# When Did you Forward Face?



## catarino (Dec 5, 2011)

Hi All,

My LO hates being in her carseat unless someone is in the back seat with her. We try not to drive great distances unless she is really sleepy and will fall asleep quickly. In CA babies must be at least 12 months old AND 20 lbs to be forward facing but I know many parents opt to keep kids rear facing for much longer.

I'm wondering when you decided to go with forward facing and why (especially if you LO was not a fan of the car seat)?

Thanks!


----------



## Maedze (Dec 16, 2008)

I had three miserable kids who hated the car seat as infants. HATED. IT. They were miserable and consequently, I drove as little as humanly possible, and cried along with them the rest of the time.

None of that made turning them forward facing at a time when they had a 500% increased risk of severe injuries or death worth it.

Sometimes kids hate things that are good for them. If your baby was trying to jam a butter knife into an electrical socket and cried when you took the knife away, you wouldn't give her the knife back to keep the peace.

Babies under two NEED to be rear facing. It is simply too dangerous to do it otherwise. The good news is, by two, they're usually just fine in the car.

My kids rear faced to 2.5 (older seats, smaller rear facing weight limits), 4 years, and 3.5 years, in descending order. The one I'm currently baking will likely be rear facing for 4-5 years, regardless of how much he or she hates the car.


----------



## catarino (Dec 5, 2011)

Thank you so much for your response!!! I can tell you feel my pain... I too have cried along with her when we've hit unexpected traffic...  I bought a top of the line carsear when we transitioned from the infant carseat to the toddler carseat which helped a bit but not nearly enough. I try to give her new toys for the car but she throws them on the seat next to her within 5 minutes and then starts to get upset... :/ I guess I have at least another 6 months of very short trips...


----------



## katelove (Apr 28, 2009)

I don't know how you feel about TV but we have a carseat hater and she is much happier now that we let her watch videos on the iPhone. We download stuff from iTunes. She is TV free the rest of the time and is very good about understanding that she only watches in the car. She's 18 months.


----------



## Friday13th (Jun 13, 2006)

I had a carseat hater too but shortly before he turned one we started giving him snacks in the car, puffs, cheerios, etc and a sippy cup. He's almost 18 months now, still rearfacing and totally happy in the car. Which is good since my personal RF minimum is 3 and I was worried for a while we'd have 3 years straight of purple faced, gagging, screaming.


----------



## McGucks (Nov 27, 2010)

I have had two children, both of whom hated carseats. With my older child, FF made no difference--he still hated it and would cry most of the time he was in a carseat, even if we were going on a long trip. It was terrible and, looking back, I really regret having taken trips to see my dad and step-mom. I should have explained the situation and given them the choice to travel to us (they lived 6 hours away). My younger child is 20 months old, weighs 30 pounds, and will stay RF until he his two (my understanding is that's the current safety recommendation).

I have learned to carry on insane conversations with him regarding the presence of trucks on the road, birds in the sky, and his toes. Music doesn't work with him in the car. What works is my non-stop comments, Oatios, water sippy cups (the only time he ever gets sippy cups), books, etc. It is exhausting sometimes.

If DH and I are driving together, I have learned how to car nurse. That helps a lot. We also paid a hundred bucks to get our back windows tinted so I'm not on display.


----------



## Maedze (Dec 16, 2008)

Caden, two is a minimum. The safety recommendation is that children MUST be rear facing till two (AAP) and that children over two but under 4 years who still FIT rear facing should remain that way until they no longer fit by height or weight (NHTSA.)

Of course, continuing to rear face after the fourth birthday is fine too. The important thing is that birth-four years stretch.


----------



## alittlesandy (Jan 20, 2010)

The AAP recommendations also say this:

"The 'age 2' recommendation is not a deadline, but rather a guideline to help parents decide when to make the transition," Dr. Durbin said. "Smaller children will benefit from remaining rear-facing longer, *while other children may reach the maximum height or weight before 2 years of age."*

http://www.aap.org/advocacy/releases/carseat2011.htm

The problem we had was that our son reached the maximum height and weight for rear-facing in the carseat we had (which we had researched for a long time before buying) when he was fifteen-months-old. We consulted our local fire department for advice, and they said it was unsafe for our son to be rear-facing beyond the maximum height and weight for that car seat. So we made the decision to turn him forward-facing. He is three now and nothing happened, thank god, but we need to keep in mind that parenting advice is not always "one size fits all," as the AAP acknowledges.


