Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Travel&Dining > Special Interest Travel > Travel with Children
Reload this Page >

To Car Seat or Not To Car Seat, That is the Question...[Merged Threads]

To Car Seat or Not To Car Seat, That is the Question...[Merged Threads]

Old Apr 28, 2016, 6:52 pm
  #346  
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: SMF
Posts: 1,251
Originally Posted by rjque
The plural of anecdote is not data.
^
Big4Flyer is offline  
Old Apr 29, 2016, 5:55 am
  #347  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Paris, Chicago, Rome, London, St John
Programs: DeltaPrivateJet, Ritz PP, Delta 4 million miler - Flying Colonel; AA Exec Plat (3 million + USAir)
Posts: 796
Originally Posted by Big4Flyer
^
By three methods we may learn wisdom: First, by reflection, which is noblest; Second, by imitation, which is easiest; and third by experience, which is the bitterest.
― Confucius

Study the past if you would define the future.
― Confucius
BeatCal is offline  
Old May 1, 2016, 8:21 pm
  #348  
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 8
Originally Posted by Big4Flyer
Anyone who has children plays with the odds of their children's well-being. Bringing your child on a plane, even in a car seat, is playing with their well-being, so is letting your kid play at the park, or even leave the house.

My point is just to show that we all make a series of decisions to balance things that we feel will improve our life with things that would risk it. Just to show why someone might choose not to bring a carseat on a plane: The cost of a human life is estimated by the DoT at around $6M, and during 2015 there were over 3.3 billion passengers flown by commercial airlines, with 560 deaths. If you apply that fatality rate to the expected cost of losing a loved one, and feel that a car seat would be the difference between life and death, then you would be rational to not bring a car seat on the plane if the cost to you of bringing the car seat is over $1.02, and that is supposing that the car seat would prevent any death, which, when you look at a list of all commercial aviation disasters in 2015, I don't see a single one where a car seat would have saved a child.

However, we don't use information like this when making decision, we use our perceptions of the danger of something as well as our estimate of how painful that loss would be to us, both of which are incredibly subjective. This is the very reason why it may not be worth it to you to fly without a car seat, but for others it is.
All I think any parent should ask, is what would they pay to get their child back to good health or resurrect them from death if they were injured or killed after they played the odds (which are clearly in their favor) and took them on a plan as a lap infant. I think parents would say they couldn't put a price on that as they'd pay whatever it took. So why not pay the added cost for a seat and put the odds even more in your favor that a child will be as safe as possible on a plane.

The only reason kids under 2 are allowed to be in a lap and not restrained is because of statistics. Statistically, someone is safer flying then driving and the thought is if kids under 2 were required to have their own seat, more parents would choose driving over flying.

Not all kids are equal though. I'm actually surprised its an age requirement when at best it should be a size requirement. If my 15 month old son was in my lap and there was severe turbulence and I couldn't hold him, he'd become a 25lb missle and could not only be injured himself, but could injure others.

It is hard to find many instances where something happened, but there have been cases where an infant flew from their parents arms into another seat. Fortunately they were ok. But why take that chance just to save some money? As I said, any parent who had the very poor luck of getting hit with those odds (who here hasn't played powerball though?) and having their kid injured or killed wouldn't go back in time and pay whatever it took?

I know if I didn't get a seat and properly restrain my son and something happened, I'd never forgive myself. There is only so much you can do, but this is a pretty simple step.
maytrix is offline  
Old May 1, 2016, 8:27 pm
  #349  
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 8
Originally Posted by azepine00
Oh not this again ...
Car seats have no meaningful contrubution to safety on board of aircraft. We went through this here many times before - and i am yet to see any data to support those claim of statistically meaningful safety benefits.

If one feels the need to take a seat on board for practical reasons (for example your kid only sleeps in his seat) - go right ahead but note that dragging one across airports is rather inconvenient and distracting.
I'm not sure how you can say that. Look at it this way. How many flights face extreme turbulence. I've flown a lot and have never experienced the worse turbulence that some have. Out of those flights that do experience this, how many have in lap infants?

There just isn't the data there, yet not that long ago (week or two maybe) there was severe turbulence on a plane where I believe two flight attendants were injured. You really don't think a child is safer in a car seat then being held? There's another case I read where an infant was thrown from a mothers arms into a seat across the isle. Fortunately they were ok. But you really think being in a car seat wouldn't have been safer?

