Car Seats as Contraception

Post by orthoxerox » Mon, Mar 30, 2026, 10:18 PM UTC

Earw0rm wrote: post #17

mullingitover wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you aren't a slave to your car, you likely live in a walkable area where the cost of a 4-bedroom apartment or house is going to be pretty high. Or you're one of the millions of people who live in developing countries which have low cost of living and low housing costs. Coincidentally this group has very high birth rates.

Also, socially conservative, multi-generational households (sharing labour and childcare between women relatives), less expectation for mothers of young kids to be away from the home, and a much lower expectation of what "housing" means in terms of both building quality and the amount of living space per person.

Post by bombcar » Mon, Mar 30, 2026, 10:20 PM UTC

regus wrote: post #46

bombcar wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even the supposed narrow ones can be a pain in the arse to actually get in the back. Every family I see with at least 2 kids has a minivan, so maybe we can discuss if minivans are causal.

I didn’t need the minivan until the third kid appeared. I would have stayed with a sedan as long as possible.

Post by yread » Mon, Mar 30, 2026, 10:30 PM UTC

rimbo789 wrote: post #31

As a parent of 2 a big reason we won’t have a third is the massive step up in transportation costs. Having to get a third car seat would require us to go from our Kia to a minivan. And then there is the cost of the car seat alone. Then there is the time cost of wrangling kids in an out of them. My toddler can easily make it 15 minutes to buckle her in just on her own. A third would mean easily 5 minutes of to get eve…

Post by bombcar » Mon, Mar 30, 2026, 10:38 PM UTC

sgerenser wrote: post #39

aaronax wrote: post #13

(Have 3yo and 1yo, another one the way, goal is 4) I have often thought that car seats are one of the major drags of modern parenting. This study apparently (I don't have time to read it, too busy with kids lmao!) confirms my suspicions. It is unfortunate that every policy change around them is trading some amount of convenience for every smaller risk eliminations. It is essentially impossible to say perfectly ration…

My child moved to front facing at around 2 or maybe 2.5 at the oldest (had to go back and lock at old pictures to confirm, she’s 12 now). Parents who obsess over things like keeping their kid rear facing until 5 or in a booster seat until 12 are just neurotic, IMHO. They’re probably the same ones who won’t let them ride their bikes around the neighborhood unsupervised or walk/ride the bus to or from school.

Post by bombcar » Mon, Mar 30, 2026, 10:44 PM UTC

oleganza wrote: post #42

bentt wrote: post #34

Let’s just focus on how cars and car culture are reducing birth rates. Nobody wants to chuck their kids into the back seat without a carseat any more. Laws aren’t the problem.

These seem like particularly specific excuses. If you are not into having kids, there are many different ways to rationalize that (but why?). If you are into kids, you'd have to overcome all sorts of pain and suffering, car culture is by far not the worst of them. (Father of 4, 39 y.o., non-religious.)