----------



## Maedze (Dec 16, 2008)

Unfortunately, you are misinterpreting the wording. THis does NOT MEAN a 1 year old is ok in a forward facing car seat. Your 15 month would have been very UNSAFE had you been unfortunate enough to be involved in a serious accident.

The wording is there to prevent parents from using an inappropriate seat beyond the limits to reach an age.

The only safe solution if your 15 month old outgrows his convertible (and either your child is enormous, or you had an infant only carrier, or you bought a convertible that is uniformly not recommended due to impractical size) is to buy a larger solution. Forward facing is not a safe or correct decision at that juncture.

This is not 'parenting advice'. This is physics.


----------



## alittlesandy (Jan 20, 2010)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Maedze*
> 
> Unfortunately, you are misinterpreting the wording. THis does NOT MEAN a 1 year old is ok in a forward facing car seat. Your 15 month would have been very UNSAFE had you been unfortunate enough to be involved in a serious accident.
> 
> ...


This is a large car seat, not a convertible. It's a full-size car seat designed to hold a child up to 70 lbs. One of the top recommended car seats in Consumer Reports. However, the warning label on the car seat clear states, "Not designed to be used in a rear-facing position with a child over 20 lbs."

http://www.britaxusa.com/learning-center/car-seats-101/car-seat-basics (see the section on forward-facing only seats)

I assumed their recommendations are based on physics 

ETA: Of course, we bought our seat three years ago. At that time, we could not find a seat that would allow rear-facing after 20 pounds. Since the recommendations have changed, they DO make seats that will rear face up to 35 pounds. I was just pointing out that parents should check the warning label on their car seat to make sure they are using it in the manufacturer's recommended way.


----------



## Maedze (Dec 16, 2008)

Ok, there's obviously massive confusion here, for you.

I'll try to pick the problems out one by one.

1. NO BRITAX CONVERTIBLE has EVER had a 20 lb maximum for rear facing. EVER. In the late 1990s it was 30 lbs. Then in the early 2000s it was bumped up to 33. 2005ish, 35. And now the new generation seats you just linked to go to 40. You clearly misread the warning label which says to never use in the forward facing position for a child under 20 lbs. Those two are COMPLETELY DIFFERENT statements. If your 15 month old was only just 20 lbs, you likely could have easily gotten another 1-2 years rear facing in that seat. Their recommendations are based on physics...and on people correctly reading and using the seats.

2. EVERY CONVERTIBLE ON THE MARKET in 2008 rear faced passed 20 pounds. (Even the Combi Zeus got bumped up to 33 lbs). Convertibles have not maxed out at 20 lbs rear facing in TWELVE YEARS. ( I hope you aren't mistaking my capitals for shouting. It's the lazy person's italics. This is really crucial stuff.)

3. Consumer Reports is a terrible source for car seat information, for a number of reasons. No CPST worth his or her salt would ever recommend consulting them for car seat information. I can elaborate on that if you're interested.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alittlesandy*
> 
> This is a large car seat, not a convertible. It's a full-size car seat designed to hold a child up to 70 lbs. One of the top recommended car seats in Consumer Reports. However, the warning label on the car seat clear states, "Not designed to be used in a rear-facing position with a child over 20 lbs."
> 
> ...


----------



## alittlesandy (Jan 20, 2010)

I'd love to see some links and sources.


----------



## Maedze (Dec 16, 2008)

On which, Consumer Reports?


----------



## leighi123 (Nov 14, 2007)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alittlesandy*
> 
> This is a large car seat, not a convertible. It's a full-size car seat designed to hold a child up to 70 lbs. One of the top recommended car seats in Consumer Reports. However, the warning label on the car seat clear states, "Not designed to be used in a rear-facing position with a child over 20 lbs."
> 
> ...


Which seat do you have that says that? I think you are misreading it somehow, because that doesn't make sense.

3 years ago there were LOTS of convertible carseats that rearfaced to 30, 33, and 35lbs, and soon after ones that rearfaced even to 40lbs, and now 45lbs. 3 yrs ago most infant only seats also rearfaced to at least 22lbs and some more. Perhaps you were looking at the minimum weight limit for turning forward facing, instead of the maximum weight limit for rearfacing?

