Parents who let their kids in cars with no restraint.

Ozzie

am i the only person who feels like exploding when they see kids unrestrained in cars or worse still people with babies in the front seat :eek:
do the not love their kids or what

snappieT

If the passenger is under the age of 17, the driver is liable to be charged the standard for not having their seatbelt fastened. Penalty Points & and On-The-Spot fine.

"do the not love their kids or what"
Do 20 year olds that don't strap up hate themselves? Kids can be very difficult, in particular on a long journey.

Nevyn

if they are difficult then you pull over and demand they belt up.

We simpley have told our kids that the car does not work if thier belts are not
on .

vixen2005

we have our baby in the back seat but i think thats an unfair comment you said about not loving their kids,
i agree long journey can be a pain and seat belts are always worn well 99.5% of the time.
but some kids just are difficult and i agree they should be worn but some times if they fightin and you two minutes from home your shoutin they cryin some would tend to let it go.

you cant judge every one by one act,certainly an important one but they still love their kids

KdjaCL

Tis shocking indeed, nothing worse than a young devoted mother i seen getting on the back of a moped carrying a small baby. I mean wtf was going on in her head.

kdjac

Ozzie

some kids just are difficult and i agree they should be worn but some times if they fightin and you two minutes from home your shoutin they cryin some would tend to let it go.

I dont want to offend anyone but some kids are difficult and want to put their hands in the fire do we let that go? its time we recognised what we are "THE PARENTS"!
i am realistic enough to realise that some kids will try it on but you know as well as i do that some are habitual reoffenders. i find a firm " put it on or we will turn back" works. i am willing to do that regardless of where we are on our journey. im not perfect just not willing to risk their lives never mind a fine.

good one about the car not working without belts on!

Ozzie

they may love themselves but boy are they stupid.

Guy:Incognito

vixen2005 wrote:

we have our baby in the back seat but i think thats an unfair comment you said about not loving their kids,
i agree long journey can be a pain and seat belts are always worn well 99.5% of the time.
but some kids just are difficult and i agree they should be worn but some times if they fightin and you two minutes from home your shoutin they cryin some would tend to let it go.

you cant judge every one by one act,certainly an important one but they still love their kids

Very few people driving around Dublin with Dublin reg cars would be in the middle of what I would consider a long journey. Difficult or not, I reckon it would be a lot more "difficult" for a parent seeing their child spread along a 50 yard stretch of road in front of the car.

The worst I've seen in recent memory was a woman in a convertible Astra (I think, wasnt really paying attention to the car, bit of shock) with two kids, around 8 -10 years old standing or kneeling on the back seat and mesiing on the back of the car.

It should result in instant disqualification like drink driving.

Shabadu

KdjaC wrote:

Tis shocking indeed, nothing worse than a young devoted mother i seen getting on the back of a moped carrying a small baby. I mean wtf was going on in her head.

kdjac

Please tell me you're joking- I seriously feel like crying after reading this.

DublinWriter

Ozzie wrote:

am i the only person who feels like exploding when they see kids unrestrained in cars or worse still people with babies in the front seat :eek:
do the not love their kids or what

True, most would make sure a bottle of Vodka was better restrained if put in the back seat.

Worse still, the ones who leave their kids in the car when they go shopping. Check out the car-parks in Blanchardstown any given Saturday if you don't believe me. Shocking.

KdjaCL

DublinWriter wrote:

Worse still, the ones who leave their kids in the car when they go shopping. Check out the car-parks in Blanchardstown any given Saturday if you don't believe me. Shocking.

Thats illegal and classed as neglect and willful harm (not sure on that one) ring police and give reg and parking location, that`ll teach em.


kdjac

monkeyfudge

Ozzie wrote:

find a firm " put it on or we will turn back" works. i am willing to do that regardless of where we are on our journey.

"Put the seatbelt on or we're turning around and not taking you to the dentist"

bonzai bob

Worst I saw was when there was a Golf in front of me, about 4 kids under 10 years in the back, all with no belt on, but the worst was the kid in the passenger seat, he wasn’t even sitting on the seat:eek:, he was sitting on the arm rest of the door:rolleyes: What made it worse was I don’t even thing the driver could see that well as the windscreen was almost shattered!!

MrPudding

Kids taken into care and the parents sterilized. That should sort it out.

