# Why no babywearing while flying?



## Marcimama (Jan 6, 2007)

So, I took a short flight with my baby this week. I brought my ergo along as I didn't purchase her her own seat and it was a packed flight. I tought, "Well, at least she will be secured to me in case of turbulance." And also, a good friends dad is a commercial pilot and told his daughter to never fly with a lap baby and to always have them in a front pack/carrier if she could because he has seen babies harmed by turbulance.
The flight attendant jumped all over me for having her in it... she said, "She'll break in half if we crash" I wanted to laugh because my thought was, "We'll all probably break in half if we crash!" At first I said, "I would rather keep her in it, as I am her mother and guardian." She told me that I could get off the plane if I didn't take her out of it. Are you joking! Why was she so insistent... other than it is "regulations" Logically, I think it would be far better to keep my baby from flying out of my arms in mild turbulance than to worry what would happen in case of a crash.







:


----------



## chickabiddy (Jan 30, 2004)

If your baby is strapped to your chest, and you slam into the seat in front of you, your body will hit your baby with tons of force (150# body x 100mph change in speed = 15,000# of force).


----------



## Caneel (Jun 13, 2007)

Also, because you are wearing a lap belt only, the body would bend at the hips (like a hinge) and the upper body would make contact with the thighs, the baby would be smushed in between.


----------



## lovebug (Nov 2, 2004)

I don't get it! I love that they use 'if the plane crashes, xyz" they do not state for turbulence cases! Well VERY few planes end in a good result so I feel its more of a fear based rule, IMHO!

however, a baby seat is the safest!


----------



## sapphire_chan (May 2, 2005)

Chickabiddy
1. Your formula doesn't result in a unit of force measurement.
2. Adults are wearing seatbelts specifically to not be thrown into the seat in front of them.
?


----------



## sapphire_chan (May 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Caneel* 
Also, because you are wearing a lap belt only, the body would bend at the hips (like a hinge) and the upper body would make contact with the thighs, the baby would be smushed in between.

Now that's more sensible.

However, wouldn't that happen with a baby held in arms as well, plus the added risk of the baby flying out of the parents arms? And the stewardess was just fine with the OP holding her baby in her arms, it was using the carrier that was a problem


----------



## Mama Mko (Jul 26, 2007)

I wouldn't argue with the flight attendants as they can and will have you removed from the plane.

You can get a baby b'air and use that but it's not allowed for take-off and landing (though I've used it during those times on most flights. I've only been told to take it off a couple times).


----------



## roxyrox (Sep 11, 2006)

I think it's a stupid rule with no base. In most of the world (apart from US and Germany) they have lap belts for babies which attatch to the parents belt. I can't see this being much different to a sling. If the plane is at risk of crashing they tell you to assume a "brace" position which means your body won't _"hit your baby with tons of force (150# body x 100mph change in speed = 15,000# of force)."_







That is Very unaccurate scaremongering at best!
In turbulence, baby would be very safe in a sling (and probably a lot more happy!)


----------



## rhiandmoi (Apr 28, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rebeccajo* 
I wouldn't argue with the flight attendants as they can and will have you removed from the plane.

Yeah, and since the FA don't make the rules, debating them about the validity doesn't get you anywhere anyway.


----------



## lifeguard (May 12, 2008)

I don't feel it has any validity & it is so poorly "enforced" that just reinforces it to me. I've flown with ds 4 times now & not once have I been asked to remove him from the wrap.


----------



## pixels99 (Jul 8, 2009)

Most front carriers position the top of the child's head a little below your chin. If your head were to be thrown down, your chin would hit the top of LO's skull right about the soft spot (fontanel) if it's still there. There actually is a reason behind the regulations.


----------



## chickabiddy (Jan 30, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sapphire_chan* 
1. Your formula doesn't result in a unit of force measurement.

You're right -- I forgot to convert from newtons. The answer is 3,372 pounds/force, which is less than 15,000, but still not so good for a baby.

Quote:

2. Adults are wearing seatbelts specifically to not be thrown into the seat in front of them.
Adults are in lap belts only, which keeps them in the seat, but does not prevent their upper bodies from impacting the seat in front.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *roxyrox* 
If the plane is at risk of crashing they tell you to assume a "brace" position

The preventable danger is not from crashes, but from turbulence. There is not always enough warning to advise passengers to brace. A sling or wrap is not adequate protection against severe turbulence.


