The new Hyundai Santa Fe is equipped with the most sophisticated backseat child monitoring system currently used by any automaker.
If there’s one benefit from the cold wave sweeping across much of the country this week, it’s the chance it will reduce the risk of children dying due to being left in hot cars. So far this year, 52 kids have died in such instances, a number that has rapidly approached last year’s record with the five deaths reported in October.
“It is unconscionable that we continue to allow this to happen when it could be fixed … with technology that is already available,” Amber Rollins, the director of the nonprofit KidsAndCars.org told TheDetroitBureau.com.
A handful of automakers have already taken steps to address the problem, with two automotive trade groups, the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers and the Association of Global Automakers, promising that virtually all vehicles sold in the U.S. will feature basic protection systems by 2025. But advocates like Rollins say the industry proposal falls well short of what’s needed and lament that what they see as a more effective solution remains bottled up in Congress.
(Automakers offer possible solutions as child heatstroke deaths rise)
They point out that, even with the addition of basic reminder systems on a number of vehicles sold by General Motors, Nissan and Subaru, the number of children who have died after being left in hot cars has continued to increase in recent years, hitting a record 54 last year.
The Hyundai system (shared with Kia) puts a visual alert on the instrument panel but also will sound the car’s horn and even send text and e-mail alerts.
There have been some high-profile cases, such as one involving Justin Ross Harris, a Georgia father convicted in December 2016, and sentenced to life without parole for purposely leaving his 22-month-old son Cooper to die in a hot vehicle. But, said Rollins, “Very few of the deaths involve intentional child endangerment, where parents willingly leave kids in a hot car.”
“Nine out of 10 times,” she added, “this is happening to wonderful, well-educated parents. Most of the time, it is an unintentional thing. With parents racing around and fatigued, they may be completely unaware they are leaving their child behind.”
One reason for the increase during the last few decades, according to experts, is that parents have been encouraged to move child safety seats from the front to the back seat. And, with toddlers typically in rear-facing restraints, it’s easy to miss a child if you’re running late for work or an appointment and have forgotten to drop them off at school, daycare or with another caregiver.
Experts warn that while rear-facing child seats are effective in crashes, they can make it easier for a harried parent to forget their child is still in the vehicle.
GM, Nissan and Subaru have all taken steps to give parents a nudge installing on some of their products reminder systems triggered when a back door is opened before the vehicle is started. When it’s later shut off, such systems will sound an alert and flash a warning on the instrument panel to see if something – or someone – may have been left behind.
But such technology isn’t foolproof, Rollins and other child advocates note. The warning may be disabled if, for example, a parent stops for gas or some other errand along the way and then restarts the car without again opening a back door.
(Nissan rear door alert aims to prevent child heatstroke deaths)
A more advanced warning system, however, has been launched by Hyundai and its Korean sibling Kia. Several vehicles, including the latest-generation Santa Fe sport-utility vehicle, are equipped not only with back door monitors but also with motion sensors built into the backseat headliner. If the ultrasonic system detects motion – which could also be triggered by a pet – it will honk the horn on and off for 25 seconds. If the vehicle isn’t unlocked and the rear door then opened, it will repeat the warning. And the system also can be configured to send a text or e-mail alert.
GM introduced the rear seat reminder first on its GMC Acadia model.
Emily Thomas, Ph.D., Consumer Reports’ automotive safety engineer, said in an article the magazine published about the Hyundai/Kia system that it may not detect suitable movements or the breathing motions of a small child asleep in the vehicle.
Nonetheless, Thomas called it a significant improvement. “Hyundai’s two-stage warning system—which uses door logic as well as an ultrasonic motion sensor located in the ceiling behind the rear seat—is a step above what other automakers are offering, based on our evaluation,” she said.
Technology like the two Korean manufacturers have introduced would be mandated under the Hot Cars Act, HR 3593, now being considered by the House of Representatives. Less advanced rear door sequencing technology is written into a similar Senate bill, SB 1601. It is far from certain that Congress will be able to come up with a compromise and pass a bill this year, Capitol Hill observers have warned.
For its part, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration said in a statement that it “prioritizes education because, even if reliable and accurate child heatstroke prevention technology were available and installed on every new car today, it would not address the issue for the vast majority of the driving public for many years.”
Experts like Rollins note that they have been trying to educate parents and other caregivers about the problem for years but the death toll has continued to rise.
(Look back to eliminate deaths of kids left in cars)
And so, without introducing more effective – and readily available – technology into new vehicles, advocates contend, still more children will die in hot cars, even those driven by the best of parents.
It is inexcusable that anyone could be so ignorant to forget that their kid is in the car with them. I don’t buy it, the frazzled parent thing doesn’t fly. At best it would suggest systemic child negligence, which could be the case sometimes. It seems more like extremely late-term abortion and, as such, stiff legal penalties, widely publicized, would be far more effective in stemming this absurdity than another chime coming from the car. Putting this on automakers is ridiculous.
Consistent (but unsuccessful) efforts have been made since 2016 to promote the Helping Overcome Trauma for Children Alone in Rear Seats Act, or HOT CARS Act, and make it law. The bill’s language is wrong and is aggravating automakers and the drivers who have no kids but still have to pay extra for new cars equipped with the reminder.
