Are Car Seat Laws Driving Down America's Birthrate?

While these laws are intended to save children's lives in the event of an accident, Nickerson and Solomon argue that the effect on birthrates is much bigger.


A provocative new study claims the steady upward creep in the age at which states mandate that children use car seats is prompting women to either postpone or opt out of having a third child.

The paper, published on the Social Science Research Network, by finance professors Jordan Nickerson of MIT and David Solomon of Boston College, argues that most vehicles can fit only two car seats in the back row, necessitating the purchase of a larger car to accommodate three young children at once. That added cost, they argue, disincentivizes some women from having a third child.

"We find that when a woman has two children below the car seat age, her chances of giving birth that year decline by 0.73 percentage points" below where they'd be if only one or none of her existing children were required to be in a car seat, write Nickerson and Solomon. "This represents a large decline, as the probability of giving birth for a woman age 18-35 with two children already is 9.36 [percent] in our sample."

The nationwide average minimum age at which children are allowed to ride in cars with just seat belts has risen from less than 3 in the mid-1980s to just under 8 today. This steady increase, the paper suggests, could help explain why fertility rates have declined in the last decade despite a long-running economic recovery that would normally encourage more childbirths. To tease out the impact of car seat laws, the paper controls for variables such as urban density, household income, and whether a male parent is present.

While these laws are intended to save children's lives in the event of an automobile accident, Nickerson and Solomon argue that the effect on birthrates is much bigger. The changes "prevented only 57 car crash fatalities of children nationwide in 2017," it says. "Simultaneously, they led to a permanent reduction of approximately 8,000 births in the same year, and 145,000 fewer births since 1980, with 90 [percent] of this decline being since 2000."

There are reasons one might be skeptical of Nickerson and Solomon's conclusion. They may not have controlled for all the variables that could account for the correlation they found, for example. And a commenter at the rationalist blog LessWrong questions the paper's underlying premise, noting that parents could avoid the cost of buying a larger vehicle by instead using narrower safety seats that make it possible to fit three children even in small cars.

NEXT: Brickbat: A Little Less Color in the World

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Yeah it`s Possible…Anybody can earn 250$+ daily… You can earn from 6000-12000 a month or even more if you work as a full time job…It’s easy, just follow instructions on this page, read it carefully from start to finish… It’s a flexible job but a good
    eaning opportunity.. Here is More information.

    1. I am making a good salary from home $1300-$2600/week , which is amazing, under a year back I was jobless in a horrible economy. I thank mfw God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now it’s my duty yjr to pay it forward and share it with Everyone, Here is what I do…… Click Here

  2. Wow. i have to add the law suit to my dairy, thanks for the notices

    1. I hope you are not lactose intolerant, Petter.

      1. Grammar fascist!

        1. I have received $17634 last month from home by working online in my part time. I am a full asd time student and doing this easy home based work for 3 to 4 hours a day. This job is very simple to do and its regular earnings are much better than any other office type work. See detail here………… USA ONLINE JOBS

      2. Got Milk? Da-iry

    2. Oman Tourist Destination

  3. I’am made $84, 8254 so far this year working online and I’m a full time student. Im using an online business. Here what I do,.for more information Read More.

  4. When I was three years old I took my turn driving along with my parents.

    Kids today are such wimps.

    1. Their parents made them wimps. It’s caused by the helicopter parenting that Lenore Skenazy tries to fight with her articles on here.

    2. Meh. When I was 3 my parents made me drive alone to buy them more beer and cigarettes. Lazy libertarians!

      1. Underage me used to go a mile to the store with a note from my stepmother to buy her cigarettes. I wonder if that’s one of the crimes they’ve abolished the statute of limitations for.

        1. Hah six year olld didn’t even need a note from Mom to buy her smokes when she chased me to the store to get other stuff too. They knew us. Back in mid-1950’s.

      2. They let you drive without a license??

    3. I honestly thought the fold-down armrest in the front bench of my grandma’s ‘76 Buick was a booster seat so I could see out the windshield. I rode all over the place on that thing.

