Ten Predictions For The Cpsias Affect On Childrens Products In 2009 || ZRecommends: Consumer research, consumer advocacy, and unbiased product reviews for parents

As seen in

Subscribe to posts

Get our newsletter

Ten predictions for the CPSIA’s effect on children’s products in 2009

By Jennifer and Jeremiah | January 15, 2009 | 17 comments / Comment now

There is a lot of fear about what will happen on February 10, 2009 - the day provisions of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act go into effect, and the day many in the small-business community are now calling National Bankruptcy Day. (Read this Christian Science Monitor article if you have any doubt about what's at stake here.)

As the CPSC muddles through these issues in the weeks before they drop the "Feb-bomb" on the entire children's products industry, many of us have lost confidence in their ability to work with Congress to make the needed adjustments that will offer the best consumer protection available under a saner set of rules. Instead, they have elected to selectively interpret sections of the Act and offer minor concessions that do little good. Exempting a series of natural materials, for example, comes with the stipulation that they not be painted or dyed, even with substances proven to be of little or no risk to consumers (plant-based pigments, beeswax). Reassuring resellers that they are not required to test products comes with the warning that they will be liable for big fines if a product they sell is discovered to violate the standard.

We'd like to go ahead and make some predictions about what the CPSIA will do to U.S. businesses and consumer choice in 2009, in addition to helping protect children from lead and phthalates, if the law stands as currently written. These predictions are offered in the hopes that any we'd like to avoid could be avoided, especially if enough consumers take action.

The mass market

Fewer choices from fewer brands. The big companies in infant care, children's toys, and apparel will begin reducing the variety of "styles" of individual products, and cut some less-profitable lines entirely rather than pay for redundant testing. This means a single model of sippy cup will suddenly come in two color choices instead of six, a pacifier in one style instead of four, and a lunch box in two licensed-character lines, one for boys and one for girls, instead of a half-dozen different characters plus a couple of generic models. Your local big-box store's sleepwear section will have half the number of fabrics, and you'll suddenly have trouble finding that yellow or green onesie to welcome a baby whose gender isn't known, and go with white instead. Brands that produce some kids' products but don't rely on them exclusively (high-end designers, furniture makers, and small companies with a range of small-batch products) may abandon the children's product market completely. Parent companies will shuffle their holdings. Startups will thin out, with fewer new entrants into the market, even than in past periods of recession.

The 8-to-12 toy gap. Although it is illegal to claim that a product intended for children is only intended for adults, a major gray area exists in the 8-to-12-year-old market. New products that would traditionally be marketed as "8 and up" will suddenly be labeled as "13 and up" or "over 12." The CPSC will challenge a few of these claims, but only the most egregious cases, because those are the only fights they can win. Other companies may choose to strengthen divisions offering products for older children at the expense of those for younger children. Either way, parents will face fewer choices as well as diminished rights for those they buy for "off-label" use.

Increased prices. Safety costs money and is worth our investment as consumers. But companies, at least initially, will be more concerned with protecting profits than competing on price. Depending on company strategy, these increases may be gradual or may hit in about six months.

The green purge. Consumers and retailers will remain confused regarding which product types can still be sold from current stock, and for how long; as a result, more products will showcase non-plastic materials, undergo stricter voluntary materials testing (Oeko-Tex), and promote themselves as "free" of banned chemicals. Book publishers will shy away specifically from synthetic covers, vinyl infant books, and integrated toy-book gimmicks. Meanwhile, vast quantities of unsold children's merchandise will be exported or destroyed. Companies doing business in the developing world will dump products there at cut-rate prices. Those that don't will send them directly into landfills, where they will slowly leach their banned substances into the environment. Non-compliant products will be retired as quietly as possible to minimize customer complaints and attempted returns.

Booby traps. Manufacturers who believed the CPSIA had no bearing on their product area will have a rude awakening. Congress will pass new laws to exclude them.

The used market

Online reselling will get safer. eBay, Craigslist, and other peer-to-peer sales services will see fewer listings of recalled items as top sellers are investigated and a few prosecuted, resulting in an overall increased safety level for cribs, high chairs, and toys offered through such services.

Online swapping will get more secretive. Many small and hobbyist forums for swapping between parents currently permit the viewing of posts by outsiders. Most of these will go fully private, often in response to requests from members, to help decrease participants' chances of being targeted for prosecution. Moderators will develop new methods for vetting members or require referrals for new members.

