# Love And Logic: opinions?



## Elena'sMami (Jul 7, 2004)

I got as a gift, a book called Love and Logic for Early Childhood, by Charles Fay and ???. I read it and really liked it. It seems like a system that is simple enough to use, and it felt right to me. Has anyone else read it/used it/ and do you have any feedback to share? Thanks!


----------



## maya44 (Aug 3, 2004)

As I recall, this book is into consequences, big time. IMHO, it goes rather overboard in this direction.


----------



## Caroline248 (Nov 22, 2003)

I have the "Parenting with Love and Logic".. I use pieces of it...like the not forcing your child to wear a coat, let them realize they will be cold without it.
Some is a bit off (I think I remember them talking about your child like they were a dog???) but I really do love the idea of letting my children learn natural consequences and make little decisions at younger ages. Makes sense that it will enable them to make better bigger decisions at an older age.
I recently used this with my sons music lessons at school. He kept forgetting his instrument at home, and then would call me and ask me to bring it in. The first time I did, after that I said I couldn't, I had other things going on at the moment, but as soon as I was free I would run it over. Of course, I was "late" with the trombone and he had to sit out at practice. I just told him (in a sort of sympathetic type way) that really was too bad. He never forgot again, and I think it is because I let him fail, but in a minor way.
It also is good becasue you are never pushing "punishments" on your child, but they are getting good life lessons...
I am rambling, I am exhausted...

~C~


----------



## because (Sep 11, 2003)

My very mainstream SIL recommended it so I instantly put it on my do-not-read list... but now I'm a little curious.







:


----------



## Caroline248 (Nov 22, 2003)

You know, I went and grabbed the book and flipped through it again....I have to say I don't think I actually use their SPECIFIC things...just the thought behind it I guess...

Meaning....let the kids suffer natural consequences at a young age when the consequences are small, rather than making all their decisions for them and then "throwing them into the fire" as teenagers and expecting them to know how to make decisions then. I would rather my child be cold for not wearing a coat at 7 then dead for drinking and driving at 17...does that make sense?

~C~


----------



## Elena'sMami (Jul 7, 2004)

Yeah, I think the natural consequences focus was what I really liked about it most. I grew up in a home where I was never allowed to make decisions (much less mistakes) and therefore, never (1) learned how to make decisions and (2) lived with consequences. When I went to college, 3000 miles away from home, I was a disaster! Of course I did ALL the things I'd ever heard about but never even got to talk about with my folks. But enough OT.

Caroline248: I totally missed the part about talking to your child like s/he were a dog - do you remember where that is?

Thanks - I look forward to reading more feedback. We are at the age (past the age) where we need to have a good sense of how we are going to discipline!

RDN


----------



## User101 (Mar 3, 2002)

I used it when we were in a real discipline slump. I mean, I used it pretty much chapter and verse. Once I felt like we had all regained control of ourselves, I transitioned into using bits and pieces (like not engaging them in debate, and the natural consequences)
Annette


----------



## Autumnly (Aug 12, 2004)

I really liked this book. Of course, DD is 13 mos. so I haven't really used it too much of it. I liked the idea of treating your child like an individual capable of controlling their own destiny through their choices instead of molding them into what you want.

I think the part about the dog was saying that people act like their dogs are smarter than their kids. Meaning that they "expect" better behavior and understanding of their dogs than they do their children and how that shortchanges your children when you don't think they are as smart as your pet! At least that is the way I took it when I read that section.

Glad to come across this thread!

Autumn
Nora 11.05.04


----------



## Periwinkle (Feb 27, 2003)

Like all other child rearing or discipline books I've read, I got some good things out of it, but disagreed with a good portion too. We do try to do "natural consequences" but really only out of instinct and what seems to work, not some set of hard-and-fast rules. IMO it's works extremely well for toddlers, and if you can skim over the parts that talk about, e.g., letting a toddler go to bed hungry... it's a book most parents can pick up lots of good points from.


----------



## Caroline248 (Nov 22, 2003)

I am so inconsistant I need those rules to keep myself in line! It works better than anything has with my oldest son (9).

I do have a question that came up over the Holidays...We were playing a video "tournament" as a family the other day. My 5 year old DD kept taking the controls away from the other kids and generally being a pain in the butt (as 5 yo girls can!!). Logical consequence would be remover her from the game, right? But should she be punished by being left out of the family time? I am a bit torn on this one...we ended up just not letting her play a round, but she was still being very obnoxious to the other kids trying to play...Any thoughts?

