header logo

The Three Rs: A Practical Solution Has Been Invented to Prevent Pediatric Vehicular Heatstroke Deaths. Heatstroke kills children every year ….


Remind the Driver


    “An automatic reminder system activated at the time the driver exits the car will work in all cases in which kids are forgotten in cars. When parents intentionally leave children in cars, and unexpectedly the interior of the car becomes dangerously hot, then an automatic temperature detection system which opens windows and sounds an alarm can save children’s lives.”

    – David M. Diamond, Ph.D., Dept. of Psychology, University of South Florida, author of reference 1

    Pediatric Vehicular Heatstroke: The Solution

    A Technologically Simple New Standard Will Prevent Children From Dying in Hot Cars




    Education can only go so far in preventing something inherently accidental. The technological solutions so far have been primarily reminders, and while everyone needs a reminder, a reminder alone is never enough to effect dramatic change. A complete safety solution requires a layered approach: reminding the driver, reversing and preventing temperature rise, and initiating rescue. Widely adopted, our “Three Rs” strategy will all but eliminate pediatric vehicular heatstroke fatalities. The technology to support the Three Rs already exists in vehicles. A simple change to the child car seat standard would ensure universal adoption of the Three Rs. On the other hand, there is compelling evidence that a car seat manufacturer introducing the Three Rs will address today’s concern of parents.

    The Solution: A Key Fob in the Car Seat

    We believe that the public is underserved by the powerful computer technology embedded in modern vehicles. Security, a valid concern, is the main obstacle. But consider this – an enabled car seat fob plugged into a car seat can reliably remind the driver a “baby is on board”, open the windows to prevent heat stroke, and honk an SOS for rescue. Vehicles come equipped to do all this. Only the child car seat maker need adapt.

    Recognizing the limitations of humans and hardware, safety professionals advocate layers of protection to reduce risk. We adopt a layers of protection philosophy in our “Three Rs” solution to pediatric vehicular heatstroke.

    1. REMIND the Driver … if Child is on Board. The first layer of protection is a reminder that a child is in the car seat when the driver turns off the ignition. The reminder does not occur when a child is not on board.
    2. REVERSE the Temperature Rise … if Child has Been Left Behind. If the temperature rises fast or reaches a critical limit with the child present, the vehicle rolls down all of the windows. Radiated heating in the car is reduced while circulating air brings inside temperature toward the outside ambient. This buys time, improving the chances of first aid, i.e., immersing child in cold water, that will prove therapeutic. Given the rate at which cars heat, there is no alternative to opening windows. Starting the car and turning on air conditioning cools too slowly, while exposing the child to a real danger. Air conditioning may be viable for electric cars.
    3. RESCUE the Child. The final step is the most important. Many critical rescues of endangered children abandoned in vehicles have been performed by bystanders who break into the vehicle to perform the rescue. At the same moment the windows are lowered, the system will unlock the car doors and initiate the car alarm. The alarm needn’t be deafening for the child. One beep every 5-10 seconds should be sufficient to alert nearby bystanders that a child is in need of rescue. Attracting attention has the side benefit of discouraging vandalism.

    Principles of Operation

    Principles of Operation 1 & 2
    Principles of Operation 3 & 4
    Principles of Operation 5 & 6
    Principles of Operation 9 & 10
    Principles of Operation 11 & 12

    What Modifications Are Required To The Child Car Seat?

    The Three Rs solution is easily incorporated into new car seat designs. There may be practical ways of adding the Three Rs to an existing car seat. Technical details of alternative solutions are provided in US patent 10,991,225. Here is one implementation.

    The car seat is fitted with a car seat fob socket as shown. Each of the car seat buckles is wired as cold contact leads to a pin pair in the socket. The wiring can be a loop through the buckle [conductive contact] or loop back from one side of the buckle [magnetic contact].

    The removable car seat fob contains all the electronics with a battery. Electrically the car seat fob is an enhanced two-way key fob, including:

    ■ Lock/unlock buttons (for programming and testing)
    ■ Three normally open [conductive] or closed [magnetic] cold contact inputs
    ■ Temperature sensor
    ■ Elapsed time clock
    ■ Receiver to remote monitor ignition status from OBD2 port [may not be required]

    This “intelligent” car seat fob controls the vehicle to achieve the Three Rs.

    If a car company decides to fully embrace the Three Rs it can enhance its performance in many ways, while relegating one simple function to the car seat fob, sense and report buckle status. This is the “dumb” fob alternative, or more exactly, a vehicle sensor solution. In the meantime, car companies can facilitate the introduction of intelligent car seat fobs as follows.

    Must Car Company(s) be Involved?

    The short answer is probably yes. Consider the scenarios with and without car company cooperation:

    Car Seat Maker Goes It Alone

    • Instructions on self programming the fob to all vehicle types must be provided
    • Consumer may need car locksmith to complete the setup
    • Consumer may need car dealer to swap software to enable fob window open
    • New vehicle models may be increasingly restrictive on self programming fobs.