MrP

DonWeNow

Like the original poster, I think parents who allow their children to travel in cars without belts are totally irresponsible. There is absolutely no excuse for them. It has been noted that most car accidents occur within mile of the home so claiming that "I'm only driving to the shop" is facile.
My kids are adult now and have never ever been allowed travel in a car without their seatbelts. It was never up for negotiation - the car didn't start until everyone was belted up.

RainyDay

I'm strongly thinking about starting to confront parents with unrestrained kids. When I'm stopped at traffic lights, I'm strongly tempted to roll down the window and say to driver something like 'What a beautiful child - do you not love them enough to give them a seatbelt like you have?' - Would this be effective?

And then of course, there are the parents who think it's OK to smoke in the front of the car while the kids are in the back (and of course the car heater is steadily blowing all the smoke from front to back). Jeez- why not just pinch the nose & blow the smoke directly down their throat into the lungs....

Shabadu

I saw a young knacker dad run across a busy rush hour street with his toddler in a buggy.

MrPudding

RainyDay wrote:

I'm strongly thinking about starting to confront parents with unrestrained kids.

Saw a great one in Coleraine, where I am from, a few years ago. The RUC set up checkpoints near a school at letting out time. Stopped everyone and handed out fines. An uncle of fine got fined. He was outraged. Fcuk him.

MrP

beer enigma

DublinWriter wrote:

True, most would make sure a bottle of Vodka was better restrained if put in the back seat.

Sad but true......My sister witnessed an accident just outside of Galway last week where the woman had a case of wine secured in the back seat by the seat belt & her five year old son sitting without a belt on !

*Page*

my daughter gives out to her grandparents if they forget to there's on. i'm very strick on seatbelts with children!

causal

It must be ignorance and/or denial on the drivers* part.
*It's not always the parent driving the car. How homicidal would you be if you found out someone let your kid in their car unrestrained :eek:

For a hard dose of reality - check out these crash test dummy sled-runs done by GMTV:
http://www.britax.co.uk/movies/Britax_GMTV_Check_It_Fits_Unrestrained_Child_Facing_Forwards_in-car_view.mpg
http://www.britax.co.uk/movies/Britax_GMTV_Check_It_Fits_Unrestrained_Child_Facing_Forwards.mpg
http://www.britax.co.uk/movies/Britax_GMTV_Check_It_Fits_Adult_Facing_Forwards_Holding_Infant.mpg
http://www.britax.co.uk/movies/Britax_GMTV_Check_It_Fits_Child_Facing_Forwards_ten_years_old_seat.mpg

Perhaps they should be compulsory viewing for all drivers, parents and children.

causal

Oryx

This is not a racist comment honest, but how do the traveller families get away with having mammy, granny and about five kids piled in and around the front seats of a hiace? Seen it dozens of times and I always think -jeez, if they have an accident...

(My mam and dad loved me, but when we were kids we used to have all of us and most of the neighbours kids in the car, with some in the boot :eek: going to the seaside. The car didnt even have seatbelts! So pot, kettle etc )

silly

i never let my daughter without her seatbelt and well she knows it too, there is just no reason why a child should not wear it, screaming, crying, whatever, they're alive aren't they?
about leaving kids in cars, i was walking around cork city one day when i saw a few cops standing around a car ahead, when i was walking past i just glanced in the car window, there was a little boy, roughly 18-24mts old, lying across the back seat, conked!!! it was awful! who would do that??? brought a tear to my eye tbh.

dewsbury

Can we all just chill out a bit about the kids & seatbelts.

Sure it is important to 'belt up'.

But lets not forget that until the last 15 or so years cars did not even have belts in the back. Many of us older fogies spend our entire childhoods in cars with no belts at all.... and we survived !!

Please keep things in perspective.

Capt'n Midnight

out of curiousity could you make a citizens arrest over something like that ?

or mention the magic words "Health and Safety"

Shabadu

dewsbury wrote:

Can we all just chill out a bit about the kids & seatbelts.

Sure it is important to 'belt up'.

But lets not forget that until the last 15 or so years cars did not even have belts in the back. Many of us older fogies spend our entire childhoods in cars with no belts at all.... and we survived !!

Please keep things in perspective.

Er... wasn't there also far far far less traffic 'back then' too?

Kernel32

dewsbury wrote:

But lets not forget that until the last 15 or so years cars did not even have belts in the back. Many of us older fogies spend our entire childhoods in cars with no belts at all.... and we survived !!

Unfortunately the ones that didn't survive can't post here to tell us that we should make a big deal out of it. I remember being in cars as a child with no seat belt but that doesn't mean it was no big deal or that it was fine.