~C~


----------



## MamaE (May 1, 2004)

Hoping some mamas are still interested in discussing this book as I just rec'd it for Christmas. I have a few thoughts after reading the book.

First off, some red flags:

This book advocates something called "room time" when a child is "misbehaving." The problem is that room time is encouraged from a very young age; the book gives an anecdote where, at 10 months, a baby is trotted off to her room after spitting out her carrots at lunch time. Does that raise red flags for anyone else? I don't believe a child this young could ever associate her actions with being left alone to cry in her room. The authors also state that the first time this technique is used, it may take up to an hour of room time before a child is "being sweet" and, therefore, ready to come out. If the child won't stay in the room, we are urged to lock the door or put a towel under it to jam it shut - yep, red flags for me!

Another issue I have is the idea of all these choices. It sounds like an attractive way to give our toddlers some control over their world, but upon closer examination many of the choices the book proposes really aren't choices at all. A smart toddler would catch on to this pretty quickly, I think. An example: at the park, a father asks his toddler if he wants to leave now or in 15 minutes. Of course, the father is OK with either, and of course, he knows what his toddler will choose. Is that a choice or just an attempt to manipulate the toddler (or young child) into believing he has control when, in reality, he has none whatsoever.

I was also a little concerned that the book cntains no references and is not reviewed (on the back cover) by anyone but parents and Love and Logic Facilitators. The book is also published by Love and Logic press. Picky? Perhaps, but I like to see sources and 3rd party recommendations if I am to believe a book contains legitimate parenting advice.

OK, some redeeming values:
The book does not advocate CIO. Hooray! The authors simply state that it breaks the trust cycle. I think we can all agree on that.

I also love the thread of empathic parenting carried throughout the book.

So, there's my 2 cents. Interested to hear what others think!


----------



## Enchanted (Nov 28, 2006)

I like the premise but have issues with some directions the authors go in. Plus, personally, I do not find their humour funny.

I think consequences for actions are realistic but I think tenderness is needed within such consequences.

Just my opinion.


----------



## gen25gen (Dec 29, 2004)

Had to post. I have a friend who uses this book and has taken Love and Logic classes. Now let me be fair and state clearly--I have not read the book myself. However, I am sooo turned off by her "love and logic" discipline techniques, this is likely why I have not read the book. Soooo...not sure if my the person I know who does this just uses her own interpretations or not.

Here is my beef:

She is big on room time. She was giving this kid what I call time outs before he was even old enough to crawl. Now that he is 18 months she puts him in his crib for a minute or two as the room time...well, the kid is having sleep issues now and doesn't want to go to his crib (go figure). So, now she has begun shutting him in his room....well, what is going to happen when he can open the door soon?

I am curious to know what other opinions are. Discipline is such a tricky issue I am always looking for help. I allow DS to learn some natural consequences (if I drop my toy Mommy isn't going to pick it up each time)...I offer a variety of food at mealtime, if he doesn't eat, I don't force the issue, etc. However, I am not going to let him go out in the freezing cold because he won't wear his coat, etc.

Having said this we've just started one minute time outs for our 21 month old...but we don't do it in his room or crib or high chair. We simply don't want to associate those with punishment. We have a playpen set up in a neutral area of the house and use that.


----------



## sagira (Mar 8, 2003)

I heard of a lady who practiced Love and Logic, which she recommended to me. Her children, three teenage daughters, are lovely people. However, I don't know how they got there as I don't know her that well yet or the method.

I do like Positive Time-Out: And 50 Other Ways to Avoid Power Struggles in the Home or Classroom because it has a positive spin in time-out in that it's:

-planned in advance, when there's no conflict
-chosen by the child
-respectful so the child can learn to calm himself down (with soft music, pillows, whatever the individual child needs)

Cheers,


----------



## Linda KS (Oct 30, 2004)

I haven't read the book. I'm very big on natural consequences, but most of the other things you are saying about the book just don't feel right for me. I'm not into punishments such as "room time" or manipulations such as fake choices.

About the video game -- could you sit with your DD far enough away from the other kids that she couldn't grab the controls but wasn't left out of the family time? I think the goal should be to help her develop impulse control so she (and everyone else) can enjoy playing together. Punishing (even if it's called "consequences") aren't going to do that.


----------



## Periwinkle (Feb 27, 2003)

See, now the choices thing works GREAT for us when dd and ds are in a NO! to everything phase. We don't do it all the time, but when we need it, it works wonders.