      1. I did that with one in the back seat about 15 years earlier. It was a Buick too.

      2. Car seat? We rode in the back of the pickup truck. On the wheel wells.

        1. Still legal in Missouri.

      3. Ha, that’s nothing. We had three in the sedan back seat all the time. On long trips, my father packed luggage on the floor, put a board over it and a sleeping back. That was child one. Child two got the length of the seat itself. Child three rode up “on the deck”, behind the seat.


        And, we lived.

        1. Were you ever in an accident, though?

          1. People who did this and were in accidents, are dead now.
            You’ll only hear about this from survivors.

          2. We lived!

            Accidents are rare. That’s not what the media hype tells us, but it’s what statistics bear out.

            1. we all li
              ved through three crashed that I remember, back when we were little. All town surface streets. Never on the highway. Dad was one incredible driver.. prolly two million miles total before he finally had a minor fender bender that was his. He turned in his drinving slicense afte that one, and sold my bro his little pickup.

              He did have one prang in all his decades of Los Ag\ngeles commuting to work… since before freeways wewnt eveyrwhere. He was on one of the new freeways, came down the offramp for our exit, came to a stop in the lineup waiting for the stopsig traffic to clear ahead, got thumped from behind. His car was a 1947 Austin A 35. Sixty mile dailycommute. The car behind had hit him, gently. He set the handbrake, got out, noticed the round glass tail lamp lens and chrome mount ring lying on the macadam, the ONLY thing touched on his car. The other car nad no damage. He picked up the two large pieces of the glass lens, the other guy asked him if he watned to get the cops. Dad said NO not worth the hassle. The other guy asked what Dad wanted to do. Dad said “give me five bucks so I can get a new tail lamp lens, and I’ll just go on home, end of the matter. The guy pulled out a twenty and haded it him, they shook hands, Dad was on time foor dinner. After super he went out pulled the rubber sealing ring, refitted the two halves of the broken glass lens into the chrome ring, worked it all back in to the housing, and drive the car that way until he sold it. Today that glass lens would be worth at least fifty bucks, they are no llonger availble, and were used on at least a dozen differnt Enlgish cars from that era. Can’t find em anywhere “ve got a handful of them, and don’t want to part with them.

        2. Hmm.. which one of ny eight siblings are YOU? Or maybe our Dads knew each other?

          1. Was you dad an engineer too? You know, the sort that has to over explain everything, can never get to the point, but is really amazingly able to do just about anything?

      4. My dad used to pick me up from elementary school on his motorcycle. He did make me wear a helmet, but it was a G-Force cartoon helmet .

  5. The changes “prevented only 57 car crash fatalities of children nationwide in 2017,” it says.

    If it saves one life….

    But you would think a bureaucracy would be held to a higher standard when doing a cost/benefit analysis. How much does it cost to provide that extra car seat for a second child? Car seats ain’t cheap.

    1. Not to mention which, cars are getting more and more safety features, how safe is safe enough? We all know the answer to that – there is no such thing as enough, you can always do more, the law of diminishing returns can go to hell as far as a bureaucracy is concerned given that growing the number of regulations, the size and cost of the bureaucracy, and the amount of power they wield is counted as a benefit in the cost/benefit analysis.

      1. Not only that, but sometimes by statute they’re forbidden to take any consideration other than health or safety into account. It’s wishful thinking in the form of legislation, saying no amount of health or safety is good enough for our people, whatever the cost. The bureaucrats would wield the same amount of power or more if those tradeoffs were allowed, because it’d be bureaucrats deciding which side to come down on in myriad cases, so the bureaucracy is not the cause of this no-tradeoffs attitude, the legislator is — and ultimately, the voters are, because they’re being flattered by it.

      2. Cars could be made much safer. Just program the engine control computer for a max speed of 45 mph.

        1. Market value of pre-throttled cars skyrockets

        2. 45 is far too fast. with a national speed limit, governed by the manufacturer at 7 MPH, no one will die in an auto accident. After all, if it saves just ONE life….