Shabadu

And just cos you survived doesn't mean 'we survived'. Plenty didn't.

Edit: Just saw kernel's post above where he made this point. Woopsy

causal

dewsbury wrote:

Can we all just chill out a bit about the kids & seatbelts.
<snip>
Please keep things in perspective.

Perspective!!!
I'll post these links again - now look at these from the perspective of the child:

http://www.britax.co.uk/movies/Britax_GMTV_Check_It_Fits_Unrestrained_Child_Facing_Forwards_in-car_view.mpg
http://www.britax.co.uk/movies/Britax_GMTV_Check_It_Fits_Unrestrained_Child_Facing_Forwards.mpg
http://www.britax.co.uk/movies/Britax_GMTV_Check_It_Fits_Adult_Facing_Forwards_Holding_Infant.mpg
http://www.britax.co.uk/movies/Britax_GMTV_Check_It_Fits_Child_Facing_Forwards_ten_years_old_seat.mpg

Or maybe a spell with the EMTs or in A&E will put some perspective on it all :rolleyes:

causal

dewsbury

I still say keep it in perspective ....

Here are some stats from the central statistics office. (There are a little bit out of date and refer to 1999).

Road deaths by age 1999:

Up to 5 years - 7 deaths.
6 to 9 years - 8 deaths
...
18-20 years - 56 deaths
21-24 years - 45 deaths
25-38 years - 80 deaths

Hopefully the above stats clarify things. It is not the kids let loose in the back seat that are resulting in fatalities.

Obviously every death is a tragedy but the young kids are the safer ones.

Shabadu

AArgh! Because parents are more careful than people in their twenties on the road. If one single child dies because it wasn't properly restrained, it is one too many. That's my perspective.

20 yr olds speed and kill themselves, parents are responsible for their children and have to belt them up. There is nothing you can say to make me tolerate it.

causal

But those figures tell us only that in absolute number less kids died than adults.

They don't take into account:
- the number of people in each age group
- the number of hours spent on the road for each age group
- the number of miles spent on the road for each age group
- the days of the week spent on the road for each age group
- the time of the day spent on the road for each age group etc.

Lies, damn lies and statistics.
btw can you include the 10-17 age groups, if you have them.

causal

dewsbury

Some good points about lies, damn, lies etc.

Here are the full stats. for 1999 (as per CSO).

0-5 years - 7 deaths
6-9 years - 8
10-14 years - 8 deaths
15-17 years - 15 deaths
18-20 years - 56
21-24 years - 45
25-34 years - 80
35-44 years - 43
45-54 years - 37

Perhaps none of those children in the zero to 9 ages bracket actually died because they were not strapped in. I.e. the child may not have been in a car at all - perhaps the child was a pedestrian. Or the child may have been strapped in but the crash was at high speed??. The CSO does not specify this level of detail.

So consider it perfectly possible that ZERO children were actually killed due to not being strapped in . Compare this to the older groups.

....perspective..perspective...perspective

MrPudding

dewsbury wrote:

So consider it perfectly possible that ZERO children were actually killed due to not being strapped in....

So what? Nobody has ever tried to murder me. Does murder really have to be illegal?

The figures you show are from 1999, even back then there was a huge push to have kids restrained.

I remember when I was young, I was rarely restrained, I did manage to survive but as someone pointed out there was a lot less traffic and probably a lot less accidents compared to now.

I think I remember you from an earlier discussion on the Motors board. I appreciate that you are pretty much anti-seatbelt full stop and do not see the point. Fair enough. If you don't want to wear a seatbelt I don't care, you are an adult and you have made, in your opinion, an informed decision.

Children are not in a position to make that choice themselves. Their parents or guardians need to make that choice for them, and they have to understand that they may be wrong.

I do not understand how anyone could think that having a child unrestrained in a car could not be dangerous. I would guess that the chance of an unrestrained child surviving any crash over 20MPH woul dbe aproximately 0.

MrP

MrPudding

dewsbury wrote:

So consider it perfectly possible that ZERO children were actually killed due to not being strapped in . Compare this to the older groups.

....perspective..perspective...perspective

Actually this reminds me of something else. Remember the All the trouble we were supposed to have when the year changed from 1999 to 2000. There was going to be chaos. Planes falling from the SKY, knashing of teeth and all that. Companies spent millions sorting stuff out. 2000 came and....... nothing. Nada, no trouble at all. Immediately people shouting about how it was all bullsh1t and a waste of money. They never actually considered that the reason there was no trouble was because of all the money spent and the work carried out.

