What parents should know about the new car seat regulations effective June 30
Starting June 30, 2025, all car seats sold in the U.S. will be required to meet new federal safety standards. The change is designed to better protect children in side-impact (T-bone) collisions, a type of crash known for causing severe injuries.
Here's what this update means for you—whether you already have a car seat or are planning to buy one soon.
If you already own a car seat, there's no need to panic or replace it—as long as it:
Has not expired
Hasn't been recalled
Is properly installed and appropriate for your child's weight and height
As the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) explains, 'Current child seats are highly effective in reducing the likelihood of death or serious injury in vehicle crashes.'
So if your current seat checks those boxes, you're in the clear.
Related: A parent's guide to car seat safety: Tips, rules & product picks
The updated regulation—Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 213a (FMVSS 213a)—adds a new crash test specifically for side-impact collisions.
Why this matters: These crashes often happen at intersections and are especially dangerous for children seated on the side of the car.
The new test simulates a 30 mph side crash and ensures that car seats:
Keep children properly restrained
Prevent head contact with the vehicle interior
Reduce the force of impact on the chest
The new rule applies to seats made for kids under 40 pounds—typically infant and toddler seats.
Many manufacturers are already producing car seats that meet the new FMVSS 213a standard, but it may not be clearly labeled on the box.
Ask the retailer if the model complies with the new standard
Contact the brand's customer service to confirm
Use the NHTSA's car seat guide to match your child's age and size with the correct seat
Use the NHTSA's installation locator tool to get your seat checked by a certified technician
Yes, , and it's more important than it sounds.
Over time, plastic parts can degrade, safety technology evolves, and newer standards (like this one) come into effect. An expired seat may no longer offer optimal protection.
Look for the expiration date printed on the bottom or side of the seat
If there isn't one, check the date of manufacture and visit the manufacturer's website for their specific lifespan (typically 6–10 years)
Related: 10 car seat guidelines every parent needs to know
If you're the research-loving type, you can view the actual crash test data and technical breakdowns behind the regulation update on the NHTSA website:
NHTSA side-impact test database
Already own a seat? Check for expiration, recalls, and proper installation
Buying a new one? Ask if it meets FMVSS 213a and confirm with the brand
Use NHTSA tools for choosing and installing the right seat
No need to panic—but being informed puts you in the driver's seat
This update is a positive move toward safer rides for our little ones—and by staying aware, you're doing exactly what matters most: protecting your child with love, care, and confidence.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Miami Herald
3 hours ago
- Miami Herald
Hands-free face-off: BlueCruise vs. Super Cruise vs. Autopilot
'Hands-free' appeals to many drivers. Yet test data shows how each system handles the real world very differently. Here's what you need to know to choose wisely. How They Rank Ford's BlueCruise tops Consumer Reports' latest active driving assistance tests with 84 points; GM's Super Cruise follows at 75; Tesla's Autopilot lands at 61. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety assigns BlueCruise the strongest safeguard ratings, Super Cruise middling marks, and Autopilot a lower tier (IIHS, 2023). Meanwhile, NHTSA's EA22-002 report links several Autopilot overrides to incidents when drivers regained control under glare or faded lane lines. Testers describe a common highway stretch at dusk where lane markings blur. BlueCruise's eye-tracking camera warns early, then ends hands-free when maps lack recent updates. Super Cruise uses precise HD maps plus LIDAR-derived data to prompt a takeover smoothly as fading lines approach. Autopilot's vision-only stack hesitates under glare, requiring manual steering with less warning. Sensor and Software Breakdown ▪ BlueCruise relies on forward cameras plus infrared driver-monitoring. It restricts hands-free to designated 'Blue Zones' (Ford publishes region maps). Eye-tracking ensures the driver watches the road. ▪ Super Cruise combines high-definition LIDAR-scanned maps with radar and camera data. An infrared sensor checks head position; hands off feels secure until map data detects new construction or unclear markings. ▪ Autopilot (FSD Beta) uses a vision-only neural-net stack. It operates beyond geofenced highways but lacks the predictive map layer. Updates arrive over-the-air frequently, altering the cars behavior unpredictably. Transition tactics Each system alerts drivers differently: steering-wheel vibrations, audible chimes, dashboard prompts. BlueCruise's prompt can feel abrupt when exit ramps aren't in its database. Super Cruise often issues a gentle vibration before displaying 'Take Control' messages. Autopilot may allow slight steering inputs before disengaging, but