked up all and read all related studies on RF vs FF and at different ages, I can tell you there is NO scientific proof that RF till manufacturer suggested age saves lifes/ prevents significant injury. There are articles that populous media spinned into something related. And this is one of the times that I think that AAP went with definitely not harmful, but not proven recommendation. I FF my kids at 1.

I'm a mom with a PhD is physics. The evidence is very clear that rear facing is significantly safer until age 2. After that there are less studies and clear evidence, but basic physics says that everyone is safer rear facing. If you need proof, look at Sweden.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I'm a mom with a PhD is physics. The evidence is very clear that rear facing is significantly safer until age 2. After that there are less studies and clear evidence, but basic physics says that everyone is safer rear facing. If you need proof, look at Sweden.

As a mother with a PhD in both car seats and raising children I can tell you you are full of it. And what does what Sweden does have anything to do with the facts here. If we are going by what Sweden does now you better stop using fluoride in your toothpaste and drinking water.

[Anonymous]

OP here.

Thank you for the replies. I've calmed down and intend to have a a discussion with our nanny about car seat safety and our preferences. If there are any issues with compliance at that point, then there may need to be more serious consequences.

And I didn't mean for this to turn into a debate about ERF.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'm a mom with a PhD is physics. The evidence is very clear that rear facing is significantly safer until age 2. After that there are less studies and clear evidence, but basic physics says that everyone is safer rear facing. If you need proof, look at Sweden.

As a mother with a PhD in both car seats and raising children I can tell you you are full of it. And what does what Sweden does have anything to do with the facts here. If we are going by what Sweden does now you better stop using fluoride in your toothpaste and drinking water.

NP and that's a great idea, actually.

[nannydebsays]

OP, have you talked with your nanny at all about car seat safety, current recommendations, and so forth? If you have talked with her at length or repeatedly, and you actually SEE that she turned your child's seat FF, then by all means, speak with her firmly, be livid, issue a warning, whatever.

But if you haven't done more than install the seat in her car and say, "Dominic should ride RF.", take the time to educate her (and your MIL!) about why RF is safest.

Then, if she has been told the "Why" for ERF, and she still turns the seat around, a formal warning is appropriate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here.

Thank you for the replies. I've calmed down and intend to have a a discussion with our nanny about car seat safety and our preferences. If there are any issues with compliance at that point, then there may need to be more serious consequences.

And I didn't mean for this to turn into a debate about ERF.

Good I hope it goes well!

After your talk this may be a situation for a surprise drop in to make sure she is in compliance.
I hope everything turns out for the best.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'm a mom with a PhD is physics. The evidence is very clear that rear facing is significantly safer until age 2. After that there are less studies and clear evidence, but basic physics says that everyone is safer rear facing. If you need proof, look at Sweden.

As a mother with a PhD in both car seats and raising children I can tell you you are full of it. And what does what Sweden does have anything to do with the facts here. If we are going by what Sweden does now you better stop using fluoride in your toothpaste and drinking water.

If you knew anything about car seat safety you would know what the reference to Sweden was about in regards to extended rear facing. Since you don't, I'll go ahead and explain. Almost all children in Sweden rear face to at least 4 years old. As a result they have significantly lower numbers of fatalities and injuries in motor vehicle accidents.

We actually do not use flouride, so I guess we are good to go there, but thanks for the heads up.

[Anonymous]

OP You have no proof, only the word of a (your word) confused MIL. Just NICELY check and say you're planning to keep your child rear facing until X age and leave it alone. It honestly sounds like your MIL doesn't know what she's talking about and is confused. You will seriously lose your nanny if you accuse her of something she didn't do based on 2nd hand information.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I feel sorry for your DCs future growing up with you, you are a pill.

I am not a nanny and I feel sorry for everyone who has the misfortune to be anywhere near you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'm a mom with a PhD is physics. The evidence is very clear that rear facing is significantly safer until age 2. After that there are less studies and clear evidence, but basic physics says that everyone is safer rear facing. If you need proof, look at Sweden.

As a mother with a PhD in both car seats and raising children I can tell you you are full of it. And what does what Sweden does have anything to do with the facts here. If we are going by what Sweden does now you better stop using fluoride in your toothpaste and drinking water.

If you knew anything about car seat safety you would know what the reference to Sweden was about in regards to extended rear facing. Since you don't, I'll go ahead and explain. Almost all children in Sweden rear face to at least 4 years old. As a result they have significantly lower numbers of fatalities and injuries in motor vehicle accidents.

We actually do not use flouride, so I guess we are good to go there, but thanks for the heads up.

Ugh. Arguing on DCUM used to be enjoyable, but the general dumbing down of society is really taking its toll. Honey I will explain. If you read that PPs comment you quoted you will see they said why does it matter what Sweden does. You are holding out Sweden to be some be all end all on car seats. No one cares what Sweden does.

[Anonymous]

So you think your nanny turned the seat FF for 2 weeks then turned it back again to RF before you came home?
Why did you ask MIL how DC was sitting?