There’s something of a mini brouhaha making news lately. The debate centers on the question of whether the safest of child safety seats we use in our cars are as safe as they could be. We figure that’s something that San Antonio readers might be interested in exploring.
Sparking the debate is new research out of a forensic operation in Pennsylvania which found that infants riding in rear-facing car seats run a risk of suffering a head trauma injury in the event the child’s vehicle is rear-ended by another vehicle going 30 mph or more. What researchers say they are most concerned about is that the injuries might go unnoticed by first responders for too long after the crash because they won’t think to look for them.
At the root of the issue, they say, is as safe as rear-facing seats are, they may not be as safe as they could be. The researchers say their studies suggest that even if they’re used according to recommended standards, infants in a severe rear-end crash could wind up hitting the seat back they’re strapped to with injury-causing force.
After such a crash, the seat would return to its proper position. The baby might be injured and crying, but first responders might not be inclined to check on them for injury because the seat is where it should be. The presumption could be that the baby is just upset.
The Post item and another on Slate.com since, note that rear-end crashes at that speed are rare. They are considered so rare that federal testers don’t even run simulations for them.
But when it comes to the safety of our children is that the right attitude to take? Indeed, if manufacturers know that an injury could occur in a particular circumstance and that it could be minimized or avoided by improving safety, shouldn’t action be taken?
These are the kinds of questions that experienced accident attorneys are trained to ask. And they especially deserve to be asked in the event an accident leaves someone with traumatic brain injury. Our firm stands ready to seek out answers.
