January 1st, 2009
And the winner is…
… mom!
No wait. She’s disqualified. Because of all the times she made me babysit my little brother when I had more important things to do like sit on the lawn and bitch to my friends about how unfair my parents were for making me babysit all those times when I had more important things to do.
The actual winner is el. Whose entry made me actually laugh out loud and whose blog you should check out, because even if you aren’t religious and so don’t understand like 40% of what she’s referring to, she’s a hell of a writer and I’m thinking a pretty darn cool lady.
This was the giveaway for the week before last. The giveaway for last week, the week of Christmas, will begin on Monday of next week. You followed that? After that, no more! I’m excited about this one because the thing I am giving away is very special - there are only 20 of them in the whole world, so it’s made of metaphorical gold. Either gold or a solid vomitous mass of partially consumed dog poop, depending on what happens with the new CPSIA regulations.
How was that for a segue? Did I do alright?
A new law aimed at manufacturers, CPSIA stands for Child Protection Safety Holy Living Shit Mother of Lord We Are All Going To Be Voted Out Of Office If We Don’t Get Toy Safety Issues Under Control Improvement Act. It’s the kind legislation that includes a lot of things that people like me dislike. Things like passive voice and poor font choice, and an appalling lack of whitespace. There’s a lot of serious panic over the CPSIA and what it means for people who sell children’s products, and I’ve had a few people ask me what I think about it all.
When I first heard and read about the CPSIA, I said: yay. Good. Yes. It puts intense restrictions on children’s products sold in the U.S.
I’m a mother. I hate unsafe toys. I already have to get over the guilt of driving to and stepping foot in Target, spending money we don’t have on things we don’t need that create clutter and mess we don’t want. Then I have to set aside the neurotic worry that our children are over-indulged and somehow damaged by the purchase of random bullshit. But at least the toys are fun and really in moderation, what’s the harm?
When it turns out that the harm is things like seizures, brain damage, and consumption of coma-inducing date rape drugs - well, you can see where I’d be mad. As a mom. So yeah.
Making baby toys out of poison, many parents agree, is bad. Bad enough that people who do it should go to jail and pay big fines and never sell consumer products in this country again.
And hey! Good news! That’s the exact gist of this new law: Anyone who sells anything that’s going to be touched by anyone under the age of twelve must have each product fully certified, with testing from an approved labratory proving that each component of the product is free of grody scary shit. Failure to comply = fines the size of your mom and jail time.
Well. Guess what! The new law also applies to small companies and individual artisans. Total panic over at etsy. But honestly, though it was unpopular to say so, the law still sounded like a good idea to me. Crafty people can buy a bunch of things from Michael’s that were all made in China out of leftover pesticides and then glue them all together into a baby teether. Wouldn’t hurt to test it for lead, you know? And even though my Nerdy Baby flashcards are made here in my own town using inks that are made onsite, I DO want to make sure they are safe for babies to eat.
But the more I learn about the law, the more I understand why people are freaking out. Here are the biggest problems that I see:
1. The testing required is redundant many times over.
For example, my ABC flashcards and the 123 ones were made as part of the same print run. Then we divided them up, shrinkwrapped them into separate products. Under this law, I have to pay for double lab testing. Each ink color must be tested, so that’s four x two tests at roughly $100 per test. The same goes for all of my prints and posters. I’ll do it, but it seems redundant and weird, doesn’t it?
If you buy yarn and knit a bunch of baby sweaters to sell at a craft show, you need to have one tested. If you make matching socks, those also need to be tested even though they came from the same blob of yarn.
2. One of a kind pieces will become almost out of reach.
When someone commissions me to do an original drawing, the price is usually $80. Under the new law, if the subject matter would even possibly appeal to children, it’s a children’s product. That means I need to have each individual color of paint, pencil or ink tested for each new painting that I sell. So an $80 painting will now cost close to $800.
Or I can scan it and make a print of it, and bring the cost down to $480 because there’s only four colors of ink in there.
3. And that is all true even if all of the materials I’m using are already certified as safe for children.
The inks I use for most of my artwork are made by Derwent, a British company that complies with the strictest safety standards in the world. I have seen a copy of their product certification, and I would have no problem feeding my ink pencils to my own child if art supplies weren’t so expensive.
