Disable passenger-side airbags for infant car seat?

mdarby · May 4, 2006

I haven't seen this discussed here.

I am wondering if it is possible to selectively (or automatically) disable the front side airbags to allow an infant seat to be positioned there. The reason is that if my wife is driving alone with our infant and young son, and if the airbags will not deploy, it is arguably safer to have the infant in the front seat where (a) he will be calmer and (b) he can be monitored without looking away from the road into the back seat.

My Porsche Boxster had a car seat system which disengaged the airbag when it was locked into a specially added locking attachment. If the seat was not there or not locked in (e.g. with an adult passenger) the airbag would deploy.

Has anybody heard about this for the Prius? Does anybody have a similar concern?

Tideland Prius · May 4, 2006

Why not put it in the back seat?

If you have it in the front seat, buckle the seatbelt. If it's light enough, AIRBAG OFF will be lit.

qbee42 · May 4, 2006

The Prius disables the front passenger airbag if an adult is not sitting in the seat. It uses a weight sensor to tell how heavy the passenger is, so an infant should not enable it. The status of the passenger airbag is clearly shown up under the windshield in front of the passenger seat.

That said, most experts recommend that infant car seats go in back.

Tom

mdarby · May 4, 2006

We would put the infant seat in the front because, absent the airbag deployment issue, it would be safer to have a happier baby which posed fewer distractions. I think on a 7-hour carride that would be more significant than the lost benefit having the front seat to help mitigate impact.

Is this a 100%-safe solution? Is there any risk that any of the passenger airbags could deploy? I would only want to do this if it were foolproof. Deploying airbags would change the logic above about net safety.

THANKS.

================

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Tideland Prius @ May 4 2006, 01:44 PM) [snapback]249814[/snapback]</div>

Why not put it in the back seat?

If you have it in the front seat, buckle the seatbelt. If it's light enough, AIRBAG OFF will be lit.
[/b]
Click to expand...

aaf709 · May 4, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(qbee42 @ May 4 2006, 11:47 AM) [snapback]249816[/snapback]</div>

The Prius disables the front passenger airbag if an adult is not sitting in the seat. It uses a weight sensor to tell how heavy the passenger is, so an infant should not enable it. The status of the passenger airbag is clearly shown up under the windshield in front of the passenger seat.

That said, most experts recommend that infant car seats go in back.

Tom
[/b]
Click to expand...

Welllllll, that sensor is pretty sensitive. I had a lunch bag and some clothes give me the warning. I don't know what the weight is that sets it off or if it varies from Prius to Prius.

IIRC the manual recommends the child's seat in the back. I really don't know what's better as we don't have kids. If my wife is carrying one of our cats, she sits in the back.

efusco · May 4, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(mdarby @ May 4 2006, 01:48 PM) [snapback]249817[/snapback]</div>

We would put the infant seat in the front because, absent the airbag deployment issue, it would be safer to have a happier baby which posed fewer distractions. I think on a 7-hour carride that would be more significant than the lost benefit having the front seat to help mitigate impact.

Is this a 100%-safe solution? Is there any risk that any of the passenger airbags could deploy? I would only want to do this if it were foolproof. Deploying airbags would change the logic above about net safety.

THANKS.

================

[/b]
Click to expand...

1)The sensor is very sensitive and a properly secured infant seat will definately activate it.
2)Even if the sensor could be deactivated it is not safer despite the 'distractions/happy baby arguement' to have the child there. Center of the back seat is definately the safest place by far. He/she's protected from side impacts, front and rear impacts and even is safer in case of roll-over.
3)I'll argue that the baby will be more of a distraction in the front seat where mom has access. The inclination will be to try to feed, sooth, play with and talk to the child when he/she is so accessible thus distracting the driver from the primary job...driving.
4)Most infants do very very well in cars and fall asleep for the majority of a longish ride. For those times he/she needs to be fed, comforted, or just played with then time should be built into the trip to accomodate stops.

Finally, I'm not just talking theory. I'm the father of 3 and have had kids in my Prius for 2.5 years including my daughter who's almost 22 months old. I'm also an ER doctor and have seen first hand the consequences of distracted drivers and improperly restrained infants...it's not pretty.

Ask yourself...if someone plowed into the side of your car and killed that baby during this trip when he/she would have survived in the middle of the rear seat would the slight amount of convenience for your wife be worth it?

It isn't for my kids.

Oh yea, forgot one point...
5)it's illegal in all or most states.

mdarby · May 4, 2006

Thank you for your thoughtful reply. I am going to look into the law here in CA, but I appreciate your arguments about safety. I am actually trying to come to my own conclusions about this, and you make some compelling arguments.