The AAP has been recomending extended rearfacing for a long time (at least sense 2002, which is more than 3yrs ago), the wording has just changed some recently and the 40 and 45lb rearfacing seats have come out.

Also, consumer reports don't have anything to do with safety stats, all carseats, when used correctly, are equally safe.

OP - My son will be 4.5yrs old in January, and he is still rearfacing. He will be rearfacing until he reaches the height or weight limit on his seat (45lbs, and he has about 5-6" of torso height to gain, he is a tiny kid!), so he will likely be rearfacing to the age of 6 or so. I'm a carseat tech and I've seen crash tests, that is enough to convince me to rearface him as long as I possibly can. He HATED the car until he was about 2, but I'd much rather have an unhappy kid than one thats been internally decapitated from forward facing too soon. Installing his seat more upright helped quite a bit, and we also limited car time to what was strictly nessisary (rode bikes or walked when we could!)


----------



## sharon71 (May 27, 2005)

I am only going to answer based on my youngest child who is now 6,she rear-faced until she was 3.5 yrs old at which time she had reached both the weight and height limit of her Evenflo Triumph carseat.


----------



## leighi123 (Nov 14, 2007)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alittlesandy*
> 
> I'd love to see some links and sources.


On what?


----------



## alittlesandy (Jan 20, 2010)

Quote:



> Originally Posted by *leighi123*
> 
> On what?


This:

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Maedze*
> 
> Ok, there's obviously massive confusion here, for you.
> 
> ...


----------



## McGucks (Nov 27, 2010)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Maedze*
> 
> The safety recommendation is that children MUST be rear facing till two (AAP) and that children over two but under 4 years who still FIT rear facing should remain that way *until they no longer fit by height or weight (NHTSA.)*


Maedze: Is the height/weight recommendation relative to the child or the car seat? I'm confused. Thanks for clarifying.


----------



## ashleyhaugh (Jun 23, 2005)

my ds was 3 years 5 months and 34lbs... i didnt know the next time we would get to weigh him again, and didnt want to push it







i wish i could turn him back around, because he gets carsick forward facing, but i cant afford a radian. he's 4 yrs and 2 months now


----------



## Maedze (Dec 16, 2008)

On the whole thing? You're KIDDING, right? You want a source that tells you you didn't read your label correctly? Ok. Go out to your car. Read your label. The whole thing. Come back. There's your source.

You want a SOURCE that tells you that seats in 2008 went past 20 lbs rear facing? Good heavens. It's common knowledge. If you feel the need, you could call Graco, and Evenflo, and Chicco, and Britax, and Sunshine Kids, and Dorel Juvenile Products, and Recaro and just ASK them.

I've been doing this for a while. It's not a big deep mystery that was concealed from the common folk or anything. When my oldest was born, in 2004, every seat available went to at least 30 lbs.

In 2008, my 32 lb daughter was rear facing in a Britax Boulevard. I'm a technician. I didn't accidentally put her in a Britax seat that goes to 20 lbs (because, you know, they never existed) for kicks and giggles.

By the way, now that I know you thought your 20 lb child had to be forward facing based on the advice you received from the fire department (Why did you call the fire department?) I also know you didn't talk to an actual CPST.


----------



## Maedze (Dec 16, 2008)

Both? The height and weight max are set by the restraint (so, for example, a Safety First Complete Air has a 40 lb rear facing max, and a 40 " rear facing max.) If your child is within those limits, he should ride rear facing. If your three year old is 35 lbs and 36", the correct way to use the Complete Air is in the rear facing mode. If he's 41 lbs, you'd have to use it forward facing. Did I explain that better? 

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *caedenmomma*
> 
> Maedze: Is the height/weight recommendation relative to the child or the car seat? I'm confused. Thanks for clarifying.


----------



## alittlesandy (Jan 20, 2010)




----------



## Maedze (Dec 16, 2008)

That is not a Britax label. And it is not the label for the rear facing function of the seat. Try again.


----------



## alittlesandy (Jan 20, 2010)

This is my car seat. I never said I had a Britax. I was showing their website to show that they don't have a rear-facing car seat that goes over 35 pounds.

Our carseat is an Evenflo, and it was the best one we could afford.


----------



## Maedze (Dec 16, 2008)

What? Did you even read the site you linked to? All of Britax's second gen convertibles go to 40 lbs rear facing. PLEASE actually read your source. And your manual. And your labels.