Did you ever consider that there are so few deaths of children in car crashes *because* such a big deal is made out of it?

MrP

RainyDay

dewsbury wrote:

Some good points about lies, damn, lies etc.

Here are the full stats. for 1999 (as per CSO).

0-5 years - 7 deaths
6-9 years - 8
10-14 years - 8 deaths
15-17 years - 15 deaths
18-20 years - 56
21-24 years - 45
25-34 years - 80
35-44 years - 43
45-54 years - 37

Perhaps none of those children in the zero to 9 ages bracket actually died because they were not strapped in. I.e. the child may not have been in a car at all - perhaps the child was a pedestrian. Or the child may have been strapped in but the crash was at high speed??. The CSO does not specify this level of detail.

So consider it perfectly possible that ZERO children were actually killed due to not being strapped in . Compare this to the older groups.

....perspective..perspective...perspective

So is 7 child deaths a year acceptable to you? or 10? or 50? Why did you omit the 'injured' statistics from your comments? Are the 274 children under 5 injured in road accidents in 2000 of any concern to you? Or the 247 children from 6-9 injured in 2000? Have you given any serious thought to the devastating impact that the death of a child will have on a family? This will almost certainly ruin the lives of both parents, or at very least, ruin the couple of years immediately following the accident and cast a gloomy, dark shadow over the rest of their lives.

Given that all it takes to save lives and reduce injury is to secure the child in an appropriately sized car seat or seat belt, the call for perspective sounds fairly hollow to me.

Kernel32

I would be interested to know how many in the 15+ range were wearing seatbelts. Its not just about protecting children, its about building good habits for later on in life. Children learn just about everything from their parents and care givers. If you make a point of strapping them in and explaining why being belted up is important then it seems more likely to me they will wear seatbelts when they start to drive. The end result is that all the numbers come down.

causal

dewsbury wrote:

Some good points about lies, damn, lies etc.
<snip>
So consider it perfectly possible that ZERO children were actually killed due to not being strapped in . Compare this to the older groups.

....perspective..perspective...perspective

By your own logic, we could equally say:
So consider it perfectly possible that ALL 38 children were actually killed due to not being strapped in . Compare this to the older groups where it is perfectly possible that ZERO adults were actually killed due to not being strapped in .
- while all that is possible, it's improbable. And the point is - Don't play percentages with childrens safety.

causal

gubby

God ye are all wonderful.. big swing. I hope ye all realize there is more to parenting than keeping kids safe in a car. and to the person who tells the kids that the car wont start till they are tied in... I would love to know what you will do when they start telling you lies!!!
I hate lies.
I just tell my granddaughter that I wont start the care till she is safe!!

causal

*spots chip on gubbys shoulder*

causal

Shabadu

gubby wrote:

God ye are all wonderful.. big swing. I hope ye all realize there is more to parenting than keeping kids safe in a car. and to the person who tells the kids that the car wont start till they are tied in... I would love to know what you will do when they start telling you lies!!!
I hate lies.
I just tell my granddaughter that I wont start the care till she is safe!!

So you didn't have Santa for your kids then?

MrPudding

gubby wrote:

God ye are all wonderful.. big swing. I hope ye all realize there is more to parenting than keeping kids safe in a car.

OK, let me see if I get your point. You are saying there is more to parenting than keeping kids safe in a car. As a parent I would have to agree with you there. There is a lot more to it. That is kind of where I lose your point. Are you saying that because there is more to parenting than keeping kids safe in cars that we should ignore keeping them safe in cars and work on the other stuff?

What do you suggest? Concentrate on the other stuff, forget about restraining them in the car and just squeeze out another one if the one you have ends up flying through the windscreen?

We can't keep our kids safe all the time. At lot of the dangers they will face are beyond out control. Having them properly restrained in a car is one that we can control so why not control it?

MrP

Ozzie

Glad my post caused such a discussion. very shocked at some peoples excuses for letting kids sit unrestrained. doesnt fool me, only excuse is bad parenting, wise up. once picked up bits of a childs brain from the scene of an accident. i didnt cry till later, anger was my immediate reaction.

Please dont play semantics on this issue

Be safe, keep your kids safer.

Yavvy

I see no chip .. I see perfect logic... There is a hell of a lot more to parenting but saftey must be a major concern.

