**If bad language offends you don't read this post** Angry rant and vent!! Not F*@#%$*! happy Aussie car seat manufacturers (Safe-n-Sound exempt so far)

So Australian car seat manufacturers, with the exception so far of Safe n Sound, are pissing me off with their complete lack of customer service, information and drive to reach for anything other than the absolute MINIMUM safety requirements. I have been doing a bit of letter writing to manufacturers, members of parliament, Standards Australia and the ACCC pushing for type D (extended rear-facing seats) in Australia. Well the manufacturers are crap! The latest response I have received, from IGC Dorel, aka- Mothers Choice, Safety 1st, ZuZu, just to name a few they own, was major fuck up on their behalf. Not only did the reply contain a bit of nonsense, but they sent me the complete email with the trail of just about everyone it had been to and their comments. I'm adding the complete email trail below, beginning with mine sent to them. It shows their absolute lack of interest in providing a seat with the ability to rear-face past 12 months, and disregard of customer suggestions along with the need for retraining their staff in the sending of a simple email LOL
So they're happy with manufacturing seats that are okay, not leading in superior safety, or even humouring consumers. Just meh whatever, it passes the standards so it'll do. Well hopefully they lose out big time once Safe n Sound (if they do indeed come good with their saying they want to make an ERF seat for Aussie Kids) or if we can ever start to share international standards and use international seats. Maybe us parents pushing now will get the last laugh then! I'll personally send them a farewell card :)
The email follows below in red and white I've added what I would LOVE to send as my response to them. But I won't, I'll be a bit more grown up about it and respond in a mature fashion, with just a touch of sarcasm ;)

____________________________________________________

-----Original Message-----

From: Lisa 

Sent: Tuesday, 20 March 2012 9:35 PM

To: info@nurseryelegance.com.au

Subject: No Subject

I’m writing to you as a concerned parent and consumer about the lack of availability of type D child restraints here in Australia.

After much personal research I have learnt that keeping a child rear-facing in the car for as long as possible is the safest way for children to travel.  Rear-facing until the age of 4 years old at least, is most beneficial. As I’m sure you are already aware, it has been proven to be 5 times safer than forward-facing.

I understand Australia has some of the most stringent safety standards for child restraints but I am shocked, and disappointed, that we do not recognise rear-facing for as long as possible, to be the safest option, even though there is already the provision for use of type D restraints in the road rules, Australian Road Rule Number 266 (2A) states:

“If the passenger is 6 months old or older, but is less than 4 years old, he or she must be restrained in a suitable and properly fastened and adjusted –

(a) Rearward facing approved child restraint; or

(b) Forward facing approved child restraint that has an inbuilt harness.”

Also in the Australian Standards, AS/NZS 1754, Type Designation as:

“Type D Rearward facing chair with harness, suitable for children 6 months to 4 years of age.”

Legally there is no reason these seats can’t be manufactured and used here, yet parents don’t have the seats available to them. It seems that it is ok to turn a six month old baby forward-facing, and there are seats available to accommodate this, even though it is not the safest way for such a young and physically underdeveloped baby to travel. But for those of us wishing to keep our children safer for longer there is absolutely no option to do so.  It just doesn’t seem right to me, and I feel that our children are being denied the ability to be the safest they possibly can be when in the car.

I’ve heard there is no market for these seats here.  However, there is a growing demand for extended rear-facing seats, due to parents becoming more aware of its safety benefits. There are several social media sites, Facebook pages and blogs, growing in numbers by the day that are educating even more parents and consumers, and creating an increasing demand for seats that are currently not available. Along with petitions, and more articles in the mainstream media regarding the safety benefits of extended rear-facing.

The American Academy of Paediatrics now recommends rear-facing children to a minimum of 2 years old.

Countries such as Sweden, rear-face their children until at least 4 years old, and they have the lowest fatalities in children 0-10 years due to car accidents. I don’t understand why our children deserve less than children overseas.

Roads, vehicles and driving styles may differ between here, the US and Europe, but the laws of physics don’t. Top tethers and anti rebound bars on seats may result in more stability in an accident, but the head and extremities not held back by the harness, still continue to be thrown forward with extreme force.  This could be so easily avoided by using a rear-facing seat to support the child more effectively.

I am extremely happy to hear of the introduction of ISOFIX into the Australian Standards. I think this will help with ease of installation, and cut misuse incidents greatly.

What would be a great step forward for Australian child passenger safety along with ISOFIX would be the addition of type D seats for sale and use in Australia.