    While the benefits and appeal to its customers are immense, would a car seat maker engineer and promote a solution in the face of these headwinds? What percentage of owners would complete the setup to activate the Three Rs in their vehicle(s)?

    One final point: unless a two way fob can derive ignition status from all vehicle types, an OBD2 plug in must be provided with the car seat fob, another piece of the setup.

    Car company support, however, makes launching a Three Rs car seat an easy decision for all car seat makers.

    Vehicles Come with Car Seat Fobs

    • Car seat makers know the future of the Three Rs
    • Car dealers / locksmiths provide car seat fobs standard to their aftermarket
    • No vehicle software incompatibility
    • A majority of parents will want and benefit from a Three Rs car seat
    • Pediatric vehicular heatstroke is virtually eliminated – lives are saved

    The car maker need only take two simple steps:

    • Select software that enables fob to open windows and receive ignition status
    • Allow dealers to program and sell car seat fobs [aftermarket]

    We’re not talking airbags here! The analogy is more like Apple allowing a 3rd party app.

    Which car company will set this new standard for child safety and carry the banner for the entire industry in advance of regulations that are

    surely coming?

    Car Seat / Fob Interface

    Fob(s) that come with a vehicle must work with any Three Rs car seat on the market. A plug standard is therefore required to achieve 100 % interoperability with third party fobs. Slide 2 below presumes an OBD plug type, allowing a self- programmable fob to directly access the vehicle’s OBD port during programming.

    Two Fob Sockets per Car Seat

    The car seat should have two fob receptacles so the car seat can be moved between two vehicles without replacing a fob. The car seat will likely come equipped with only single self-programmable fob, since multiple vehicles can be programmed to recognize it.

    How Does Three R’s Get Off The Ground?

    A regulation requiring that new child car seats include fob port(s), supported by vehicle manufacturers agreeing to be a source of car seat fobs, is one path. Car companies individually or collectively motivating car seat makers to add fob ports is another. So is a single car seat manufacturer acting as a first mover to offer Three Rs to customers willing to program the included fob to their vehicle(s).

    A “smart car seat fob / dumb car” combination narrows the gap as follows between what car makers might be willing to do and what regulators want, shortening the time frame for meaningful change:

    • Compatible with all vehicles on the road
    • No change to current vehicle design
    • Minimal liability to car maker

    Can A Car Company Do It Alone?

    A car company can implement the Three Rs by surveilling the back seat(s) to detect the occupancy of any installed car seat. This involves significant design and production investment, and cost.

    This “car of the future” solution is many years away. A car company would not initiate nor
    regulators require retrofitting Three R protection in existing vehicles.

    Doesn’t the same “car seat of the future” argument apply to the car seat fob solution? Actually no, child car seats and safety regulations turn
    over quickly compared to vehicles. Car seats have expiration dates. And wiring a vehicle for back seat surveillance is an order of magnitude more costly than wiring a car seat for buckle detection.

    Legislated standards specify the requirement, not how to achieve it. There are two long term paths, each with advantages and disadvantages. In the end, one path will be followed. Isn’t a contact closure technology cheaper and more reliable than AI? What can go wrong for the car company and the consumer with another AI safety solution?

    Trapped in Vehicle Outside Car Seat

    “Two simple solutions to two problems beats one complex solution to two problems”, Robert Lyons, PhD Electrical Engineering 1967

    The scenario of child NOT in car seat has historically also been a big contributor to vehicular pediatric hyperthermia deaths and injuries. The victim is typically a 1 – 5 year old who opens the car door from the outside, closes it from the inside then does not open it to escape.

    The door in question is nearly always a rear door, where they normally enter, and where not coincidentally manual rear door child lock may be enabled.

    Separate death and hospitalization statistics are available for children who were in car seats versus not. However, there seems to be no data on whether the rear door lock enabled manually played a role in latter cases. This is unfortunate and should be corrected going forward.

    The introduction of auto lock by the vehicle makers, that locks all doors a few seconds after ignition and unlocks them when the driver turns off ignition. has reduced the need for manual rear door child lock, but this feature is still mandated. Note that the rear door must be OPEN to disable manual child lock, so even an adult can be “entrapped”.

    Hyperthermia is just one (albeit the worst) bad outcome when a child is trapped in a car. Such occurrences are probably preventable simply by correcting an outdated vehicle standard*:

    49 CFR § 571.206 – Standard No. 206; Door locks and door retention components, specifically
    S4.3.1 Rear side doors
    S4.3.2 Back doors

    and possibly limiting Door handles.

    • What additional security is provided by a manual lock that is not released by a child or adult entering the back seat, who otherwise will be “locked in”?