Baby on lap

[tartemis]

I have always been able to afford to buy my infants their own seats, but I choose not to. Why? Because I'm against waste. I don't believe in spending money for minimal incremental benefits (if at all) -- which I believe is all you get when you purchase an infant a seat.

The anti-lap baby crowd is very vocal, but they are a minority. The majority of folks don't purchase plane seats for infants.

 

[Minniemouse07]

The anti-lap baby crowd is very vocal, but they are a minority. The majority of folks don't purchase plane seats for infants.

Actually... if you had made that statement 9yrs ago when we started flying w/ my dd, I would wholeheartedly agree with you (about the fact that most held their babies on their laps and didn't use car seats) but over the last 9 yrs (and having another child where we purchased seats for him) I have seen a HUGE increase in the number of babies in car seats on planes.

I suspect that if the number of car seat users aren't more than lap child flyers currently...it is pretty darn close to being more in the near future.

 

[tlbwriter]

So get 2 plastic bags and fill them with rice or something like that. Make it so the difference in mass of the bags is the same as ooo, lets’ say a baby and a tray of food. Okay now grab a baking pan or a tray or some sort of stable platform. Now go outside put both bags on the tray, hold it with both hands (one on each edge) and start running. Your natural running motion is going to cause the tray to go up and down. Let me know what one moves more? That is what I mean. Not Pick up the bags and throw em at your face and figure out what one hurts more. That is NOT what I'm talking about.

Interesting experiment, but it has absolutely nothing to do with the physics involved in a crash or turbulence. It would be a better comparison if you held a tray of food on a roller coaster, and then held a baby on a roller coaster. Which do you think is more likely to slip out of your grip?

 

[justhat]

I have always been able to afford to buy my infants their own seats, but I choose not to. Why? Because I'm against waste. I don't believe in spending money for minimal incremental benefits (if at all) -- which I believe is all you get when you purchase an infant a seat.

The anti-lap baby crowd is very vocal, but they are a minority. The majority of folks don't purchase plane seats for infants.

I am against waste too. So I won't buy 20 boxes of cake mix just cause they're on sale, knowing most would expire before I could use them.

Any possible safety benefit for my kids though? That isn't considered waste to me. If the rest of the passengers need a seatbelt on a plane, why wouldn't a young child? That just doesn't make any sense.

 

[maxiesmom]

IAny possible safety benefit for my kids though? That isn't considered waste to me. If the rest of the passengers need a seatbelt on a plane, why wouldn't a young child? That just doesn't make any sense.

You are right, it makes no sense at all. No matter how people phrase it, they are betting their child's safety on the fact that airline mishaps are rare. But I would hate to be the parent who didn't buy a seat, and ended up in extended rough air, or worse!

 

[tartemis]

I am against waste too. So I won't buy 20 boxes of cake mix just cause they're on sale, knowing most would expire before I could use them.

Any possible safety benefit for my kids though? That isn't considered waste to me.

So you will spend money as long as it as "any possible safety benefit" for your kids? Really? I bet I could find a hundred things that you could, but don't do because you view that any possible safety benefit is really marginal and not worth the expense or hassle (even though you could afford it.)

For example, do your kids wear helmets at the playground? (Statistically, they are much more likely to suffer a serious head injury on the playground than to be in a plane accident.) Why not? Wouldn't they be safer?

I assume that you made sure that you purchased a home near your kids school so that they can walk and minimize time in a car (again one of the biggest causes of injury of a child). IF not, why? Too expensive? Not convenient?

Look, I don't begrudge anyone who wants to buy their kid a seat. But the truth is that it is a marignal (if at all) increase in safety for the child. And I say, if at all, because as evidenced in this thread, there seems to be disagreement among countries as to whether a kid is safer in a seat or being held.

To me it is wasteful and a hassle -- especially when they are very young and when I want to be nursing them on takeoff and landing anyway.

 

[maxiesmom]

So you will spend money as long as it as "any possible safety benefit" for your kids? Really? I bet I could find a hundred things that you could, but don't do because you view that any possible safety benefit is really marginal and not worth the expense or hassle (even though you could afford it.)

For example, do your kids wear helmets at the playground? (Statistically, they are much more likely to suffer a serious head injury on the playground than to be in a plane accident.) Why not? Wouldn't they be safer?