reports note some drivers found the warning delay risky. Hands-free safety: Crash counts and fatalities compared GM's Super Cruise boasts over 160 million accident-free miles with no publicly documented fatal crashes under its engagement. Ford's BlueCruise has been implicated in approximately 32 reported crashes under NHTSA review, including two fatal collisions in Mustang Mach-E vehicles resulting in three deaths (NHTSA ODI, 2024). Tesla's Autopilot has been involved in 956 reported crashes reviewed by NHTSA and is linked to 51 reported fatalities to date (NHTSA EA22-002, 2024). Enthusiasts should note that reporting criteria vary, and ongoing probes may uncover further data, underscoring the importance of vigilance and understanding each system's limitations. Coverage and update cadence BlueCruise restricts hands-free to mapped stretches in the U.S., Canada, and select regions; Ford updates zone maps periodically. Super Cruise covers over 750,000 miles of roads in North America, with map updates via dealer visits or over-the-air in newer models. Autopilot's software changes often, but without map anchoring, performance can vary by region and conditions. Practical recommendations Match System to Drive Profile: If you log long interstate miles in mapped areas, Super Cruise offers predictability. For regional highway runs within Ford's Blue Zones, BlueCruise excels with strict gaze monitoring. If you enjoy frequent software tweaks and can stay vigilant for false positives, Autopilot may appeal-but treat it as a beta experiment. Test under Known Conditions: On a clear day, engage hands-free on a familiar highway. Note how each handles faded lines, curves, or light rain. Observe takeover warnings: Is the vibration firm? Is the chime clear? Does the prompt arrive early enough? Stay Alert at All Times: Hands-free does not mean eyes-free. Keep your gaze on the road even if systems allow relaxed hands. Note that NHTSA data demonstrate that incidents often occur within seconds of takeover. Check Map and Feature Coverage: Before relying on hands-free in a new region, verify if your route lies within BlueCruise or Super Cruise zones. Understand that Autopilot may operate but might misread unfamiliar markings. Plan for Updates and Maintenance: Factor in how frequently each system updates. Ford's BlueCruise zone updates may lag behind new roads. Super Cruise map refreshes often require dealer or connected-car service. Tesla's Autopilot updates automatically but can alter performance without warning. Essential metrics at a glance BlueCruise: CR score 84; top IIHS safeguards; strict eye-tracking; 32 crashes and 3 fatalities, limited to Blue Zones (Consumer Reports, 2025; IIHS, 2023). Super Cruise: CR score 75; broad HD-map network; LIDAR+radar support; smooth prompts; zero crashes and zero fatalities (160 million accident-free miles), map updates via OTA/dealer (Consumer Reports, 2025; GM, 2024). Autopilot: CR score 61; vision-only stack; wide availability; frequent software shifts; 956 crashes and 51 fatalities (Consumer Reports, 2025; NHTSA, 2022). Hands-free systems free your hands but not your responsibility. Choose BlueCruise for strict monitoring in mapped corridors. Opt for Super Cruise if you need broad coverage, map-driven predictability, and a perfect safety record. Treat Autopilot as NSFW; an evolving tool that demands constant vigilance. Test each under clear conditions, track updates, and always keep eyes forward. Copyright 2025 The Arena Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
7 hours ago
Crash dummies used in car safety tests are still modeled after men despite higher risks for women
Maria Weston Kuhn had one lingering question about the car crash that forced her to have emergency surgery during a vacation in Ireland: Why did she and her mother sustain serious injuries while her father and brother, who sat in the front, emerge unscathed? 'It was a head-on crash and they were closest to the point of contact," said Kuhn, now 25, who missed a semester of college to recover from the 2019 collision that caused her seat belt to slide off her hips and rupture her intestines by pinning them against her spine. "That was an early clue that something else was going on.' When Kuhn returned home to Maine, she found an article her grandma had clipped from Consumer Reports and left on her bed. Women are 73% more likely to be injured in a frontal crash, she learned, yet the dummy used in vehicle tests by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration dates back to the 1970s and is still modeled almost entirely off the body of a man. Kuhn, who is starting law school at New York University this fall, took action and founded the nonprofit Drive US Forward. Its aim was to raise public awareness and eventually encourage members of Congress to sign onto a bill that would require NHTSA to incorporate a more advanced female dummy into its testing. The agency has the final word on whether cars get pulled from the market, and the kind of dummy used in its safety tests could impact which ones receive coveted five-star ratings. 