I think its fine to make any choice you want, but to tell anyone, anything but their child is safer in a car seat then in a lap is just a lie. All you can say is that the odds are good that it won't make a difference.
maytrix is offline  
Old May 2, 2016, 5:37 am
  #350  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Paris, Chicago, Rome, London, St John
Programs: DeltaPrivateJet, Ritz PP, Delta 4 million miler - Flying Colonel; AA Exec Plat (3 million + USAir)
Posts: 796
BigFlyer; The cost of a human life is estimated by the DoT at around $6M,
Maytrix's response is right on. There should be no price for your child
BeatCal is offline  
Old May 2, 2016, 11:56 am
  #351  
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: SMF
Posts: 1,251
Originally Posted by BeatCal
Maytrix's response is right on. There should be no price for your child
While that's a nice sentiment, its not very practical. Maybe there should be no price for your child, but there is. Right now, the safest car for children is the Volvo XC90 SUV. Using your logic, despite a starting price of $44,000 anyone who says their children have no price should own that car, otherwise, if you were driving your family Corolla and you were in an accident, you could never live with yourself, knowing that the Volvo might have prevented it. Actually, as a matter of fact, you should never let your child drive in a car at all, knowing if they get killed in an accident you could never live with yourself knowing that you let them get in the car that day. Using the logic that there is no price for your child, you should be willing to pay for a police escort anytime you drive anywhere with your children to reduce the risk of them being in an accident, is that correct? If you wouldn't be willing to pay for that, then aren't you essentially saying that the cost is more than the risk of something happening?
Big4Flyer is offline  
Old May 2, 2016, 6:04 pm
  #352  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: LAX
Posts: 10,904
Originally Posted by BeatCal
Maytrix's response is right on. There should be no price for your child
yep.. but what people earn is rather finite... trying to mislead them into spending more than practical by implying that they somehow compromise child's safety is irresponsible
azepine00 is offline  
Old May 3, 2016, 5:11 am
  #353  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Paris, Chicago, Rome, London, St John
Programs: DeltaPrivateJet, Ritz PP, Delta 4 million miler - Flying Colonel; AA Exec Plat (3 million + USAir)
Posts: 796
Big
my kids have a volvo. Nice trip to Europe to pick it up and 25% discount
BeatCal is offline  
Old May 3, 2016, 7:13 am
  #354  
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 8
Originally Posted by azepine00
yep.. but what people earn is rather finite... trying to mislead them into spending more than practical by implying that they somehow compromise child's safety is irresponsible
I think its worse to imply that a child is just as safe in a lap as they are in a car seat. Sure, on an uneventful flight that would be true. We could say the same for driving in a car - child on a lap in an uneventful car ride is just as safe as in a car seat.

Simple fact is that a child in a car seat on a plane is safer then if they are in a lap in the event of some sort of survivable incident. Planes go off runways, land in the hudson river, have bad enough turbulence to injure flight attendants, and even have a baby thrown from their mothers arms.
maytrix is offline  
Old May 3, 2016, 7:33 am
  #355  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Portland
Posts: 11,569
Originally Posted by maytrix
I think its worse to imply that a child is just as safe in a lap as they are in a car seat. Sure, on an uneventful flight that would be true. We could say the same for driving in a car - child on a lap in an uneventful car ride is just as safe as in a car seat.

Simple fact is that a child in a car seat on a plane is safer then if they are in a lap in the event of some sort of survivable incident. Planes go off runways, land in the hudson river, have bad enough turbulence to injure flight attendants, and even have a baby thrown from their mothers arms.
I don't think anyone is arguing that it is safer for a child to be in his or her own seat in the unlikely event of an accident or extreme turbulence. But it's misleading and wrong to tell parents that it is either dangerous or unloving to take a child as a lap child. Yes, there is anecdotal evidence that kids can be thrown around the cabin in extremely unusual situations, but there is no evidence that this decision is comparatively more dangerous than many other decision we make for our children every day.