To make this comparison fair, you would have to also state that the parents at the playground DO wear helmets. That is what is so silly. Flying apparently has enough inherent danger that all adults and bags need to be secured, but for some reason are babies do not. Makes no sense at all!!! We worry more about our bags being secured than we do our children????

 

[deegack]

So you will spend money as long as it as "any possible safety benefit" for your kids? Really? I bet I could find a hundred things that you could, but don't do because you view that any possible safety benefit is really marginal and not worth the expense or hassle (even though you could afford it.)

For example, do your kids wear helmets at the playground? (Statistically, they are much more likely to suffer a serious head injury on the playground than to be in a plane accident.) Why not? Wouldn't they be safer?

I assume that you made sure that you purchased a home near your kids school so that they can walk and minimize time in a car (again one of the biggest causes of injury of a child). IF not, why? Too expensive? Not convenient?

Look, I don't begrudge anyone who wants to buy their kid a seat. But the truth is that it is a marignal (if at all) increase in safety for the child. And I say, if at all, because as evidenced in this thread, there seems to be disagreement among countries as to whether a kid is safer in a seat or being held.

To me it is wasteful and a hassle -- especially when they are very young and when I want to be nursing them on takeoff and landing anyway.

Sometimes a car seat in a car is a hassle but I always use it. Sometimes using the seat belt in my daughters stroller is a hassle but I use it. My child doesn't wear a helmet at the playground, but I do go to a playground that has safe equipment and a soft surface for falls. We did actually choose our house because we can walk to school when dd is that age. When we bought our car, car seat, crib, etc we looked at safety features and ratings and factored that into our choice. If you want to play russian roulette with your kid, that's fine, but to say its a waste of money for others to do so is just ridiculous. Every union and agency connected with air travel agrees using a seat is the safest choice for every child. Its only a matter of time before it is the law.

eta - the coffee pot on an airplane needs to be secure to prevent it from flying around in turbulence, why shouldn't your kid have to have the same protection

 

[justhat]

So you will spend money as long as it as "any possible safety benefit" for your kids? Really? I bet I could find a hundred things that you could, but don't do because you view that any possible safety benefit is really marginal and not worth the expense or hassle (even though you could afford it.)

Yes, I will spend the money on safety every time. I have 3 kids, and one is under the age of 2. We live in Tucson so flying anywhere is a huge expense. Even flights to San Diego are around $200/person and it's super close. But we pay for 5 tickets every time. And have since her 1st flight at 2 months old. And same with the others, on their first flights, at the same age. It's never been a question. If adults and 2yos need to be buckled in, why on earth wouldn't my 1yo be? By your reasoning, I assume you don't wear a seatbelt on the plane? As the risk of danger is negligible, so why bother?


For example, do your kids wear helmets at the playground? (Statistically, they are much more likely to suffer a serious head injury on the playground than to be in a plane accident.) Why not? Wouldn't they be safer?

Have there been studies showing that wearing a helmet on the playground is safer? Because it very well may not be, as it makes the child's head heavier, therefore offsetting their balance when running and climbing. So no, they don't, as I can't say that is definitely safer, and in fact, I can see how it would NOT be safer.



I assume that you made sure that you purchased a home near your kids school so that they can walk and minimize time in a car (again one of the biggest causes of injury of a child). IF not, why? Too expensive? Not convenient?

Actually, we did, in our old house/city. We specifically chose a house that was close enough to walk the kids to school. And we walked nearly every day, barring bad weather. That was in Washington, DC. However, now we live in Tucson, where there are no sidewalks, tons and tons of senior citizens here for 6 months of the year (so they aren't super familiar with driving here during the morning rush, yet they still do, and some honestly shouldn't be driving), and tons of wild animals roaming freely. So while we only live 5 miles from the school, a distance that I easily biked with the kids in DC, it would NOT be safer than driving. In the 9 months we've lived here I have seen about 12 bobcats on the road between our house and school, at least as many coyotes, far more javelinas (often with their babies, so the moms are particularly aggressive). Plus we'd either have to walk through desert scrub (with the scorpions, huge centipedes, and tarantulas) or be on the actual road (and people treat roads like highways here, so they literally drive at least 60 on 4 lane roads with no shoulder and no sidewalks) and I honestly don't consider either option to be safe. So sadly, while I'd love to bike it, it really isn't safe with small kids. If they were older, sure, I'd try it (though we have a killer hill to climb to get back home!), but not with a 4yo.