'It seems like we have an easy solution here where we can have crash test dummies that reflect an average woman as well as a man,' Sen. Deb Fischer, a Nebraska Republican who has introduced the legislation the past two sessions, told The Associated Press. Senators from both parties have signed onto Fischer's 'She Drives Act,' and the transportation secretaries from the past two presidential administrations have expressed support for updating the rules. But for various reasons, the push for new safety requirements has been moving at a sluggish pace. That's particularly true in the U.S., where much of the research is happening and where around 40,000 people are killed each year in car crashes. The crash test dummy currently used in NHTSA five-star testing is called the Hybrid III, which was developed in 1978 and modeled after a 5-foot-9, 171-pound man (the average size in the 1970s but about 29 pounds lighter than today's average). What's known as the female dummy is essentially a much smaller version of the male model with a rubber jacket to represent breasts. It's routinely tested in the passenger seat or the back seat but seldom in the driver's seat, even though the majority of licensed drivers are women. 'What they didn't do is design a crash test dummy that has all the sensors in the areas where a woman would be injured differently than a man,' said Christopher O'Connor, president and CEO of the Farmington Hills, Michigan-based Humanetics Group, which has spent more than a decade developing and refining one. A female dummy from Humanetics equipped with all of the available sensors costs around $1 million, about twice the cost of the Hybrid used now. But, O'Connor says, the more expensive dummy far more accurately reflects the anatomical differences between the sexes — including in the shape of the neck, collarbone, pelvis, and legs, which one NHTSA study found account for about 80% more injuries by women in a car crash compared to men. Such physical dummies will always be needed for vehicle safety tests, and to verify the accuracy of virtual tests, O'Connor said. Europe incorporated the more advanced male dummy developed by Humanetics' engineers, the THOR 50M (based on a 50th percentile man), into its testing procedures soon after Kuhn's 2019 crash in Ireland. Several other countries, including China and Japan, have adopted it as well. But that model and the female version the company uses for comparison, the THOR 5F (based on a 5th percentile woman), have been met with skepticism from some American automakers who argue the more sophisticated devices may exaggerate injury risks and undercut the value of some safety features such as seat belts and airbags. Bridget Walchesky, 19, had to be flown to a hospital, where she required eight surgeries over a month, after a 2022 crash near her home in Sheboygan, Wisconsin, that killed her friend, who was driving. While acknowledging the seat belt likely saved her life, Walchesky said some of the injuries — including her broken collarbone — were the result of it pinning her too tightly, which she views as something better safety testing focused on women could improve. 'Seat belts aren't really built for bodies on females,' Walchesky said. 'Some of my injuries, the way the force hit me, they were probably worsened.' The Alliance for Automotive Innovation, an industry trade group, said in a statement to the AP that the better way to ensure safety — which it called its top priority — is through upgrades to the existing Hybrid dummy rather than mandating a new one. 'This can happen on a faster timeline and lead to quicker safety improvements than requiring NHTSA to adopt unproven crash test dummy technology,' the alliance said. Humanetics' THOR dummies received high marks in the vehicle safety agency's early tests. Using cadavers from actual crashes to compare the results, NHTSA found they outperformed the existing Hybrid in predicting almost all injuries — including to the head, neck, shoulders, abdomen and legs. A separate review by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, a research arm funded by auto insurers, was far more critical of the dummy's ability to predict chest injuries in a frontal crash. Despite the vast expansion in the number of sensors, the insurance institute's testing found, the male THOR dummy was less accurate than the current Hybrid dummies, which also had limitations. 'More isn't necessarily better,' said Jessica Jermakian, senior vice president for vehicle research at IIHS. 'You also have to be confident that the data is telling you the right things about how a real person would fare in that crash." NHTSA's budget plan commits to developing the female THOR 5F version with the ultimate goal of incorporating it into the testing. But there could be a long wait considering the THOR's male version adopted by other countries is still awaiting final approval in the U.S. A 2023 report by the Government Accountability Office, which conducts research for Congress, cited numerous 'missed milestones' in NHTSA's development of various crash dummy enhancements — including in the THOR models. Kuhn acknowledges being frustrated by the slow process of trying to change the regulations. She says she understands why there's reluctance from auto companies if they fear being forced to make widespread design changes with more consideration for women's safety. 'Fortunately, they have very skilled engineers and they'll figure it out,' she said.
