Does Ohio Need Stricter Booster Seat Laws?
Wednesday, December 3rd, 2008 By Marc Kilmer
But does it? For instance, Dr. William Cotton, medical director for the Primary Care Network and Nationwide Children’s Hospital contended that “recent research into 48,000 crashes involving some 56,000 children showed that youth in booster seats were 59% less likely to sustain an injury” (this is Gongwer’s summary of what he said, not a direct quote). However, as Stephen J. Dubner and Steven. D. Levitt, he authors of Freakonomics, point out, this data is based on comparing the use of a child in a booster seat to an unrestrained child, not a child who was using a seatbelt. Since the law already mandates children use seatbelts, this statistic is worthless in informing this debate.
Levitt and Dubner go on to point out:
In recent crashes and old ones, in big vehicles and small, in one-car crashes and multiple-vehicle crashes, there is no evidence that car seats do a better job than seat belts in saving the lives of children older than 2. (In certain kinds of crashes — rear-enders, for instance — car seats actually perform worse.) The real answer to why child auto fatalities have been falling seems to be that more and more children are restrained in some way. Many of them happen to be restrained in car seats, since that is what the government mandates, but if the government instead mandated proper seat-belt use for children, they would likely do just as well / without the layers of expense, regulation and anxiety associated with car seats.
While it is understandable that Rep. Shannon Jones, the sponsor of this legislation, thinks the evidence points to the need to revise Ohio’s laws, it just isn’t so. While the popular conception is that booster seats save lives, this conception is based on a misreading of the data. Public policy needs to be based on solid facts. It does not seem this legislation is.
Tags: booster seats, nanny state, safety
December 4th, 2008 at 2:22 pm
Dennis Durbin, M.D., M.S.C.E. the study’s lead author and a pediatric emergency physician at
Children’s Hospital.
Philadelphia, Pa. — The use of belt-positioning booster seats lowers the risk of injury to
children in crashes by 59 percent compared to the use of vehicle seat belts. The finding comes from
a study of children ages 4 through 7 by Partners for Child Passenger Safety (PCPS), a State Farmfunded
research project at The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia.
In addition, the study demonstrates that proper positioning of the belt by booster
seats virtually eliminates injuries associated with seat belt syndrome, including injuries to the
abdomen, neck/spine/back, as well as lower extremity injuries. In contrast, children in the study who
were restrained in seat belts alone suffered injuries to every body region.
Vehicle seat belts are designed to protect an average –sized adult male. Improper fit of both
lap and shoulder portions of seat belts in younger children place children at risk of injuries to the
abdomen and spine. Belt-positioning booster seats function to raise children up on the vehicle seat so
that the vehicle lap and shoulder belts are properly positioned across a child’s hips and chest,
allowing the vehicle seat belt to work as designed. The National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration and the American Academy of Pediatrics recommend booster seat use for children
who have outgrown child safety seats until they are at least 8 years old, unless they are 57 inches.
Until this study, advocates have lacked the real-world evidence to support the recommendation.
“Motor vehicle crashes remain the leading cause of death and disability in this age group,”
states Dr. Durbin. “It’s important that measures are taken to get children into optimal restraints for
their age and size on every trip. Booster seats are easy-to-use, affordable, and effective at protecting
our children from injury.”
December 4th, 2008 at 3:55 pm
Oh please. Freakonomics is to science what the DaVinci Code is to history. Please reread that section you quote. Look at their data source: FARS. The F stands for ‘Fatal’. This means A) they didn’t look at representative crash data, B) the data they did look at was heavily skewed towards events that produced dead kids, and C) they competely ignored any data source that might have shown the effects of proper restraints in non-fatal crashes. Any wonder then that they found what they did?
If anybody is misreading the data, it’s Marc Kilmer.
December 4th, 2008 at 4:10 pm
Please review the medical literature. I will continue to provide if you like. Please note 4-7 year category in this abstract.
Analysis of booster seat and seat belt use: how many Wisconsin childhood deaths and hospitalizations could have been prevented in 1998–2002?
Corden TE.