Thrift store profiling. Resellers are not required to test products, but are liable for the products they sell. This will likely result in product "profiling" strategies that vary wildly from store to store, but products obviously made from softened PVC (backpacks, play yards) will become difficult to find used and will go directly into landfills without being reused or passed on. Painted and plastic toys by unknown brands will also be broadly rejected. Few, if any, will conduct any testing.

The handmade and craft market

The handmade industry will contract and undergo a broad cultural shift. Consumer options and volume will both be significantly reduced as work-at-home artisans are forced to choose between going out of business and flaunting a law they feel is unjust. Those who stop selling will tend to be older, and have more to lose from the risk of prosecution - homes, assets - while those who remain will tend to be younger, and will absorb the new business while pressing the "handmade movement" into more pointed political service. The most active agitators will help articulate the movement's goals using techniques from edge communities and will improve their skills at drawing media attention, which will protect them from prosecution to some degree. DC-area crafters will hold crafting sit-ins at public hearings and agency meetings. Sales of Civil Disobedience will rise. Those who leave may find other work, or may wait, and even produce goods, while they wait for a fix.

The mass media will speak up about the issue. An ill-informed spike in television news coverage will miss much of the point and overhype the rest. Oprah will get involved, Martha might, and when they do, they'll nail it.

A few questions for you, any of which you're welcome to respond to in the comments:

What do you think of the planned CPSIA regulations?

What do you think of the CPSC's handling of the public concern and confusion surrounding these issues?

Do you have any predictions to add to the list, or any of ours you think won't come to pass?

What have you done, or could you still do, to make an impact on this issue?

Photos, from top, by Hey Het, photophonic, and tegurity. ZRecs.com cover image by phlora. All photos shared via Flickr.

Categories: CPSIA, CPSC, crafts, kid and baby accessories, kid and baby clothes, safety, toys

1. Diana (Ladybug Limited) [1/15/09]

I think you’ve totally hit the nail on the head with these predictions! I keep praying that a giant cloud of Common Sense will move over DC and rain down on the heads of the CPSC, Congress, President-Elect Obama and anyone else who can make a difference with this well-meaning but very misguided piece of legislation. I think the CPSC has done a dreadful job of handling all this, too, by the way and I know I’m not alone in that opinion!

I’m all for safer children’s products, but this legislation has gone about it in the wrong way: “all products” is pretty far-reaching. So are libraries going to ban children or dump their children’s sections? (That’s about the only prediction you didn’t touch on in your list above that I could think of.)

So what have I done? As a mom and Etsy seller of children’s hair accessories, I have spread the word wherever I could since I first learned about this almost 6 weeks ago: I’ve e-mailed all the major bloggers I read who I thought might pick up this issue (including you guys), I’ve posted on forums (both on Etsy and a hair clip forum I belong to), I’ve signed every petition I can find, and I’ve e-mailed the CPSC and my representatives. Oh, and I’ve posted Save Handmade buttons on all 3 of my blogs and submitted an entry to Endangered Whimsy, a blog that highlights all the children’s products that will soon disappear.

So what can I do now? I don’t know. At this point I just keep on keeping on. I’m still stocking my Etsy shop and working on wholesale and consignment agreements as if this will all be worked out. I read about a Class Action Lawsuit against the CPSC this morning and will have to look into that. Testing all my products? Too expensive at my price point-- all my items are $5 or less and come in countless variations.

I feel like I’m on information overload at this point, but thanks for this post-- I’ll go mention it in the Etsy forums now. Mass media has missed so much of the scope of this already, so thanks for actually getting this right.

And yes, this is the longest comment I’ve ever posted on any blog… sorry!

2. Jenna [1/16/09]

I’m really conflicted. I feel like this is a huge step in the right direction after we’ve gone so long with terriblly lax regulations that have led to recalls and safety problems. So I very much support stronger laws regarding product testing and product safety.

However, it’s clear that small businesses and individual artisans can’t afford to do the kind of testing required. So I don’t know what the right answer is. How about testing at the suppliers’ end before the artisans get their supplies?

I’m also not sure that unsafe things landing in landfills is such a bad thing-- better, to me, than being resold on eBay or in a thrift store and landing in a baby’s room.