Same for people who raise their own sheep, shear the wool, spin it into yarn, and make things out of it. Those end products must be tested to make sure they don’t contain lead paint. Seriously.
4. The law is insanely broad and far-reaching.
Even products that children are unlikely to ever touch are affected. I have to certify a decorative art print before I can sell it, even though the parent is going to take it home and display it in a frame made out of solid lead.
Also, ANYthing that a kid is likely to play with counts. Not just toys. If it looks the least bit cute or bright or appealing to children, it must be tested. In my house that means that scrap paper from Office Max, miniature staplers, turkey basters and other kitchen utensils all should be certified.
And my goodness - think of the number of objects in a school classroom. Staples, paper, pencils, wall decor… All of those are about to become a lot more expensive. Not because the manufacturers have to switch to safer ways of making them, but because the burden of proof/testing is so expensive.
5. The law contains a lot of ambiguous language, and we’re having a hard time getting any clarification.
So small businesses with limited resources are scrambling to comply with this law in time for the Feb 10 deadline — but we still don’t know exactly what we are supposed to do.
6. The law affects you, even if you aren’t a small toy manufacturer.
- If you donate toys or clothes to charity or sell them on ebay, you’d better make sure all of them are certified. If you knit socks and give them to the local children’s shelter, that’s your ass unless you have them tested. Fabulous Julie giving away her amazing quilts? About to be illegal even if she grows the cotton herself and makes all of the fabric and thread on her very own loom, which I assume she does.
- If you shop for children’s products - including jewelry, clothes, art, toys, art supplies, anything - prepare for prices on those things to go up a bit. The more components a product has, the more expensive it’ll be. Look at a shoe and count up the number of different materials you can touch. Of course, if you’re selling 20,000 pairs of those shoes the expense of certification might not be terrible… but it’s a rough time for anything to become more expensive, ya know? Then again, as a mom I’m okay with this. A small fee to make sure my kids aren’t ingesting poison? Ehh… nevermind this one. Suck it up, consumers. Said in a loving way.
- You’re also likely to have fewer choices. Consignment and resale shops - including ones on ebay - may have to shut down, and a lot of smaller toy manufacturers are throwing up their hands and shutting down, or at least giving up selling in the United States. Not because they want to produce unsafe toys - but again, because the burden of proof is not only expensive but so complex that it’s easy to mess up and become a felon despite your best efforts to follow the law.
So! that’s what I think. I think it’s a good law that needs to be clearer and less redundant. Manufacturers who buy parts from other vendors should be able to use the certifications that those vendors provide. If you make a dress out of certified fabric using certified thread and certified zippers and buttons, why re-test every one of those things once they’ve been assembled into a dress?
My plan is to stay in business and do my best. My flashcards are already at the lab for testing, and my prints and posters will go next. Unless the law is ammended, I’m no longer going to offer one of a kind things like mobiles and drawings. This also changes my plans for complex products with multiple components like Nerdy Baby toys, mobiles, craft kits, and gift sets. I’m bummed because those things were going to sort of rock, but you never know. I’m hoping hoping hoping that enough people will appeal to lawmakers to change and clarify this law.
And if that doesn’t work, we’re going to move into a three bedroom apartment and use the extra room to start a lead-testing lab. Woooo!
January 1st, 2009 at 12:16 pm
Thanks for posting about this important issue. Love your point of view!
January 1st, 2009 at 12:53 pm
Your last line here is exactly where I was going. Was there a test-lab lobby involved in this legislation? I think they were involved in getting all new job applicants drug-tested years ago. Now they have this wonderful new windfall.
I’m glad you’re still going to be able to make some of your products. But, dear lord, this is a bureaucratic nightmare. As you said, this is more for politics than children’s safety.
Good luck to you and all the other small business entrepreneurs.
January 1st, 2009 at 12:55 pm
I run a shop on ETSY for my 80 year old father. He makes toys. Simple little toys made with wood, wheels and non-toxic (edible even) shellac. He sold less than $1000.00 worth of toys last year and will never ever be able to comply with the new regulations. He is heartbroken that he won’t be able to continue. He makes his toys to have something to do, to keep active, to make a little extra money.
What’s so scary about this is that there are thousands of people like my Dad that make toys or kids’ items for the joy of it or to suppliment a fixed income. The wonderful unique things you can get on ETSY will now become memories and we will lose much of what is great about being able to get something that is not plastic or not made in China. I feel horrible for our craftspeople and artisans. Think of the craft shows, the suppliers of things like wheels, wood, yarn, etc. This is crazy.