If you go out and read the CORRECT label you will see that depending on which seat you had it goes to either 30 or 35. Based on your label I'd say you have a Titan or a Tribute.


----------



## alittlesandy (Jan 20, 2010)

I read my label, which said not to rear-face after 20 pounds. Did you read my label?


----------



## Boot (Jan 22, 2008)

To be fair, I can see how the wording on that label can be misinterpreted but what it means is 'don't forward face your infant if they weigh less than 20lb'. Anyway, your son is fine so don't beat yourself up about it.


----------



## leighi123 (Nov 14, 2007)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alittlesandy*
> 
> This is my car seat. I never said I had a Britax. I was showing their website to show that they don't have a rear-facing car seat that goes over 35 pounds.
> 
> Our carseat is an Evenflo, and it was the best one we could afford.


Here is evenflo's website:

http://www.evenflo.com/product.aspx?id=148&pfid=191

It says:


Rear Facing for infants 5 to 35 lbs.
Forward Facing for infants 20 to 50 lbs.

That means a child can ride rearfacing from 5-35lbs, they can ride forward facing from 20-50lbs, if they are between 20-35lbs, and over 1yr old, they can ride rearfacing or forward facing.

Other evenflos have a forward facing weight limit of 40, 50 or 65lbs, They rearface to either 35 or 40lbs depending on the model. So a 20lb 15month old can rearface in ANY of evenflo's convertible seats, even the ones from 3yrs ago.


----------



## alittlesandy (Jan 20, 2010)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boot*
> 
> To be fair, I can see how the wording on that label can be misinterpreted but what it means is 'don't forward face your infant if they weigh less than 20lb'. Anyway, your son is fine so don't beat yourself up about it.


It says (exact words as you can see in the picture) "Use only in a rear-facing position with an infant weighing less than 20 lbs."

I really don't see how I'm misinterpreting this.


----------



## Maedze (Dec 16, 2008)

YOU ARE READING THE FORWARD FACING LABEL. GO READ YOUR REAR FACING LABEL.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alittlesandy*
> 
> I read my label, which said not to rear-face after 20 pounds. Did you read my label?


----------



## eclipse (Mar 13, 2003)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alittlesandy*
> 
> It says (exact words as you can see in the picture) "Use only in a rear-facing position with an infant weighing less than 20 lbs."
> 
> I really don't see how I'm misinterpreting this.


The opposite of that is "Don't use in a forward facing position with an infant weighing less than 20 lbs" not "Don't use in a rear facing position with an infant over 20 lbs." It is very, very poorly worded, and I understand why you read it the way you did.


----------



## lasciate (May 4, 2005)

I forwardface my children from birth. They need to learn to be tough right away, there's no coddling in this family.


----------



## leighi123 (Nov 14, 2007)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alittlesandy*
> 
> I read my label, which said not to rear-face after 20 pounds. Did you read my label?


Did you read the label on the other side? It says rearfacing for 5-35lbs (or to 40lbs depending on what seat you have)

The label you took a picture of says " use only in a rearfacing position when using for an infant less than 20lbs" It does NOT say "do not use rearfacing after 20lbs", it just is saying if they are less than 20lbs they HAVE to be rearfacing, after 20lbs you have the option of forward or rearfacing (for a child over 1).

Just because its the minimum doesn't mean its safe, my child is not a minimum, I go by what give him the maximum safety which is why he is rearfacing at 4yrs old. Here in florida, the law also says that a 3yr old does not need a carseat. Safe? I don't think so! My son was 25lbs on his 3rd birthday! But its legal.

Here is a story of an 18month old, 33lbs who was in an accident: http://www.joelsjourney.org/

Had he been rearfacing in this crash (which wasn't all that bad of a crash) he would likely not have had such awful injuries. Yes, your son is ok, but thats because you didn't get into a crash. If you had, the results could have been very different.


----------



## Maedze (Dec 16, 2008)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *eclipse*
> 
> The opposite of that is "Don't use in a forward facing position with an infant weighing less than 20 lbs" not "Don't use in a rear facing position with an infant over 20 lbs." It is very, very poorly worded, and I understand why you read it the way you did.


No, she's all ready had that explained to her and is choosing to ignore it.


----------



## Maedze (Dec 16, 2008)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lasciate*
> 
> I forwardface my children from birth. They need to learn to be tough right away, there's no coddling in this family.


I adore you.


