How do you feel about the new Kids clothing law going into affect February 10, 2009?
I’m not in the US but I was shocked when I heard about it. As if life wasn’t already hard enough for thousands of hard-working families!
And given that I never heard of babies killed by wearing a T-shirt, I suspect there is an ulterior motive to this law being passed. Maybe something that has to do with "kick-starting the economy"…
November 22nd, 2009 at 7:02 pm
please give details i dont know anything about it,is it in the us or australia or what
References :
November 22nd, 2009 at 7:36 pm
Which law is that?
References :
November 22nd, 2009 at 7:44 pm
I’m not in the US but I was shocked when I heard about it. As if life wasn’t already hard enough for thousands of hard-working families!
And given that I never heard of babies killed by wearing a T-shirt, I suspect there is an ulterior motive to this law being passed. Maybe something that has to do with "kick-starting the economy"…
References :
November 22nd, 2009 at 7:56 pm
The law is the CPSIA (Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act) and if you read it, it doesn’t pertain to clothing, with the exception of pajamas and bibs.
From the CPSC website:
"What kind of products does the phthalates prohibition apply to?
Three phthalates, DEHP, DBP, and BBP, have been permanently prohibited by Congress in concentration of more than 0.1% in “children’s toys” or “child care articles.” A “children’s toy” means a product intended for a child 12 years of age or younger for use when playing, and a “child care article” means a product that a child 3 and younger would use for sleeping, feeding, sucking or teething.
Three additional phthalates, DINP, DIDP, and DnOP, have been prohibited pending further study and review by a group of outside experts and the Commission. This interim prohibition applies to child care articles or toys that can be placed in a child’s mouth or brought to the mouth and kept in the mouth so that it can be sucked or chewed that contains a concentration of more than 0.1% of the above phthalates."
It also only applies to things manufactured after Feb 10th:
"When does the phthalates ban go into effect for children’s toys and child care articles and does it apply to inventory in existence on February 10, 2009?
On February 10, 2009, DEHP, DBP, and BBP are permanently banned, and DINP, DIDP, and DnOP are banned on an interim basis, for children’s toys or child care articles as defined in section 108 of the CPSIA. The ban on the six specified phthalates in section 108 of the CPSIA only applies to products that are manufactured on or after February 10, 2009. For more information see the Office of General Counsel Advisory Opinion (http://www.cpsc.gov/library/foia/advisory/320.pdf). "
References :
http://www.cpsc.gov/ABOUT/Cpsia/faq/108faq.html
November 22nd, 2009 at 8:34 pm
I think its great
References :
November 22nd, 2009 at 9:04 pm
It is a law in the US that effects any item sold for children under age 12. It effects toys, clothes and many other items. It basically is a mandatory lead and phthalatte test on all these items. It is making it very difficult for stores that sell second hand items and wll have a HUGE impact on the economy and many families.
Personally I have nothing against the law. I think it is a very good idea for mandatory lead testing. Many items in the last few years have been recalled because of lead in the products. I am reserving judgement on the law until I see how this effects non-profit orgs. Women’s shelters, Goodwill, and the Salvation Army will probably not be affected. If they are than I would say its a travesty of justice for the less fortunate.
References :
November 22nd, 2009 at 9:11 pm
I think it’s ridiculous that it also applies to BOOKS.
Now you won’t be able to buy secondhand children’s books. That is just plain stupid.
References :
November 22nd, 2009 at 9:57 pm
I can understand it but I think it’s a little far fetched. Growing up we didn’t have much money, I ended up wearing re-used clothing. I barely made it out alive, DAMN LEAD!
References :
November 22nd, 2009 at 10:44 pm
I personally think it is stupid. The risk is so small, its pointless. How many generations grew up on second hand things? How many of them died? Its rediculous.
References :