Posted By Jim Walker Anwar, What's the most important to you? Staying inside the law, or avoiding your passengers getting unnecessary injuries in an accident. I saw in a newspaper article, a few weeks ago, by a senior A&E medic about all the spinal injuries caused to young kids by ill fitting seat belts. Compelling argument I believe.

Posted By Lynne Ratcliffe Personally as a new grandma i would be happy to get a second car seat to take my grandchild out. there are exceptions in the reguslations for 'occasional' trips but how often do accidents happen on the 'occasional' trip? whilst the infant is tiny the baby seat that my daughter has got will fit in all cars. When bigger you can get a booster seat for under £20 and i would put any child at a higher value than that.

Posted By sagalout Anwar, this is just the way I have assessed the intention of the new regs for my own personal use. I guess a definition will only emerge via the courts. It seems clear to me that the intent is to ensure that wherever possible children should be protected. However, there are equally many exemptions provided so there is an acceptance in the law that children will still travel without the prescribed restraints. So, I have to determine my approach to those exemptions, guidance that I found about short term exemptions said "There are a few exemptions but parents and carers will need to think ahead about how they, or someone else, will be carrying their child." and If there is an “unexpected necessity” there is an exemption for a child of 3 years or more.... This quite clearly, it seems to me, allows me to make a judgement based on specific and, by inference, relating only to unforeseen or unexpected circumstances. It allows me to, for example, consider other risks to a child that may put them in greater danger than travelling for " a short distance" without restraint. I am allowed by the law to do this and not automatically be guilty of an offence. As long as the distance travelled is the demonstrably shortest distance necessary to remove the child from risk then it would seem acceptable in law. It seems most likely that it will only be more closely defined in court if any party feels it needs to go that far. This is only my personal view of this new law and should not be relied upon in any other way.

Posted By Anwar Afzal Thanks for the various opinions, but there is still no clarity from what i see and here. Would it not be better to have a similar belt to the one's they use on planes, these are attached to the adult ones and when a small child were to sit on an adults lap. they would attach them? Just cannot get my head round the idea of not being able to give a family member a lift becuase they have children and they did not have a car seat with them because they came by taxi. And surely the risk is the same when they come by taxi because taxi's and private hire vehicle do not have baby seats? Or has the risk changed with Taxi's? Come on guys, whats the difference of me being a taxi without the licence and a taxi/private hire vehicle?

Posted By Phil D I dont care what the regs say, I have a neice that "occasionally" comes to visit. If she was involved in an accident and I hadn't taken the easy step of ensuring she was safe in the car, I would never be able to live with myself. What I dont understand though, is how so many drivers have their children in the backs of cars, on town roads and on the motorways, either on laps of unrestrained passengers, or just clambering about on the back seat, and get away with it. Whats more, they are too stupid to see what they are doing is not just a crime, its a sin. Rant over, I'm going back to my su doku.

Posted By Karen Newman Just another point to bear in mind. Have you ever tried to transport 3 children needing child booster seats in the back of the car? This is not an unusual senario for me or many of my friends. The size of the seats make it very difficult probably impossible in a small car to get 3 in a row. I have got a reasonably sized car and its a very tight squeeze, on the last trip out I managed to trap my sons fingers between 2 booster seats as I was trying to get the car door shut. We own 4 booster seats ( we only have 1 child under height)and its still not enough sometimes when children are being given lifts by others who may need to borrow a seat. The use of booster seats has so many flaws and impractialities, (just think about taxis and coaches as well as seat size) I can't understand why more effort has not gone into the redesign of car seats and seat belts to eliminate these problems - surely the principle of designing out the problem in the first place should be applied. From someone who complies with the law but finds the amount of advanced planning of journeys required very hard work!

Posted By Anwar Afzal Hi All As Karen states it is impossible to comply wiht this legislation and it does not provide the added safety, it would have been better to redesign the cars to suit the purpose,after all that is how it is meant to be in safety "fit for the purose" and not the other way round. It is not practical to apply this law always, and it does not serve the purpose of safety, in fact it can do more harm when you have a child or children strapped up in this way and the cause tantrums leading to an accident because of the distraction

Posted By jackw. Hi, Sory if i seem harsh but i am a bit unhappy with someone looking for advice views etc. on getting "around" the law on a HEALTH & SAFETY forum as opposed to how to comply with the law and ensure the safety of passengers/children that they may only have occasionally but never the less regularly in a car. My point..safety forum = safety so think safety and how to prevent the horrendous injury or fatality of those you are charged to look after. And yes i agree there may be "emergency situations.. but the one outlined here does not fit into that category.. ok will get down off the soup box cheers

Posted By Jim Walker I can't believe you are all more concerned about the inconveniences this law is causing you than you kid's well being. Google : seat belt children spinal injuries and or look here; http://www.automedia.com...ty/Boost/dsm20040301bs/1 By the way; all these trivial objections sound pretty much what we had when the adult belt law came in. Anyone want to argue that THAT was a bad regulation?

Posted By Peter Rose I am in full agreement with Jim. I cannot understand the how the cost of car seats or boosters, can compare to the injuries received, or even death, of a child whether they are immediate or distant family. Surely it is better to pay for a seat that is used only once or twice a year, than to take a chance. Legislation is one thing, common sense is another!! Peter

Posted By Anwar Afzal Its not about how to break the law legally but how to comply with it practically. Its not about cost of a car seat but where do you carry one for the occassion, surely if you have say a small car and you have 3 adults and 2 kids and you fit 2 car seats in the back, do you then tell the one adult to catch a taxi, when you know the vehicle is made to carry 5 persons. It is not practical is what i am saying, and if you fill the boot with spare car seats just in case. then where do you put your shopping or other goods on the other passengers lap? Come on guys be realistic