Sure, it is safer to keep kids at home than to take them out of the house in a car, but nearly every parent decides it is worth the risk of riding in a car to experience the world beyond the home. It is inappropriate to judge parents for making a similar decision regarding flying on an airplane.
rjque is offline  
Old May 3, 2016, 7:35 am
  #356  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Portland
Posts: 11,569
Originally Posted by BeatCal
Big
my kids have a volvo. Nice trip to Europe to pick it up and 25% discount
"If you really loved your children, you would buy a Volvo."
rjque is offline  
Old May 3, 2016, 11:28 am
  #357  
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 8
Originally Posted by rjque
I don't think anyone is arguing that it is safer for a child to be in his or her own seat in the unlikely event of an accident or extreme turbulence. But it's misleading and wrong to tell parents that it is either dangerous or unloving to take a child as a lap child. Yes, there is anecdotal evidence that kids can be thrown around the cabin in extremely unusual situations, but there is no evidence that this decision is comparatively more dangerous than many other decision we make for our children every day.

Sure, it is safer to keep kids at home than to take them out of the house in a car, but nearly every parent decides it is worth the risk of riding in a car to experience the world beyond the home. It is inappropriate to judge parents for making a similar decision regarding flying on an airplane.
I don't judge - I just think more parents need to be aware.

You do realize why lap infants are allowed, right? There's only one single reason. Statistically speaking, airline travel is safer. The thought is if kids under 2 were required to be in their own seat in a proper restraint, that parents would choose to drive instead of fly and therefore statistically speaking, end up at a greater risk.

Here's my last though - something for any parent to think about when they consider whether or not to buy a seat.. Consider this - Some day, some time in the future, an infant is going to be on a plane with severe turbulence or some other incident and that infant will be injured or maybe even killed. Is spending the money on a seat to properly restrain them worth it to remove yourself from being in that pool of people where someone, someday will be with their infant? For me, it is well worth the added cost.
maytrix is offline  
Old May 3, 2016, 11:53 am
  #358  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Portland
Posts: 11,569
Originally Posted by maytrix
I don't judge - I just think more parents need to be aware.

You do realize why lap infants are allowed, right? There's only one single reason. Statistically speaking, airline travel is safer. The thought is if kids under 2 were required to be in their own seat in a proper restraint, that parents would choose to drive instead of fly and therefore statistically speaking, end up at a greater risk.

Here's my last though - something for any parent to think about when they consider whether or not to buy a seat.. Consider this - Some day, some time in the future, an infant is going to be on a plane with severe turbulence or some other incident and that infant will be injured or maybe even killed. Is spending the money on a seat to properly restrain them worth it to remove yourself from being in that pool of people where someone, someday will be with their infant? For me, it is well worth the added cost.
It's an individual decision for everyone, and there is no wrong answer. If spending the money on the extra seat meant fewer visits to grandma before she passed away, then the low risk of flying with a lap infant would be worth it to me.
rjque is offline  
Old May 3, 2016, 12:05 pm
  #359  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: NYC
Posts: 9,089
Lugging around infant gear (including a car seat) can cause joint injuries requiring surgery. Surgery carries a significant mortality risk.

In short - by lugging a car seat around the airport you may die, leaving your kid with only one parent!
erik123 is offline  
Old May 4, 2016, 5:22 am
  #360  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,103
Originally Posted by erik123
Lugging around infant gear (including a car seat) can cause joint injuries requiring surgery. Surgery carries a significant mortality risk.

In short - by lugging a car seat around the airport you may die, leaving your kid with only one parent!
Removal, transport and re-installation of an otherwise car-installed CRS risks damage to the CRS, thereby increasing the risk of death or serious injury in a future car accident when that plane-used CRS is again used in a car. Also, when a person is busy with the removal, transport, and reinstallation of an otherwise car-installed CRS, the person managing such CRS is not watching the child who is to use such seat, thus increasing the risk of death or serious injury of such child.

If people really care about securing their U2 children way more from greater risk of serious injury/death, then they would be better off putting away their phones/tablets/laptops and paying attention to their kids rather than worrying about whether or not to buy a plane seat for a U2 child.

If a parent is not hiring a full-time guard to pay attention to the U2 child every second of the day and night, then the parent is not doing everything possible to reduce the risk of serious injury/death of the child. All those parents without a full rotation of full-time nannies/guards is not doing as much as possible to reduce the risk of serious injury/death of their child unless and until they go broke paying for top-tier child care around the clock, around the year.

Last edited by GUWonder; May 4, 2016 at 5:28 am
GUWonder is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.