Yahoo
9 hours ago
- Yahoo
Crash dummies used in car safety tests are still modeled after men despite higher risks for women
Maria Weston Kuhn had one lingering question about the car crash that forced her to have emergency surgery during a vacation in Ireland: Why did she and her mother sustain serious injuries while her father and brother, who sat in the front, emerge unscathed? 'It was a head-on crash and they were closest to the point of contact," said Kuhn, now 25, who missed a semester of college to recover from the 2019 collision that caused her seat belt to slide off her hips and rupture her intestines by pinning them against her spine. "That was an early clue that something else was going on.' When Kuhn returned home to Maine, she found an article her grandma had clipped from Consumer Reports and left on her bed. Women are 73% more likely to be injured in a frontal crash, she learned, yet the dummy used in vehicle tests by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration dates back to the 1970s and is still modeled almost entirely off the body of a man. A survivor becomes an activist Kuhn, who is starting law school at New York University this fall, took action and founded the nonprofit Drive US Forward. Its aim was to raise public awareness and eventually encourage members of Congress to sign onto a bill that would require NHTSA to incorporate a more advanced female dummy into its testing. The agency has the final word on whether cars get pulled from the market, and the kind of dummy used in its safety tests could impact which ones receive coveted five-star ratings. 'It seems like we have an easy solution here where we can have crash test dummies that reflect an average woman as well as a man,' Sen. Deb Fischer, a Nebraska Republican who has introduced the legislation the past two sessions, told The Associated Press. Senators from both parties have signed onto Fischer's 'She Drives Act,' and the transportation secretaries from the past two presidential administrations have expressed support for updating the rules. But for various reasons, the push for new safety requirements has been moving at a sluggish pace. That's particularly true in the U.S., where much of the research is happening and where around 40,000 people are killed each year in car crashes. Evolution of a crash test dummy The crash test dummy currently used in NHTSA five-star testing is called the Hybrid III, which was developed in 1978 and modeled after a 5-foot-9, 171-pound man (the average size in the 1970s but about 29 pounds lighter than today's average). What's known as the female dummy is essentially a much smaller version of the male model with a rubber jacket to represent breasts. It's routinely tested in the passenger seat or the back seat but seldom in the driver's seat, even though the majority of licensed drivers are women. 'What they didn't do is design a crash test dummy that has all the sensors in the areas where a woman would be injured differently than a man,' said Christopher O'Connor, president and CEO of the Farmington Hills, Michigan-based Humanetics Group, which has spent more than a decade developing and refining one. A female dummy from Humanetics equipped with all of the available sensors costs around $1 million, about twice the cost of the Hybrid used now. But, O'Connor says, the more expensive dummy far more accurately reflects the anatomical differences between the sexes — including in the shape of the neck, collarbone, pelvis, and legs, which one NHTSA study found account for about 80% more injuries by women in a car crash compared to men. Such physical dummies will always be needed for vehicle safety tests, and to verify the accuracy of virtual tests, O'Connor said. Europe incorporated the more advanced male dummy developed by Humanetics' engineers, the THOR 50M (based on a 50th percentile man), into its testing procedures soon after Kuhn's 2019 crash in Ireland. Several other countries, including China and Japan, have adopted it as well. But that model and the female version the company uses for comparison, the THOR 5F (based on a 5th percentile woman), have been met with skepticism from some American automakers who argue the more sophisticated devices may exaggerate injury risks and undercut the value of some safety features such as seat belts and airbags. A debate over whether more sensors mean more safety Bridget Walchesky, 19, had to be flown to a hospital, where she required eight surgeries over a month, after a 2022 crash near her home in Sheboygan, Wisconsin, that killed her friend, who was driving. While acknowledging the seat belt likely saved her life, Walchesky said some of the injuries — including her broken collarbone — were the result of it pinning her too tightly, which she views as something better safety testing focused on women could improve. 'Seat belts aren't really built for bodies on females,' Walchesky said. 'Some of my injuries, the way the force hit me, they were probably worsened.' The Alliance for Automotive Innovation, an industry trade group, said in a statement to the AP that the better way to ensure safety — which it called its top priority — is through upgrades to the existing Hybrid dummy rather than mandating a new one. 'This can happen on a faster timeline and lead to quicker safety improvements than requiring NHTSA to adopt unproven crash test dummy technology,' the alliance said. Humanetics' THOR dummies received high marks in the vehicle safety agency's early tests. Using cadavers from actual crashes to compare the results, NHTSA found they outperformed the existing Hybrid in predicting almost all injuries — including to the head, neck, shoulders, abdomen and legs. A separate review by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, a research arm funded by auto insurers, was far more critical of the dummy's ability to predict chest injuries in a frontal crash. Despite the vast expansion in the number of sensors, the insurance institute's testing found, the male THOR dummy was less accurate than the current Hybrid dummies, which also had limitations. 'More isn't necessarily better,' said Jessica Jermakian, senior vice president for vehicle research at IIHS. 'You also have to be confident that the data is telling you the right things about how a real person would fare in that crash." The slow pace of changing the rules NHTSA's budget plan commits to developing the female THOR 5F version with the ultimate goal of incorporating it into the testing. But there could be a long wait considering the THOR's male version adopted by other countries is still awaiting final approval in the U.S. A 2023 report by the Government Accountability Office, which conducts research for Congress, cited numerous 'missed milestones' in NHTSA's development of various crash dummy enhancements — including in the THOR models. Kuhn acknowledges being frustrated by the slow process of trying to change the regulations. She says she understands why there's reluctance from auto companies if they fear being forced to make widespread design changes with more consideration for women's safety. 'Fortunately, they have very skilled engineers and they'll figure it out,' she said. Jeff Mcmurray, The Associated Press