But it sounds as if, whatever the potential merits / risks, you can't disable the sensor.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(efusco @ May 4 2006, 02:17 PM) [snapback]249828[/snapback]</div>

1)The sensor is very sensitive and a properly secured infant seat will definately activate it.
2)Even if the sensor could be deactivated it is not safer despite the 'distractions/happy baby arguement' to have the child there. Center of the back seat is definately the safest place by far. He/she's protected from side impacts, front and rear impacts and even is safer in case of roll-over.
3)I'll argue that the baby will be more of a distraction in the front seat where mom has access. The inclination will be to try to feed, sooth, play with and talk to the child when he/she is so accessible thus distracting the driver from the primary job...driving.
4)Most infants do very very well in cars and fall asleep for the majority of a longish ride. For those times he/she needs to be fed, comforted, or just played with then time should be built into the trip to accomodate stops.

Finally, I'm not just talking theory. I'm the father of 3 and have had kids in my Prius for 2.5 years including my daughter who's almost 22 months old. I'm also an ER doctor and have seen first hand the consequences of distracted drivers and improperly restrained infants...it's not pretty.

Ask yourself...if someone plowed into the side of your car and killed that baby during this trip when he/she would have survived in the middle of the rear seat would the slight amount of convenience for your wife be worth it?

It isn't for my kids.
Oh yea, forgot one point...
5)it's illegal in all or most states.
[/b]
Click to expand...

DocVijay · May 4, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(efusco @ May 4 2006, 03:17 PM) [snapback]249828[/snapback]</div>

1)The sensor is very sensitive and a properly secured infant seat will definately activate it.
2)Even if the sensor could be deactivated it is not safer despite the 'distractions/happy baby arguement' to have the child there. Center of the back seat is definately the safest place by far. He/she's protected from side impacts, front and rear impacts and even is safer in case of roll-over.
3)I'll argue that the baby will be more of a distraction in the front seat where mom has access. The inclination will be to try to feed, sooth, play with and talk to the child when he/she is so accessible thus distracting the driver from the primary job...driving.
4)Most infants do very very well in cars and fall asleep for the majority of a longish ride. For those times he/she needs to be fed, comforted, or just played with then time should be built into the trip to accomodate stops.

Finally, I'm not just talking theory. I'm the father of 3 and have had kids in my Prius for 2.5 years including my daughter who's almost 22 months old. I'm also an ER doctor and have seen first hand the consequences of distracted drivers and improperly restrained infants...it's not pretty.

Ask yourself...if someone plowed into the side of your car and killed that baby during this trip when he/she would have survived in the middle of the rear seat would the slight amount of convenience for your wife be worth it?

It isn't for my kids.
Oh yea, forgot one point...
5)it's illegal in all or most states.
[/b]
Click to expand...

Same, father of 2 (soon 3). Kids ALWAYS in the back. Agree 100% with his post.

galaxee · May 4, 2006

my laptop bag sits on the passenger seat and is heavy enough to activate the sensor. and i'm guessing your baby was probably born heavier than my computer, so... i wouldn't chance it.

yauman · May 4, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(mdarby @ May 4 2006, 11:42 AM) [snapback]249811[/snapback]</div>

My Porsche Boxster had a car seat system which disengaged the airbag when it was locked into a specially added locking attachment. If the seat was not there or not locked in (e.g. with an adult passenger) the airbag would deploy.

[/b]
Click to expand...

The reason you have that feature on your Boxster is that it's a 2-seater and therefore without the rear seat to put baby, the air bag must be turned off. Same is true for front-seat only pickup's.

The center of the rear seat of the Prius is the best place for the baby - and it's equipped with the LATCH system for all new baby seats to anchor properly and securely.

Jim1eye · May 4, 2006

From the CALIFORNIA VEHICLE CODE:

27360. (a) A parent or legal guardian, when present in a motor vehicle, as defined in Section 27315, may not permit his or her child or ward to be transported upon a highway in the motor vehicle without properly securing the child or ward in a rear seat in a child passenger restraint system meeting applicable federal motor vehicle safety standards, unless the child or ward is one of the following:

(1) Six years of age or older.

(2) Sixty pounds or more.

(B ) (1) A driver may not transport on a highway a child in a motor vehicle, as defined in Section 27315, without properly securing the child in a rear seat in a child passenger restraint system meeting applicable federal motor vehicle safety standards, unless the child is one of the following:

(A) Six years of age or older.

(B ) Sixty pounds or more.

(2) This subdivision does not apply to a driver if the parent or legal guardian of the child is also present in the vehicle and is not the driver.
(C ) (1) For purposes of subdivisions (a) and (B ), and except as provided in paragraph (2), a child or ward under the age of six years who weighs less than 60 pounds may ride in the front seat of a motor vehicle, if properly secured in a child passenger restraint system that meets applicable federal motor vehicle safety standards, under any of the following circumstances:

(A) There is no rear seat.