Let's take the example of me trying to put on dd's (2 years 7 months) winter coat to go outside in 15 degree weather when I have to run to the store to get food for supper...

Me: Ok honey time to put on your coat.
Dd: NO!
Me: It's very cold outside and you'll be very chilly without it.
Dd: NO! (runs away)
Me: (runs after her, coat in hand)....

Now a lot of people who don't have two or more kids







will say, well, you should plan ahead and never HAVE to go to the store, or maybe you could find a babysitter to stay with dd while you go to the store with ds, or maybe you could put her in her carseat (forcibly apparently) and then bundle a giant wool blanket around her nomad style. I kind of say "Nonsense" to this. There are some times in life when we have to do things we don't *want* to do. My dd (a bright, verbal 2 1/2 year old) is old enough IMO for me to differentiate between her needs and her wants at times like this.

I can kill 2 birds with one stone duirng these NO! moods by respecting her desire to assert herself AND my need to get the kids out the door to the grocery store already. Example:

Me: It's time to go grocery shopping and it's veeery chilly outside! Would you like to put your coat on here or by the front door? [or...now or in 2 minutes? or... by yourself or with my help? etc. etc.]
Dd: Here.
Me: OK, on it goes....

[no drama, no confrontations, no subjugating my entire family's needs to coddle the whims of a 2.5 year old]

I totally understand the desire not to manipulate a toddler, but I wonder to what extent we let our toddlers manipulate us by running the show and making us have to jump through burning hoops to get anything done. IMO it isn't necessarily better just because a toddler gets to choose his/her own path all the time, and when the time comes when we really DO have to leave the park, or get dressed, or whatever, the choices thing can work wonders at avoiding all kinds of nasties (assuming the child is old enough... prob. no younger than 2 at the absolute earliest).

***
Edited to add -- this has nothing to do with the Love and Logic book. I just find it works well for us when needed. As I said in my previous post, there was much in the book I found bothersome.


----------



## Caroline248 (Nov 22, 2003)

I think that with different age children, you have to do things much differently. I notice that most people responding have young children. If I told my ten year old "You can put your coat on now or two minutes from now" he would look at me like I was nuts. But I do give my three year old that choice.

As with anything, you take what works and throw away what doesn't. We send the kids to their room, but not as "punishment", more as down time. (Why don't you go play with your puzzles upstairs for a little while?). It works. And as your kids get older, things keep working or they don't...you have to go with the flow on that!

~C~


----------



## Dragonfly (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Periwinkle*
Me: It's time to go grocery shopping and it's veeery chilly outside! Would you like to put your coat on here or by the front door? [or...now or in 2 minutes? or... by yourself or with my help? etc. etc.]
Dd: Here.
Me: OK, on it goes....

I know this was just an example, but just want to make sure you know that children shouldn't be wearing coats in carseats. So, that knowledge might help you avoid the confrontation altogether.







:

That said, I like your method.







My son's answer to that, of course, would still be, "No coat!" I'm one to let him walk outside and figure it out for himself, though.

About Love & Logic - never read it. What do they call "natural consequences?" I know someone on here mentioned taking thrown toys away as a natural consequence when, really, it's a logical consequence. Is this the sort of thing that Love & Logic advocates?

Re: manipulation - I used to give ds "false" choices when he was younger and too little yet to truly "get" the differences in outcome. What he wanted was the power of decision-making (in a limited context; too much was overwhelming for him). I didn't really see it as manipulation; moreso just honoring what he and I both needed at the time. I do think that giving false choices later on is pretty disrespectful.


----------



## Seasons (Jun 10, 2004)

I share the OP's concern about the apparent lack of peer scientific review for "Love & Logic," and the overemphasis on consequences without regard for the age/logical reasoning ability of the child. I just Googled and couldn't find any peer reviews.

