This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Child safety seat article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
Legal requirements for child car seats and restraints in New Zealand was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 11 January 2013 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Child safety seat. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
The contents of the Infant car seat page were merged into Child safety seat on April 16, 2012. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
Note: We need a history of Child Safety Seats.
Mind you, I'm fond of the place, but the main article's awfully, er, Canadacentric--laws regarding child safety seats in different regions should be linked externally. Pity I'm not the man for it. Nhrenton 18:52, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
We didn't have any of this when I was a kid. back then rear seats didn't have those uncomfortable shoulder straps, windows rolled down all the way, and you could pull the belt out enough to fit an adult without it 'catching' and constricting you if you try to use it. Let's just admit it, cars are deathtraps. No amount of inconvenience is going to fix that.. and anyway if you get in an accident you might as well be dead because you can't afford car repairs -and- food.
Edited my prior comments in response to balls. Mommy0406 05:31, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
Mommy0406 05:27, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
How you present information can be wery important and in this case can aument fatal injuries instead of saving lifes. People alot of times only looks for quick information and act from what they quickly finds, so it is important that on a page like this you give the best recommendations possible first and most clearly. Hope you know that the best recommendations today is to follow the recommendations used in Sweden which recommends to seat the child facing backwards until 4 years old.
So I think it is important that this page is changed to give the recommendations to place the children facing backwards until 25 kg and/or 4 years (or as logg as possible).
Regarding the comment on Steven Levitt's database study that suggest it is better to place the children in the car seat with a normal belt. that study does not regard the best option (rear facing) because Steven did not have access to that data in his study. I refere to personal email conversation with Steven Levitt, where he replies that he (as many other) thought it was not possible to put a child rear facing up to 4 years old, it is time to inform the world of the safest way for the childrens sake.
Niklar ( talk) 13:12, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
references:
Cite error: There are <ref>
tags on this page without content in them (see the
help page).
1.Carlsson G, Norin H, Ysander L: Rearward-facing child seats – the safest car restraint for children? Accident Analysis and Prevention, 23(2-3):175-182, 1991
2. Kamrén B, von Koch M, Lie A, Tingvall C, Larsson S, Turbell T. The Protective Effect of Rearward Facing CRS. An Overview of possibilities and problems associated with child restrainf for children aged 0-3 years. Child Occupant Protection symposium, San Antonio, nov 1993. Society of Automotive engineers (SAE), Inc Warredale, PA. SAE technical paper 933093.
3. Isaksson-Hellman I, Jakobson L, Gustafsson C, Norin H: Trends and effects of child restraint systems based on Vovo´s Swedish accident database. SAE Technical paper 973299. Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE). Warrendale, PA, 1997.
4. Jacobsson L, Isaksson –Hellman I, Lundell B: Safety for the growing child – experiences from swedish accident data. ESV conference 2005. Paper no 05-0330.
5. Tingvall C. Children in cars. Doctor thesis. Some aspects of the safety of children as car passangers on raod traffic accidents. Acta Paediatrica Scandinavica. Supplement, 339:1-35,1987. (Doctoral thesis )
6. Turbell T. Child restraint systems: Frontal Imapct Performance. VTI rapport 36A. Swedish Raod and Traffic Resarch Institute (VTI) Stockholm Sweden. 1974
7. Fuchs S, Barthel MJ, Flannery, AM and Christoffel KK: Cervical spine fractures sustained by young children in forward facing car seats. Pediatrics 84(2), 348-354, 1989.
8. Stalnaker RL: Spinal cord injuires to children in real world accidents. SAE SP-986. Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE). Warrendale, PA. 1993. Pp 173-183.
9. Arbogast KB, Cornejo RA, Kallan MJ, Winston FK, Durbin DR: Injuries to children in forward facing child restraings. Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine 46th (AAAM). Annual Conference, Tempe, AX 2002. Pp 213-230.
10. Henary B, Sherwood, C P, Crandall J R, Kent R W, Vaca F E, Arbogast K B, Bull M J. Car safety seats for children: rear facing for best protection. Injury Prevention 2007; 13:398-402.
11. Sherwood C P, Crandall J R. Frontal sled tests comparing rear and forward facing child restraints with 1-3 year old dummies. Annual Proc Assoc Adv Automot Med. 2007;51:169-80
This has got to be the lowest rated article I have ever seen. Any suggestions for improvement? Marcus Qwertyus 23:55, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
These devices looks brute, stupid and restraining, much like something BD*M. And from the "Critism" section "Levitt suggests that the available data does not support the necessity of forward facing child safety seats for children over two years old, arguing that the cheaper and simpler alternative of seat belts offers similar protection as forward facing seats". Why did you westerners not invent some simple portable harness that can be joined to seat belts, but rather these big curbersome devices? Can these be comfortable and pleasant for children? Won't it hampers contact between child and a not-driving parent? From an Asian's manner of view, I dare to query. 183.195.21.160 ( talk) 15:41, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Child safety seat. Please take a moment to review
my edit. You may add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 20:51, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
it is perplexing that the description of the "convertible seat" is tagged by a "citation needed" mark while the neighbouring paragraphs are untagged. its hard to think of a scientific type reliable source for this kind of distinction, yet this is one prominent feature you perceive when you go shopping for a child seat. tagging simple descriptions doesnt seem to be right. if theres a need for sources then that need arises for the whole article rather than for a trivial description within it. other types of child safety seats arent tagged for citation even though those descriptions (see the same section of the article) are not differing from this one. one could question the notability of these types of seats but that seems quite a natural way of describing the topic even though probably no scientific journal has ever received submissions on this topic. just because it is trivial or irrelevant from a physics/mechanical engineering point of view(that is from scientific POV) it might be still important enough for the average buyer/wiki reader to include in the article. 89.134.199.32 ( talk) 13:21, 30 April 2020 (UTC).
i found no information in this article concerning the difference in effectiveness/safety of the isofix type that became common since 2002 and the earlier (still existing) safety belt held child seat. nor is this covered in the article about seat belts neither in the article about the isofix standard. there are cars still in use that were manufactured before the mandatory built in isofix fixture points - in these cars a child passanger is seated in the older type child safety seat, that is held in place by the built in safety belt intended for adult passengers. these older type child seats may vary in design, some of them have 5 point harness to hold the child in seat, but the seat itself is attached and fixed by the cars built in safety belt. i think it would be relevant to cover these and a comparison between them and the newer isofix type child seats, not just for a historical point of view but also because these are still used. 89.134.199.32 ( talk) 20:19, 30 April 2020 (UTC).