Anyway. Kids would scream, fuss, battle, sometimes even while strapped in, and all the way until we arrived. Because they're kids. Some parents would try to soothe the kids, some would just ignore their fuss, and some would try to talk the driver/me out of using the seats.
The reasoning even among the parents that though "this is ridiculous, let me just hold the kid in my arms" was quite the same: We all knew that if something happened, the seats would likely be the difference of life and death for the kid. And thus, we just accepted that kids not wanting to be strapped is a part of life and had to be tolerated.
Not arguing against you here. I'm saying, yes, it's has difficulties, but the consequences of not using proper security is far worse.
In the UK rear facing is a legal requirement up to 15 months - I think that's being extended to older kids soon. We used rear facing until about 3.5 for our eldest. At that point we got her a new forward facing one and gave that one to our youngest.
Two child seats basically means no one can fit in the middle unless you have an extra wide car. Some of the compact but bigger cars seem to be incredibly popular with parents around here.
I can't say we ever had an argument about front versus rear facing - that was just the direction the seat was in. They didn't even know there was another option! I can see how it might be difficult if you tried to change a seat a kid was already used to though. That said, pretty much everyone here uses ISOFIX bases with the extension bars so maybe we do have more room (as per the article). I'd recommend them either was as being able to clip the seats in and out is fantastic if you have a sleeping baby.
The middle I never even worried about, the problem I find is that they take so much space in the front/back direction of the car. I.e. if you put a rear facing seat in the front passenger seat, no adult can sit behind it, and if you put a rear facing seat behind the front passenger seat, then no adult can sit in the front passenger seat.
So for the first child, a compact was no problem. The read-facing seat takes the non-driver side of the car - front or back doesn't matter). One parent drives and the other sits behind the driver.
With TWO rear facing seats however, we found that not even a medium size car (A4, 9-3, C-class, 3-series...) would fit them in a way that also fits two adults - at least not in a way that works for long trips.
We spent a few weeks in Aus/NZ and bought a couple of car seats there (cheaper than renting them), which was odd -- they were rear facing and belted, but had straps to go over the back of the passenger seat and connect to an anchor point in the boot (trunk).
The rear-facing laws in California define the _minimums_ (weight, age, and I think also height?) for when you're _allowed_ to let your child face forward. Given the difference in fatality rates between the two, I was OK with going past the minimum time.
When we were last car shopping, we looked at small SUVs (CRV, Rav4, Forester) and a rear facing seat mounted "American-style" still intruded on the passenger seat. I can't imagine how you could shift the seat forwards in a sedan and make it work.
One problem with rear facing seats and large children is that it requires a LOT of space in the car, if you want to fit more people in it. A rear facing seat for a 3yo behind the front passenger seat will make the front passenger space tiny in all but the largest cars.
If you look around europe you'll find that countries that traditionally use small cars (France, Italy, Britain) probably don't use rear facing seats as much. What part of this is cause and what is effect I don't know, but you won't find many families with small children driving compact cars in Sweden like you do in say the UK or Italy. I saw someone in the UK describe a golf as a "family hatchback" at one point. That person hadn't been in the front passenger seat of a Golf with a rear facing child seat behind (The front seat is then nearly touching the glove compartment).