----------



## Quinalla (May 23, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *chickabiddy* 
The preventable danger is not from crashes, but from turbulence. There is not always enough warning to advise passengers to brace. A sling or wrap is not adequate protection against severe turbulence.

Is it any worse than holding a child in your lap with your arms though? I wouldn't think so, but I might be surprised









And even if you think the flight attendant is being ridiculous, no point in arguing if they get to the "Do it or get off the plane" point. Next time, I would try and clear it ahead of time with the airline and hopefully get something in writing you can bring with you onto the plane


----------



## Twinklefae (Dec 13, 2006)

A friend of mine used to be a FA and she was taught that it was because in case of major accident, in theory you could be pinned under something and they wouldn't be able to save your baby. (Not that that makes any sense, but that's what they told her during training.)


----------



## chickabiddy (Jan 30, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Quinalla* 
Is it any worse than holding a child in your lap with your arms though? I wouldn't think so, but I might be surprised









I believe the theory (which I do not agree with -- I am convinced that babywearing on planes is not safe, but I don't think babies in arms is much better) is that if the baby flies free, s/he might have a chance. Also, if there is any warning of turbulence, parents are advised to put the baby *under the seat in front of them*: presumably, that could be done more quickly if baby is not in a sling/wrap (as I wrote above, I'm kind of skeptical about this).


----------



## TheGirls (Jan 8, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *chickabiddy* 
Also, if there is any warning of turbulence, parents are advised to put the baby *under the seat in front of them*:

I don't believe this has been true for several decades now, at least not on any airlines I've flown on or according to any (current) flight attendants I've spoken to. Last time I flew I noticed several airlines now show how to hold the baby in case of turbulence in their seatback pamphlets. The pictures show holding a small infant up against your shoulder, facing you, and a larger infant sitting in your lap, facing you. You hold the infant with one arm and brace against the seat in front of you with the other arm.

All the flight attendants I've spoken to say that it is no longer suggested that you put the baby under the seat. Most had never even heard of it, and thought it was pretty preposterous.


----------



## Fujiko (Nov 11, 2006)

I've only ever heard of not being able to babywear during takeoff and landing, but not actually during the flight. I was always told to keep my dd out of the wrap during TO/L, but when we were in the air the flight attendants didn't care.


----------



## Marcimama (Jan 6, 2007)

I am still completely unconvinced that arms only is a safer alternative...

- If the force was great enough to harm a strapped in baby (in a frontpack) then the force would be great enough to launch a baby through the air and kill them. I would think it is logically MUCH safer to be restrained than to fear crushing a baby. (People and infants are injured by seat belts, airbags and carseats in crashes too, yet the potential risks of injury are worth the reality of death with out them.) Honestly, I suspicion they are only concerned with the adult or paying passengers.

- As for the "chin hitting the soft spot" I can understand it, but that would have to be a major force. My and many front packs can be shifted to the side. In fact, I did use mine today with a blanket over the top (hiding the carrier) and her head was no where near my chin. And again, if it were that major of a force, I think the baby would go flying and also, if you are holding a baby near your body their head will be under your chin, potentially. I really don't think that could be the reasoning...

- And for "if you were to be lodge in they wouldn't be able to get you out" that is very very hypothetical. Turbulence occurs often and regularly, why would they even worry about that...when so may things could happen in air? You could potentially be trapped in your seat by a seat belt...would that warrant not wearing it?

- They want you to put your baby under the seat in case of a crash? What kind of parent is going to do that? ...Why don't we just stow them in the over head bins for the flight?







Seriously, I still think a front pack is the safest choice...with out question.

I did want to say that I have only dealt with this problem 2 times... both on Frontier and in situations where we had no choice... both last minute flights to funerals. And both FA were very very rude about it. We flew to another funeral on Southwest and used the ergo with no comment at all... it confuses me why they were SO rude and acted like I was ignorant and harming my child, while on other flights they say nothing... really it isn't right to treat people that way if it isn't a all over regulation...

True... arguing doesn't help. Both times I just waited until we got in air and put the baby in the carrier with a blanket over us and pretended to be asleep when the FA walked by..


----------



## Mama Mko (Jul 26, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *chickabiddy* 
Also, if there is any warning of turbulence, parents are advised to put the baby *under the seat in front of them*: presumably, that could be done more quickly if baby is not in a sling/wrap (as I wrote above, I'm kind of skeptical about this).