      3. Some mandated safety features actually make cars *less* safe for smaller children, like 3-point seatbelts and airbags, thus necessitating the carseats. And the cycle of bureaucracy continues

        1. Or ABS leaving drivers to think they can tailgate safely, since “this car won’t let me crash”.

          1. the ONLY two times I ever thuogth I was certain to crash in my 2.5 million road miles was when the ABS system on my van kicked in and should not have.. refused to apply ANY braking to front wheels.. had to let off, then feather the brakes myself to just below the skid point on the wet road. I did end up partway into the intersection on the red llight that was too short. a year later when the warning lamp came on, and stayed on, I realised after some fooling around, again in the rain that theABS system was dead. HOORAY. I have not m missed it one bit. Now I know WHO is driving my car.. I AM, not some stupid computer. I’ve had more red light issues, but now I feather the pedal, maintain tarction AND steering, and am much happier. Take ABS and shove it. I had considered piping round the controller and surge motor assembly, but then the system did me the favour f failing. The van is far safer now. I liked things a lot better when that sort of thing was an add-on option. Whjcih I’d never add.

            1. I avoid like the plague places where there are too many people, but do have a certain fondness for difficult climates. ABS on ice is a PITA! Give me a standard (manual) transmission, and I’m good to go even on ice and snow. Of course, with age comes a bit of perspective too; at this point I tend to say F-it, it sucks out, I’ll just stay around the property today.

      4. the law of diminishing returns can go to hell as far as a bureaucracy is concerned
        If it saves 0.1 life.

    2. It’s not about safety, it about the state declaring they have the authority to kidnap your child

      1. Ding, ding, ding.

      2. Yup. Friends were in a minor prang, ahd their little daughter in the appropriate car seat, air bags deployed so cops summoned the ambulance, towad the car, and had them all taken to hospital for checkover. Mum was expecting another , so taht all got checked out, to. Everyone was fine, a sister riding along did get a small gash in her ehad, which they sta=pled back together. She’s got a massive head of hair, so no one ever even saw it.

        The ambulance had taken the car seat along to hospital, and after it was all over and help had come to take them all home, hospital would NOT release the little girl, because the carseat they had for her had “been in an accident”. MUST get a NEW one before we can release her. SO.. Dad had to get taken to the nearest WalMart to buy a new seat, hospital ordered him to take the old one along to dispose of it. He looked at them and said UYOU just MADE me buy a new one, now we have no room in the car we’re taking ome to fit the old one.That was YOUR choice, so YOU dispose of it. He pikcked up his Daughter and the NEW carseat t and they walked out.

        Had that been me I’d have taken the old seatAND the Daughter, and just walked out. If they tried to stop me I’d have said “e’re WALKING to th store to buy another one. Buh bye. And gone home. Child IN the old seat.

    3. I’m not endorsing mandatory car seats, but you also need to factor prevented injuries into the cost/benefit analysis besides straight up fatalities.

  6. Holy shit! Is that a backwards-facing car seat in the front seat of a car with a big-ass warning on it not to put the car seat in a backwards-facing position in the front seat of a car because the air bag will kill the baby? What the fuck?

    1. Hopefully that was a staged example of “what not to do” for the photo, not how the photographer usually drives their kid around

      1. Was going to make a joke about the UK and catapulting baby contests.

        Some cars have a way to turn off the passenger air bag.

      2. Or the photog (or Reason editor) does not know much about cars (like most hip urbanistas).

        1. Since the picture clearly shows the kid on the left of the car (and the word “airbag” is readable so we know that it wasn’t just artistic license in flipping the picture), that suggests to me that it wasn’t a US-based Reason editor making this mistake.

          1. And I don’t think you have to know a lot about cars to read the sticker and do what it says.

        2. Soave can’t change a tire and he’s probably the most masculine writer working at Reason.

          1. Nancy,

            He was on some show recently and mentioned his wife. First thought I had was, “Robby’s not a queer?”

            He’s so far from masculine, it’s a bit funny to read your comment.

