Unbelted child - Family offloaded. Now what happens etc

[lowcostdolly]

Bigjames I totally agree with you re an airline provided booster seat

Most carriers will allow a car seat up to 36 months but all the regs are in the very small print....the stuff that nobody reads Hence you have people turning up with seats which can be used in normal flight for sleep/feeding etc but according to the regs are not suitable during take off/landing and turbulence...the very times you need to secure the child!

Airlines providing these seats would involve cost which would ultimately be passed onto the parents.......would they be prepared to pay?. I don't know. I would but when you see parents who don't feel junior should have to sit down for the take off/landing roll to ensure his safety I'm not so sure.

Personally as a parent I feel that 2 years for the own seat rule as laid down by the CAA is too young. Some two year olds are fine but many are not for the reasons of size and temperment. However CC have to ensure this rule because if we don't and something happens as a result of us using our discretion we and our company are liable. An airline provided booster seat for use up to 36 months would be a great idea IMHO.

[bigjames]

i would be prepared to pay a reasonable supplement for a booster seat. just as i am prepared to pay for a rented child seat with any rental car company. hardly likely to be a huge extra cost.

[Boomerang_Butt]

Booster seats ( as opposed to car seats/capsules) are not allowed in Australia as the booster seat itself is not secured to the aircraft seat. Only car seats (capsules) with certain attachment points are allowed, so I think there might be a problem there with booster seats, if you're referring to the ones used by older kids that can sit upright rather than by babies.

If the seat is only secured when the seatbelt is done up around the child then it's not really safe in the case of turbulence, I guesss this is why they are banned for use. Kind of the same reason we're told kids shouldn't sit on pillows for takeoff and landing.

Another issue I deal with on a regular basis is parents not wanting to sit the child up for landing because they're asleep. Trying to explain why a seatbelt won't work that way is proving to be very difficult, as 95% of them don't seem to understand why we're asking. Same goes for arm rests being down for landing... do we really have to give parents to gory details so they'll do as we ask? (Actually I had to once, as the mother was absolutely refusing)

A quick whisper of 'it will stop you crushing your child if we stop suddenly' did the ttrick though!

[bigjames]

of course the child seat has to be properly secured. but i do not understand why they can be properly secured in a car and not a plane. i have secured a good seat plenty of times. of course for take off and landings we have complied with the airlines sop, ie cx sq they have belts, ac they just say hold on tight. but in flight, esp for long hauls, we can let down our guard for a bit in the knowledge that the child is secure.

[Boomerang_Butt]

I'm thinking that booster seat means something different in your part of the world perhaps. The ones I'm speaking of are basically a moulded plastic or foam seat that the kid sits on, and the seatbelt passes across the front and sometimes under 'arms' on the side of the seat. These are not allowed in Aus because nothing aside from the seatbelt secures it. Whereas car seats have the attachment point which goes over the seat back, which is why they have to be in certain locations in the cabin and not just any seat.

Sorry for any confusion!

[jetset lady]

but i do not understand why they can be properly secured in a car and not a plane.

Not having children, child car seats are not quite my specialist subject but the above did make me wonder if they are speed rated in some way, say for the forces involved in an accident. Could this be the reason they are not approved for use during take off and landing onboard an aircraft, as higher speeds would apply? It would seem sort of logical.

With regards to the age limit of two for infants on lap, as I mentioned once before, I was told by a medical expert that it is nothing to do with the size of the child, but actually because, at two years old, a child's spine has started to stiffen. As a result, they're more likely to suffer from spinal injuries if a parent is thrown forward over them when they are sat on the parents lap. Having them sat in a seat of their own is not ideal either, but apparently considered the lesser of two evils. Now, surprising though this may be, the development of a child's bone structure is also not one of my specialist subjects, but again, it seems to make sense. I'd be interested to know if any other medical personel are able to confirm or deny this as a likely explanation.

Thanks

[Matt101]

Hey BB your description of a Booster sear is what I think one is to (and I am from the UK) and indeed they aren't secured directly.

I think what is being suggested here though is to make a new 'securable' booster seat. Good idea on paper. In reality probably a pain to get approved by the various CAA's and Airlines.

[Dual ground]

So why not just manufacture specially adapted seat cushions, twice the thickness of the standard ones? If the same materials are used for these cushions and their covers, then burn testing should be no problems. When a child requires one whip the standard cushion off, and fit one of the "Kiddy Kushions". Maybe even fit a crotch strap with a loop, that the standard seat belt could pass through. This would reduce the risk of "submarining" under the belt.

Would probably be very easy in economy seats, not so easy in business or first though.

[DX Wombat]

Only car seats (capsules) with certain attachment points are allowed,

Car seats are fine and by far the best means of securing a baby or toddler, but those capsules are positively dangerous as they consist simply of a wide belt strapped around the poor infant with no means of preventing the infant from hurtling forwards or backwards through it. It's about time they were banned.

your description of a Booster sear is what I think one is to (and I am from the UK) and indeed they aren't secured directly.