I have a question.. about child saftey in a car. you know those attachment seat belts they have for mothers laps on planes.. have they ever been accepted in cars. what about a baby harnessess they must be as safe as a child seat when the parent is secure ?

im just thinking are there options for younger children 1-10 months say , when i had a car I really didnt like the britax graco baby seat we had.. eventually got rid of the car but im getting another car and another Baby !! so just thinking about options .

causal

Alany wrote:

what about a baby harnessess they must be as safe as a child seat when the parent is secure ?

What do you mean by baby harness? The harness that a parent straps on to hold a child (like a rucksack)? If so, it's like asking if a wet paper bag is suitable for base jumping !

Best child seat is ISOFIX
Available for Newborns " Birth to 13kg (Birth to approximately 9 to 12 months)"
and 8 months to 4 years .

They're about €300, but imho well worth it

causal

Hobbes

Shabadu wrote:

Please tell me you're joking- I seriously feel like crying after reading this.

I can't believe someone would actually do that.

Kernel32

Alany wrote:

I see no chip .. I see perfect logic... There is a hell of a lot more to parenting but saftey must be a major concern.

I have a question.. about child saftey in a car. you know those attachment seat belts they have for mothers laps on planes.. have they ever been accepted in cars. what about a baby harnessess they must be as safe as a child seat when the parent is secure ?

im just thinking are there options for younger children 1-10 months say , when i had a car I really didnt like the britax graco baby seat we had.. eventually got rid of the car but im getting another car and another Baby !! so just thinking about options .

There is a lot more to parenting than simple safety in the car but does ensuring your child is secured really mean that other areas of parenting will suffer? I can't really think of any reason why it would. I would be interested in hearing of an example of how other areas of parenting would suffer due to ensuring car safety.

The attachment lap belt in an airplane is not a safe alternative. It was introduced many years ago by airlines to entice people to travel with young children and weren't ready to pay for a seat. We did that with our son several times before he was two, I regret it now. Travelling also became easier once I bit the bullet and got him his own seat and brought the car seat on board.

For the first three months when our son was born he screamed his head off in the car seat. It was very stressful. We were 45minutes from anywhere so every journey was a long journey. We couldn't understand it as we thought babies love the car. Eventually it stopped and he did a complete U-turn and would fall asleep within minutes of getting in the car seat. He is 2 and a half now and climbs into the backseat and pops himself in the car seat waiting to be buckled in. A short while back my wife was in a hurry picking him up from pre-school and forgot to buckle him up. Just as she was pulling away he let her know he wasn't strapped in. I thought it was great he did that. Just the routine of it makes him feel comfortable in the car. I can't think of any reason why you wouldn't use a car seat.

causal

Just came across this document on the National Safety Council website, which people who carry kids in cars might find informative:

Child Safety in Cars

It can be downloaded in .pdf format, and you can order a hardcopy by post.

arrive alive
causal

Cabaal

causal wrote:

Just came across this document on the National Safety Council website, which people who carry kids in cars might find informative:

Child Safety in Cars

It can be downloaded in .pdf format, and you can order a hardcopy by post.

Converted to html here
http://pdf2html.pootwerdie.com/pdf2html.php?url=http://www.nsc.ie/RoadSafety/Publications/File1,913,en.pdf&ID=98760
and Google html cached version
http://216.239.59.104/search?q=cache:http://www.nsc.ie/RoadSafety/Publications/File1,913,en.pdf

IANOC

Ozzie wrote:

some kids just are difficult and i agree they should be worn but some times if they fightin and you two minutes from home your shoutin they cryin some would tend to let it go.

I dont want to offend anyone but some kids are difficult and want to put their hands in the fire do we let that go? its time we recognised what we are "THE PARENTS"!
i am realistic enough to realise that some kids will try it on but you know as well as i do that some are habitual reoffenders. i find a firm " put it on or we will turn back" works. i am willing to do that regardless of where we are on our journey. im not perfect just not willing to risk their lives never mind a fine.

good one about the car not working without belts on!

sums it up for me
top man

Sleipnir

My Gf used to work in Mama's and Papa's (posh baby store for those who don't know)
The amount of people who used to buy car seats which were dangerously inappropriate for the child was unbelievable.
GF used to say "this seat is not for a baby of that age"
and the customer would say
"but it goes with the interior of my car so I'll take it"

One woman was off to France with her 3 month old baby so she got rid of the car seat and bought a booster seat (which is for a kid of around 11) because
"it will leave more space for luggage"
Using a booster seat for a baby which can't even sit up on their own? Utter stupidity.

I'm also still disgusted that the Buy & Sell still permit ads selling 2nd hand car seats.