      3. Hopefully that was a staged example of “what not to do”
        It is what all the politicians are doing.

    2. Dude, you can turn off the passenger airbag in a lot of vehicles. Meanwhile, I wonder how many kids have choked to death while their parents couldn’t reach them in the back seat.

      1. It used to just be 2-seaters that don’t have a backseat to put the kid in. Now it seems newer cars have the weight sensors in the seat to automatically activate the airbag when a large enough person is sitting there

        An 8 year old in a state-mandated car seat doesn’t weigh more than 75 pounds, right?

  7. Funny….having two kids young enough to require car seats might be motivation for birth control regardless of the type/size of car the person drives.

    1. Agreed

    2. Funny….having two kids young enough to require car seats might be motivation for birth control regardless of the type/size of car the person drives.

    3. Under 12ish? They need to be in a car seat until theyre 5′ and 100lbs.

      1. Not even close – they’re kids until age 26.

      2. My oldest was 14 and hadn’t cleared 5′ and 100lbs.

        Barely made that before she got her license.

        But they have a point here. Once you go above two adults and two children, you really need the third row, which means either a large $UV or the dreaded minivan, which is cultural death to the childbearing generation.

        1. Hell my ex-gf wasn’t 5′ and 100 pounds when she was 23

      3. So what’s my 50 year old sister to do? She’s a tad under both numbers. Car seat for her?

      4. Read about an incident in California a while back.. copoper pulled over a woman, in her mid twenties, thinking she was too young to be driving. She was from guatemala, a people group that tends to be VERY small. SHe could barely see out UNDER the top of the sttering wheel, and over the dash. Cop wrote her for not being in a boooster eat, because she was UNDER the max size established, and thus state law mandated a booster seat regardless of age. Funny thing.. she could barely reach the pedals. without the booster, when she tried one she could not. Went to court, showed the judge her driving lincence and thus age, jusge was far smarter than the cop.. he dismissed it wiht an apology. Copper prolly never got any flak fot that one. Dummie

    4. And yet, parents had more kids than just two for many centuries despite the distractions that kids create.

      The downward trend in family size (especially including the step-function in the graph) cannot be explained by other kids alone. The timing of the step-function suggests something interesting. It might be car seats. It could be something else that happened at the same time. It might be coincidence. But it can’t be other kids.

      1. If you’re going back centuries then yes, there are a lot more factors than carseats

        But going back that far also means the nuisance of raising kids also does become a factor, since having extra help on a farm, or needing someone to care for you in old age no longer necessitates making sure you have enough kids to ensure at least one survives to adulthood

        1. Yet none of those factors correlate well with the apparent step-function in the graph. And that’s the point. What changed that would have caused this particular, rather distinctive, change in family size?

          Causes that have been consistent over time (or consistently changing) do not generally cause temporally- and jurisdictionally-distinctive effects.

      2. I’d say it was primarily transitioning from farming and better child survival.

  8. Better to save one life than to create 1000 lives.

    Do car safety laws hurt the environment?

    1. Yes, by encouraging people to live in the suburbs and drive around to non-essential businesses. Baby-bjorns and granny-carts for everyone shall be mandated! For the environments!

  9. Also, with the child seats installed, it’s really hard to fool around in the back seat.

  10. Another article on reduced birth rate. Really. Is there any chance that the human race will go extinct because we don’t have enough people? Let’s leave the question of birth rate to some time in the future when it might be really important.

    1. Go donate to PP again so they can go kill more black people. That seems to be your main concern.

      1. LOL

        It’s not Planned Parenthood’s fault that Black bodies are more likely to access abortion care at their facilities.


        PS — And don’t give me that “Margaret Sanger was a racist” routine either. I learned in college Sanger was probably the only white figure in American history who wasn’t racist.

        1. This must be the Black Body Catastrophe that I read about in my physics classes.

        2. You need to get a tuition refund. Sanger’s stated goal was to reduce the “inferior negro population”. Her words, not mine. And today, PP kills more black babies than any other abortion provider in America.