My Dad wrote a letter to his congresswoman and senators (as did I) and he got back a form letter from his congresswoman that basically said, “Thanks for your concern, I share it too and I am proud to say I voted for this shitty law and did I read your letter? No, I did not, but vote for me anyway!”
As a mother, I also am glad that we won’t have to worry about lead paint or other toxins, but I think that the implications of this law reach further than we can imagine. I think that there needs to be something in this law that protects our craftspeople as well as our children. Our artistic culture depends on it.
I’m so glad that you will be able to find a way to keep creating, and I hope that many more like you will be able to as well. Unfortunately my Dad cannot. (Shameless plug? Get the toys while you can before they become the legal equivalent of broken-glass covered radioactive lead bombs on wheels at http://www.simplewoodentoys.etsy.com)
Thanks for writing about this Tiffany. I don’t think enough people know about this issue.
Mary
January 1st, 2009 at 1:29 pm
Mary, you’ve hit on what’s so frustrating. They should (but currently will not) allow your dad to certify his products as lead-free without testing each and every toy. Common sense would say that he could send off ONE toy, pay $75 for testing and then sign a document saying that every other toy is made using the same materials. There - done. Consumers are protected, kids are protected, and there’s no sleezy loophole created for giant corporations to use.
I guess I’m still hanging on to the hope that the law will be changed over the next few weeks. It will break my heart to see so many small businesses disappear, and I just don’t think people realize how bad it’s going to be.
January 1st, 2009 at 1:53 pm
So my point is - why not let the consumer make an informed decision? Create a special label that is “poison-free certified”. Everyone who gets the testing done can slap it on their product and use it to market their wares. If something doesn’t have this label, the consumer knows it has not been tested and may possibly be unsafe. Therefore, if I trust you and want to by an uncertified nerdy baby toy, I can. Or not. My decision.
I liken it to our food supply. I buy organic. Sometimes certified, sometimes from a local farm I trust. The labeling helps me the consumer make an informed decision. Don’t you think we should focus on getting the poison out of food first? Something that every child is sure to ingest every day?
Have reactive responses ever been made in moderation?
January 1st, 2009 at 2:04 pm
I would agree except - that’s sort of the set up we already have and it hasn’t worked very well. Although, a totally informed decision would mean that uncertified products carry a label declaring them uncertified and unproven.
Kevin thinks the burden of testing should be on the government. As in “You aren’t required to test your product, but we’re going to. You’d better be confident that your stuff is lead-free before you sell it because if we find lead, you are going to pay massive fines and possibly go to jail.”
January 1st, 2009 at 2:42 pm
Holy cow. I had no idea… that *sucks*…
January 1st, 2009 at 5:42 pm
I’m with Kevin
January 1st, 2009 at 7:21 pm
Thank you so much for writing about this. The law has me gobsmacked to be truthful. Quite badly laid out, for all that it is a good idea, in essence.
Now. I’ve never won anything in my life. And while I am pleased to know that my caption made you laugh out loud (it made me laugh, writing it, but I didn’t know if that really meant anything at all: most folks think I’m a little odd), and thank you, so much, for the compliments and shout-out for my blog *is shy* I’m stumped as to what, exactly, I am supposed to do now? For I would, indeed, very much like to avail myself of the winnings. Do I email you? Do you email me?
January 1st, 2009 at 8:16 pm
el! Please email me with your address and the name of the print you like best. :-) You can see them all here:
http://electricboogaloo.etsy.com
Yay and thank you!
January 1st, 2009 at 11:23 pm
that so completely sucks.
January 2nd, 2009 at 10:18 am
I’m surprised that you are as okay with this law as you seem to be. It is unacceptable to me that I will no longer be able to buy handmade, one of a kind items for my children for under $100. I love being able to buy hand-knit hats and hand-carved wooden toys and anything else that all the lovely, creative, crafty people out there can make. In my opinion, this is hurting the consumer as much (if not more) as the small business or WAHM. Ultimately, this is killing individuality and creativity, and we will be left, ironically, with toys and items for our children that are boring and repetitive - likely made almost exclusively in China - in a time in their lives when they most need to be exposed to the unexpected and unique. As Benjamin Franklin once said, “Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.” The very companies that provoked this law in the first place are the ones that will care little about breaking it. In my opinion, this law solves nothing and destroys much.
