Old news, but good that people are talking about it.

ABC, just today, ran a story on the AAP's recommendation to keep kids rear-facing in their carseats until at least age 2. It's good advice. It's been around for several years, yes, but it's good that people are finally talking about it.

I do find that it is very interesting how much it has changed over the past year. A year ago, we were the ONLY family we knew at this post that kept our toddler rear-facing. When I said anything about it, people told me I was crazy. Today, it's a different story. I'm not the only one talking about this stuff, and other people say, "Yeah, my toddler is rear-facing, too!" or "We don't plan on turning him around until he's 2!" and stuff like that. The word is getting out.

Even so, there are a lot of people who are just painfully ignorant, and they are the loudest. It's really kind of sad. Some lady was saying, "Use common sense! Would you make an entire car ride sitting indian style?!" How about using common sense, and seeing that in Sweden, which keeps their kids rear-facing until at least 3 years old, but commonly to 5 or 6, child car accident fatalities are unheard of, while in the US, where people forward-face their kids at 1 year old in most cases, car accidents are a leading cause of death for children under the age of 14. How about looking at the crash tests, and medical documents showing the progression of spinal development, and using common sense, even if you have little understanding of the laws of physics, to see that crash forces interact far more intensely on each vertebrae when the body is held only by straps, rather than supported by a hard shell? That's common sense.

The thing that gets me more than anything else are the ones who say they just "couldn't" rear-face past a year old because their kid was just too tall. OK, my son is 2 years old. He is EXTREMELY tall for his age. There isn't a 1-year-old on the planet who's as tall as Orren, and Orren rides rear-facing. (Granted, Orren has a very nice carseat.) There isn't a 1-year-old in existence who CAN'T rear-face. There is hardly a 2-year-old in existence who CAN'T. There are a lot of parents who WON'T.

I'm honestly past the point of telling people that they should keep their kids rear-facing. If they're going to, they're going to. If they're not, they're not. What I do ask is to own the choice, whatever it is. If you are choosing to forward-face your child when you could rear-face, own that you are making a less safe choice. Your kid is only 1/5 as safe as mine in the car. Your kid runs the risk of internal decapitation in a car accident. Your kid actually runs a significantly higher risk of leg and arm injuries in a crash than mine does (because those injuries, believe it or not, are very common among forward-facing passengers, and unheard of in rear-facing passengers). This is a CHOICE. You are CHOOSING to forward-face. You COULD rear-face, but you are CHOOSING not to. I don't think I'd have nearly the problem with people as I do if they'd just say, "We're choosing not to do that. We don't want to. We've seen the evidence and it's a risk we're willing to take." I could respect that. I wouldn't understand it, but I could respect it to some degree because at least they owned it. To try to argue with the laws of physics, then say they CAN'T do something they obviously can do, is where the aggravation comes from, not the decision in and of itself.

Anyhow, keep them rear-facing to at least 2 if you will. There's no reason why you can't, so just do your best with it. We have. I can tell you it's really not hard.