As a parent wanting the best in child passenger safety for her children and generations of children to come, I’m hoping to see manufactures making type D seats available to Australian consumers in the very near future.

Yours sincerely,

Lisa Patterson.

_____________________________________________________

Dear Lisa

You are correct with your research. There are a number of problems which require attention, the  Australian standards AS/NZS 1754:2010 calls up additional head protection and a tether strap must be used at all times. Many seats that are manufactured overseas, don't require the use of the top strap and side head protection is also not required or tested. In Australia these requirements are mandatory.

Another issue which is some times over looked is the child's leg position, a older child's legs are cramped

I know that the CS 085 child committee has had discussions on this subject and are currently looking at these issues.

Currently we have manufactured a new seat called : Maxi cosi Hera model no CCA2010 which allows the child to be rear facing up to the age of 12 months or until the child's shoulders reach the upper height markers. 

Kind Regards,

Alan Tanner

Research and Development Manager

____________________

IGC Dorel Pty Ltd

655-685 Somerville Rd.

West Sunshine VIC 3020

Phone: +61(3) 8311 5357

Fax:    +61(3) 8311 5390

Email: Alan.Tanner@igcdorel.com.au

Thank you Alan for your reply. Yes I understand we require a mandatory top tether and head protection, oh and did you forget side impact protection too? So design a type D seat with those features! There are seats available overseas with said features so what the fuck is the problem here?

Obviously even though you said yourself I am correct in my research, and that rear-facing is indeed safer, it appears you still have no interest in producing a seat to rear-face as a superior safety choice for Australian children, why not?

I don't believe I have overlooked the issue of cramped legs in older children, especially seeing as it is a load of crap! Unlike you, obviously, I have researched other seats designed for older children that are used widely on a daily basis in Europe and the US and they seem to have overcome this Australian 'issue'and produced seats in which the kids are comfortable.(Or will you now tell me our kids have different legs than those of their overseas counterparts?) Also you do understand children are a lot more flexible than adults and rarely sit with their legs out straight or perfectly bent at the knee hanging over their chair FFS.

 Are you seriously the research and development manager? You don't seem to have done a lot of research into this in my opinion, and your development appears to be extremely slow compared to other parts of the world. If you have been researching, you clearly don't give a shit, or more likely because you're making quite enough money out of the seats you're selling now, so why bother hey.

I too already know that the CS 085 Child Committee are looking into this, so at what point are you going to tell me something I don't already know?  

Oh and woo fricken hoo for your Maxi-Cosi Hera rear-facing until APPROX 12 months seat. You have been able to get seats like that for quite some time here now so don't pat yourselves on the back too much there, you're not exactly ahead of the pack!

But thank you Alan for at least pretending to give a shit about my request and the request of other parents for safer seats for our children, and sending me an email full of fluffy nothings. I have obviously come to the wrong place, the child restraint manufacturer, for any improvement to safety without a change to what is mandatory. Maybe if the standards are rewritten you'll have to pull your heads out of your asses and manufacture a decent seat.

I do hope you manufacture seats a hell of a lot better than you send emails, because clearly you have fucked that up today, oh unless of course you wanted me to see the lack of interest in customer care and added safety for our children from the other staff at IGC Dorel that also read my email. I will reply to each of them individually as well.   __________________________________________________

-----Original Message-----

From: Tina Porcha

Sent: Wednesday, 21 March 2012 12:55 PM

To: Alan Tanner

Subject: FW: No Subject

Here it is, sorry Alan !

-----Original Message-----

From: Tina Porcha

Sent: Wednesday, 21 March 2012 9:13 AM

To: Customer Service Requests; Murray Sparks

Cc: Esra Erbakip; Robert Berchik

Subject: RE: No Subject

We received an email from this same person on this same subject last year and decided not to respond.  She's obviously persistent so perhaps we can prepare a quick response - Alan, can you please action !!!

Tina

          

Actually Tina, no, this is the first communication I have ever had with your company on this matter. So shit hey, looks like there's more than one of us. Who would've thought it?! But I can be persistent especially when patronised and in turn, pissed off! Perhaps you picked the wrong person to ignore! You have a nice day now :)

-----Original Message-----

From: Customer Service Requests

Sent: Wednesday, 21 March 2012 8:45 AM

To: Murray Sparks; Tina Porcha

Cc: Esra Erbakip; Robert Berchik

Subject: FW: No Subject

How would you like to respond to this? Do we even want to respond to this?

