Real case: What do parents expect when we talk about child safety?

After the publications of the last posts (links Part II Y Part III) and the comments received, it seemed necessary to conclude with this post. images (1)

A few months ago we talk about real cases where chairs with the same restraint system were banned in other countries. This prohibition was given after carefully studying the cases and seeing that the injuries were serious enough to be unacceptable.

Today we want to collect, briefly, an accident that has been carefully studied in this study. 

This accident occurred during the day, on a rural road. The surface was wet and the car left its lane. No other vehicles intervened. He just got off the road and braked abruptly colliding, frontally, with a ditch.

The researchers estimated a speed of 30 km / h.

The 30-year-old driver suffered only bruises and scratches (AIS1. Abbreviated scale of injuries = 1, mild)

In the right front (without airbag) a baby of 14 months of age and 11 kg of weight was traveling, sitting correctly (as indicated by the manufacturer) in a Group I chair with a shield, approved by the Accidente silla escudoR44 / 04.

During the study the checks were made by an expert that the chair was correctly installed, the shield was correctly placed and the child was properly retained. The conclusion was that it fulfilled everything.

During the accident the child suffered serious injuries that were located in the lower part of the cervical spine (C5 / C6) and in the upper part of the thorax (fracture of the 1st to 3rd rib of the right side with pulmonary contusion)

It is a case presented by technicians in a project to study the safety of safety chairs with shield, therefore there is no doubt that it is objective, there is no misuse of the chair and it meets all safety recommendations.

And what was the result?

That a chair that had to protect a baby, did not do it at low speed and when the occupant of the next seat had only a scratch. That's not what parents expect when Accidente silla escudo 2We talk about the safety of our children.

In this case it is not about abdominal pressure, it was a cervical problem. Abdominal pressure and all documentation presented, are facts, are laboratory risks that need further investigation to determine the lesivity. But with these types of accidents (and those you will see below) we can say that these safety systems generate doubts at the cervical level, abdominal pressure and ejection. Many doubts do not you think? Should they be ranking winners as safer chairs?

Would the result have changed if I had traveled with a harness?

No, possibly the injury would have occurred in the upper cervical wall. What we do know, because it is proven and you have seen it in hundreds of videos, photos and posts, is that if he had traveled backwards this child would have left unharmed or with a scratch like his mother.

This type of accident can happen to any of us. Moreover, 4 years ago I suffered a similar accident, at a ridiculous speed and ended up embedded against a mountain (M was not born). It doesn't matter if you are a better or worse driver.

ACCIDENT MEANS: An unforeseen event that disrupts the normal or expected progress of things, especially that which causes damage to a person or thing. An accident is uncontrollable.

More real cases:

  • In case of Jackson taylor, who also traveled in favor of the march.
  • The accident of this mother of Baena that crashed into a curb and in which his two and a half year old son died. We are not aware of in which chair model he was traveling but he was traveling in favor of the march
  • Or the accident of Gabriel that with 2 and a half years his neck was fractured at the height of the C2 and he was traveling facing the march in a chair with a frontal shield.

What do parents expect when we look for a child safety seat for our children?

We know that traveling by car is dangerous in itself. We know that 100% security does not exist and that the only way to achieve it is to stay at home (and still). But it is evident that we move. So when we assume that there is a risk we want the chair to at least protect us against the most frequent injuries. Therefore we want you to tell us the WHOLE truth, NOT A HALF.

That is why this movement of publications began in 'mama's laboratory', when it did not yet exist as a blog, after almost putting my own daughter in a chair with a shield.

Moved by the recommendations of the RACE we already had a Juno Fix in the shopping cart. Luckily, the recommendations on A Counter March reached our ears. Shortly after we began to know all these cases of children who were not so lucky. As you can see, I also did not receive, as they say from RACE, their recommendation on traveling backwards. I only received the headline, almost in neon lights, that the safest chair was that one or her cousins with a shield.

This movement of publications does not pretend to be an empty criticism, it tries to alert on the doubts that generate this type of systems, something that seems to have not raised the professionals that it recommends in the RANKINGS. All those who in their day (some already many years ago as www.acontramarcha.com) began to move for child safety we are always willing to collaborate, although sometimes it seems that we repeat ourselves or want war without more.

There is not much more to say, we can only continue to sting doors until they open.

 

 

You may also like

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *