Should I keep my mouth shut or make a stink?

[disneyfav4ever]

I think you've done everything you can do.

 

[Art 1]

I would mention it, once.

 

[CdnCarrie]

If you go after him like a pit bull, that not going to do anything. Just make him mad and OP isn't going to see niece.

No you're right - it won't do anything like say hmmm save her life in a collision.


Absolutely I would be telling the brother if he is not going to protect his daughter then you will by reporting him to the police. Heck if the kid wanted to play with a loaded guy would he let her do that? There is a reason it's a law.

 

[CdnCarrie]

I would bring my niece to the car, buckle her up in her car seat in the back seat and tell my brother to grow up.. But that's just me

Absolutely.

 

[cassie]

I'm going to say this in the nicest way possible. Every single child safety seat expert says that children under 12 should NOT be riding in the front seat at all. AND they should be in a booster seat unless they are 57 inches tall, which I seriously doubt the 5-year-old in question is. The OP is absolutely correct to be concerned, as her brother is putting her niece in a well-established unsafe situation.

OP, I would say something one more time, because he really is putting that child at risk of serious injury or death if they are ever in an accident. Is there anyone else in the family who is concerned and could say something as well?

The fact that he responded immediately with "don't you give me grief" tells me that he knows full well that what he's doing is wrong. And if he says again that he "hardly ever gets to see her," I'd reply that if God forbid she's killed in a crash then he'll NEVER get to see her again.

Totally agree with you. Those airbags can deliver serious injuries to adults....not to mention kill a child. My state says 12 yo can sit in the front seat, and it was a pain for my dgd's to be in the back till they were 12. I'm very safety conscious, especially with family.

 

[Coconut36]

Totally agree with you. Those airbags can deliver serious injuries to adults....not to mention kill a child. My state says 12 yo can sit in the front seat, and it was a pain for my dgd's to be in the back till they were 12. I'm very safety conscious, especially with family.

There are cases where it broke the neck or decapitated children sitting in the front seat.

I personally had an airbag deploy when I was in an accident a few years back and it caused my most severe injuries and bruising. I had horrible chemical burns on my face and neck along with a bunch of bruises on my face..I can't imagine the force of that deploying on a 5 year old!

 

[roxysmum123]

Maybe approach it not from the place where your brother is wrong but where you are a loving aunt sincerely concerned for the wellbeing of your niece. Yes, this could just give his ex ammo for any future custody hearing, and yes this is a child safety issue, but he has spend gosh knows how long being attacked by his ex and lawyers I'm sure so hearing you come at him like a "pitbull" will probably go in one ear out the other.

If at 5 she's able to make him give her what she wants at a risk to her safety, I worry for what she'll be able to convince him of later.

 

[disykat]

You are probably not out of line to be concerned and express your concern.

You ARE out of line to bring his divorce and custody issues into it, and make implied threats.

I think losing custody if this is discovered is a very real possibility. I can't imagine NOT warning my brother of that. Sometimes people need to be reminded to THINK!

 

[cornflake]

Yeah, I'd call the cops on him. Better if you know a cop well, who will pull him over and scare him into it, but regardless... as others have noted, children that size can be killed by airbag deployment, as well as by sitting in the passenger seat improperly belted (which she almost certainly is in a truck, without a booster, because the belt will hit her in the wrong spot unless she's super scary tall).

This isn't a mind your own business situation, imo, it's her life and he's being an idiot not even for any particular reason.

 

[iheartdisney]

I vote for keep your mouth shut. You have given your opinion...twice. So the problem is NOT that he hasn't heard you. If the worst thing he does as a parent is let her ride in the front seat, I would say your niece has a wonderful dad. And if you have nothing better to obsess over, I think you need a new hobby.
As for some of the outrageous claims in this thread:
* I cannot fathom any judge revoking custody rights over a child sitting in the front seat of a vehicle. I feel very sorry for any family that would appear before such a judge.
* 57 inches, really? So you are keeping your children in a car seat past puberty? That has fallen off the silly boat into a vat of ridiculousness.
What should families like myself do, that have only 2 seats in the backseat and three children? That is honestly a question for all of the "experts"- is it safer for one child to be in the front seat or in the backseat without a seat belt?
For the record, I was pulled over a few weeks ago for a non-moving violation (taillight burned out) and the CHP officer did not bat and eye. My DD5 was in the front seat *gasp* AND not in a booster. *double gasp*

 

[mhsjax]

I vote for keep your mouth shut. You have given your opinion...twice. So the problem is NOT that he hasn't heard you. If the worst thing he does as a parent is let her ride in the front seat, I would say your niece has a wonderful dad. And if you have nothing better to obsess over, I think you need a new hobby.
As for some of the outrageous claims in this thread:
* I cannot fathom any judge revoking custody rights over a child sitting in the front seat of a vehicle. I feel very sorry for any family that would appear before such a judge.
* 57 inches, really? So you are keeping your children in a car seat past puberty? That has fallen off the silly boat into a vat of ridiculousness.
What should families like myself do, that have only 2 seats in the backseat and three children? That is honestly a question for all of the "experts"- is it safer for one child to be in the front seat or in the backseat without a seat belt?
For the record, I was pulled over a few weeks ago for a non-moving violation (taillight burned out) and the CHP officer did not bat and eye. My DD5 was in the front seat *gasp* AND not in a booster. *double gasp*

My niece, age 3 at the time, at herself out of her car seat. She was a real Houdini. Anyway, her mom was fussing at her and was about to pull over and put her back in the car seat. A car ran the stop sign and she was t-boned. The cop that showed up said actually it was a good thing that the child has freed herself, the car seat was a mess, and yes it was up to standard at that time. She would have been seriously hurt, as it was she had put on her seat belt and had no real injuries. My point is, I don't think a child of 5 should be riding up front, but like another pp said, I think some of these laws are way over the top. If I listened to them, my youngest DS age 11 would still be in a car seat/booster seat. My soon to be 6th grader won't be riding around in the back in a booster. We all survived and some people are just way over the top.

 

[2girls4me]

Letting her sit wherever she wants has nothing to do with hardly getting to see her. Her safety should be his number one priority.

 

[Planogirl]

Some people never get over 57 inches. I've never heard of that number before.

 

[kidshop]

I vote for keep your mouth shut. You have given your opinion...twice. So the problem is NOT that he hasn't heard you. If the worst thing he does as a parent is let her ride in the front seat, I would say your niece has a wonderful dad. And if you have nothing better to obsess over, I think you need a new hobby.
As for some of the outrageous claims in this thread:
* I cannot fathom any judge revoking custody rights over a child sitting in the front seat of a vehicle. I feel very sorry for any family that would appear before such a judge.
* 57 inches, really? So you are keeping your children in a car seat past puberty? That has fallen off the silly boat into a vat of ridiculousness.
What should families like myself do, that have only 2 seats in the backseat and three children? That is honestly a question for all of the "experts"- is it safer for one child to be in the front seat or in the backseat without a seat belt?
For the record, I was pulled over a few weeks ago for a non-moving violation (taillight burned out) and the CHP officer did not bat and eye. My DD5 was in the front seat *gasp* AND not in a booster. *double gasp*

As long as you can live with the consequences of your decision, go for it. a deploying air bag will likely kill your daughter. without an airbag, her chances are better to survive a crash, but if the seatbelt doesn't fit her properly across the hips and shoulder and instead is on her neck, well, it won't be good.

I'll never understand why it is such an imposition to make sure a seatbelt fits a child properly so it can provide protection in an accident.

 

[tink_n_pooh]

Laws vary from state to state, Florida seems to have the youngest age to no longer require a child safety restraint of some sort (3 years). The state of Minnesota requires all children <7 and <57" in a child seat, children must be over age 8 or over 57" (4'9") before being allowed to use only a seat belt.

http://www.ghsa.org/html/stateinfo/laws/childsafety_laws.html

This commercial is on all the time around here, I always notice because it has a Cinderella theme

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8KK5vrcMyY

 

[leebee]

It's illegal, it's dangerous, and if I were the child's mom, you can bet that I'd be hauling the dad back into court over custody. This is totally dangerous, he knows better, and he is choosing to break the law. This is EXACTLY the kind of thing that gets custody cases reopened. (And as far as the kid who wasn't buckled in and therefore survived an accident... for ever ONE of these stories there is a mountain of cases where children's lives were saved by being in their car seats... FAR more are saved or safer in their car seats/buckled up than are injured!! Search online for the statistics.)

 

[Coconut36]

I vote for keep your mouth shut. You have given your opinion...twice. So the problem is NOT that he hasn't heard you. If the worst thing he does as a parent is let her ride in the front seat, I would say your niece has a wonderful dad. And if you have nothing better to obsess over, I think you need a new hobby.
As for some of the outrageous claims in this thread:
* I cannot fathom any judge revoking custody rights over a child sitting in the front seat of a vehicle. I feel very sorry for any family that would appear before such a judge.
* 57 inches, really? So you are keeping your children in a car seat past puberty? That has fallen off the silly boat into a vat of ridiculousness.
What should families like myself do, that have only 2 seats in the backseat and three children? That is honestly a question for all of the "experts"- is it safer for one child to be in the front seat or in the backseat without a seat belt?
For the record, I was pulled over a few weeks ago for a non-moving violation (taillight burned out) and the CHP officer did not bat and eye. My DD5 was in the front seat *gasp* AND not in a booster. *double gasp*

Wow..just wow And yes in a state where it is a violation of child restraint laws they very likely would lose custody as well they should.

As for the "claims" being made..they are recommendations from organizations like the AAP and NHTSA not "claims". If a child is not tall enough (or heavy enough) they seat belt can not properly restrain them..thus resulting in serious injury or death as a result. So yes "really". The recommendation (and Disney has one out that gives the same info) is 4'9" (57 inches) to sit in just a seat belt. To no do so is endangering their life.

As for what you should do if you don't have enough rear seats..buy a bigger car is the solution. Endangering your child's life isn't the viable solution.

As for being pulled over and nothing done with a 5 year old in the front..based on you saying CHP I am going to assume California? If so then you had a crappy officer as you are violating your state law that requires they be 8 and 57" to be out of booster seat and requires them to be in a rear seat. You might want to review the laws of your state closely as you sound like you are breaking them.

It's really not difficult to do what is safest for your child..but hey..you have to live with their death on your shoulders and your deliberate and conscious choice to violate state law and safety recommendations..not me. Just hope that next time you get pulled over you have another unaware officer otherwise it is apparently points on your license and a $100 fine for the first offense.

 

[CHawthorne]

Apparently I was a little too mean on my last post. I believe 100% in seatbelts and child restraints. What I cannot believe is how quickly some of you (and I use the general YOU) fall all over “expert” opinions. And what I cannot believe is that most of you (again general) have not done your own research.

If tomorrow the “experts” told you that the only way you could really protect your child was to strap them to the roof would you do it? And if all the “experts” really cared for the children why are child restraint systems not standard? Why if I really want to protect my child I have to have the socio-economic means to do so? Does it mean that if I do not have $300 available I cannot adequately protect my child?

And as far as calling the police for endangering a child…come on. I have read a few trip reports from some of the posters and I would say that I have a case of attempted murder with the poor nutritional choices made by the same safety first people. I might just send the photos to the local stations and CPS.

 

[Coconut36]

Apparently I was a little too mean on my last post. I believe 100% in seatbelts and child restraints. What I cannot believe is how quickly some of you (and I use the general YOU) fall all over “expert” opinions. And what I cannot believe is that most of you (again general) have not done your own research.

If tomorrow the “experts” told you that the only way you could really protect your child was to strap them to the roof would you do it? And if all the “experts” really cared for the children why are child restraint systems not standard? Why if I really want to protect my child I have to have the socio-economic means to do so? Does it mean that if I do not have $300 available I cannot adequately protect my child?

And as far as calling the police for endangering a child…come on. I have read a few trip reports from some of the posters and I would say that I have a case of attempted murder with the poor nutritional choices made by the same safety first people. I might just send the photos to the local stations and CPS.

And have you done any research? If you have please do share actual factual studies that prove that a child does not need a car seat or booster seat to be safe when they are under a certain height/weight. I have yet to ever see anything to indicate it is safer to not be restrained in a booster/car seat..never and I doubt you have any proof of that either.

This has nothing to do with the cost of a seat or brand of a seat..it has to do with a properly installed child restrain that is appropriate for the child's height/weight and age. It can cost $300 or $65..as long as it is installed and used appropriately it provides safety..both the triage nurse and fire fighter I spoke with and learned car seat safety from emphasized this. Yes some seats that are more expensive get higher ratings and praise..but that doesn't mean they are the only options out there. It's about using them appropriately not about how much they cost and most hospitals, fire stations and other agencies can and do provide safety seats for those that can not afford them.

I have been in 3 serious car accidents (all caused by the driver of the other vehicle), I have reviewed car seat and crash test data, I have spoken to the seasoned fire fighter and triage nurses who taught us car seat safety..they witnessed what nobody should ever have to witness happening to their child..I have no doubt in my mind having my child properly restrained will keep them safer than a seat belt..none at all and there is plenty of data to back that up. I don''t know of any that "proves" that it is safer for a 3 year old at 30 lbs to be in the front seat in a seat belt or any data or studies that prove it is just as safe for a 5 year old to be in the front seat in a seat belt..to the contrary..the data proves the opposite. In general a child who is in a seat appropriate for their height/weight/age and properly installed in the car is going to survive an accident or receive little to no injury vs a child who is too young/small riding in a seat belt..there are lots and lots of stories about kids in seat belts before they should be that are seriously injured or killed in an accident they likely would have walked away from if properly restrained.

Even if you don't believe in it (and how you couldn't is beyond me...) in many states the LAW requires that you restrain your child to a certain age/weight/height AND both vehicle manufacturers, the AAP and various other agencies also state they are safest in the back seat. They don't call the front passenger seat the "death seat" because it is the safest place to sit now do they?

 

[Plannin'Shannon]

The recommendation (and Disney has one out that gives the same info) is 4'9" (57 inches) to sit in just a seat belt. To no do so is endangering their life.

Disclaimer: I am not being flippant or challenging your statement in any way. The following is just a funny observation.

My mother and I laugh about those commercials (the Cinderella ones) all the time. She's 4'9 with osteoporosis and is losing height. I tell her all the time she'll be needing a booster seat soon.