Look, I don't begrudge anyone who wants to buy their kid a seat. But the truth is that it is a marignal (if at all) increase in safety for the child. And I say, if at all, because as evidenced in this thread, there seems to be disagreement among countries as to whether a kid is safer in a seat or being held.

To me it is wasteful and a hassle -- especially when they are very young and when I want to be nursing them on takeoff and landing anyway.
I exclusively nursed all 3 of my kids. Youngest is still nursing. I never had an issue on a plane with any of the 3. I nursed them immediately before takeoff and every single kid fell asleep on takeoff and slept for the majority, if not all, of the flight. If need be, I nursed them again before landing. With my older 2 I sometimes took pumped bottles along, but very, very rarely. And while the older 2 used pacifiers as babies (1st till 16 months, 2nd till 9 months), my 3rd hated them from birth so she didn't suck on anything and did fine.

And again, buying meat is wasteful if I am a vegetarian. Ensuring my child is as safe as possible will NEVER be a waste.

To make this comparison fair, you would have to also state that the parents at the playground DO wear helmets. That is what is so silly. Flying apparently has enough inherent danger that all adults and bags need to be secured, but for some reason are babies do not. Makes no sense at all!!! We worry more about our bags being secured than we do our children????

Exactly! Why do the rest of us need seatbelts? If it isn't for safety, then what's the point? And why do they not allow you to hold bags on your lap? Even a small purse? Heck, they don't even allow you to hold large jackets, as I've been told to place mine under the seat. But a baby is okay? Really?

And what's the deal with 2yo being a cutoff? My youngest is 15 months old and weighs 18lbs. My niece weighed 31lbs at 15 months. So at 2yo, niece is weighing in at 36lbs, more than my 4.5yo, while my daughter at 2yo will likely weight about 22lbs. What is the logic that says my niece can be a lap child (or could have, till last Saturday when she turned 2yo), but my 4.5yo who is smaller, needs his own seat?

 

[nchulka]

I found a great solution. I didn't want to pay for an extra seat but I wanted my child safe and secure so I just chucked my baby up in the overhear storage

Actually we're too cheap to fly, we drive everywhere. When I saw that this thread had grown to so many pages I figured it was probably no longer so much about seats on a plane but just another thread that has turned into the great debate on who is the better parent.

Just FYI my vote would be for not buying a seat

 

[tartemis]

I'm replying en masse since you all are making essentially the same points.

What you are missing, is that it is all a cost/benefit analysis. Cost includes money and hassle. Benefit includes actual increase in safety plus any relief you get from thinking you are safer. And despite, the protestations otherwise, I GUARANTEE that all of you engage in this analysis and do not ALWAYS choose the safest option no matter what the cost (monetary or otherwise.) As one of you mentioned, you FACTOR safety into decisions, but it isn't the SOLE factor.

Despite the failed analogy that I'm playing Russian Roulette with my child by not buying her own seat (Really, there is a 1 in 6 chance that my baby will die by not getting her a seat?) or the equally failed analogy of why bother using a car seat since its a hassle too, if you apply a simple cost/benefit analysis, it seems hard to argue that you are really only getting MARGINAL increase in safety buying a lap baby a seat. That is not true with respect to car seats, which is why I reach a different conclusion in that dfferent situation.

And since it keeps getting brought up -- babies aren't unsecured if they are lap babies. They are SECURED by me. I am the seatbelt. Now, perhaps, I won't be as an effective seatbelt as a vinyl one that holds me, but you are again making a failed analogy by comparing a lap baby to a coffee pot.

Speaking of which, the stupid coffee pot isn't being secured the whole time anyway -- at some point in the flight it is taken out and used to actually give people coffee. But wouldn't it be safer to just keep it strapped down the whole time or to not even have it -- what happens if the plane hits unexpected turbulence and it goes flying, knocking a baby strapped into a seat somewhere unconscious? Is a cup of coffee really more important then the safety of a baby?