      2. JesseSPAZ says:

        Babies!?! BABIES?!?! To HELL with babies! They will grow up to be murderers, rapists, drug dealers, and SOME of them will grow up to be good people, but so what?!?! MANY of them will vote Marxist! FEW of them will vote for the likes of Der TrumpfenFuhrer (All Hail!) or Der Uber-Alex Jones (All Hail!)! They will dilute our perfect 1-party “R” state, and mooch welfare checks, and lust after EVIL things, such as multi-party so-called “democracy”! Democracy, schmeemocracy, my ass!

        1. Flag. Refresh.

          1. Whoa! PhD Computer Scientist here has figured out how to move the mouse-cursor, and click on the flag icon! Congratulations, Stable Genius Junior! Maybe You could write Your NEXT Computer Science PhD thesis on HOW You do that? And thread-clutter-post it EVERY FUCKIN’ TIME that you see a post that you disagree with? And expect all the OTHER marching morons to THANK you profusely?

            Remember, all ye persons who might like to be or become benevolent, decent, ethical persons… Do NOT become a follower of the Church of Morons! MANY of them apparently act like up-Chuck here! You do NOT want to become a Moron! Remember, kids, what comes around, goes around! Act like a Moron, and you will be treated like a Moron! As if you were a Moron! Which you ARE, if you act like a Moron!

    2. Yes, M4E, we get it. You progs are all Malthusian defeatists who think we need far fewer people the world. Planned Parenthood, minimum wage, etc. are all proggie plans to reduce the surplus population.

  11. Follow the $. Car seat makers no doubt lobby politicians to raise the age kids must stay in seats.

    1. Baby-seat laws are like COVID lockdowns. Good political insurance.
      MADD, too. Yes, I was killed by a drunk driver almost 20 years ago, but it didn’t really matter, because I was drunk, too (but not driving).

    2. Youre the first one to bring up the REAL push behind this whole thing. Yes, the folks tht MAKE them have made it into a racket. THEY have decided to make a bazillioin differnt sizes, each one carefully designed for a VERY narrow range of size/age, thus requiring a series of half a dozen different devices for a child’s growing years. Maybe more. THEN they imagine that the things wear out simply because they are a certain age. REALLY?? The plastics they use are e NOT the kinds that fall apart in just a few years. They have carefully engineered not only the seats but the whole industrry to maximise the number of them being sold. I know families that have been forced to throw out perfectly usable and strong car seats that the now older kids used when they were tiny, but since they (the seats, not the kids) are a certain age they are now deemed “unsafe” for the younger ones to use. Some families I know have more money invested in their range of car seats, including the ones that hve aged out and are thustrash, than I have in my daily driver car. That does not take into account the facts that they are illegel to sell to others now, or todonate to Goodwill, etc, OR to use even for the fisr trip back home from hpspital after a kid has been in a minor fenderbender whjist sitting in his near new seat…… they have made a disgusing racket out of the entire mess. The manufacturers ARE the ones pushing the laws and regulatioins.. specifically designed to sell more seats. Can’t use tham onec they reach a certain age (of the seat), can’t sell them used, cna’t use after eventhe most mn=inor non-ijury prangup, can’t reuse, must have the correct model narrowly sized for a small range of age/size.. insane. And instead of costing maybe forty bucks, they now are sometimes well abovea a hundred… to be used less than twoyears and tossed out? What about the landfills?

  12. Two thoughts;
    First, it is more likely that women are reluctant to bring a child into a socialist America,
    Second, the car seats have prevented 8,000 abortions.

    1. And you know it’s not a question of if, but when, they will decide that traveling in a car is simply too dangerous for children (now defined by the WHO as anyone under age 26).

      1. (now defined by the WHO as anyone under age 26).

        So is the definition of “child”, or “child-like”?

      2. I believe the WHO recommends anyone under 26 ride the magic bus.

  13. From a Koch / Reason libertarian perspective, anything that reduces the American birth rate is a good thing. It strengthens our argument that there just aren’t enough people in this country — and that the solution is unlimited, unrestricted immigration.