University of Wisconsin, Department of Pediatrics, Madison, WI 53792-4116, USA. tecorden@wisc.edu
BACKGROUND: Motor vehicle collisions (MVC) remain the leading cause of childhood death and injury in Wisconsin and throughout the nation. The objective of this study is to estimate the potential benefits of increased use of belt-positioning booster (BPB) seats for children ages 4-7, and increased seat belt use for children ages 8-18.5 years. The outcomes measured were the reduction in MVC-associated childhood deaths and hospitalizations as a result of increased use of BPB seats or seat belts. METHOD: Childhood MVC-associated deaths and hospitalizations from 1998 to 2002 were obtained from the Wisconsin Interactive Statistics on Health (WISH) data query system. Three separate age groups were analyzed: children ages 4-7, 8-15, and 16-18.5 years. Ages for the groups were designed to match current “best practice” recommendations for the use of BPB seats, published age-range specific baseline restraint use data, and age specific mortality/injury relative risk (RR) values as closely as possible for a pediatric population. Population attributable risk (PAR) was calculated to predict preventable deaths and injuries (hospitalizations) over the years studied. RESULTS: From 1998 to 2002, MVCs accounted for 440 childhood deaths and 2639 injuries requiring hospital admission. Using the calculated PAR population statistic for each age group studied, the predicted reduction in childhood MVC deaths and hospitalizations were calculated for various increases in restraint use above current baseline compliance. At the 100% use level, the model predicted 16 fewer deaths and 84 fewer hospitalizations for children 4-7 years old (BPB seat use); 45 fewer deaths and 206 fewer hospitalizations for children 8-15 years old (seat belt use); and 119 fewer deaths and 669 fewer hospitalizations for children 16-18.5 years old (seat belt use). The total potentially avoided deaths and hospitalizations across all age groups studied was 180 childhood deaths and 959 hospitalizations during this 5-year study period. CONCLUSION: Communities should devote resources to public education programs directed at increasing the use of belt-positioning booster seats for children 4-7 years old and seat belts for older children. Evidence-based child passenger safety laws should be improved and enforced in Wisconsin in an effort to support families in their attempts to safeguard their children. With a multi-component child passenger restraint safety campaign, unnecessary MVC-associated childhood deaths and injuries can be avoided in the future.
December 5th, 2008 at 11:25 am
[...] post from a couple days ago on efforts to change Ohio’s booster seat laws has engendered some [...]
December 8th, 2008 at 11:25 am
Marc
Booster seats are not recommended for older children as you stated in your reply but rather for children 4-7 years who are graduated prematurely from a car seat to a cars adult sized seat belt. Perhaps you misunderstood, but the booster seats are for this vulnerable population of children. Studies, such as the one included, have found booster seats to be effective in reducing the severity of injury to these children in the event of a motor vehicle crash. That saves a tremendous amount of grief and pain for families, and a tremendous amount of cost to society in general.
Thanks so much, have a great day.
December 4th, 2008 at 2:22 pm
Dennis Durbin, M.D., M.S.C.E. the study’s lead author and a pediatric emergency physician at
Children’s Hospital.
Philadelphia, Pa. — The use of belt-positioning booster seats lowers the risk of injury to
children in crashes by 59 percent compared to the use of vehicle seat belts. The finding comes from
a study of children ages 4 through 7 by Partners for Child Passenger Safety (PCPS), a State Farmfunded
research project at The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia.
In addition, the study demonstrates that proper positioning of the belt by booster
seats virtually eliminates injuries associated with seat belt syndrome, including injuries to the
abdomen, neck/spine/back, as well as lower extremity injuries. In contrast, children in the study who
were restrained in seat belts alone suffered injuries to every body region.
Vehicle seat belts are designed to protect an average –sized adult male. Improper fit of both
lap and shoulder portions of seat belts in younger children place children at risk of injuries to the
abdomen and spine. Belt-positioning booster seats function to raise children up on the vehicle seat so
that the vehicle lap and shoulder belts are properly positioned across a child’s hips and chest,
allowing the vehicle seat belt to work as designed. The National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration and the American Academy of Pediatrics recommend booster seat use for children
who have outgrown child safety seats until they are at least 8 years old, unless they are 57 inches.
Until this study, advocates have lacked the real-world evidence to support the recommendation.
“Motor vehicle crashes remain the leading cause of death and disability in this age group,”
states Dr. Durbin. “It’s important that measures are taken to get children into optimal restraints for
their age and size on every trip. Booster seats are easy-to-use, affordable, and effective at protecting
our children from injury.”
December 20th, 2008 at 6:13 pm
Booster seats? Everyone will need to purchase the larger SUVs or a van in order for the taller children so their heads won’t touch the ceiling of the smaller economical mid or compact vehicles. My daughter owns a Subaru, it will not accomodate a booster seat for her 7 year old without his head barely reaching the ceiling. He is 52 inches tall so that means he is required to sit in a booster seat. I am so glad my children are grown…both my sons were taller than average, even at 4 years old. True all children need a safety restraint for protection from serious injury following an accident, let’s start with the vehicles. Have adjustable seatbelts for children. Children are of all different sizes, to just declare 4-8 years to sit in a booster seat is unjust. 4′ 9″ for the height? What about the child’s weight? My grandson sat in a booster seat and complained continuously that his legs and “butt” kept getting numb. This is just another law that is being put quickly into effect without any real study done with “real children” of all sizes, not statistics from accidents of children that are deceased. Tell an 8 year old under 4′ 9″ to sit in a booster seat, that will be a battle no matter how much you tell them it is for their safety. The boy in the booster seat pictures looks like a sissy, a mommy’s boy, he wouldn’t argue about anything. Get real kids to test it out, not selected good boys. Go back to the drawing board, do more research before putting a law into effect that has too many if, and, or buts.