Neither are many car seats. Most removeable ones are secured by the adult seatbelt passing through and/or across various points of the seat and often also the child. Another, major problem is that parents often do not have the child strapped in tightly enough and place blankets etc between the child and the straps. I lost count of the number of times I stopped parents taking their baby home from hospital to show them how the baby should be secured. Usually the reason for the slack straps is that they, understandably, didn't want to hurt the child by having them too tight.

[Boomerang_Butt]

I'd have to look it up but I'm pretty sure the regs here only allow for car sets which have the attachment point on the rear, as in my company Engineering approval is required to carry a car seat and they fit the long extension strap which goes over the seatback. This is why we have specific seats in the cabin as the seat behind (if there is one) needs to be blocked off also as the strap covers the tray on the seat behind.

I'll have to have another look but we're told they need a sticker saying approved for use by (and then several civil aviation authorities of certain countries)

I can imagine the issue with cushions would be, having somewhere to stow them and again a cost constraint. If parents were willing to pay a suplement perhaps they could be stored in the airport not onboard but then you also run into the problem of needing different ones for each seat/aircraft type.

For now the CARES kiddie harness seems to be a good idea for the older ones, and it's approved for use by CASA in Australia.

http://www.kidsflysafe.com

[bigjames]

I think that is why it would make sense for each airline to have either a list of approved seats and/or an in house seat that could be booked in advance (and paid extra for). i recognize that the logistics of the latter would be very difficult but there may be an elegant solution.

Still find it strange that this part of the market has been ignored as i agree with everyone here that many parents of kids in this age group seem un prepared and uninformed of the safety risks to their young ones.

many thanks for the link to the CARES product. that actually looks very good! i may get one.

[Boomerang_Butt]

Yes I've often thought that someone with the time & inclination could come up with a solution to the problem, however my guess is that they tend to run up against walls when it comes to testing & approvals. There's another device on the market which is only approved for use in cruise (the Baby B'Air) which is a vest with a loop (much like the infant seatbelt) to prevent a baby flying around the cabin in unanticipated turbulence.

However the site is clear to emphasise it's not for use on takeoff, landing or taxi. I'd say because they have not yet met requirements as mentioned before for loading/impact/G forces and the suchlike.

If I recall correctly it took the United FA many years before her idea for the infant seatbelt was approved. Now there's disagreement over this device in some countries as well for the reason mentioned earlier of children being crushed by parents. In my opinion I'd rather take the chance of hurting the child myself then having it fly through the cabin on impact (as told by many flight crew accounts of crashes, inc UAL232, where that FA who invented the seat belt for the babies worked)

It's a tough case I suppose purely because it's difficult to have a 'one size fits all' kind of approach. Does anyone know if in fact any other (airline/manufacturer) companies are working o nany type of child restraints/seats?

[lowcostdolly]

Bigjames/BoomerangButt the CARES kiddie seat works well.....a couple of my friends have them and swear by them

JSL you asked for a medical opinion to confirm/deny the explanation given to you by a medical expert. Please could I respectfully ask their field of expertise?

The reason I'm asking is that I am a Registered Nurse on both the adult and child register. I also have a post registration qualification in Accident and Emergency nursing. I don't claim to be a medical expert as I'm not a doctor and in any case peadiatric orthopeadics is so specialised it is considered a speciality in it's own right by the medical profession. I have no specialised training in this field other than what I gained when I did my childrens training quite a few years ago.

What I learnt at that stage is that childrens bones are soft and pliable hence the common "greenstick fractures" frequently seen where they bend and crack rather than break as adults do. An injury that is considered serious in an adult and can take many months to heal takes only a few weeks in a child. I've never heard of children's bones "stiffening" at age two. Childrens bones form and grow right up until the end of their teens and the rates also differ according to sex and nutritional status.

With regard to the infant's occupying their own seat rule at age two I've alway's been taught at my company that it is because over two's are considered too big to be adequately protected by the infant brace position. That would be a good rationale if all two year old's were of equal and predicted size. We both know as crew they are not. Some two year old's are tiny and I guess we have both seen them slipping under the adult belt that the CAA say they have to have.

Personally I feel as both a parent and an SCCM that all children up to a certain weight should have to be restrained by a seat approved by the airline. That should be law. If the parent cannot provide it themselves then the airline should have to and pass the cost on. That is what car hire companies do.

I cringe sometimes when I see parents of a 2 year old who is tiny and really does not want to sit in his own seat for the take off role trying desperately to restrain him. The noise does not bother me. What bothers me is the belt is quite often really near juniors neck as he tries to wriggle out/under it. If we had a rejected take off.......

On an approved seat with a five point harness this would not be an issue.

Just to reiterate on the medical front my training was generalised and a few years ago. Happy to be corrected by a more qualified practioner now.

[Glamgirl]

To bring this thread back to the opening post: A friend told me the family travelled the next day. It might of course not be the same family, but by the sounds of it, it's highly likely that it was.