Kind regards,

Ben Berchik

Customer Care

IGC Dorel Pty Ltd

 

Ah Ben, says there in your signature you work in customer care. Pfft seems more like 'customer couldn't fucking care less' Why would you not want to respond? Maybe the issues are a little over your head? Because how would an average old consumer possibly know more than you? I think some retraining would benefit you in what your role as customer care should be, because clearly you have no idea!

__________________________________________________

Creepy stalker extended rear-facing info cards.

So I had some business cards made up with information, well as much info as you can squeeze onto a business card. I take them out with me and in the car-park when I see cars with baby seats in them, I pop one on the drivers side window.

 (The purple is the reverse side of the card. Crap pic I know but I can't get it to come out any better)









The Man rolls his eyes and tells The Monstar "Mum's being a creepy stalker again" LOL
I think it's a good idea, don't know if anyone takes any notice of them, but hey, it's worth a try. Even if someone has a read then whinges to a friend that some idiot put a card on their car crapping on about rear-facing longer. They might think yeah whatever, but the friend might have half a brain and think hey there might be something in that, and do their own research. Or maybe someone will actually have a light bulb moment and be grateful for the info that could protect their child. Either way it's a win. Yeah yeah I'm sure most of them end up in the bin, but well I'm doing what I can.

I've sent quite a few out to members of my Facebook page too Extended Rear-Facing For Aussie Kids I was pretty pleased when I started getting requests for them :)

Someone said people will think I'm having a go at them and criticising. I'm not, they're meant for information not criticism. I want to get people talking and thinking. The more people get the message that our kids here in Australia are being ripped off the better. The more people making noise the more likely a change will be made.

When is the best time to move your child to a forward-facing car seat.

Simple answer, when they have reached the MAXIMUM height and or weight limit for the seat you are using, and NOT before.

In my opinion if this happens before they are 4 years old it is still too early. But if we live here in the lucky country, Australia (not so lucky when it comes to car seats) we don't have that option, crap I know! People have the unsafe, but legal, option of turning their babies forward-facing at 6 months if they choose to do so. But if you actually want to keep your children safer for as long as possible, bad  f*#@%^! luck. There's my little rant for today.

So when it's time to turn forward-facing...

*Currently here in Australia that will be either 9kgs or 12kgs.
Always check the manual to be sure of your seats limits.

*If you own a newer seat it will be when they reach the rear-facing HEIGHT MARKERS on the seat.

 *Your child's head needs to have at least 2.5cm (1 inch) of the seat's shell ABOVE their head when rear-facing for sufficient protection in an accident. 


This reference is used mostly on US seats.  

 *AGAIN ALWAYS CHECK YOUR SEAT'S MANUAL FOR SPECIFIC INSTRUCTION ON THE LIMITS OF THE SEAT YOU ARE USING.*

Some "reasons" for not rear-facing, and their solutions.

"My son/daughter cries when they can't see me." - Get a mirror! You can see them with out turning around, and they can see you, simple. They can even look at themselves in there too. The Monstar's quite often pulling faces at himself.

We have this one. The Monstar calls it his cheeky monkey :) We got it in BigW. They're pretty easy to find in stores and on line.


 ___________________________________________________________
 "Their legs are uncomfortable." - I doubt it have you checked out how they sit normally? Reading, playing, watching TV...

Not many straight legs happening here...even on the couch...










 So do these kids look uncomfortable?

I think not :)
____________________________________________
"Their legs will be broken in an accident." -There are actually NO statistics to show rear-facing children with leg injuries from accidents. There are however studies showing forward-facing children are more likely to suffer leg injuries in an accident. http://www.thecarseatlady.com/car_seats/rear-facing_seats_6.html

More to the point, there are children with serious neck and spinal injuries, and children who did not survive accidents because they were forward-facing. Even if it were a factor, wouldn't you prefer a broken leg?
____________________________________________

"There's nothing for them to look at, they can't see out the window." - The Monstar gives a running commentary on what he's looking at all the time. He tells me when we're nearly home, or when we're nearly at the shop.  Just because they can't see what we see out the front, doesn't mean they can't see anything.  If they have siblings travelling with them, there's another source of amusement for them too.
____________________________________________
"My toddler doesn't like rear-facing." -Well to be honest if they don't know any different they're hardly going to complain are they. If your toddler wants ice-cream and Coke for breakfast lunch and dinner, do you give it to them? Is your toddler allowed to play on the road, because they want to and they think it's fun? Seriously that is just a ridiculous excuse to forward-face when there's the option to rear-face.
____________________________________________
"What about in rear end accidents?" -Frontal and side impacts are the most common types of accidents. They account for 96% of all accidents. They are also the most deadly type of crashes (especially side impacts) and rear-facing children have MUCH more protection in both types of crashes than forward-facing.
 So rear end accidents only account for 4% of accidents are are less likely to be the most severe, as forces are different, they're often at lower speeds, and both cars are travelling in the same direction.