3. AJ [1/16/09]

Prediction: The price of hand-held lead (etc.) detectors will, through improved sales to major companies, drop a few thousand dollars. Not that they’ll be any more affordable, I’m just sayin…

4. Kate Holmes [1/16/09]

More predictions about the used-kidstuff industry:
* Resale shops will go out of business, causing staff, landlord, and resellers to suffer monetary losses over perfectly-safe merchandise that is now “banned hazardous substance.” Many of the vacated retail locations are in downtowns which can ill-afford another gap in their retail mix. Tax coffers of towns, counties, and states will be stripped of the sales and income taxes of the workers in this industry.
* Less aid for the needy. Charitable thrift shops will have their income slashed, and thus their community activism curtailed. More water in the soup at the soup kitchen, fewer emergency beds for those who need them. At the same time, these thrifts will face vastly increased waste-removal fees, as consumers use these shops as a dumping ground for now worthless children’s clothing, gear, and equipment. Net result” less community activism, just when we need it.
* Child abuse charges. If you are dressing your shild and/or providing your child with toys, books, sports equipment that is not PROVEN lead-free: could that be construed as child endangerment? Yes, it can. Far-fetched, yes, but this quote comes to mind:
“There’s no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible to live without breaking laws.” Ayn Rand

5. Jess [1/16/09]

I’m with Jenna.

I was on the fence about this issue for a while. I’m glad the government is trying to be more proactive in protecting our kids--I want to be able to go into a store and buy my baby a teether, or an outfit and KNOW that it’s safe, without having to do research beforehand… But the “predictions” are very real possibilities. I’d like to think that Congress will start feeling the heat from consumers and make some necessary changes so that small business DON’T have to close their doors, thrift shops can continue to provide clothing and other items to those who can’t afford them any other way and consignment sales don’t become a thing of the past.

What I REALLY don’t understand is why the government is taking such a firm stance on this and such a lax one on BPA… Even CANADA has banned BPA in baby bottles (maybe that’s one reason why they think America is such a dangerous place, where you’re likely to get shot walking to the bus stop everyday, no matter where you live… At least, that’s what all the Canadians [including my in-laws] I’ve spoken to think… But I digress...)

Sigh…

6. Jennifer [1/16/09]

I own a Children’s store (new and used items), and this law is a nightmare. Of course I care about safety. I make sure I don’t sell recalled items, or any that I personally don’t feel are safe even if they haven’t been recalled.

I want to comply with this new law, but as I try and research what items commonly test at more than the legal limit of lead I become more and more certain that I might have to close my doors:

Anything with vinyl (including dolls, dinosaurs, and fake leather coats, shoes, belts, etc.); PVC (raincoats and many small toys); metal snaps, grommets, zippers, zipper pulls and zipper stops (painted or unpainted); fake shell and fake pearl buttons and decorations; opalescent buttons of any color; some decals on shirts (the vinyl ones); decorative crystals on clothing; rhinestones; brass (particularly when it is a buckle or purse joining); vinyl books (particularly baby bath books); some red dyed textiles; paint on inexpensive toys (and going by the recall lists, some not so inexpensive toys as well).

This covers pretty much 80% of my inventory. Without a $40,000 XRF analyzer to test each and every item in my store, I apparently can’t be reasonably certain that ANYTHING is under the legal limit. And with fines STARTING at $100,000 per violation, I just don’t feel comfortable taking my chances.

Add to that the fact that most of the other children’s stores in my area either don’t think they need to worry about the law because it won’t be enforced, or believe that they are exempt (due to some very irresponsible reporting by some of the media and news outlets).

7. Sarah [1/17/09]

I feel like I’m in communist Russia or something. I keep wondering how much longer this is actually going to be AMERICA!!!! Protecting our children is very important, but this should also continue to be a FREE country where artisans can follow their dreams and be creative and be able to sell their products. It’s ridiculous to include these people in the ruling which should be focused on factories and China etal.
This is a “Farenheit 451” situation...they’re going to burn books too. What’s going to happen to the vintage and antique industry?? My goodness, it’s like Big Brother is watching.

8. Heather [1/19/09]

a few more predictions…

small companies like myself, who choose to produce in the USA so we can manage small inventories, will now consider moving overseas for manufacturing. why? because the law states we test every style in every product run. if i only produce on a need basis say 6 styles totaling 300 blankets in one order but order often, i have to pay testing fees (ranging from $140-$350 each) for those 6 blankets 2-3 times a month. if i manufacture overseas I make one big run of 6 blankets and test once in 3 months. congress started this testing because of toxic childrens toys coming from overseas and we are pushing more manufacturers who can manage to stay in business, across the ocean. i can’t help but feel this could be an opportunity for the government to revive the US manufacturing industry if they thought it through and focused on the heart of the problem.

this is a sad one, but a reality. children will still get lead posioning. the homes which our children live in are not filled with products for 12 years and under. old houses and apartments still have lead paint that chips off. older siblings still have charms that fall off shoes and jewelry that babies can ingest. the government requiring testing for every product a child 12 years and under touchs is paranoid and controlling. I have two girls and believe childrens products should be safe, but there are better ways of accomplishing that than broad tangled up reactionary laws.

my heart goes out to all the people who have been working so hard to build businesses who will really be ruined by this law.