----------



## leighi123 (Nov 14, 2007)

Check out the crash tests here: 



 (starting at 1:35 are the crash tests), and you can see what a HUGE difference it makes rearfacing vs forward facing in terms of how much damage is done to the child's neck, you can see from the video how much the kids heads move. Its VERY clear which is safer.


----------



## Boot (Jan 22, 2008)

It says 'Use only in a rear facing position when using it with an infant weighing less than 20lb'. It would have been clearer if they had switched the clauses i.e.' When using it with an infant weighing less than 20lb, use only in the rear facing position'. The equivalent rear facing label should give the actual weight for rear facing.


----------



## alittlesandy (Jan 20, 2010)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Maedze*
> 
> No, she's all ready had that explained to her and is choosing to ignore it.


I'm not ignoring it, but the rear-facing label says the same thing. I will take a picture of it when it stops snowing. I see how it can be misinterpreted. All I said in my original post was that some car seats do not allow rear-facing beyond a certain weight limit. I was just frustrated by being condescended to. I followed the recommendation of our local fire department, but I can see that I'm a total idiot. I never, ever, ever said that it wasn't safer to rear-face.

I apologize and will bow out now. Hope everyone has a great day.


----------



## eclipse (Mar 13, 2003)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Maedze*
> 
> No, she's all ready had that explained to her and is choosing to ignore it.


What, I'm supposed to read the whole thread before jumping in?


----------



## Maedze (Dec 16, 2008)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Boot*
> 
> It says 'Use only in a rear facing position when using it with an infant weighing less than 20lb'. It would have been clearer if they had switched the clauses i.e.' When using it with an infant weighing less than 20lb, use only in the rear facing position'. The equivalent rear facing label should give the actual weight for rear facing.


I agree, the wording is horrid, but it's required by NHTSA. AND the manufacture also writes the actual limits of the seat on the same sticker.


----------



## Maedze (Dec 16, 2008)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *eclipse*
> 
> What, I'm supposed to read the whole thread before jumping in?


----------



## chickabiddy (Jan 30, 2004)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alittlesandy*
> 
> This is my car seat. I never said I had a Britax. I was showing their website to show that they don't have a rear-facing car seat that goes over 35 pounds.
> 
> Our carseat is an Evenflo, and it was the best one we could afford.


As has been explained, your carseat rear-faces to at least 35#. An Evenflo is a fine, safe seat and it is even safer when it is used according to best practice standards, which means rear-facing to the limits.

Most Britax convertibles rear-face to 40#. I realize you don't have a Britax, and Britax is not the be-all and end-all of car seat safety, but they do have seats that rear-face to 40#.


----------



## pers (Jun 29, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alittlesandy*
> 
> *This is a large car seat, not a convertible.* It's a full-size car seat designed to hold a child up to 70 lbs. One of the top recommended car seats in Consumer Reports. However, the warning label on the car seat clear states, "Not designed to be used in a rear-facing position with a child over 20 lbs."
> 
> http://www.britaxusa.com/learning-center/car-seats-101/car-seat-basics *(see the section on forward-facing only seats)*


Which seat is it, exactly? A Britax, I assume, since you linked to a Britax page?

If it is a forward facing only seat, then you are correct, the minimum weight is twenty pounds and the seat can not be used reaf-facing at all with a child of any weight. However, this sort of seat is meant for older children. A fifteen month should be in a convertible which can rearface.

If it was a seat that can rearface or forward face, then it is a convertible seat. The wording on the seats is similar to what you quoted, but something more like "to be used rearfacing only under twenty pounds" which is very annoying for being confusing, and I really wish they'd fix it. A lot of people take that to mean it can only be used rf to twenty pounds and then must be turned forward, but that is not what it means. It actually means that under 20 pounds it can only be used in the rearfacing position, you can not turn it forward until at least 20 (or 22 for most Britax?) pounds, not that you can't continue to rearface beyond that. There is a bit of overlap when the seat is allowed to be used either way. If you check the label, it will tell you what the actual limit for rearfacing is.

The now long-expired Britax Marathon I bought for my daughter in 2003 rearfaced to 33 pounds, and there were several seats at the time that went to 30 or 33 pounds rf. I'm pretty sure by the time I was shopping for my now five year old, while there may have still been a seat or two around that had a 20 lb rf limit, I didn't see a single one on the shelf. I know that was the case when in 2009 when I was shopping for my youngest.