*General reader reviews:*

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...89716?v=glance

A negative review on this first site was:

Quote:

This book does a superb job of explaining the corrective discipline technique "logical consequences." Logical consequences basically makes the punishment fit the crime, or more aptly--here, to let the child suffer the effects of the error of his ways. However, if you use this as theprimary way of relating to your child, you are setting yourself up for sorrow. Besides, leaving a pre-teen downtown for five hours because he was more than three minutes late when you came to pick him up, as the authors recommend, borders on abuse, if not at least asking for someone to kidnap them... A child dealt with so matter-of-factly in virtually all situations will quickly come to the conclusion that you don't give a darn about him or his feelings, which can be delicate. I think the tactics in this book have their place in loving, effective parenting, but--be careful not to add too much salt to the cake batter, per se--things won't come out right. Besides, Christ knew (and He'd be the one to ask!) that the only way to command obedience is through unconditional love. If a child truly feels loved by his parents, he would be loathe to do anything to offend them, because he loves them so deeply. For an expansion of this concept, I highly recommend "How to Really Love Your Child," an old book but a gem, nevertheless. As for "Parenting with Love and Logic," read it, but take it with a grain--or two or three--of salt.
http://search.barnesandnoble.com/boo...=9780891093114

http://santa.crosswinds.net/08910931...nsibility.html

A negative review on this last site was:

Quote:

Summary: Not for my family
Comment: Parenting with love and Logic was extremely disappointing to me. I am in the process filling out adoption paperwork for a special needs child. the ideas of (as examples stated in this book) putting my child in the basement when they are having a tantrum and harming themselves, or of denying my child supper because he neglected to feed the cat by 5 PM (on the basis of "Mommy feeds 3 mouths. Since you didn't feed the cat, tonight those 3 mouths are Mommy, Daddy and the cat) are appalling. Many examples involved enlisting friends who would be willing to follow your children home after you put them out of the car, were willing to stay overnight at your home (after your child's waking you up in the middle of the night prompted you and your spouse to go to a hotel) or to hang around the store/mall waiting to see if your child would misbehave, so you could call them and have them take the child home. This book operates on the assumption that children are "Miniature Adults" and if that's your theory as well, perhaps this book will be of value to you.
*Earlier MDC threads on this subject:*
http://www.mothering.com/discussions...ght=love+logic
(says the authors used to be pro-spanking but recently changed)

http://www.mothering.com/discussions...ght=love+logic
(opinions = cheesy but helpful)

http://www.mothering.com/discussions...ght=love+logic
(some felt it was too harsh)

http://www.mothering.com/discussions...ght=love+logic
(disagreement whether helpful to use in eating battles)

http://www.mothering.com/discussions...ght=love+logic
(mild disagreement whether too "doggy")

http://www.mothering.com/discussions...ght=love+logic
(Trading Post thread)

There was also this thread, apparently critical of Love and Logic (as anti-AP), but the link doesn't work [I pasted the link from the first MDC thread I list here]:
http://www.mothering.com/discussion...threadid=115376

HTH! I haven't read it, myself, so can't offer my own opinions.


----------



## Enchanted (Nov 28, 2006)

I agree with previous posters that some of their techniques are just plain wrong. But children DO need to learn about consequences.

Manipulating children is awful. Kids know when they are being played. But honestly, I know many AP moms, just like some mainstream moms I know, who are a bit too manipulative for my tastes. I do not think being AP means that one is suddenly free from being manipulative.

I think we have to look at out own hearts and our own struggles sometimes. And sometimes taking a breather is good. I have called friends in the middle of a situation and asked "What do I do NOW?"









I think that ANY discipline method is going to have problems. That is why I do not subscribe to a particular method but I have asked mothers, whom I respect, who are older or who have older children I enjoy. I ask them about specific situations that I am struggling with.

I think that mothering in community is really good.


----------



## Jane (May 15, 2002)

I like Love and Logic because it gives actual phrases and sentences to use. It is a great book for parents who are already out of control. It prevents spanking by giving another option. I like that it makes parents think about what they want to do, rather than just resort to set punishments like spanking, smacking, or time out.
I don't have an issue with manipulation, so that's not my issue to take on. The choices offered are real choices, though. When you tell a child something manipulative like now or in 10 minutes, you are outlining that are flexible and that's how far you go. I like living in a gray world, not black and white. It's giving more information rather than less, so I think it is less manipulative than offering no choice. But I know lots of moms disagree. But I don't think this book is for people with really set ideas already. If you know what you want and it's working for you, why change?


----------



## Enchanted (Nov 28, 2006)

Apricot said:


> I like Love and Logic because it gives actual phrases and sentences to use. It is a great book for parents who are already out of control. It prevents spanking by giving another option. I like that it makes parents think about what they want to do, rather than just resort to set punishments like spanking, smacking, or time out.
> 
> 
> > Ah, yes. Very good point.


----------



## Caroline248 (Nov 22, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Apricot*
. But I know lots of moms disagree. But I don't think this book is for people with really set ideas already. If you know what you want and it's working for you, why change?


