LHR/MEL/Europe FF

CelticPax - yes indeed, rearward facing seats are much safer. However, the reason why they are not mandated is cost.

A rear facing seat experiences a lot more pressure on it during an emergency (whole body weight of person being pushed into it). This requires additional strengthening - I read somewhere like 1/2lb per seat.

Airlines have worked out that it is a lot cheaper to pay out (via insurance) for the once-in-a-blue-moon that an accident occurs, rather than have to carry the extra weight around on every aircraft, every day, for possibly decades. The cost of the fuel is just too high.

The other argument by airlines is that passengers 'do not like to fly backwards' - although this attitude may have changed over the last 10 years given the greater focus on safety (and programs like Air Crash Investigator).

On military transports, I believe rear facing seats are common. But the troops don't really have much of a choice.

To the OP - I too feel that a blocking the person in front's recline is a little inconsiderate. As someone suggested, it may have been possible to obtain a bulkhead seat so that no one's comfort was compromised.

Additionally, you have stated that if the person in front had asked nicely, you may have turned the seat around anyway. So this makes it seem that the concern is not for the safety of your child, but rather the manner in which the FA instructed you. As you say, nothing went wrong on the flight and your child was not injured. In fact the chances that something would have gone wrong are one in a million anyway.

scubatooth - it is interesting in the US that a child's life is valued more highly than an adult. In many other jurisdictions this does not hold true because the potential of the child has not yet been recognised (in the case of death).

Sure, if there are sustained and long-lasting injuries that require ongoing care for the rest of their life, a child's payout will be higher. But no so for death. It is not until at least the accomplishment of some post high school qualification (whether this is skills based, or academic) that a value of future earnings can be assessed and the payout starts to increase.

But yes, in the circumstances of a commercial flight within the USA (and the associated non-risk), I would place a greater emphasis on the comfort of the adult passenger rather than the safety of the child who, in the event of some major issue could be returned to the seat.

joshkuo

Thanks again for all the replies. Does anyone else has other suggestions as far as filing a complaint? I have already had a different complaint with the said airline that went pretty much no where (it was ticketing related, not safety), so I doubt a second complaint will be treated any differently.

I thought about filing something directly with FAA, but that seems a little overboard (or is it?). I do not want to make a big deal out of it (i.e. TV stations and such), but I do feel that when it comes to safety concerns, I should voice it to the proper channel so no other children may be harmed in the future due to the same issue.

And for the curious, yes, we did purchase an additional seat for the infant, precisely because it's a longer flight and we wanted to leave the 5-months old sleeping in a car seat and not in my tiring arms.

LHR/MEL/Europe FF

joshkuo - you have already said that if the person in front had asked you nicely, you would have turned the seat around anyway.

It seems you might possibly be wanting to take out your frustration on the person in front, or on the FA, by covering this up in a safety related issue?

Any newspaper or television station would see you were willing to turn the seat around and wonder what the issue is?

Perhaps a campaign to prevent other children being harmed might be to write some letters to newspapers advising parents with rear-facing seats should request a bulkhead?

CD_YOW

joshkuo...

Presuming that this situation happened on board a U.S. air carrier, here is a link to the contact information for the FAA:

Contact FAA

A properly installed restraint system will provide protection for your child in the event of unanticipated turbulence. As well, if the seat belt sign is turned on during the flight for any reason, the restraint system would have been required to be properly installed at that time as well.

There is certainly no harm in contacting the FAA, asking your questions and receiving additional information.

firespirit

So what does someone do to not turn the seat around if instructed?

We are flying with our 9 week old daughter this week for the first time. The bulkhead was not available (or the airline was unwilling to let us have those seats) and my daughter's seat is rear facing only. We specifically bought a seat for her for safety an comfort. Unlike the OP I am not willing to turn the seat around as then it would not be properly installed.

Liba

I would make the rear facing car seat as upright as possible to make room for the person in front to recline. I actually have never had a problem with a rear facing car seat in economy preventing anyone from reclining though. The rear facing car seat has also always been put next to the window, so it isn't blocking anyone from getting by.

CDTraveler

Making the seat "as upright as possible" is dangerous to the infant. Not maybe, theoretically dangerous - like there could be an air plane crash! - but actively dangerous as you risk compromising the airway of a 9 week old child which does not have the muscle development for head control. By trying to sit the child upright you may force them into a position where the head comes forward enough to prevent adequate breathing. That's why rear facing seats have angle of recline indicators on them.

Given a choice between compromising the angle of recline and facing forward, I would install the seat facing forward. You can use a rolled up towel or blanket under it (at the seat back end) to achieve the correct angle.

Liba

It is recommended that newborns and young infants sit in a rear-facing carseat at a 45 degree angle (maximum). Some infant carseats have a built-in level indicator. Older infants should have less recline once they are able to support their heads. The less reclined the seat is in a crash the better the seat will cradle and protect the baby.

The angle indicator is because it should not be reclined more than the indicator.

Obviously a new baby shouldn't be upright to a point that their head is flopping forward. That is commonsense.

CDTraveler

The reason that it is recommended that car seats remain rear facing for at least 12 months is that babies do not have adequate head and neck control until that age. There is no such thing as "Older infants" - by definition, infants are very young babies - and they don't have head control.

Shouldn't be reclined less than that either.

Changed your mind since post #21, have you? That's where you said "I would make the rear facing car seat as upright as possible"

firespirit

The installation will specifically not allow forward facing (the seat belt will not properly hook in to the car seat). So there really isn't a choice other than to ask the flight attendant to relocate us to the bulkhead. However, if the flight attendant is telling me to improperly install a car seat for the comfort of a passenger in front of me, I doubt he or she would displace at least two passengers in the bulkhead row.

Liba

You can argue if you would like, but the reason for rear facing has nothing to do with floppy heads, "as upright as possible" in my head was as upright as possible without the baby's head flopping forward. I am sorry I wasn't more clear.

The definition of infants varies, but it is either a baby up to a year, two years or until they can walk. http://www.merriam-webster.com/medical/infants Young infants are generally considered an infant from 0-3 months old.

Most babies can hold their head up and sit well before they are no longer considered infants.

Read the car seat manual, the recline on most seats does not have to be the full 45 degrees, that is the maximum. If your seat says that it has to be at 45 degrees, that is the maximum.

Any which way an infant in a rear facing infant seat is not safe forward facing and unsecured.

Liba

http://www.car-safety.org/rearface.html for your reading pleasure, if you really want to learn and not just to argue.

Have a good day!!

Doc Savage

Being that it is a red-eye flight and the passenger in front of you was likely extremely tired, I am sure you realize how silly of you it was to bring a baby seat which prevents the passenger from reclining and then not being understanding when you realized that this was the problem?

I assume that you will go out and purchase a seat which does not encroach on others' space if you wish to use one on flights from now on, as you seem like a reasonable person.

VickiSoCal

Firespirit, just because bulkhead is not avialable now, doesn't mean it won't be available when you get to the airport, most airlines don't release bulhhead seats until day of travel and give preference for them to people traveling with infants.

As for specifically buying a rear-facing seat that allows person in front to recline, I don't believe most do, and how would you test that before boarding the plane?

CaliC

There really is no such thing. The seat must be at a certain angle, as indicated on the side by the red/green leveler.

Safety comes first, comfort second. That's the bottom line. I would not comply with any flight attendant's instruction for me to hold my child for someone else's comfort. They can play musical chairs if they like, or they can stuff it and have me arrested when we land. I am okay with either one.

Cali