‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

Allow babywearing carriers on planes

202 points · 277 comments · surprisetalk

  1. areoform · · focus · HN ↗
    There is a deeper issue, in a crash, a poorly secured rigid baby carrier seat becomes a potentially lethal projectile. Worst comes to worst, today, the projectile is an infant. An infant is substantially softer and less massive than a rigid seat containing an infant.

    For soft babywearing carriers, the outlook is also grim. The kinematics of the baby, adult, carrier and airplane seat lead to crush injuries that are worse than the poorly restrained arm hold version.

    Could there be a solution here that straps around a seat to give babies a safe seat?

    Yes, but it wouldn't necessarily be easy to use or consumer friendly. The ideal solution would have the baby with their back facing front, and the attached carrier facing inwards towards the seat. It would have to be carefully specced and tested so no unverified, third-party seats... Logically extrapolated, in this scenario, the airline becomes responsible for the baby's wellbeing. And I don't think that's a good place for the airlines to be?

    1. throw0101c · · focus · HN ↗
      > Yes, but it wouldn't necessarily be easy to use or consumer friendly. The ideal solution would have the baby with their back facing front, and the attached carrier facing inwards towards the seat.

      There is an existing international standard (ISO 13216) for child safety seats in cars:

      * <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Isofix" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Isofix

      It could be added to airplanes seats.

      1. bethekidyouwant · · focus · HN ↗
        Fun fact all these rules act as contraception. Who wants to have a third child when you can’t actually squeeze three car seats into the back of a car.
        1. drdexebtjl · · focus · HN ↗
          That’s great? You shouldn’t have kids if you can’t stand the slightest temporary inconvenience such as… providing them safe transportation.
          1. bethekidyouwant · · focus · HN ↗
            fun fact. the same number of women are having kids as in the 80&#x27;s they are just having fewer children.
            1. expedition32 · · focus · HN ↗
              My mom had my brother when she was 21.

              Who the hell has kids nowadays at that age? Not many in the first world.

              1. bethekidyouwant · · focus · HN ↗
                Starting later certainly has a chilling effect on the numbers
Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.