Do you think too that a lot of the moms responding are moms of younger children? I see me doing lots of things now with my oldest that I never would have dreamed of doing when he was a baby or toddler....and I think that having four kids has changed my perception a lot since I was a new mom. Maybe we loose some of our ideals along the way of day to day stuff...or maybe we see that our kids aren't as "fragile"? I don't know....but I can agree that if you told me 8 years ago I would let my preciouse little 18 month old go outside w/o a coat and be cold..I would have been horrified. Now, I really don't get bothered by that, it seems so trivial. Maybe I have become a different kind of mom than I set out to be.,,.

~C~


----------



## Linda KS (Oct 30, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragonfly*
I'm one to let him walk outside and figure it out for himself, though.

Same here. This is one place where natural consequences work well. Kids really don't have to walk outside with no coat when it is bitter cold very many times to learn that a coat is a lovely thing. Mittens, too. And a hat.

For example, when my older DD was 3 we had to take the dog to the vet and she refused to get dressed, so I took her in her nightgown. Everybody told her how cute she was and was really embarressed to bring so much attention to herself so she never did that again. When my younger DD was 2 we were at the park on a hot day she refused to put on her shoes before we went to the car. The pavement burnt her feet so after taking one step, she sat down on the curb and put on her shoes.

The thing is, if you manipulate your tot into stuff like getting dressed, wearing a coat, etc, they learn NOTHING. Nothing. If you let them learn WHY these things are a good idea, then you don't have to spend years figuring out new and better ways to get them to do them. They just do them because life is better for them that way. They are warm. People don't look at them funny. Their feet don't get burned. This is the whole point of natural consequences.

It takes the willingness to let a child get be uncomfortable and the willingness to let other people look at you like you are a bad mommy.









I would never say that you should just stay home and be bossed around by a 2 year old, that is silly. I would tell my DD that it was time to go and that she needed her coat (hand it to her if she is too short to get it herself). Let her put it on or carry it or give her help with buttons if she wants it, but then just go to the store. If it is truly cold outside, she will want it eventually.

There are some things that the natural consequences would be to great to allow my child to suffer -- the natural consequences for not flossing, for example, are very removed from the act, so skipping flossing so the child can see why we floss wouldn't work. None the less, even in those circumstances I didn't manipulate my kids. I was straight and honest with them.

I believe that kids learn to treat others the way they are treated, so if a child is manipulated, I think they learn to manipulate.


----------



## Jane (May 15, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Caroline248*
Do you think too that a lot of the moms responding are moms of younger children? I see me doing lots of things now with my oldest that I never would have dreamed of doing when he was a baby or toddler....


Quote:

Maybe I have become a different kind of mom than I set out to be.,,.
I do think that you learn to not sweat the small stuff, eventually. Or at least better identify what is the small stuff.








I don't think it matters if you are a different kind of mom, as long as you think you are a good mom.


----------



## Periwinkle (Feb 27, 2003)

I think this concern about manipulating kids is kind of overblown for this audience? I think no one here is manipulating their kids like I mean when I use that term anyway. Asking a child if they want to put on their church clothes in the bedroom or in the hall (or now or in 5 minutes) IMO isn't manipulating them, it's allowing them to control their world with boundaries. Since when have boundaries for a 2 year-old been questionnable?







I can't imagine bringing my child to church in a diaper because it would be highly disrespectful to do so. Plus, who's manipulating who there... who's in control in that situation (the child) and why is that necessarily so much better than the parent being in control? Like a toddler is going to learn that wearing a diaper to church is disrespectful? I don't think so -- waaay outside of their level of mental comprehension (empathy etc.) My toddlers would love to go to church in a diaper most weeks!!

I also have gravitated toward natural consequences when it makes sense (which is much more often than choices). Just that choices are a nice tool to have in the toolbox too to avoid WWIII.


----------



## Caroline248 (Nov 22, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Linda KS*

There are some things that the natural consequences would be to great to allow my child to suffer -- the natural consequences for not flossing, for example, are very removed from the act, so skipping flossing so the child can see why we floss wouldn't work. None the less, even in those circumstances I didn't manipulate my kids. I was straight and honest with them.

.


Now, I think the point of starting the natural consequences young would be exactly for this...if you have let them learn on little thinkgs (coat/no coat...eat dinner/not eat dinner) you have a better "backing" when you say flossing (or whatever) is important. What I mean is, if your child sees that you are correct when you say he will be cols w/o a coat, he may be more inclined to listen when you say flossing is important.