    1. Why not both? Less births, less immigration.

  14. Parents might consider cost when procreating? Is this news?

    Now tell us about the inverse: if society subsidized or even rewards popping out babies, do mothers make more of them?

    1. Smart and hard-working people make fewer babies, because they are too busy being productive. Poor and-or lazy people make more babies, for more welfare checks. The dysgenic effects of this are straightforward, as it has been for decades. Private charity, not public charity, would be a “baby step” in the right direction!

      1. They should make a movie about that. Oh, they did.

      2. I don’t think it’s for welfare checks. Kids cost more than you can get from welfare. I think it’s just not thinking about consequences.

        1. No. Selfishness. Highly educated people are more self-centered and less interested in having kids around. They have children only when it fits in with their schedules and ability to hire nannies. Their children always are less important to them than their status and wants.

    2. It is well known that abject poverty leads to more babies – between an increased infant mortality rate, the need to produce child labor and the hopes of producing someone to take care of you in your old age, poverty is the best way of producing babies. Hopefully, with Joe Biden in office, we’ll soon see another baby boom here in the US. Between killing off all the old folks with the ‘rona and the coming baby boom, we’ll have enough workers to operate all the Goobleboxes and Flooblecranks we’re going to need once fossil fuels are outlawed.

      1. Also the lack of entertainment options in poverty leads to only a few activities that are both fun and free for young adults to engage in

  15. If you have a child seat it’s because you have a child.

    I think you’ll find that having a child is a far greater obstacle to sex than a car seat is.

    1. “C’mon upstairs with me sugar”

      “What? The kids are still up”

      “Don’t worry. I have them parked in front of the Disney channel with a box of fruit loops”


      (10 minutes later. Knock on the bedroom door)

      1. More like ten minutes later I’m back downstairs all disappointed.

    2. As noted above, parents were getting interrupted by kids long before car seats were invented. The existence of other kids can not explain the step in the graph of family-size by time. Something else must have caused that step.

      1. That and the fact that you can have unprotected sex a few times a year and still pop out a dozen kids.

      2. Its not the existence of other kids that we’re talking about, it’s the increase in effort per child brought about by new regulations that are postulated as the cause. That’s not exactly the same thing.

        It almost certainly contributes. A well-raised child is a high-effort endeavor. Adding external burdens to that is surely going to get some people to opt out. How much? Its hard to say.

        1. Taxes, cost of living, hassle of raising kids in a world where they’re not dismissed and can walk home at ten y/o but need to be picked up from school, other parents not letting kids have sleepovers anymore, stranger danger, living on credit cards, uncertainties of life in a country where you’re being pushed out by illegals who vote and lie and steal resources from your children, and living in a fucking surveillance state where police make up excuses to pull people over and every asshole has a fucking video camera aimed at you all the time, and it’s just not worth having more than one or two kids anymore, and even if you want more kids you can’t afford it.

          It has nothing to do with fucking car seats.

  16. despite a long-running economic recovery that would normally encourage more childbirths

    Except, of course, for the longstanding trend, once you reach a certain level of wealth, where more money means *reduced* family sizes.

  17. The issue of child safety in cars is very important
    It’s good to have you dealing with this. It is hoped that parents will pay attention to this.

  18. Stupid
    correlation causation etc

    after 3 or so it is just a booster

  19. How is this a “provocative new study”? I read about this a year or two ago. The authors have an interesting hypothesis that’s about as well supported as most behavioral economics findings (which is to say, imperfectly). Read Freakonomics or any of that genre of books for dozens more like this.

    1. Yes, the echo of Freakonomics is deafening. Freakonomics itself was BS, as proved by audits of the computer programs used in generating the conclusions.
      The freakonomics (genre) are interesting/entertaining. The laws (like most laws these days) are destructive, and should be repealed/prevented.
      One of the less-appreciated harms of laws is the increased power it gives the police over the publics they’re supposed to be protecting.

  20. Does this mean left wing eco freaks (who want to reduce the earth’s population to purportedly prevent climate apocalypse) will be lobbying to allow only one child car seat per car?