This is what I was told I would have to do if we encountered turbulence:

http://www.deliciousbaby.com/journal...me-turbulence/

I don't think flight attendants tell people to put the baby under the seat anymore.


----------



## Marcimama (Jan 6, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *TheGirls* 
Last time I flew I noticed several airlines now show how to hold the baby in case of turbulence in their seatback pamphlets. The pictures show holding a small infant up against your shoulder, facing you, and a larger infant sitting in your lap, facing you. You hold the infant with one arm and brace against the seat in front of you with the other arm.

So... basically how they would be held in a wrap, sling or ergo...


----------



## chickabiddy (Jan 30, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *TheGirls* 
I don't believe this has been true for several decades now, at least not on any airlines I've flown on or according to any (current) flight attendants I've spoken to.

You may be right. It's what was taught in my CPST class, but I don't have personal experience.

Still, I don't believe that a carrier is necessarily more unsafe than a baby in arms. I just don't think either is safe.


----------



## kay4 (Nov 30, 2004)

I flew once with a 6 month old and had her in a front carrier. The FA told me that I couldn't wear her during take off or landing but the in between time I could.


----------



## SparklingGemini (Jan 3, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Fujiko* 
I've only ever heard of not being able to babywear during takeoff and landing, but not actually during the flight. I was always told to keep my dd out of the wrap during TO/L, but when we were in the air the flight attendants didn't care.

Me too.

I had DD in a ringsling on a flight when she was 15 months old. She had her own seat which she was buckled in for take-off and landing but ended up with a stomach bug on the way home and wouldn't sleep unless she was against mama, so I snuggled her in there and we both slept for an hour.







The FA checked on us a few times and never mentioned anything about DD being in a carrier.

I cannot see how having a baby in a sling or unstructured carrier is that different than having a baby in your arms with a blanket wrapped around you.


----------



## not now (Mar 12, 2007)

Meh, I wouldn't even question it. I'm not gonna mess with anyone willing able to throw me off my flight. Sometimes you just gotta follow the rules regardless of how stupid they may sound.


----------



## Twinklefae (Dec 13, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *SparklingGemini* 

I cannot see how having a baby in a sling or unstructured carrier is that different than having a baby in your arms with a blanket wrapped around you.


I asked my former FA friend about this too, and she said that they can't make different rules for people using more structured carriers. So the rules apply to everyone, from Baby Bjorns to wraps.


----------



## aprons_and_acorns (Sep 28, 2004)

What about if they have to make an evacuation of the plane? A baby in a structured carrier would be strapped to one person whereas a babe in arms could be passed to anyone who was able to exit safely. Just a thought, I'm not sure if it has any bearing on why the rule is there.


----------



## SparklingGemini (Jan 3, 2008)

I guess MY point is that I think its up to the discretion of the FA. I'm not sure there really _is_ a rule.

Because while it may have affected some, others have never been bothered; myself included.


----------



## mija y mijo (Dec 6, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Fujiko* 
I've only ever heard of not being able to babywear during takeoff and landing, but not actually during the flight. I was always told to keep my dd out of the wrap during TO/L, but when we were in the air the flight attendants didn't care.

Same here.


----------



## Ironica (Sep 11, 2005)

I've always only heard it for takeoff/landing (or if the fasten seatbelt sign is on, maybe) also.

I think there's a few reasons for this rule:

1) They've simulated crashes with babies in carseats and with babies in arms, but not with babies in every random carrier type on the market. They have NO IDEA what might happen, and while it might be better than in-arms, it also might be worse. It's a risk they can't take.

2) US tests of the belly belts that are popular on some European carriers show that lap children secured with them are more likely to be injured than those in-arms. It's not the same as a carrier, but it's the most similar circumstance that's actually been tested.

3) It's entirely possible that the carrier would dramatically worsen the nature of injuries. Your arms will give a LOT more in a crash; in an Ergo, for example, baby's head is free to flop about, but the body of the carrier will keep their torso with yours. That may result in much greater head excursion than the situation where their body *and* head will move a bit more naturally along with your arms.

4) FAA regulations prohibit it; they MAY NOT allow you to use a carrier during takeoff/landing, or risk their licensure. So if you don't like it, you have to take it up with the FAA... the flight attendant is in no position to negotiate it.


