# s/o Resonding to criticisms of "no coats in car seats"



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

I've recently mentioned the "no puffy coats in car seats" thing to a couple people. I'm wondering how one would respond to these criticisms of it.

- MIL said that she would be more worried about hypothermia in a child who got ejected from a car seat, than she would be worried about the straps being too loose. Now, we live in Vancouver- it RARELY gets below about 30F.

-BIL said that when he buckles his dd in, he compresses the coat and gets the straps tight. He's saying that even if it's looser than it would be without the coat, the coat itself wouldn't compress enough for the straps to be too loose WITH the coat on. (does that make sense?). So he's saying that she couldn't be ejected because, even if it's looser than it would be without the coat, the coat takes up some of the space.

So how would one respond to those ideas? The "debate" is over, but I'm mostly curious as to the best response. Just so I know hypothetically. Also, there could be a small chance the BIL brings it up again- I know he wants to do the safest thing, he just doesn't believe me that it isn't safe.

Also, as an aside- how about coats in boosters? If ds1 were to wear a coat in the booster, but not have the coat anywhere in between him and the belt, is that ok? I guess this would be similar to the "coat trick" in harnessed seats. The coat would still be behind him. Ok?


----------



## vbactivist (Oct 4, 2006)

What about adults with coats on? Wouldn't that be the same as a booster for a child?


----------



## KristyDi (Jun 5, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *DevaMajka* 
- MIL said that she would be more worried about hypothermia in a child who got ejected from a car seat, than she would be worried about the straps being too loose. Now, we live in Vancouver- it RARELY gets below about 30F.

Hypothermia is treatable. A broken neck or back/and or major head trauma is much less so. Of course the child could also be ejected into oncoming traffic, hypothermia really is a lesser concern than being struck by another vehicle.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *DevaMajka* 
-BIL said that when he buckles his dd in, he compresses the coat and gets the straps tight. He's saying that even if it's looser than it would be without the coat, the coat itself wouldn't compress enough for the straps to be too loose WITH the coat on. (does that make sense?). So he's saying that she couldn't be ejected because, even if it's looser than it would be without the coat, the coat takes up some of the space.

I don't care how strong your BIL is, he is not capable of producing force equal to the force of a major accident. The coat will compress more that he thinks possible. People don't just make this stuff up, they actually test it.


----------



## Maedze (Dec 16, 2008)

There's more at risk than just ejection. For every bit of slack in a harness introduced by bulky clothing, the head travels that much further in an impact.The higher the excursion, the greater the number of head and neck injuries. It's still possible to be severely injured without being ejected!


----------



## Wild Lupine (Jul 22, 2009)

As far as the compressibility issue, have them tighten the harness with the coat on, then take the coat off and see how tight the harness is. Then they'll be able to see if it is tight enough to prevent ejection and head/neck movements.

As far as the hypothermia issue, it is possible to keep kids warm enough without puffy coats. It was very cold here until a few days ago (15 degrees F) AND our car heater was on the fritz. We had a three hour round trip to make so I made sure the kids had hats and gloves on, put them in long undies and fleece, covered them in blankets, and they were fine. IF MIL doesn't want to use blankets, a fleece coat would work well, especially in Vancouver where it isn't super cold. Although if MIL is more worried about hypothermia she might be underestimating the impact forces of ejection. Unless she drives in places where it is so cold, and so few cars travel that the children would freeze to death before help came, injury would be a much, much bigger threat to their health than hypothermia. I used to know people who thought it was better to be ejected from a car than stuck in it, it was their rationale for not wearing seat belts, so maybe talking to MIL about how dangerous it is to be ejected from a car in an accident.


----------



## Adventuredad (Apr 23, 2008)

Someone even mentioning hypothermia as a risk in a ejection clearly has no idea about forces in a collision. Please strap child in as usual in a coat and then take of heavy coat and see how loose the straps are. This is less of an issue in a rear facing seat but it's a much larger issue in a forward facing seat due to ride down time.

Some people can't be convinced no matter what proof are offered. Sad but true.


----------



## chickabiddy (Jan 30, 2004)

Get one of those "space bags" -- the ones that you use a vacuum to suck the air out of. Put a puffy coat in and suck all the air out. Invite your BIL to manually compress the coat to the same size. He won't be able to.


----------



## jeminijad (Mar 27, 2009)

First of all, I am not advocating puffy coats in car seats!

But I do think that maybe the argument that the BIL makes is being misunderstood. He is acknowledging that he can't get the straps as tight as they would be on a coatless child. He is acknowledging that there will be compression greater than he can duplicate tugging on the adjuster strap.

The difference is that he believes that the thickness of the jacket, even very compressed as in a collision, will still increase the height/width of the child in such a way as to "fill" up some of the extra harness length. In other words, the child + coat "compressed" is bigger than the child alone.

Is this right, OP?

