![child restraint systems for airplanes child restraint systems for airplanes](https://www.amsafe.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/KSF-banner1c.png)
The NTSB has recommended for years that child restraints be made mandatory, and has had this item on its "Most Wanted" list of safety improvements since 1999.
![child restraint systems for airplanes child restraint systems for airplanes](https://www.babycantravel.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Traveling-with-car-seats-for-babies-and-toddlers-1-1024x683.jpg)
This is an unnecessary risk to our children." "During takeoff, landing, and turbulence, adults are required to be buckled up, baggage and coffee pots are stowed, computers are turned off and put away, yet infants and toddlers need not be restrained. "While the FAA’s new position may provide more options for the voluntary use of safety seats, we continue to believe that infants and young children deserve the same protection that is provided to other passengers," said NTSB acting chairman Mark Rosenker. The announcement that child restraint systems will not be required but will be permitted on a strictly voluntary basis deeply disappointed the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). However, if requiring extra airline tickets forces some families to drive, then we’re inadvertently putting too many families at risk." "We encourage the use of child safety seats in airplanes.
![child restraint systems for airplanes child restraint systems for airplanes](https://sp-ao.shortpixel.ai/client/to_auto,q_lossy,ret_img,w_600,h_899/https://havebabywilltravel.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Car-Seats-in-Airplanes-600x899.jpg)
"Statistics show that families are safer traveling in the sky than on the road," Blakey said. It should be noted that unrestrained infants and toddlers not only can be injured when the forces of deceleration break them out of their parents’ arms, they can cause injury to other passengers as they are flung about the cabin.įAA Administrator Marion Blakey justified the decision to not require restraints on the grounds that, if forced to purchase an extra airline ticket, families might choose to drive. In 1997, this commission believed it is "inappropriate for infants to be afforded a lesser degree of protection than older passengers" and recommended an end to lap children (see ASW, May 10, 1999). The latest development ends a debate, at least for the moment, over child safety in airliners that was energized by the White House Commission on Aviation Safety and Security (a.k.a., the "Gore Commission," so-named in honor of its head, then Vice President Al Gore). Thus, for parents who do not have car seats also approved for aircraft use, the FAA ruling will have the practical effect of requiring lap children. These words from the FAA’s announcement are significant: "Alternative child restraint systems must be approved by the FAA and provided by an airline, not passengers." According to sources, this language means that systems such as improved child-friendly lap and shoulder belts cannot be brought aboard by passengers but must be provided by airlines. Infants and small children will continue to run the risk of being hurled from their parents arms or crushed by their parents bodies, rather than be protected in a child restraint system, because the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) argues that requiring parents to purchase a seat for their infant children will force many families to drive rather than fly, and the death and injury rate while driving is higher.Īs a result of this determination, the FAA is withdrawing an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) that eventually would have led to a requirement for safety seats in lieu of a hard requirement, it has issued a rule making it easier to receive FAA approval for child restraint systems (CRS) for airlines that want to provide them.