Originally Posted by
BeatCal
GU. Once again you write "most" don't recommend. But you cannot find one. JUST one that does not recommend against flying with a lap child. ALL state that it is safer and preferable NOT to fly as a lap child. See Swise' note. But you will argue it does not say what it says.
As to "injuries you have seen" I guess you don't fly enough for the unexpected large drop in turbulence where everything goes flying. Or the coffee spilt on the lap child and burns them.
Again you ignore
CDC infants safety seats reduced infant injury in cars > 71%. The majority of those injured had improperly placed safety seats (eg: not rear facing, not middle of back seat, improper attachment to car). Across the country we find a greater than 95% misuse of
car seats,” says Alisa Baer, M.D., a pediatrician and nationally certified child passenger safety instructor (who’s also known as
The Car Seat Lady)
Most government agencies don’t recommend against flying with U2 lap-child infants. Not so different from most government agencies not recommending against leaving the house in a car despite car travel being far more dangerous than traveling by air. Only a very small minority of all government agencies have any recommendation with regard to this kind of matter.
You are welcome to spend your time listing all the governments agencies that don’t recommend against lap-children infants in planes, not that I expect you to do that in any sort of accurate, comprehensive way.
Especially as that would cover far more government agencies than those government agencies that recommend against the bugbear of U2 lap-children in planes, I have no intent to compile a huge list of government agencies that don’t recommend against U2 lap-children in planes.
I have flown hundreds of thousands of miles per year for many, many years, and yet over many millions of miles of flights with some unexpected turbulence, lap children injuries from unexpected turbulence resulting in receptions by ground medics for blunt force injuries: zero.
Children in CRS/CRDs get burn injuries even in “properly placed car seats”, in the air and on the ground. Why ignore such injuries or real world use of CRS/CRD and all the other risks children face in the world that are better use of money than paying for U2 children to not be lap-children on planes? Some risk mitigation efforts are a better use for money than other risk mitigation efforts, no less so when dealing with extremely marginal risks where further risk reduction measures come with a negative opportunity cost in regard to child welfare/well-being — as is the case for those flying with U2 children and paying for a plane seat.