Here's a link to a rear end survival story from the UK
 https://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=303948046323061

Here's another from Australia 
https://www.facebook.com/notes/extended-rear-facing-for-aussie-kids/rear-facing-protected-the-6-month-old-baby-in-this-rear-end-accident-in-australi/235615796535269


And another from the US 
https://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=268397099878156
____________________________________________

Happy to see my 2 year old has an awareness of passenger safety :)

 Sometimes The Monstar doesn't like to travel alone, and the mirror doesn't quite cut it. So on days like that instead of having a cranky toddler making a fuss one of us sits in the back with him. He lets us now who he'd prefer, he's just a little bossy :)

 So this day it was me, he was in a bit of a cheeky mood (not unusual) but he also had his BFF Tamba the purple dragon with him. We'd been driving a few minutes when he decided Tamba needed to be strapped in too!!


He supervised making sure I did the belt up and made him look comfy.

So even at only 2 The Monstar is showing some awareness of passenger safety, for both people and dragons :)

I'm not sure about belt placement here. We may need to get some kind of dragon booster if he's going to travel with us regularly.

SQUISHING!

 The angle adjuster is beginning to squish! When I first installed with it there was a gap between the top of the seat and the back of the passenger seat head rest.

Now after only a few weeks, it's touching the head rest. The Radian is allowed to touch the back of the front seat, but, I'm wondering how long it will be until it completely squishes down and we're back to the original recline? I was once in love with the adjuster, now that I have used it, the honeymoon seems to be coming to an end. It's still a good idea. It may just be an idea that needs to be repurchased every 6 -12 months, maybe, time will tell I guess. I'm thinking a solid rear-facing toddler boot, making the recline angle less than the original rear-facing boot, may have been a better way to go. Well better for me, and the average consumer.

 So I wonder if this could be the deal breaker when it comes to buying a second seat for the grandparents car? Hmmmm, another few weeks to see what happens maybe. Not to mention my ridiculously drawn out decision making abilities as an indecisive Libran :P 

Bit of a rant and link to a story showing Australia is way behind in keeping our kids safe in the car.

I just watched this report on Australian car seat safety versus European car seat safety. I am not usually a fan of Today Tonight, but I thought this was good at getting the ERF message out in the mainstream media. It really didn't focus as much as I would like on ERF, more focus was put on ISOFIX, but it did touch on it and overall it shows how we are backward here Down Under when it comes to keeping our kids safe in cars, even though we boast about such stringent standards for child restraints. The Swedes should be the ones boasting with only 5 deaths in about 40 years!
I'm willing to bet that the introduction of ISOFIX here would also bring about extended rear-facing too.
You really have to wonder what, how much politics, and more likely, $$$ in the car seat manufacturing world are playing a big part in not wanting things to change here.

With all the facts, and, the laws of physics, (which I always thought were the same worldwide, but please correct me if I'm wrong!) and lowest death and injury rates where rear-facing is practised for the longest, Australia still thinks we're doing ok, WTF! With excuses like, 'Vehicles and driving styles are different so you can't compare statistics.' Load of crap there! In an accident if you're rear-facing you are safer, doesn't have much to do with your driving style, seriously *roll eyes*  'We have top tethers and anti-rebound bars so our seats are superior.' So manufacture a rear-facing seat catering for kids up to 4 years with a top tether and ARB to meet Australian standards, duh! I even read somewhere parental misuse is the big factor in deaths and severe injuries in Australia. Well that may be a contributor, so here's a thought, ISOFIX would greatly cut down cases of misuse because it makes installation so easy! And hey, how about better education? Now there's a thought. Stop telling parents, and legislating things like, it's ok to forward-face your baby from 6 months, and maybe they won't.
What am I missing here? It all seems like pretty simple logic to me.

*Rant over*

Anyway it's worth a look :)
http://www.cadoges.com/auto-quotes/2010/10/17/safe-child-restraint-in-modern-cars-australia-v-europe.html

Volvo's Lotta Jakobsson says Australian laws allow children to face forwards far too early