I don't have helpful suggestions for how to convince him, though. Maybe acknowledge that yes, the coat will fill a little bit of harness slack. Maybe ejection won't occur. But ANY extra room in the harness causes the increased head excursion that the techs talk about. I always find that acknowledging the merits in the other person's argument helps to eventually convince them of my point- certainly better than "oh some people just won't learn."

At least he is thinking and reasoning.


----------



## KayleeZoo (Apr 8, 2003)

Quote:

There's more at risk than just ejection. For every bit of slack in a harness introduced by bulky clothing, the head travels that much further in an impact.The higher the excursion, the greater the number of head and neck injuries. It's still possible to be severely injured without being ejected!
This. I had to explain it to my mom, who thought that as long as we made the straps tight enough so that baby wouldn't go flying in a collision, it was all good. A spinal cord injury is just as bad as being ejected!

That said, you just can't convince some people


----------



## writteninkursive (Feb 22, 2009)

Wouldn't _any_ clothing have some similar affect as the puffy coat? I mean, it's still providing space and could be compressed in an accident..?

My kids won't even keep their straps and harnesses ON! They just unbuckle them when I'm not looking. How the heck do you fix THAT problem?


----------



## RedPony (May 24, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *writteninkursive* 
My kids won't even keep their straps and harnesses ON! They just unbuckle them when I'm not looking. How the heck do you fix THAT problem?

Not go anywhere? Honestly, it's what I'd do. I haven't faced this yet, tho, so that's just my current thought. Give me a few years.


----------



## writteninkursive (Feb 22, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *RedPony* 
Not go anywhere? Honestly, it's what I'd do. I haven't faced this yet, tho, so that's just my current thought. Give me a few years.









Um well, that's not really very reasonable. Wow, life would be boring without going anywhere! Not to mention, we would never have groceries!


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Ah, head excursion. Never even thought of that. Or even knew it, actually.

So here's a question- is there more head excursion in a booster or a ff harnessed seat?

To make the debate even more interesting, he brought up (a few times) that harnessing was much safer than boostering. (perhaps implying that my 5yo 48lb boostered ds is not as safe as he should be. But I certainly don't think there was anything negative meant by it.)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *chickabiddy* 
Get one of those "space bags" -- the ones that you use a vacuum to suck the air out of. Put a puffy coat in and suck all the air out. Invite your BIL to manually compress the coat to the same size. He won't be able to.

That would have been a PERFECT thing to mention. It didn't come up again over Christmas, but if it ever comes up again, this is great.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *jeminijad* 
First of all, I am not advocating puffy coats in car seats!

But I do think that maybe the argument that the BIL makes is being misunderstood. He is acknowledging that he can't get the straps as tight as they would be on a coatless child. He is acknowledging that there will be compression greater than he can duplicate tugging on the adjuster strap.

The difference is that he believes that the thickness of the jacket, even very compressed as in a collision, will still increase the height/width of the child in such a way as to "fill" up some of the extra harness length. In other words, the child + coat "compressed" is bigger than the child alone.

Is this right, OP?

Yes, exactly.









I was kinda thrown off guard with BIL. I had just mentioned something about ds wearing a coat in a booster, which had nothing to do with BIL, and it became a discussion. I didn't even realize that it went from a "discussion" to a "debate" until he was sort of upset. I never meant to make him feel on the defense!


----------



## chickabiddy (Jan 30, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *DevaMajka* 
So here's a question- is there more head excursion in a booster or a ff harnessed seat?

That's a hard question to answer, because there's a lot of variation between seats and cars and kids. Assuming that the child can use a booster properly (age, size, maturity, good fit, etc.), I'd definitely use a booster over an *untethered* harnessed seat. I would probably pick a booster over a harnessed seat that sits high on a base. I'd not have a preference between a booster and a tethered baseless harnessed seat.


----------



## Roxswood (Jun 29, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *writteninkursive* 
Um well, that's not really very reasonable. Wow, life would be boring without going anywhere! Not to mention, we would never have groceries!

I had this issue with a child I nannied for and I stopped the car every time she took the harness off. We didn't go anywhere until she put it on, which was of course more effective when we were going somewhere she really wanted to go. She was almost 3y at the time. It took a while, and we actually planned some extra outings to nice places just in order to take the trip to teach her that lesson iyswim so we weren't pushed for time or obliged to be somewhere. Otherwise, no, I'm not driving with an unbelted child. Luckily in the UK I could order groceries online, and here in France I live walking distance from the grocery shop. Anywhere else we just wouldn't go. Bribery is good too. Carseat harnesses and seatbelts are SO important they override almost all other concerns and parenting ideals for me.


----------



## npl (Nov 29, 2008)

Still curious on the answer about compression in a regular seatbelt and booster seat - that's a factor in whether we get ds2 a booster or a nautilus.


----------

