Sigh.
It seems that something entitled the "Consumer Products Safety Improvement Act" will go into effect in two months.
I learned of this unfortunate piece of news via Cool Mom Picks' announcement of the issue. I look towards Cool Mom Picks for fun and unique toys and gift ideas. As they note in their post about the CPSIA, most of these cool finds are from smaller shops or parent-run businesses which simply won't be able to afford the licensing required under the new guidelines.
The gist of it is that in an effort to prevent unsafe chemicals (ie, lead, psychotropic drugs, and other things) that have been in the news as being unwanted components of [mass-marketed, cheap-o, usually imported] toys, the CPSIA will require thorough testing of products before they are allowed on the shelf. While the idea behind it is "good," the result is that only the large manufacturers will be able to comply with the law.
Ironic, since it is large manufacturers cutting corners that have created the unsafe environment in the first place. It is the independent and smaller businesses that take the time to use natural methods and high-quality components -- check out CMP's Safer Toy Guide to see some of those excellent companies that we may find missing in a couple months.
Will this cause a domino effect: small local businesses must shut doors, so communities lose sales tax revenue, so money that could have gone towards road safety, schools, and other community-bettering facilities will be less? My town doesn't have a Walmart. And I sure don't want us to have one!
The CPSIA relates to other children's items as well, such as clothing, hair accessories, and shoes. Does this mean our kids will all have cheaply-made, non-environmentally-friendly stuff, since the money for manufacture will instead go towards obtaining the CPSIA certification? I certainly hope not. I want comfortable, unique, environmentally sustainable clothes, not what a big-box manufacturer deems "what kids want." My son loves his Tiny Revolutionary shirt, but is pretty neutral on those generic Target things.
Because of the new packaging requirements, I would think that the environmental impact of these new laws would be pretty great: lots of new labels (designating specific lot-numbers,) lots of tags declaring "safety," lots of protective packaging (to prevent tampering.) Hopefully some of these "labels" can be printed on the item itself, assuming that ink is safe to use. Still, I'd rather purchase a product with no ink on it than one that has tons of messages about its supposed "safety" printed in ink that might not react well to my sensitive child.
This "good intention policed in a negative way" reminds me of an issue I had two years ago when the Cat was in Kindergarten. Every day, the Kindergarteners had snack-time. Rather than bring their own, each child in the classroom was responsible for providing snack for the whole class every 20 school days. The catch was that it had to be pre-packaged and individually-wrapped.
Thus, in an area where obesity runs rampant, the highly-processed pre-packaged food was the snack of choice, rather than something more healthful like fresh fruit. In the school "recommendations" they actually listed things like M&M-laden trail mix or snack-sized Oreo cookies as being "fun" choices.
This unfortunate "requirement" came from a misunderstanding of local school-lunch law. The actual law related to items sold as needing to be prepackaged so as to assume proper health regulations. Of course, this means that a bake sale is no longer a friendly table of homemade goods, but instead a bunch of folks tearing off the cellophane from around Twinkies and Svendard's.
Fortunately, I knew of some organic kid-friendly crackers that the Cat could eat, and I also brought in individually-wrapped carrots-with-ranch-dip from Trader Joe's. (No on the PB with celery because of PB-allergies.) Because his classmates inevitably brought in food that he couldn't eat on their turns, I still had to pack him a snack each day.
But the consequence of a law intended to protect kids from dirty kitchens is that the kids are eating much more processed food and far less healthful food. Bingo - obesity!
What will the consequences be for CPSIA?
Already we have the FDA for food-related things. And of course we have the health department for restaurants and other eateries. Thankfully, I can still go into an independent bakery and order a cake made with all-natural ingredients. I can purchase Feingold-safe candy from the Squirrel's Nest instead of relying on Nestle or Hershey for our candy needs.
But apparently, I won't be able to purchase a handmade green sweater for my son from etsy "thanks" to the CPSIA. And unless toothbrushes aren't considered "child care items" (I could not find the answer) we might have a tough time finding white-bristled toothbrushes, since the type I purchase are from a small manufacturer. (Even Preserve Jr. has colored bristles for most models. So we may have to stick with the adult version, which is a bit tricky with a kid-sized mouth.)
Having dye-free bristles on my child's toothbrush isn't trivial. The Cat must have white bristles. But Colgate, Oral B, and Crest don't "do" white bristles because they somehow believe that the colored ones appeal to kids more. And then there is the well-meaning "when the dye runs out of your toothbrush, it is time to get another!" trick.
Confession: I purchased fun toothbrush kits for the kids in my son's "Adopt-a-Family" but almost put them back on the shelf when I saw how brightly colored the bristles were, and how the enclosed toothpaste was filled with artificial colors and flavors. I thought about how dental health is frequently dismissed in low-income families. (And as a result, serious infections can occur.) But then I wondered about whether the dyes would have an affect on the kids: if either of them had similar sensitivities as the Cat, maybe my gift would actually cause a big problem. Perhaps I should have gotten white-bristled toothbrushes and all-natural toothpaste, but I knew the "appeal" wouldn't have been as great. I wish there were a company that would create sparkly pink toothbrushes with white bristles and all-natural toothpaste housed in a glittery tube (even if the paste inside were white.) Marketing is everything for kids.
I hope that I am misunderstanding the CPSIA - what it encompasses and what the ripples might be. I hope that I won't see favorite and trusted shops go out of businesses.
Fortunately, the Handmade Toy Alliance has created a proposal to modify the CPSIA in such a way that still maintains high quality control, but keeps independent stores and craftspeople in business.
Of course, we don't know if their suggestions will be considered with anything other than a quick glance, but we can hope. Visit Cool Mom Picks for more about this issue, and links to places where you can inquire about the CPSIA.
--
Cross-posted (with a personal story) on the Karianna Spectrum