(B ) The rear seats are side-facing jump seats.

(C ) The rear seats are rear-facing seats.

(D) The child passenger restraint system cannot be installed properly in the rear seat.

(E) All rear seats are already occupied by children under the age of 12 years.

(F) Medical reasons necessitate that the child or ward not ride in the rear seat. The court may require satisfactory proof of the child's medical condition.

(2) A child or ward may not ride in the front seat of a motor vehicle with an active passenger airbag if the child or ward is one of the following:

(A) Under one year of age.

(B )Less than 20 pounds.
(C )Riding in a rear-facing child passenger restraint system.

IN SHORT, No kids in the front seat of a Prius.

And with ten years of working as a Police Officer with a major Highway going through my sector, I can't imagine why you would even think that there is even the remotest possibility that the child would be safer in the front. If the child is giving your wife a problem, tell her to PULL OVER and check the child (Even if it turns a 7 hour trip into a 10 hour trip)

guyweathersby · May 4, 2006

I sometimes used to help my wife teach a Red Cross class on safety seats. This was several years before cars had airbags. The course stressed that all safety experts very strongly recommended against putting a safety seat in the front.

They should always be in the back whether or not the car has airbags.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(mdarby @ May 4 2006, 01:48 PM) [snapback]249817[/snapback]</div>

We would put the infant seat in the front because, absent the airbag deployment issue, it would be safer to have a happier baby which posed fewer distractions. I think on a 7-hour carride that would be more significant than the lost benefit having the front seat to help mitigate impact.

Is this a 100%-safe solution? Is there any risk that any of the passenger airbags could deploy? I would only want to do this if it were foolproof. Deploying airbags would change the logic above about net safety.

THANKS.

================
[/b]
Click to expand...

mdarby · May 4, 2006

Thanks for summarizing the code, I think it's clear: kids in the back until they are 60 pounds.

But with all due respect, it's not at all clear to me that it's unimaginable why I "would even think there [was] even the remotest possibility that the child would be safer in the front."

The New York Times Magazine last year (July 10 edition) ran an interesting article about the empirical evidence for the effectiveness of car seats.

The answer can be found in a trove of government data called the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), which compiles police reports on all fatal crashes in the U.S. since 1975. These data include every imaginable variable in a crash, including whether the occupants were restrained and how.

Even a quick look at the FARS data reveals a striking result: among children 2 and older, the death rate is no lower for those traveling in any kind of car seat than for those wearing seat belts. There are many reasons, of course, that this raw data might be misleading. Perhaps kids in car seats are, on average, in worse wrecks. Or maybe their parents drive smaller cars, which might provide less protection.

But no matter what you control for in the FARS data, the results don't change. 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.

Is it crazy to suggest that commonly-held beliefs are not always supported by data? Similarly, the more I read about causes of traffic accidents is that even very small distractions can increase risk of traffic incidents. I would argue that avoiding traffic incidents is a more significant contributor to child safety than relative placement of the child in an accident.

So, are you sure beyond a reasonable doubt that your wife would be less distracted with a crying baby in the back seat than a happy baby in the front seat?

To be clear: through this discussion I learned about (a) California law and (B) what can't be done to the Prius airbag system.

My original post was basically suggesting that if you could disable the airbags, and if it were legal, might it make sense to have the child up front? I think it's not black and white. Not that I'll be trying any time soon.

But thanks again for the useful information.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jim1eye @ May 4 2006, 05:02 PM) [snapback]249905[/snapback]</div>

From the CALIFORNIA VEHICLE CODE:
27360. (a) A parent or legal guardian, when present in a motor vehicle, as defined in Section 27315, may not permit his or her child or ward to be transported upon a highway in the motor vehicle without properly securing the child or ward in a rear seat in a child passenger restraint system meeting applicable federal motor vehicle safety standards, unless the child or ward is one of the following:

And with ten years of working as a Police Officer with a major Highway going through my sector, I can't imagine why you would even think that there is even the remotest possibility that the child would be safer in the front. If the child is giving your wife a problem, tell her to PULL OVER and check the child (Even if it turns a 7 hour trip into a 10 hour trip)
[/b]
Click to expand...

qbee42 · May 4, 2006

Once again, the infant seat should go in the center of the back seat. If you really insist on disabling the front passenger airbag, all you have to do is stuff something under that seat. The control system throws a little snit and refuses to activate the airbag system, since it can't get an accurate read on the passenger's weight. My wife has accidentally done this on several occasions with her purse, then has to remove it and unbuckle her seat belt to get it to reset.