January 2nd, 2009 at 10:23 am
No, you’re right Sonja. The problem is that I literally cannot believe that it won’t be amended. I think all of this was an unintended consequence, and the government is messy and slow - but I think I’m naively holding onto the hope that common sense will somehow prevail.
If it doesn’t, I promise you I’ll come unglued. :-)
January 3rd, 2009 at 12:06 am
Kick ass. I’m glad you wrote about this mess.
I have read a bit here and there that OOAK items may end up being exempt because the testing process often destroys the finished product (and that would be…pointless).
I just wish they would start amending this disaster already. I’m thinking very seriously about dropping everything that could be considered appealing to kids and just market to adults (however that works).
Seriously, do we have to add “adult” elements so no one is confused? Beer? Nudity? Cussing?
Oh and if you have a second, could you tell me who is doing your testing? I tried to get a company here in Minneapolis to help me but they said prints didn’t need testing. Yeah.
January 3rd, 2009 at 12:27 am
For now, I’m using Intertek. http://www.intertek.com/
I wonder about things like this: http://www.hellokittyuniverse.com/page/Hello+Kitty+Vibrator?t=anon
I’m very very very much thinking/hoping that it will be fixed. It kills me every time I see someone closing up shop or frantically selling off their inventory because they’re scared of what’s going to happen. I want to say Noooo! Don’t! It’s all going to get fixed, somehow.
But then a teeny part of my brain goes: But what if it doesn’t? :-\
January 3rd, 2009 at 12:32 am
I also want to clarify my thoughts on the rise in prices for kids’ products. In this country we’ve become accustomed to insanely low prices on items that are mass produced overseas. Spread the cost of testing a fisherprice toy over tens of thousands of units sold and you’ll have to pay an extra dime for that Imaginext playset or whatever.
What SUCKS though, is that the prices will go up a lot more for products made by smaller companies. Things with niche markets, boutique toys. Educational things. Books. Musical instruments. Things like that are going to become a lot pricier, and my suggestion is for the American consumer to NOT SUCK THAT UP.
My parents sell violins to kids. Each fiddle would require so much testing that it would become totally out of reach for the average family. Even if they can certify a batch at a time, we’re talking ten units, not 10,000. The cost is going to add an extra burden on families that are tight as it is right now.
January 3rd, 2009 at 8:51 pm
Thanks for the links! That Hello Kitty page is a riot. Good find.
January 3rd, 2009 at 11:30 pm
I can understand the reasoning behind the new law, but you’re right, it’s so redundant and it’s going to be impossible for so many small businesses to stay open. Not because they’re doing anything wrong, but because it’s going to be made impossible for them to do it right. If the government wants to enforce the testing, then they should make the testing more realistic and affordable. So frustrating.
January 4th, 2009 at 7:06 pm
It’s my understanding the OOAK items are/will be exempt, as will those made with natural fibres. At least - that’s the word from the diaper-making mamas… Crazy - I agree that this one will get amended.
January 4th, 2009 at 7:48 pm
Alison, have you seen anything official? There was a quote somewhere saying that about one of a kind, but unless the people in charge of enforcing the law clarify in writing it all feels like opinion of different staffers and hearsay. :-\
I’m going to post more about this, but wanted to link to this - this issue hit #1 on economic concerns:
http://www.change.org/ideas/view/save_handmade_toys_from_the_cpsia
Voting will be re-set on Monday, and I’m trying to figure out a way to make going and voting part of my last giveaway.
January 5th, 2009 at 5:21 pm
[...] tested and the cost paid for by the maker and then passed on to the consumer. Here, just go read Electric Boogaloo. She’s way cooler than me and is being very directly effected by this as she has an adorable [...]
January 6th, 2009 at 10:09 pm
This makes me so so sad. I’ve only just happened upon the world of etsy, and children’s toys are one of the things I’ve really wanted to start making.
I’ve been lurking on your and several others’ mom-blogs lately, because I love children a ton, but am too poor and young, and healthcare-lacking to be having any of my own yet. I love their creativity and imagination. So instead of making awesome handmade toys for my own children, I was hoping to make some and sell them on etsy for other peoples’ little ones. Well poop.