----------



## asoulunbound (May 16, 2006)

never been questioned about using a carrier except had to take her out at the metal detector. only flown twice w dd though.


----------



## Quinalla (May 23, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Ironica* 
1) They've simulated crashes with babies in carseats and with babies in arms, but not with babies in every random carrier type on the market. They have NO IDEA what might happen, and while it might be better than in-arms, it also might be worse. It's a risk they can't take.

4) FAA regulations prohibit it; they MAY NOT allow you to use a carrier during takeoff/landing, or risk their licensure. So if you don't like it, you have to take it up with the FAA... the flight attendant is in no position to negotiate it.

I'm guessing #1 is the reason for the #4 rule. If they haven't simulated it, then they don't feel comfortable allowing it. Good to know that is the FAA regulation for takeoff & landing and not just an imaginary rule made up on the spot, no amount of arguing will do you any good that's for sure.


----------



## NicoleCS (May 30, 2008)

From past experience - never argue with flight attendant's - It doesn't matter how irrational they are being - you'll simply never win.







: Don't even get me started...they thing that makes me so mad is that the airlines allow children under 2 to ride in the lap...if it's really that unsafe then my question is why????? It seems to me that they are sending mixed messages all the time...I am being told something different every time I fly with my girls.


----------



## charleysmama23 (Sep 28, 2008)

Oh my, I've flow with dd 3 times in her first year of life (so that's actually 10 separate flights on 3 separate airlines) and always had her in the Ergo on my front and never heard one word about it. I felt safest with her attached to me, for example if we made an emergency landing I'd be much better able to get us both off the plane with both of my hands free than if I was trying to keep hold of a squirmy babe. But since those flights I've decided it's best for everyone to have a seat and plan all future flights to include a separate seat for her (even if she's still under 2) and her baby brother, due Nov. Though these flying rules are incredibly aggravating because I've had family members/friends be told a lot of different stuff about car seats, boosters, carriers, etc. The FA/airlines are REALLY inconsistent.


----------



## coloradomama1 (Dec 31, 2006)

probably not the most popular idea on here but i ALWAYS wear my babies in a ring sling and just kind of hide the ring so it looks like they;re under a blanket during TO, landing and most of the flight actually. i haven't read the other posts but i personally am of the opinion that i'm much more worried about random turbulence than crashing in terms of my child's safety.


----------



## loraxc (Aug 14, 2003)

This just happened to me for the first time on our last flight. I'd been told no carriers during takeoff and landing before, but this was during flight. She didn't MAKE me take him out but she said something like, "I need to tell you that technically that's not allowed, but it's up to you." (I left him in.)

I have to say, I have been on planes with turbulence, and I think a baby would be much safer in a carrier--a big jolt could so easily make you open your arms/jump with surprise.


----------



## aja-belly (Oct 7, 2004)

the only time we've flown with lap babies was on our middle of the night flight home with marvel when she was a newborn. i had her in a pouch and nobody said anything. when we hit some turbulence they put on the seat belt sign and the fa asked me to put my bag under the seat. then she saw there was a baby in there and woke up the man in front of me and made us switch seats (peter and i were next to each other - both with lap babies) and i got a way too long lecture on how unsafe it was to have her in a pouch and to have two babies in one row (which they NEVER explained - i found out later that it is because they only have one extra oxygen mask per row).


----------



## sapphire_chan (May 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *chickabiddy* 
Adults are in lap belts only, which keeps them in the seat, but does not prevent their upper bodies from impacting the seat in front.

So people are smacking their faces against the seat in front of them on a regular basis? Because of turbulence?

Quote:


Originally Posted by *chickabiddy* 
The preventable danger is not from crashes, but from turbulence. There is not always enough warning to advise passengers to brace. A sling or wrap is not adequate protection against severe turbulence.

Really? A wrap, at least, holds a baby more securely than mama's arms and babies aren't thrown out of people's arms everytime there's turbulence.

And please don't link to the article about the woman who got injured by turbulence recently, she was walking around and that has nothing to do with what would happen to a firmly held infant.


----------



## sapphire_chan (May 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *chickabiddy* 
Also, if there is any warning of turbulence, parents are advised to put the baby *under the seat in front of them*: presumably, that could be done more quickly if baby is not in a sling/wrap (as I wrote above, I'm kind of skeptical about this).