  21. most vehicles can fit only two car seats in the back row, necessitating the purchase of a larger car to accommodate three young children at once.

    Both the larger car problem and 3rd child problem will be solved under the green new deal.

    1. I have a better option: SUVs for All. Everyone deserves safe, comfortable transportation. Plus you can live in them when times get tough.

      1. SUV’s are a RIGHT!!!

        1. Oh, sorry, I though “sterilization” was going to be right.

          1. Or mandatory.

            That’s what the greenie’s want… total control, fewer and fewer people until we just die out and the bunnies and wolves can take over and play nicely together.

  22. Someone is confused about correlation and causation. Americans don’t think 12 months ahead usually. People are forming families later because they are children themselves until much later in life, and have enormous college debts to pay off, and want to enjoy single life for longer. By the time they finally get married and have the first kid, they are too old to have too many more. Plus their friends will look at them like they are despoiling the Earth if they create more humans than the 2 to replace themselves.

  23. women are having kids later, and with a longer space in between

    no time for three

    oh, and money

  24. God, being a kid must be lame these days. 8 year-olds in car seats? I was fucking pissed when I had to wear a seat belt at age 5 when the first seatbelt law for kids came in.

  25. sounds plausible at least. i have two kids under 8. still get around just fine with my Honda civic.

    I want nothing to do with a third child for a myriad of reasons, but the idea that i’d have to buy a new friggen car would be something i’d have to consider if that were a plunge i was otherwise willing to take.

  26. i was not expecting to be wowed by this article…. but good god, what a load of hot garbage……. women with two small children are marginally less eager to have a third….. IT MUST BE THE CAR SEATS!!!! i mean i know we all oppose nanny state over regulation, but is this really the kind of sloppy garbage we are supposed to get behind to do so?

  27. Where I live it’s illegal to put a kid in the front seat even if you can deactivate the air bag. I bet more than 57 deaths have resulted from moving kids to the back. Some of them are countable, the children left alone in cars by forgetful parents. Some of them are not. I remember a terrifying ride along the New Jersey Turnpike driven by a mother who kept turning around to look at her kid in the back. I don’t mean a glance, I mean seconds of face to face talking.

    1. I am making a good salary from home $1300-$2600/week , which is amazing, under a year back I was jobless in a horrible economy. I thank mfw God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now it’s my duty yjr to pay it forward and share it with Everyone, Here is what I do…… Click Here

    2. More than that, you’ve got to do the cost-benefit analysis, and that’s really hard when the benefits are intangible. Riding shotgun with my father was always a chance to talk, and just hang out. Since we weren’t being helicoptered, it was a great time. Hard to do strapped down in the back seat, treated like cargo rather than another person…

  28. Perhaps research shows that some women would have more children if seats were smaller. If a woman’s choice to give birth is determined by such spurious reasons then that is hardly worth considering. If legislators want to make it easier for women to have children then let them focus on genuine reasons why women cannot choose. This is not a genuine reason.

    Legislators should not allow themselves to be emotionally manipulated by the claims of companies who stand to reap benefits.

  29. Everybody I know who aren’t having more kids it’s because they can not afford them. Most have mini vans, it isn’t a matter of a lack of seating space in their vehicle.

  30. Although I doubt something this stupid is having any actual effect on the stupid breeders filling our planet to bursting with their puling spawn, I am all for anything that reduces human reproduction in any way.

    1. We all wish your parents felt as you do.

  31. “well, I was planning to have more kids, but with all these car seat laws it just seems like a lot of work!”

    sounds about right.

  32. Fantastic work-from-home opportunity for everyone… Work for three to eight hours a day and start getting paid in the range of 7,000-14,000 dollars a month…
    Weekly payments….. Read More.

  33. I’d put money down that the exact same thing will be said, in 10 hence, of impending regulate of reproductive rights in the South: “the laws was meant to save ‘lives’ but dramatically lowered birthrates”

  34. Ok by me. We’re becoming way overcrowded.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.