Handmade Toys And Clothing: Threatened With Extinction Under US Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act
by John Laumer, Philadelphia 
on 01.11.09
Save Handmade Toys from the CPSIA
The Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA), as passed by the US Congress in August, 2008, inadvertently threatens to take many handmade toys and children's clothing items off the market. According to the Handmade Toy Alliance, "The CPSIA simply forgot to exclude the class of children's goods that have earned and kept the public's trust: Toys, clothes, and accessories made in the US, Canada, and Europe. The result, unless the law is modified, is that handmade children's products will no longer be legal in the US." 'How can this be,' you may be wondering? Look below for details.
According to the Handmade Toy Alliance, cottage industries - among the smallest of small businesses - simply can not afford the hundreds or even thousands of dollars private labs are charging to certify a product, as per requirements of the CPSIA.
Big corporations are directly responsible for causing the lead contamination problem by outsourcing toy and clothing production to China. Paradoxically, now, small US businesses established to serve a market segment which specifically wanted to avoid purchasing lead- contaminated, made-in-China goods is being squeezed out by a rigid and insensible CPSC regulation, which is cost effective only for high-volume manufacturers.
Whether this oversight was a plausibly deniable 'on-purpose,' or merely a coincidence, we'll never know.
The Handmade Toy Alliance is seeking exemptions: and rightly so, as there are plenty of less onerous and more cost-effective ways to manage the risk of childhood lead exposures.
Simply by self-certifying that no components or finishing materials are sourced from China, a huge element of the risk would be removed. By offering a "Not China" exemption to small businesses, commonsense and fairness would be restored.
If a "Not China" certification would be problematic for political reasons, the equivalent risk reduction can be accomplished euphemistically: just by certifying that no vinyl is used. (Chinese vinyl makers are the ones using lead stabilizers - a vinyl additive that industries in Western nations have largely phased out, the exception being that use of lead additives is permitted for certain electrical equipment.)
It is illegal to sell or use lead-based paint in most Western nations. All a US toy or clothing maker or distributor need do is to specify appropriate suppliers of paint or other coatings, and the risk of lead exposure is eliminated.
The remaining hazard is in metal trim, jewelry, and bead work.
If the maker of a hand-made or "boutique" item documents that suppliers have been told that they must not be using lead or lead alloys (such as bronze or pewter), pushing the responsibility to test and certify lead free materials upstream, the responsibility for certification becomes comprehensive for the large paint supplier, and therefore more beneficial to society.
If the boutique business is making jewelry from base or noble metals, they are unlikely to be mining, benefacting ore, and smelting their own metal. The solution is to require metal suppliers to certify lead-free materials, pushing the responsibility upstream to where it is cost effective to perform the lab tests and issue certifications.
You have to wonder why the US Congress, which normally is quite sympathetic to small businesses, did not see the need to hear the small business point of view, and why the CPSC staff did not propose such exemptions for small businesses?
Key background posts on lead in toys.
February Deadline To Get The Lead Out Of Kid's Cloths & Toys: No ...
Barbie, Don't Blame China
Follow @TreeHugger on Twitter & get our headlines with @TH_rss!
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
Everyone is blaming China for the problem with lead in toys. What no one seems to be talking about is American greed for inexpensive toys. The Chinese toy companies were only giving us what we wanted: mass produced toys that were as inexpensive as possible. Well, I guess we're simply reaping what we sowed.
sign the petition
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/handmadetoys/
just in case you need a reason
http://poppytalks101reasonstobuyhandmade.blogspot.com/
I like the thought of certifying materials, and have that passed on. I don't think we should target a country, especially if we are looking for things to change, certifying the incoming material, encourages offending parties (whom ever they may be) to change.
I also agree with Frank's comment, we need to understand cheaper is frequently cheaper for a reason... we need to quit spending our money on crappy inexpensive toys that end up in land fills, all that STUFF, doesn't seem to help kids appreciate it any better.
"the US Congress, which normally is quite sympathetic to small businesses"
Ha ha ha... that's the best laugh I've had all day! Get real!
"Whether this oversight was a plausibly deniable 'on-purpose,' or merely a coincidence, we'll never know."
A law brought in under the cor-pirate puppet government
that cuts out any competition to the cor-pirationist was not forgot!
I think the "Not China" rule is horribly bias and a very poor choice for international relations.
I think more 3rd party certification is good because it is impossible for consumers to obtain all of the information necessary about all products they buy. However, I'm not sure I believe in "forcing" certification. It's important for the US to stay innovative and flexible in the free market, and it is unrealistic to expect bureaucratic entities to be flexible enough to keep up with *all* new toys and trends. Consumers should be given the information that something has been certified, but allowed to make their own purchasing decisions.
Also, it seems the root problem in this article is the cost for certification. Whether or not the certification is required, small companies will be at an inherent disadvantage if their items are placed on the shelf next to similar certified items. There needs to be a way for smaller businesses to obtani certification more cheaply or to be able to get around it by being made with 100% certified materials.
Certifying the materials should be adequate. Require the artisians (small business artists) to maintain copies of the "Lead Free and Safe for Children" statement on each of the material they use (which could easily be printed on material labels or available on websites much like OSHA MSDS sheets for chemicals).
As a seller in Etsy, I am required to list my materials, the added step of saving the labels (which I already do for journaling purposes) would be an added but unobtrusive requirement. Additionally, it could be a selling point for material manufactuerers.
I want to hear more about what can be done about this. The suggestions in this article are a good start. I'm on my way to sign the petition and already swear off plastic toys (from China or not) and synthetics as much as possible. For organic clothing manufacturers, doll makers, wooden toy makers, etc, this means their entire livelihood, something my family has been invested in supporting since before our children were born. Something more must be done...
It's too bad you have to donate in order to sign the petition...
You do not need to make a donation to sign the Handmade Toy Alliance petition!
After you sign it does ask you to make a donation, but it is not required. Both my husband & I signed it w/o making a donation & our signatures were recorded.