Ridiculous you may say? No, again it is just a cost/benefit analysis. The airlines deem that the benefit of people getting coffee outweighs the remote possibility of a baby getting injured -- and that does not mean that coffee is more important than babies.

 

[justhat]

I found a great solution. I didn't want to pay for an extra seat but I wanted my child safe and secure so I just chucked my baby up in the overhear storage

Actually we're too cheap to fly, we drive everywhere. When I saw that this thread had grown to so many pages I figured it was probably no longer so much about seats on a plane but just another thread that has turned into the great debate on who is the better parent.

Just FYI my vote would be for not buying a seat

How does holding your child foster their independence? Shouldn't you have them sit alone, 13 rows behind you?

 

[nchulka]

How does holding your child foster their independence? Shouldn't you have them sit alone, 13 rows behind you?

Actually they take a separate plane, sometimes we even vacation different places. DH and I may go to Hawaii and the kids might hop a plane to Disney

As I said we don't fly at all, I was just trying to lighten the mood.

 

[justhat]

I'm replying en masse since you all are making essentially the same points.

What you are missing, is that it is all a cost/benefit analysis. Cost includes money and hassle. Benefit includes actual increase in safety plus any relief you get from thinking you are safer. And despite, the protestations otherwise, I GUARANTEE that all of you engage in this analysis and do not ALWAYS choose the safest option no matter what the cost (monetary or otherwise.) As one of you mentioned, you FACTOR safety into decisions, but it isn't the SOLE factor.

Despite the failed analogy that I'm playing Russian Roulette with my child by not buying her own seat (Really, there is a 1 in 6 chance that my baby will die by not getting her a seat?) or the equally failed analogy of why bother using a car seat since its a hassle too, if you apply a simple cost/benefit analysis, it seems hard to argue that you are really only getting MARGINAL increase in safety buying a lap baby a seat. That is not true with respect to car seats, which is why I reach a different conclusion in that dfferent situation.

And since it keeps getting brought up -- babies aren't unsecured if they are lap babies. They are SECURED by me. I am the seatbelt. Now, perhaps, I won't be as an effective seatbelt as a vinyl one that holds me, but you are again making a failed analogy by comparing a lap baby to a coffee pot.

Speaking of which, the stupid coffee pot isn't being secured the whole time anyway -- at some point in the flight it is taken out and used to actually give people coffee. But wouldn't it be safer to just keep it strapped down the whole time or to not even have it -- what happens if the plane hits unexpected turbulence and it goes flying, knocking a baby strapped into a seat somewhere unconscious? Is a cup of coffee really more important then the safety of a baby?

Ridiculous you may say? No, again it is just a cost/benefit analysis. The airlines deem that the benefit of people getting coffee outweighs the remote possibility of a baby getting injured -- and that does not mean that coffee is more important than babies.

You aren't answering the point regarding bags/coats/purses/etc. all needing to be out of your lap. Nor why you wear a seatbelt. Or the big point, of why we secure *everything* on a plane, EXCEPT babies under age 2. Or like I said, why my 4yo needs a seat, when he's smaller than my 2yo niece who could fly free? (Again, she just turned 2yo last Saturday, but she was larger than my son then anyway.) Wouldn't weight be better? Or height? Some 2yos, are 40lbs. You really think you can hold 40 squirmy pounds in the even of an emergency? I don't have to question that, as I know I can't, nor can any individual. So you aren't a seatbelt, the baby has none, plain and simple.

 

[tartemis]

You aren't answering the point regarding bags/coats/purses/etc. all needing to be out of your lap. Nor why you wear a seatbelt. Or the big point, of why we secure *everything* on a plane, EXCEPT babies under age 2. Or like I said, why my 4yo needs a seat, when he's smaller than my 2yo niece who could fly free? (Again, she just turned 2yo last Saturday, but she was larger than my son then anyway.) Wouldn't weight be better? Or height? Some 2yos, are 40lbs. You really think you can hold 40 squirmy pounds in the even of an emergency? I don't have to question that, as I know I can't, nor can any individual. So you aren't a seatbelt, the baby has none, plain and simple.