ETA: well, darn. I thought I hit post before I went to Costco, but came back and found it still sitting here, so posted... and there has been a page since then.


----------



## chickabiddy (Jan 30, 2004)

oops, double post, sorry


----------



## chickabiddy (Jan 30, 2004)

Alittlesandy, there seems to be some confusion.

The seat you have IS a convertible. It has a rear-facing limit of 35# and a forward-facing limit of 50#, not 70#.

Britax seats with 70# limits ARE convertibles with 40# rear-facing limits.

Britax seats that are NOT convertibles have 85# harness limits and do not rear-face at all.


----------



## MJB (Nov 28, 2009)

Kid #1: 15 mos. I didn't know any better (this was in 2004).

Kid #2: 2.5, when he hit the 33 lb. limit of his Radian (in 2008).

Kid #3: RFing at 1.5 and will probably not outgrow her seat RFing until 4+. I don't plan to turn her before then.


----------



## CTH3989 (Sep 28, 2006)

I turned my children at the age of 2.


----------



## sosurreal09 (Nov 20, 2009)

Didn't read the thread but do you have a mirror back there? (The kind so you can see her/her you?) That helped us a lot.


----------



## katelove (Apr 28, 2009)

Ok, so I just went out and read the label on my carseat. It is a Safe N Sound (Britax) Compaq Deluxe which is a convertible. It says "To be used only in a rearward facing position for a child weighing up to 12 kg." There is no other discussion of weight or height on the label. The forward facing maximum is 18kg. Can I use it rearfacing when my LO is over 12kg or not? Thanks.


----------



## Maedze (Dec 16, 2008)

Nope. Are you Australian? Unfortuantely Australia is lagging behind the US in keeping kids rear facing. 12 kilos is the max rear facing weight limit of you seat sadly.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *katelove*
> 
> Ok, so I just went out and read the label on my carseat. It is a Safe N Sound (Britax) Compaq Deluxe which is a convertible. It says "To be used only in a rearward facing position for a child weighing up to 12 kg." There is no other discussion of weight or height on the label. The forward facing maximum is 18kg. Can I use it rearfacing when my LO is over 12kg or not? Thanks.


----------



## Maedze (Dec 16, 2008)

Oh, look, your location says Australia. I'm so observant. LOL.


----------



## jocelyndale (Aug 28, 2006)

Back to the OP:

My son hated the carseat. We switched him to a rather plush convertible when he was 7mo, hoping the cushiness would help. We did more upright installs to get him at a better angle. He screamed and screamed.

So I took the bus or walked when possible. We saved car-necessary errands for times when someone could sit in back with kiddo--grocery shopping at night with DH, friends to come on trips to coffeeshops, etc. He still screamed, but I felt better knowing I was with him.

When he was two years old, he started tolerating rides of 15 minutes or so. Over that year, he started tolerating longer rides. He's now a fabulous traveler, aside from his backseat driving (which he did even when RF) and incessant questions about being there yet.

He RF until he was 4yo. I gave him the choice then and he flip flopped for awhile, which was fine. This past summer, he hit the weight limit on his carseat (2007 britax blvd, so 33lbs) and went FF fulltime.

We used the ipod, snacks, songs, you name it. I think part of his issue was not being able to see out. The seats are low in my sedan and the headwings on the blvd block a lot of the view. Once he was finally a bit taller, he could actually see out the windows a bit and enjoy the ride. I miss the RF days. Every time he makes a fire engine noise, the siren goes straight to my ears. Was better when his voice had to go to the back window and bounce back. And he complains about his feet/legs falling asleep now. Won't keep shoes on because they weigh down the legs. Really frustrating when it's pouring out or cold. I try to keep a pile of blankets on the floor in front of him for foot support, but they always end up kicked around.


----------



## katelove (Apr 28, 2009)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Maedze*
> 
> Nope. Are you Australian? Unfortuantely Australia is lagging behind the US in keeping kids rear facing. 12 kilos is the max rear facing weight limit of you seat sadly.


Thanks, that's what I though [sigh]. Yes we are lagging badly in this area. I don't know why, usually we're pretty good about safety stuff.


----------



## cristeen (Jan 20, 2007)

I flipped DS to FF shortly (days) after his 2nd birthday, when I realized he was 37 pounds in a 35 pound limit seat.