Gg

[beamender99]

Glamgirl.
Thanks for your update. The pax were on the BA LGW UVF service.
They were lucky there was space on the next days flt.

[Widger]

I had an absolutely awful flight some years ago, Manchester to Cyprus. My wife and I travelled with our two children, both under the age of 3. My youngest sat on my wife's lap with an extra belt in seat B, and my eldest was in the aisle seat C. i was then seperated by the isle in seat D. Half an hour of taxi started to really irritate my eldest, who wanted a cuddle from her mother. (Note that we were not travelling at 150knots at the time, more like 0). We both tried to calm our daughter down but, I was not allowed to get up to assist, or have her sit on my lap and my wife with our other daughter on her lap, could do little to restrain our normally well behaved daughter, with parents who have very good parenting skills, thank you very much. Merry hell ensued, with my daughter wriggling and us both trying to get her to sit down. She having been sat down and belted for over half an hour and having been woken at 4 a.m. to travel to the airport, was quite clearly distressed. i would like to say that the CC were helpful but I cannot. They were in fact rude and obstructive to any attempt we made to try and calm our daughter.

Thankfully the crew on the trip back were much more helpful and we had no such problems, also helped by not sitting on the tarmac for half an hour. So, I realise that you all have a difficult role to undertake and safety responsibilities but, do not tar all SLF with the same brush of being bad parents or the kids brats. Often, much as the return crew did, a little bribery of a drink of water or a sweet, can often work wonders, especially when mum and dad can not get to their bags.

Thanks for reading and keep safe.

[Married a Canadian]

I have flown with MAC junior quite a lot over the last year..and only the European carriers have given us a lap belt to strap him to us. He is only a year and a half in age now.
United, Delta and US airways all said they didn't give lap belts and we had to hold him on our laps.
Now we hadn't booked a seat for him as he is less than two but I wondered why the US carriers were different in regards to "attaching" babies to the parent with a lap belt.

Does anyone know if there are different regulations?

[Binman62]

The family is of course responsible but the attitude and understanding of the crew is also critical. Like the previous post I had a really bad experience about 5 years ago when my angelic featured, blond haired daughter decided that the 30 min taxi around Heathrow was not what she had signed up for. While on the ground she simply lost control. Her behavior was so out of character that we got quite worried. We were also deeply embarrassed, as on top of everything else we were in the front row of club class with a flight to Larnaca ahead of us.
The crew was not at all sympathetic and I would say inflamed the situation by both their words and actions at the time. We were fully aware of the need to have her seated but nothing we said or did, and no matter what reassurance we gave them they stood over us like sentries wagging fingers and being thoroughly unpleasant. It was quite a performance from all concerned.
She was in the end forcibly pinned down in a seat between my wife and I but within seconds of lifting off the ground was angelic again. ……much to the relief of my wife and everyone else in club…

Since then almost 200,000 miles in 7 years and a BA silver exec card holder. She has never looked back and we have received numerous compliments from crews and passengers about her ad her younger brother.

Parents need to take control but crew need to have some understanding and sympathy. Just getting onto aircraft today is stressful and crews simply do not experience what their passengers have been through before they get on. Children are not immune to this and whilst parents should and must prepare and reassure their kids before travel crews should be able and willing to help support those parents who are having a tough time.

[Boomerang_Butt]

Yes it's a difficult scenario especially on taxi as you describe,the hard part is that some parents think we are being harsh by coming back to check on whether the little one has been managed to be made to sit down, whereas we cannot sit down ourselves or give a cabin secure callback until the child is seated too. So of course it adds pressure on both sides, we don't want to rush the parents but on the other hand we can't just walk off and hope little Janne or Johnny has sat down by the time we take off.

As you say the crew can help or hinder and personally try to be the helping kind, then again there are a minority of parents out there who will scream and carry on as soon as we even mention that the child needs to be sitting/buckled in a different way to how they currently are. I always get told 'Yeah yeah he will sit down when the plane takes off' unfortunately is not an acceptable answer for me to give a cabin secure callback. It's my job on the line if I do so when it's not. That minority of parents need to educate themselves and perhaps ask what needs to be done on that particular carrier to satisfy the regulations. I'm tired of being yelled at for asking the little ones to be sat upright on the seat for landing. Some simple common-sense would go a long way there!

But as I mentioned these parents are in the minority thank goodness!

MAC, my understanding of the seatbelt issue is, the US side of things believe infant (loop) seatbelts have the potential too do more harm as the child can be crushed by the adult in an impact, wheres Europe/Aus/NZ regulate that they must be worn.

[Married a Canadian]

my understanding of the seatbelt issue is, the US side of things believe infant (loop) seatbelts have the potential too do more harm as the child can be crushed by the adult in an impact, wheres Europe/Aus/NZ regulate that they must be worn.

Interesting...thankyou.

Makes me wonder though the potential for injury to them though if the adult loses their grip in the event of a severe impact.

It is the opposite of the initial thread start point....imagine if in the US a parent flying with an infant under 2 insisted upon a lap belt..and got offloaded because the airline was not willing to provide one.