Child-safety laws may reduce the birth rate • Hacker News Board

Re: Child-safety laws may reduce the birth rate

#211

Post by j1elo » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 1:04 AM UTC

eCa wrote: post #184

PopeDotNinja wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the vast majority of cars today simply don't work for a family of five I recently visited Pakistan for the first time, and was amazed to see a family of five riding around on a small Honda motorbike. The father was driving, a small child sat in front of the father, the was mother hanging on behind the father, and the oldest daughter sitting on the far back with both legs hanging off to the left while holding an inf…

I was in Ukraine in the mid-00s. Saw a five person motorcycle. No helmets, but they had an open side-car so a bit more space. Youngest kid was in a bucket held by big sister.

Add to that a wooden box with a small metal bars through which I could glance a couple of chickens that were being transported by the family, in Vietnam. Amazing.

The rate of children deaths or severe injuries caused by motorbike accidents must have been over the roof in these countries.

Re: Child-safety laws may reduce the birth rate

#212

Post by kube-system » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 1:07 AM UTC

giantg2 wrote: post #90

kube-system wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As they should. That weight sensor is not intended to make it safe to put a car seat in the front of a car.

So what's the difference between a front seat without the airbag on and back seat? My guess is that it's really just automakers CYA so they don't have to treat it as a safety critical system. There's really no reason to have that sensor then.

It is part of a safety system, but the other way around. One of the purposes is to make an annoying dinging sound when the passenger does not put their seat belt on.

Re: Child-safety laws may reduce the birth rate

#213

Post by jo6gwb » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 1:08 AM UTC

irateswami wrote: post #15

This is an actual conversation I had to have with my wife, having a third kid definitely requires a larger vehicle as the vast majority of cars today simply don't work for a family of five. Child car seats are too wide and the backseats of most cars are too narrow, and the price jump to a vehicle that would be able to handle three child car seats at once is enormous. Throw in some dogs, a couple pieces of luggage tha…

Your comment leads me to wonder if car safety laws also contribute to this. Back in the day cars were large and you could fit four kids in the back of a station wagon. In sedans, there was a platform behind the seats in the rear that kids could stretch out on (no seatbelt of course).

Re: Child-safety laws may reduce the birth rate

#214

Post by lastofus » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 1:08 AM UTC

bigmattystyles wrote: post #205

1-6 wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's not forget the expiration dates on Car Safety Seats. C'mon, really? Seats with Styrofoam may deteriorate eventually but I haven't heard of a casualties due to expired car seats.

To be fair, how do you test this - as a system - effectively. The consequences of failure on a child seat are not like, say, a stand mixer. That being said, I suspect it has more to do with the manufacturer attempting to limit their liability window. It's wasteful right, but in a litigious world, I get it.

Start crash testing expired seats and compare results to new ones of the same make/model. They expire relatively quickly, so they would not be difficult to find. For example, our Graco Keyfit 30 expires after 6 years.

Re: Child-safety laws may reduce the birth rate

#215

Post by marcandre » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 1:08 AM UTC

irateswami wrote: post #15

This is an actual conversation I had to have with my wife, having a third kid definitely requires a larger vehicle as the vast majority of cars today simply don't work for a family of five. Child car seats are too wide and the backseats of most cars are too narrow, and the price jump to a vehicle that would be able to handle three child car seats at once is enormous. Throw in some dogs, a couple pieces of luggage tha…

The cost of raising a child is roughly 10-15k a year. How much is the car upgrade (on a per year basis)?

Re: Child-safety laws may reduce the birth rate

#216

Post by lsllc » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 1:09 AM UTC

irateswami wrote: post #15

This is an actual conversation I had to have with my wife, having a third kid definitely requires a larger vehicle as the vast majority of cars today simply don't work for a family of five. Child car seats are too wide and the backseats of most cars are too narrow, and the price jump to a vehicle that would be able to handle three child car seats at once is enormous. Throw in some dogs, a couple pieces of luggage tha…

Alright, don't leave me hanging -- which Volkswagen?

Re: Child-safety laws may reduce the birth rate

#217

Post by bobthepanda » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 1:10 AM UTC

saagarjha wrote: post #180

bobthepanda wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not particularly secure (unless you go to the expense of getting a second lock for the bike helmet) and depending on the configuration of the bike parking where you are, may not fit with other bikes parked.

I mean, it’s just a helmet. Sure, I lock it so you’d have to cut the strap to get it (thus rendering it largely useless without repair), but in general the theft rate of helmets is low enough that I can just eat the cost of buying a new one.

Not everyone lives in an area where that is true, nor can everyone just afford to replace $20 helmets on a regular basis.

Compulsory helmets just for cyclists is a bit arbitrary too, since pedestrians and car occupants would also benefit from helmets, and at least pedestrians are likely to encounter the same exact crash scenarios which cyclists encounter where helmets are necessary (e.g. pedestrians can also get hit by cars and flung a distance)

Re: Child-safety laws may reduce the birth rate

#218

Post by kube-system » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 1:15 AM UTC

1-6 wrote: post #155

irateswami wrote: post #15

This is an actual conversation I had to have with my wife, having a third kid definitely requires a larger vehicle as the vast majority of cars today simply don't work for a family of five. Child car seats are too wide and the backseats of most cars are too narrow, and the price jump to a vehicle that would be able to handle three child car seats at once is enormous. Throw in some dogs, a couple pieces of luggage tha…

Let's not forget the expiration dates on Car Safety Seats. C'mon, really? Seats with Styrofoam may deteriorate eventually but I haven't heard of a casualties due to expired car seats.

Some tests have found that brand new seats break when loaded near their stated limits. I think it is reasonable to say that plastic weakened due to the relatively harsh thermal and UV conditions in a car would fare worse.

https://www.consumerreports.org/toddler-booster-seats/child-...

Re: Child-safety laws may reduce the birth rate

#219

Post by Forbo » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 1:16 AM UTC

notsureaboutpg wrote: post #141

giantg2 wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Multigenerational households where grandparents provide childcare are one solution around this problem that I've seen." Except many grandparents are still working, especially to cover healthcare costs.

In the US, elderly people have Medicare, so why is this happening?

I vouched for your comment, because I'm also curious. What healthcare costs is Medicare not covering?

Re: Child-safety laws may reduce the birth rate

#220

Post by throwaway2245 » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 1:22 AM UTC

This claim is a little sus.

Cars themselves have only been popular for 100 years or so.

A 0.73% drop in third child births is really nothing compared to what else has happened to the birth rate over that time period - the effect size is very small.