Again, I am coming at this from the point of a parent of an almost ten year old. I really think that moms of one or two toddlers would be looking at this from a different view. I looked at things from the same view 8 years ago!!

If you define manipulating as trying to control the situation, than heck yeah I manipulate. I am the parent. I do know best. My job is to do the best. I need to be "in control" of my kids. I can do that the more respectful way, or I can be a dictator. When it comes down to it, I want to be the "nice mommy", but not the "friend mommy".

~C~


----------



## Linda KS (Oct 30, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Caroline248*
Now, I think the point of starting the natural consequences young would be exactly for this...if you have let them learn on little thinkgs (coat/no coat...eat dinner/not eat dinner) you have a better "backing" when you say flossing (or whatever) is important. What I mean is, if your child sees that you are correct when you say he will be cols w/o a coat, he may be more inclined to listen when you say flossing is important.









well put!

I also think it is important to avoid power stuggles so that kids are free to make their decisions without feeling like that winning or loosing. I know kids who are the same ages as mine who still get into power struggles with their moms over stuff like coats. They would rather be cold than let mom win by being right. Since it has never been a power struggle for my kids, they are free to make their choice without it being about winning or loosing. When they were tots, I would carry their coats with me so they could put them on when they realized they needed them. As they got bigger that changed to them being responsible for bringing their own coats "just in case."

If we say things matter that really don't, our kids quickly figure it out and learn that we are not a reliable source of information. I feel that it is imperative that I keep my list of things that I control for my children as short as possible so that they know that what I say is important.

Most the little kids I know really don't believe their parents about what is safe and not safe and I think part of the reason is because parents waste their clout on stuff that doesn't matter or that kids could easily figure out for themselves.

Quote:

If you define manipulating as trying to control the situation, than heck yeah I manipulate.
I don't think they are the same. There are things that I feel the need to control, but I'm not manipulative about it. I am direct, honest and authentic. "Manipulate" means to control by being devious or shrewed. I don't do that.

Quote:

I am the parent. I do know best. My job is to do the best. I need to be "in control" of my kids. I can do that the more respectful way, or I can be a dictator. When it comes down to it, I want to be the "nice mommy", but not the "friend mommy".
I agree. It's just that my list of what I need to control is much shorter than most moms. I think the question isn't just "how do we control the things that we have to control and stay respectful of our kids?" but also, "what things do we need to control?" and "What are the best ways to teach children to be self controlled?"

If choices work for you and that feels right to you, then that is what you should do. I think they can be part of GD. They never felt right to me, so that isn't what we did. We are past this stuff now and I'm happy with how it has worked out for my kids. They want to dress for the weather and in ways that make sense for where we are going and what we will be doing.


----------



## ShannonCC (Apr 11, 2002)

I haven't read the book but I wanted to comment on something.

I let my kids go out without coats. I just don't think it's worth a fight and, like has been stated, if it's really cold, they will decide to put it on pretty quickly. However, despite doing this since she was old enough to say no to the coat (toddler) my dd is 6 she still hasn't learned :LOL I still think letting them out without a coat and figuring it out on their own is the way to go (unless you are in the Arctic or someplace! - but I didn't even argue last week in the teens with wind chill below 0 - just that much faster they decide to put it on







) I just wanted to point out that not all kids are the same.


----------



## Meli65 (Apr 29, 2002)

You can't put kids in carseats with coats on.....?

That's a first for me. What's that about?


----------



## Jane (May 15, 2002)

Having a coat on means the straps have to be bigger/longer to go over the coat, too. Then, if an accident happened, the filling of the coat crushes down and the there is slack between the child and the straps, increasing the risk of injury.
The current recomendation is to put a blanket over the child instead of a coat on the child.

It also explains why the bucket-snap-in seats are more popular now. The bucket part stays toasty warm in the house, instead of being icy cold in the car. If you are putting a sleeper-clad child in it, with no coat, it's nice if the plastic is warm.


----------



## Caroline248 (Nov 22, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Apricot*
It also explains why the bucket-snap-in seats are more popular now. The bucket part stays toasty warm in the house, instead of being icy cold in the car. If you are putting a sleeper-clad child in it, with no coat, it's nice if the plastic is warm.


And you can get those creat bundle me things...the straps go through the bundle me and then you cover the baby with a zippered sleeping bag like thing.

~C~


----------

