or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Childhood and Beyond › Education › Learning at Home and Beyond › New Law? Children's books banned????
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

New Law? Children's books banned???? - Page 3

post #41 of 56
One of the most troublesome aspects of this law is that it requires manufacturers to determine the total lead levels of the finished products, not just the component parts. So, even if a publisher is using the same papers and inks for all of their books, they would have to get testing and certification on every.single.title.
post #42 of 56
It seems like the only way for this law to work and not produce a huge headache and an incredible amount of waste would be to exempt all products already on shelves (and to exempt homemade items). Sellers of homemade items could hand buyers a non-liability form when they sell the item--that is, the buyer willingly acknowledges that they are buying something for a child that has not been tested for lead, etc. I'm not a lawyer, but it seems like an option like this should be offered.
post #43 of 56
Wow. That is going to have major implications world-wide, but isnt going lead-free the goal we all want?
Im confused
(for real)
post #44 of 56
The law is very poorly written. Small and family businesses that make small quantities of children's products instead of mass-producing them cannot financially survive the lead testing requirements as they are now written.

Only Congress can change it.

The more US Senators and Representatives hear from people, the more likely they are to do something to fix it.

There is also an open public commment on the third party testing of *components*, instead of whole final products. They are taking comments untiil January 30.

This blog has the specific instructions for emailing a public comment in. They are also available on the CPSC website but harder to find.

http://joeyandaleethea.typepad.com/b...the-cpsia.html

Here is the pdf about the request for public comments:

http://www.cpsc.gov/about/cpsia/Comp...tsComments.pdf

Quotes from this document of particular interest:

"The Commission staff invites comments on Section 102 of the CPSIA, Mandatory Third- Party Testing for Certain Children’s Products. The staff requests comments specifically on third-party testing of component parts "

"Given the schedule for implementation of the third-party testing requirements, the staff is interested in comments and information regarding:"
"• How the risk of introducing non-compliant product into the marketplace would be affected by permitting third-party testing of the component parts of a consumer product versus third-party testing of the finished consumer product.
• The conditions and or circumstances, if any, that should be considered in allowing third-party testing of component parts.
• The conditions, if any, under which supplier third-party testing of raw materials or components should be acceptable."
"• Whether consideration of third-party testing of component parts should be given for any particular industry groups or particular component parts and materials. Explain what it is about these industries, component parts, and/or materials that make them uniquely suited to this approach."

This is what small businesses need to be allowed to do - submit certificates that all of the component parts they use have been tested and are compliant, instead of having to pay for the third party testing of their entire line of finished products, each separate product they make, in every variation, having every part of it tested. It would make so much more sense for each component they use to be tested once, and for the manufacturer who mass-produces that component to be the one to do it and supply the certificates of compliance to those who purchase the components from them.

This public comment period is a chance for the public to be heard on this.
post #45 of 56
So I guess selling or buying children's items on Craigslist or eBay are going to be banned unless it was released after X time frame? Ugh.
post #46 of 56
Not now, because the CPSC released a bulletin on Jan 8 removing the lead testing requirement for resale items:

http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml09/09086.html

Quote:
Originally Posted by filiadeluna View Post
So I guess selling or buying children's items on Craigslist or eBay are going to be banned unless it was released after X time frame? Ugh.
post #47 of 56
So if I sell some clothing through a local mother's group that has a big bi-annual sale at the fairgrounds and someone tests it and it exceeds limits, I'm out $10k?
post #48 of 56
Talk about a law of unintended consequences! While the intent is in the right place, I have to agree with everyone here that it is a poorly written and overly far-reaching law. It just seems like congress didn't think it through at all. Although I've moved out of the States to Canada, and am not as affected by this law as I would've been had I not moved, I still have written and called to oppose this. Let's hope the re-consideration they're giving it will result in some change, some loosening of parameters.
post #49 of 56

This helped make more sense of the ramifications

http://www.hslda.org/docs/news/20091130.asp
post #50 of 56
Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong- but it sounds to me like this law only applies to the SALE of items, not gifting or donating them.