9. Cheryl Malandrinos [1/19/09]

I’ve spoken a bit about this at my blog too. It’s certainly a case of good intentions going astray and punishing consumers more than anyone else.

As an aspiring children’s author, this couldn’t come at a worse time. Publisher’s seem to be holding off on contracts to see what will happen, and if their efforts will lead to any last minute changes to the law. I’m not very hopeful.

Cheryl

10. trinlayk [1/19/09]

Well my kid is grown now… but if it weren’t for the second hand shops, and crafty friends and neighbors, I wouldn’t have been able to dress and equip her.

In my particular circle of crafty friends, Civil Disobedience is becoming a more & more popular idea… My kid is grown and has promised to take care of my house and cats if something happens to me, so I can afford to go that route.

A single mom raising a toddler or school age kid, would need a lot more courage to pull off the civil disobedience.

HOWEVER, I’ve also seen people who panicked and shut down their shops right after Christmas, are feeling belligerent. Rather than helping to correct this law, I’ve heard one person PROMISE that she would report people who continued working and selling their product after she chose to close her shop. Thanks a lot.

If I’m exercising my right to Civil Disobedience, and continuing to sell my product which I KNOW is safe… I’m also fighting for YOUR right to sell what you’ve made and what YOU know is safe.

11. M [1/19/09]

I really hope people don’t give up. It is unreasonable to let them put you out of business.

12. Connie [1/19/09]

trinlayk - your comment about those who have already decided to close is the one that sends chills up and down my spine. It is my biggest fear assuming the law does not change. The vigilantes are ready and waiting to pounce ...

13. trinlayk [1/19/09]

Connie,
at the same time, it was ONE person… in a discussion with LOTS of people.
Hopefully, the bitter ones are a minority, and the rest recognize that my staying in business isn’t GREED but 1) desperation & 2) also defends the right of others to do harmless business.

My kid is grown, and I don’t own anything of significant worth… so it’s pretty easy for me to day “If you feel that way, go ahead and turn me in. I’m sure the Media would love the story of the Feds picking on a disabled granny making toys to pay the heat bill.”

(if I weren’t selling my crafts, I’d need foodstamps, energy assistance, and much more assistance economically. )

14. Liz Gumbinner [1/21/09]

Terrific, thoughtful post as always you two.

I would also say that crafters just start neglecting the children’s market. Obviously a barrette maker can’t, but a quilter can start selling items “for adults” and a knitter can stop doing booties and start doing adult scarves instead.

The good thing is, it seems like this is going to be fixed. At least based on the letter from the commerce committee members to Henry Waxman that I read today. Thanks in large part to all of you, of course.

15. trinlayk [1/22/09]

I have to admit, I’ve been SERIOUSLY entertaining the idea of adding boobs or private parts to all my plushies.

It just feels...wrong…

16. sue [2/04/09]

I just don’t understand. Now prices on items are going to go up, for testing that we WOULD NOT need if the items and products used to make toys, clothes, etc were manufactured in th USA. The US have guidelines foriegn countries do NOT have to follow. Most of these issues regarding lead were created from China. So let’s put more Americans out of work with this law, instead of trying to fix the problem, government creates yet a bigger one. With downsizing of items produced, we are just going to have more layoff and then the price of infant necessities are suppose to go up...can’t buy used.....it just doesn’t make sense. And odviously, the government did not think this through

17. trinlayk [2/05/09]

Sue, but a lot of us here in the US are making children’s items and using materials from the US or nations with equivalent or superior standards.

This law is putting US home based businesses making these items for kids out of business.

If each baby blanket granny makes is One Of a kind, the testing leaves her with no product.
If each baby blanket granny makes sells for $20 and requires testing on each batch of 10, at $400 per test… how much can she actually sell that $20 blanket for, make any profit, and still have people buy that blanket?

And granny can’t claim she’s laid off, she was selling those blankets at $20 directly to people before this went through.

CALL your SENATORS in WASHINGTON
ASK them to support CPSIA reform offered by Senator DeMint.

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.

Next Post Previous Post