As you should be, since that happened once on one flight in '89.


----------



## DahliaRW (Apr 16, 2005)

Actually, they no longer tell you to put the baby on the floor. That is old protocol. Now they tell you how to hold them.


----------



## chickabiddy (Jan 30, 2004)

I know. I already acknowledged that. Sorry.

And no, people are not injured due to turbulence "on a regular basis" -- just like some of us go our whole lives without being in a car crash but we still wear our seatbelts and restrain our kids.

It's not safe for kids not to be in their own seats on planes. Sometimes parents make that choice for their own reasons, and sometimes those reasons are pretty compelling, but that doesn't make it a safe choice.


----------



## kcstar (Mar 20, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Fujiko* 
I've only ever heard of not being able to babywear during takeoff and landing, but not actually during the flight. I was always told to keep my dd out of the wrap during TO/L, but when we were in the air the flight attendants didn't care.

Same here... but I think we only flew with him in arms the first trip, after that we used his car seat. I used the ring sling in flight, but had him out for takeoff and landing.

TO and Landing are the most frequent times for a crash, so I can see those cases.

But for in-flight turbulence, I would rather he be secured.


----------



## khaoskat (May 11, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Quinalla* 
Is it any worse than holding a child in your lap with your arms though? I wouldn't think so, but I might be surprised









And even if you think the flight attendant is being ridiculous, no point in arguing if they get to the "Do it or get off the plane" point. Next time, I would try and clear it ahead of time with the airline and hopefully get something in writing you can bring with you onto the plane

Under FAA rules and regulations you can only used FAA approved child carriers and restraints on an airline. A sling or front carrier or backpack carrier are not FAA approved. It is also the reason you cannot use a plain booster seat. You also cannot use a convertible carseat without the internal straps on an airline, they are not FAA approved for such use.

So, technically, any airline that allows a child to be attached to a person is violating FAA rules and regulations. If you go to any of the airlines web pages and look through their rules for traveling with children you will see that they all state you can only use an FAA approved child restraint on the plane.


----------



## Eclipsepearl (May 20, 2007)

I'm a former Flight Attendant. There are so many misconceptions in this thread I just had to respond. First of all, let me make this clear.

*Please NEVER wear your baby for take off and landing. It's dangerous and could kill your child since your body weighs more than theirs.*

So let's get that out of the way. Flying with a baby on your lap is unsafe. Strapped to you is _even more_ unsafe. The ONLY way to fly safely is to bring a car seat and have your child strapped in. If you opt to save money and put your baby in your lap, you are chancing it that nothing will go wrong because air travel is safe and statistically, that's likely.

You don't need a mathmatical calculation to prove that an adult weighs more than a child. If the adult, in foward impact falls on the baby, that baby has almost no chance of survival. If they fly from your arms, at least they might land somewhere and survive. We cringed when they explained this in training but it's true. In the Sioux City crash, one little girl landing in the overhead bin and survived. If she had been tied to her parent, it's doubtful...

YOU ARE MORE LIKELY TO SURVIVE THAN DIE IN A CRASH.

Please keep this in mind. Taking the attitude "We're all goners" might actually cause you to give up and not make the effort to get out of the aircraft. Yes, it's happened. You need to be proactive.

Yes, a baby carrier could be a hinderance during an evacution but the main reason it's unsafe is because of forward impact. Many foreign companies have dangerous "belly belts" which are still used because of political reasons. The European Union has tried to stop their use but it gets bogged down with compulsory car seat use and parents will never allow safe flying to be obligatory. They want to save money with babies on their laps. Germany has already banned belly belts and other contraptions on take-off and landing.

Some airlines require "lap babies" to be place on the floor in a prepared emergency landing. Not all. Turbulence, I've never heard of that! The big difference is that turbulence is not forward impact. Less force and a different movement. Not the same.

So if you decide to fly with your child on your lap, just remember to remove him or her for safety's sake. Please don't post that you "got away" with putting your child at risk this way. If you're concerned about safety, buy a seat and bring the car seat on board.

Please, _no more threads_ beretaing airline employees for just doing their jobs and for enforcing rules to help the security of your unsecured children.


----------



## mrs joe bubby (Mar 1, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Eclipsepearl* 
Please, _no more threads_ beretaing airline employees for just doing their jobs and for enforcing rules to help the security of your unsecured children.











Agreed, and I support this.


----------