Did you miss the discussion of the coffee pot -- insert bag, purse, whatever, its the same point. It is a cost/benefit analysis. Even with respect to why the rules are somewhat arbitrary -- it is a less costly system to operate with minimal impact on safety.

 

[justhat]

Did you miss the discussion of the coffee pot -- insert bag, purse, whatever, its the same point. It is a cost/benefit analysis. Even with respect to why the rules are somewhat arbitrary -- it is a less costly system to operate with minimal impact on safety.

Those items are secured during the turbulent portions of flights, during takeoff, and during landing. They aren't free to move about. Correct?

Any impact on safety to me is important. If I can prevent a possible injury to my kids, why wouldn't I? I'd hate to be a parent saying "I really wish I would have spent the $300 on a seat for my baby so that she didn't have a head injury from slamming into the overhead bin!"

 

[tigerchick]

While everyone has their own opinions on the matter, my own 14 month old daughter has flow Transpacific twice, and from Houston to South America 4 times now. It is something that always felt safe to me, granted we currently live in a 3rd world country and I know many people who think we were crazy for moving our infant here in the first place.

I think the ultimate decsion comes down to what are you comfortable with? Can you hold you child for hours in your lap? Will you really hold them or will you just lay them down? Is you child wiggly?

Answer these question and you will have you answer.

 

[tlbwriter]

And since it keeps getting brought up -- babies aren't unsecured if they are lap babies. They are SECURED by me. I am the seatbelt. Now, perhaps, I won't be as an effective seatbelt as a vinyl one that holds me, but you are again making a failed analogy by comparing a lap baby to a coffee pot.

I actually agree with much of your argument (even though I would choose to buy my child a seat, I do realize the odds are that it won't be needed for safety reasons), but you lost me here. A lap baby is NOT secured. First, because you are not gripping the child tightly during the entire flight. Saying you are securing a lap child is like loosely holding each end of your seatbelt instead of latching it and saying you are secured. And second, because even if you did manage to tighten your grip in time, your ability to hold the child is much, much less effective than a seatbelt. No "perhaps" about it. So go ahead and make the argument that your unsecured lap baby is safe. You have some valid points. But don't claim YOU are "securing" that child. It's not true.

 

[DopeyDame]

You're totally right. It IS a cost/benefit analysis, just like everything we do all day. There's a risk to crossing the street. I can, without hardly any cost at all, reduce (but not eliminate) that risk but looking both ways before I cross. Easy decision. I could completely eliminate that risk by not crossing the street. HUGE cost. Easy decision.
You're right that there is a VERY small chance of a scenario happening when flying where my kid would get hurt by being a lap baby. Flying is very, very safe for everyone involved, thank goodness and there's a very small chance that the aforementioned coffee pot, you strapped in your seat, or your baby will ever go careening through the plane. There IS a small, but real, increase in safety (and comfort!) is I securely restrain my kid in a carseat, though - that's a benefit. He is LESS LIKELY to go flying and get injured if he's securely restrained. Maybe that's not an earth-shattering benefit - but a benefit none the less. The cost to getting that benefit is pretty small in the grand scheme of vacation costs. The price for one more ticket and the PITA of carrying one more item through the airport just aren't that huge when compared to a whole vacation budget.

So you're right, it's cost benefit. You get a little benefit at a correspondingly (to me) little cost.

Like someone earlier said, if you really do know the facts and really do understand the true cost and benefit and decide it's not worth it - OK. That's your decision. Not the decision I would make, but it's legal and no skin off my back, so go for it. But trying to pretend that there is NO benefit or that it's a huge, onerous cost is disengenuous and inaccurate.

 

[NotUrsula]

If you're doing a cost-benefit analysis, don't forget the benefit to the parent of having the child secured in a CRS that he cannot escape from -- especially on an overnight flight. I don't know about the rest of you, but I like to be able to sleep on a transatlantic flight, and there was no way that I was going to be able to with a toddler loose and able to get into God knows what. I also like to be able to eat my meals WITHOUT little Miss Sticky Fingers crammed between me and my plate.

I have never been reticent about admitting that while there is a small safety benefit to my child in using a carseat on board, there is a HUGE convenience benefit for me. It's not comfortable trying to wrangle a squirmy baby in a coach seat for hours on end, and I'm not about to do it if I don't have to.