Tom

Jim1eye · May 5, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(mdarby @ May 4 2006, 07:19 PM) [snapback]249949[/snapback]</div>

The New York Times Magazine last year (July 10 edition) ran an interesting article about the empirical evidence for the effectiveness of car seats.

Is it crazy to suggest that commonly-held beliefs are not always supported by data? Similarly, the more I read about causes of traffic accidents is that even very small distractions can increase risk of traffic incidents. I would argue that avoiding traffic incidents is a more significant contributor to child safety than relative placement of the child in an accident.
[/b]
Click to expand...

Absolutly not. However the arcticle you cite, although it mentions placement, is a discussion of Car seat vs. seat belt, not front seat vs. back.

So, are you sure beyond a reasonable doubt that your wife would be less distracted with a crying baby in the back seat than a happy baby in the front seat?
[/b]
Click to expand...

Yes. You suggest that front seat = happy baby. I would suggest that baby is only happier because driver is paying more attention to baby.

My original post was basically suggesting that if you could disable the airbags, and if it were legal, might it make sense to have the child up front? I think it's not black and white. Not that I'll be trying any time soon.
[/b]
Click to expand...

It appears to have been less of a gray area to California lawmakers as the back seat rule is less than 2 years old, while the car seat rules are approaching 2 decades.

But thanks again for the useful information.
[/b]
Click to expand...

You're welcome.

ohgreys · May 5, 2006

The article is interesting but, as has been stated, does not address front seat versus back seat. It also does not address the number or type of injuries that a child sustains when seated in the front seat versus the back seat.

Maytrix · May 5, 2006

I agree with much of what's been said and concur that the back seat is the best spot.

But, I also wonder the following..

Infant + 7 hour ride + 1 adult = much happier plane ride?

Not sure of the specifics requiring a solo 7 hour ride with infant, so obviously the above formula may not work in your case

DougSlug · May 5, 2006

If you haven't already, you also might want to review the material on the NHTSA website. They have spent quite a lot of of time studying these issues and readily offer info and guidelines.

http://www.nhtsa.gov

There are links on the home page for child safety.

- Doug

mdarby · May 5, 2006

Doug,

Thank you for the reference to this website. I does seem to have lots of thoughtful and useful information.

Best,
Michael

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(DougSlug @ May 5 2006, 04:39 PM) [snapback]250477[/snapback]</div>

If you haven't already, you also might want to review the material on the NHTSA website. They have spent quite a lot of of time studying these issues and readily offer info and guidelines.

http://www.nhtsa.gov

There are links on the home page for child safety.

- Doug
[/b]
Click to expand...

vk-30 · Jun 2, 2006

OK, I had 4 kids in the car today and put one in the front. Stuff comes up - I had to take someone else's 2 kids on top of my own.

So, I just did it because the back seats were full. I would feel better if I knew a way to disable the airbag, however.

I have an 05 and didn't notice any airbag off light anywhere on the dash. Is that 06 only?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Tideland Prius @ May 4 2006, 01:44 PM) [snapback]249814[/snapback]</div>

Why not put it in the back seat?

If you have it in the front seat, buckle the seatbelt. If it's light enough, AIRBAG OFF will be lit.
[/b]
Click to expand...

Disable passenger-side airbags for infant car seat?

mdarby Junior Member

Tideland Prius Moderator of the North
Staff Member

qbee42 My other car is a boat

mdarby Junior Member

aaf709 Ravenpaw of ThunderClan

efusco Moderator Emeritus
Staff Member

mdarby Junior Member

DocVijay Active Member

galaxee mostly benevolent

yauman New Member

Jim1eye Shaklee Ind Distributor

guyweathersby New Member

mdarby Junior Member

qbee42 My other car is a boat

Jim1eye Shaklee Ind Distributor

ohgreys New Member

Maytrix Member

DougSlug Member

mdarby Junior Member

vk-30 Junior Member

About PriusChat

Quick Navigation

Like us on Facebook

Buy us a beer!

Useful Searches

Disable passenger-side airbags for infant car seat?

mdarby Junior Member

Tideland Prius Moderator of the North Staff Member

qbee42 My other car is a boat

mdarby Junior Member

aaf709 Ravenpaw of ThunderClan

efusco Moderator Emeritus Staff Member

mdarby Junior Member

DocVijay Active Member

galaxee mostly benevolent

yauman New Member

Jim1eye Shaklee Ind Distributor

guyweathersby New Member

mdarby Junior Member

qbee42 My other car is a boat

Jim1eye Shaklee Ind Distributor

ohgreys New Member

Maytrix Member

DougSlug Member

mdarby Junior Member

vk-30 Junior Member

Tideland Prius Moderator of the North
Staff Member

efusco Moderator Emeritus
Staff Member