So if I sell an old toy for 25 cents, and that toy turns out to contain lead, then I could face a fine of up to $10,000. But, if I give a bag of toys away for free, I haven't *sold* anything, and this law simply doesn't apply.

And I wouldn't want the law to do away with the "under 12" wording. I wouldn't want legislation that only helps small makers of toys for older kids but leaves babytoy makers vulnerable. Nor do I want my 7yo or 12yo playing with lead-containing toys, even though we're well past the "toys in the mouth" stage. I don't know how much lead can be absorbed throught the skin, hands often end up in the mouth anyway, sometimes they eat without washing hands first, etc.
post #51 of 56
post #52 of 56
I think the part that is going un(der)reported about that clarification is that yes, resale shops do not have to have their merchandise tested, but they also cannot sell things that exceed the new lead standards, and can be fined if they do. So, how are they to know without testing? And what if they don't test, because they are not required to, and sold something they had no idea contained lead (a screen-printed T-shirt maybe?), and suddenly were fined $10,000 because of it? It still leaves them open to prosecution, it seems to me. And, like Ruth asked previously, what about those who sell things at a garage sale?
post #53 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by MyLittleWonders View Post
I think the part that is going un(der)reported about that clarification is that yes, resale shops do not have to have their merchandise tested, but they also cannot sell things that exceed the new lead standards, and can be fined if they do. So, how are they to know without testing? And what if they don't test, because they are not required to, and sold something they had no idea contained lead (a screen-printed T-shirt maybe?), and suddenly were fined $10,000 because of it? It still leaves them open to prosecution, it seems to me. And, like Ruth asked previously, what about those who sell things at a garage sale?
Although theoretically this is still a matter of concern, the last paragraph of that Snopes article cited above addresses this. The thrift stores/resale shops should avoid selling items that are likely to contain lead/phthalates and likely will not be targeted for investigation if they are not blatantly ignoring this warning. And how likely is it that an individual will buy something at a thrift store then go to the expense of having it tested?

Again, I'm wondering if it would be possible to allow resale shops to have customers sign some kind of non-liability form that acknowledges that they are buying used, untested items and are willing to accept the risk involved with that (assuming, that is, that the thrift stores still attempt to avoid items at high risk for conaining lead and phthalates).
post #54 of 56
There's been a bit of discussion about that snopes page, there is some misinformation. Most importantly, they get a major fact wrong -- they say the law applies to items MADE after Feb 10th, when it fact it applies to all items SOLD after Feb 10th. Just seeing that sentence made me lose a massive amount of faith in snopes.com! That's a huge difference. They also should not make guessing at how the law will be enforced, they're not lawyers or safety experts. I don't think they're qualified to make any interpretations of any law as they've done here.

Also, it's not $10,000 -- it's up to $100,000 and/or 5 years in jail. Not that I think that's going to be applied to a second-hand store, but it's within the scope of the law to do so.

Ruthla -- the law says you cannot sell or distribute, i.e. give away. This includes, for example, making blankets for project linus. Clothing swaps. Me giving you our outgrown toys. It's ridiculous.

Whoops, sounds like the sick baby is up!! Sorry if this is a little abrupt, can't edit any longer!
post #55 of 56
FYI- this law is also a problem for public libraries:
http://www.wo.ala.org/districtdispatch/?p=1322
post #56 of 56
Quote:
California passed a law that will ban ALL incandecent light bulbs in the entire state taking effect in 2010. A good law you say. It's time for everyone to use the energy saving light bulbs. Guess what? The head lights in your car are incandecent. So is the light bulb in your refrigerator and your oven. Come 2010, these will all be banned in California.
Not to mention fluorescent lights are loaded with mercury & *far* worse for the environment than incandecents. Plus all the people who get sick from fluorescent lights. It's ridiculous. Talk about rushing in without thinking.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Learning at Home and Beyond
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Childhood and Beyond › Education › Learning at Home and Beyond › New Law? Children's books banned????