The HOT CARS Act should require that parents with kids below a certain age (and, eventually, pet owners) have an add-on technological reminder in their vehicles, similar to child safety seats (which are an add-on and have saved countless lives so far). Instantly, the automakers and drivers won’t oppose the bill which will easily become law (since there will be no opposition) and start saving lives in 2020 — it’s plain common sense.
The most reliable, affordable and versatile reminder and lifesaver for kids and pets in cars has been designed and patented here in America: “Never Forget Us!” (www.never4get.us) and works for any model/year vehicle. Here is how it works: https://youtu.be/m0La4E4NBxM
Dan, the general sense is the cost of a motion-sensing system could come in at about $10/vehicle for hardware. The software is negligible when amortized over such large numbers of vehicles. FYI, you’re already paying for the child seat anchor system on all new vehicles.
Paul E.
Paul: In most cases kids are forgotten in cars because they are asleep and don’t make any noise. How reliable could a motion detector be for a sleeping motionless child?
Hi, Dan, and thanks for asking a legitimate and important question. Note that in my story I wrote, “Emily Thomas, Ph.D., Consumer Reports’ automotive safety engineer, said in an article the magazine published about the Hyundai/Kia system that it may not detect suitable movements or the breathing motions of a small child asleep in the vehicle.” She did say, however, that it was significantly better than the single door sequencing strategy of other manufacturers. What is the best solution? I’m not the expert and can’t say for sure, though CO2 detectors, infrared, AI and cameras and other solutions have been proposed. There are child seats being sold that use various methods to detect whether they are holding an infant and then send alerts, if needed. The reality is there may be nothing 100% effective, but there are likely ways to improve accuracy.
Paul E.
Amen Dan!! Finally someone else that sees that aggravating language and thus why the legislators and NHTSA are dragging their feet. Baby Cooper’s Law has addressed that language and we are trying to get to DC in the spring. Also the authors information that kids are not left intentionally but a small part of the time. When a group only counts the kids that die.. the statistics are manipulated to back the advocacy group’s supposition this is accidental the majority of the time. When you count all the kids left in hot cars, the ones that live and die.. we learn it becomes purposeful 81% of the time. Passive alerts will be helpful but not full proof and will need the addition of a Carbon Dioxide sensor to negate false alarms ( the reason the NHTSA has refused to mandate) and have an alert for passersby and law enforcement.
Wow, Chris, for someone who tried to make a case against “the manipulation of statistics,” you do a good job of that yourself. Worse, as I pointed out in my prior note, you seem to read into things what you want to hear v what is actually said (or written).
Let’s look at the 81% figure you “quote.” I’ve spent a fair bit of time now trying to find a single source backing up that number and the one instance where 81% is referenced it is completely different in meaning from what you suggest — but close enough it appears to be what you THOUGHT you read. But let’s hold off on that excerpt for the moment. The bigger issue is that you simply could not come up with a number like you quote even if you wanted to. You say that if you “count all the kids left in hot cars, the ones that live and die..we learn it becomes purposeful 81% of the time.” The problem is that nobody COULD gather such a statistic. It would require conducting a statically valid survey of parents who would then have to admit they’d left children in a vehicle and done it purposely.” Try to get parents to admit that. Meanwhile, since those children, as you so qualified, didn’t die … and who may not have been injured or otherwise been in a situation where police or other authorities were involved…there would be no valid statistical evidence, now would there?
As to the reference to “81%” I was able to locate, it was on ChildrensMD.org and the meaning was significantly different than what you implied: “Who forgets about a baby in a car? We all do. Parents of every socioeconomic level have done this. Professionals, stay-at-home parents, grandparents. Good people. Afterwards, many contemplate suicide. One father tried to wrestle a gun from a police officer at the scene—to end his own life. As if this suffering is not enough, 49% of caregivers responsible for these children are charged with a felony, according to a study by the Associated Press. 81% resulted in convictions.”
A more careful perusal says that of 100% of child hot car deaths, 49% are charged with a felony and OF THOSE (emphasis mine), 81% are convicted. The math actually works out to around 39.7% of ALL child hot car deaths work result in convictions. FYI, a number of those are set aside on appeal, but let’s round it out to a higher 40%, that’s a long way from 81% of ALL deaths…and certainly not 81% of all situations where a child has been left in a hot car, purposely or otherwise.
What you’re showing is not a case of manipulating statistics, Chris, but wholesale sloppiness and a lack of comprehension.
Paul E.
Also Paul Einstein, the supposition this is happening because of moving child safety seats to the rear seat is irresponsible on the part of KAC. The death rate of children in car seats in the front seat or in a forward facing car seat before a childs brain and neck were strong enough accounted for way more than 52 or an average of the 39.5 kids who die on average in hot cars. Again the manipulation of statistics.
Hi, Chris, First, your argument would be stronger getting facts straight, starting with the spelling of my name, Eisenstein. Secondly, try to correctly read what the author is saying. To whit: I am making no argument against 1) moving children to the back seat. Quite the opposite; 2) same goes true for rear-facing seats which, in decades past, I wrote about as a way to improve safety for infants in frontal crashes. So, your argument is spurious prima facie. Third, the only “manipulation of statistics” here is your 39.5 child deaths which average over whatever period you choose to use v noting the increasing trendline in recent years.
Paul E.