----------



## ThankfulMama (Dec 1, 2009)

Hi! I agree that the structure of the wording is not the best.

It says: "Use ONLY in a rear-facing position with an infant weighing less than 20 lbs." (caps mine)

*That means*: if kid is under 20lbs, must be rear-facing.

Sometimes it helps to really think carefully of what it is and is not saying, and sometimes breaking down the sentence or coming up with an alternative wording helps.

For example, it does not say "use in a rear-facing position ONLY with an infant weighing less than 20lbs" Now that means something entirely different.

*That sentence means*: if rear-facing, kid must be under 20lbs.

Wishing you all the best!!

ETA- BTW, DD is 2.5 and is still rear-facing. Not sure when I will turn her. With twins on the way around the time she will be almost 3 I'm not sure I can do 3RF with my current seats.


----------



## treehugginhippie (Nov 29, 2004)

5 yrs 3 mo


----------



## sunnygir1 (Oct 8, 2007)

It's only been a couple years, but I can't really remember why I did it. I think maybe dd outgrew her seat rear facing (we didn't have an extended rear facing kind of seat). I also didn't know how important it was. I actually did some reading and considered buying a seat to turn her back around but in the end I didn't. She was 2.5, I think, when we turned her ff. Ds is 2y 2.5m, and I intend to keep him rf longer that I did dd.


----------



## Megan73 (May 16, 2007)

I'm actually curious to see how long I'll be able to keep DS1 RF. He's a tall, slim almost 3.5-year-old in a 45-pound RF limit Radian. I assume he'll outgrow it by height long before he's 45 pounds.


----------



## sunnygir1 (Oct 8, 2007)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Megan73*
> 
> I'm actually curious to see how long I'll be able to keep DS1 RF. He's a tall, slim almost 3.5-year-old in a 45-pound RF limit Radian. I assume he'll outgrow it by height long before he's 45 pounds.


I think that's pretty standard. My kids have only ever outgrown car seats by height.


----------



## Devaskyla (Oct 5, 2003)

I picked 2 options. Ds1 was somewhere around 18mths. Bearing in mind that was in 2002/early 2003, I had him rear facing far longer than anyone else I knew of. I had to hunt & hunt to find a seat I could use rf'ing over 20lbs & I only managed to find 1 at the time, a crappy tray shield type. By th time ds2 came along, there were a few more seat options & I kept him rear facing until he was just over 2. With ds3, I would have liked to keep him rear facing longer, I even spent a fortune on a Radian (despite not owning a car, I need seats for when we drive with my mother), but it doesn't fit rear facing in my mother's car as it touches the seat back & the car's manual specifically forbids that. So, I turned him forward this summer at about 2 1/2 when he outgrew his Alpha Omega by height.


----------



## Super~Single~Mama (Sep 23, 2008)

My son was RF'd until 18months in his dad's car, and 2yo in my car. His dad and I have not been together since ds was 10mo - I tried REALLY hard to get his dad to RF him until 2yo, but 18mo was the best I could do. I don't own a car, but whenever I took DS in a car he was RF'ing until he was 2yo, and then he outgrew the RF on the carseat I own. If I ever buy my own car I will try to get a carseat that will RF him until he's much bigger, but I'm pretty sure that by then he will have outgrown most RF'ing carseats and we will just buy a really nice FF'ing harness that will last a long time.


----------



## CortLong (Jun 4, 2003)

With DD #1 we forward faced at 12 months (born in 2001)

With DD #2 we forward faced at 14 months (born in 2005)

With DS #1 we forward faced at 2 years (born in 2006)

With DD #3 we forward faced at 2 years (born in 2008)

With DS #2 we are Still rear facing at almost 2 1/2 years (born in 2009)


----------



## KaliShanti (Mar 23, 2008)

DS #1: 2.5 yrs (he outgrew his seat)

DD #2: Still RFing at 25 months old. Want to RF til 3 at least.


----------



## JudiAU (Jun 29, 2008)

DS was turned at around 20m because he outgrew his seat and their wasn't anything that would have kept him rf much longer. He was a big, tall boy. He'll remain in a four point harness until he outgrows everything on the market. Right now he is in a Graco nautilus which we like.

DD is 2y3m and is still rear-facing and will be until she outgrows her Radian. Same thing with nanny and grandmother. Tough.

I love her little legs and neck enough to deal with the complaining that we occasionally have. Tough.


----------

