I plan to reopen on the morning of August 4, rather than the evening of Aug. 3 as I had previously announced (I think this will make it easier for people to get orders in, and will allow me to keep a better eye on the numbers). I will be requesting that orders be placed only by those who do not already have a sling they can use, so that people without a sling have a chance to get an order in. Because I'd like to take a break with my kids before school starts again, I will be capping orders at no more than 250 slings -- I have had almost no time to just be with and enjoy my children this summer, and they need me, too.
I will be posting regular updates about the precise time I will reopen the store on my Facebook page. If you "like" my page on Facebook you can get them easily, and if you select "get notifications", Facebook will tell you when I post, which is likely the best way to get reminders. Otherwise, you can always refresh the home page here and check the Facebook feed in the lower right to see what I've posted.
While the store is closed, the "add to cart" button has been removed to keep new orders from being placed. (Clicking "next" will just take you to the next product, not the next step in ordering.)
This is a very, very old file, and I had completely forgotten it was on my site. SBP is compliant with the CPSIA. Mandatory ASTM testing for wraps and ring slings will go into effect in mid- to late-2015, and of course I will also be compliant with that. The following was written in 2008-9, before most of us had any understanding of the law and what it meant for cottage-industry-level baby carrier makers. It's a lot clearer now, so you can really disregard my panic in the second half. I'll leave it here for posterity, but will add a postscript to the bottom to clarify some things.
Yay! On January 30, 2009, the CPSC granted a one-year stay of enforcement, which pushes the date the CPSIA goes into effect back to February 10, 2010. It's a bit confusing to me; the language says that you still can't sell things that don't meet the guidelines, but you don't have to test them. So a big ??? on that. I am guessing that it means that unless you have a reason to believe there may be high lead levels in a product or a component (like cheap zippers, or particularly children's jewelry), it's okay to sell. This is great news!
The below was written before January 30, and I'll update it when I have more time.
Everyone wants safer toys and other items for their kids -- there's no question of that. So in 2008, Congress approved the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act, a sweeping reform of current safety legislation. Sounds great, right? Now our kids can be protected from lead and phthalates in numerous products, and who on earth would vote against that?
Well, the trouble is the broad scope of the legislation. It doesn't target only plastic or lead-painted toys from China. It targets every single item made and sold in the United States that will be used on or around children. Whether you're a giant corporation importing toys, or a tiny garage business making wooden toys, or, like me, a mom sewing slings to help pay her mortgage, everything has to be tested. And this means, every fabric, every color, every different color of ring, has to be tested for lead. Testing done by the fabric manufacturers themselves is not enough -- it's finished products that have to be tested, so just testing upstream is not sufficient. Every small business will be required to test each and every component of its items for sale, and label them with a batch number and date of manufacture. This includes thread, buttons, fabric, etc. If they do not comply, they are in violation of federal law and could be subject to fines up to $100,000 PER ITEM - and even jail time. Any children's items made before this date that are not tested and certified lead-free are considered banned hazardous waste and cannot be sold after February 10, 2009. Even fabrics and other materials that were tested by their manufacturer not to contain lead must have third-party testing done.
Testing for lead costs more than $100 per item. For me, that means a conservative estimate of $8000, based on my current fabric inventory (add another $2000+ if I add more colors or fabrics in the future, which I will need to do eventually). I would also need to test thread, zippers and snaps -- each different color -- so I would be looking at around $10,000 (minimum) in testing. That's a huge portion of my annual profits -- more than I care to admit!
Obviously, that is totally unsustainable for a small business, or even a big one. My business, along with pretty much every single other cottage industry, would be forced to close down, or face fines of $100,000 and even jail time for violating this law. If we pass the costs on to you, the consumer, we'd be looking at price increases of 2-5 times the current prices at least.
This goes for other textile items as well... including knit hats, blankets, cloth diapers, stuffed animals and other plush, and boutique clothing. Every WAHM producing anything of that nature will be affected by the law. Keep in mind that lead levels in fabric are already low -- on the order of <10ppm. The standards right now are 900ppm, falling to 90ppm in the future. Even at that level, the vast majority of fabrics (barr those with plasticized overlays, which have been an issue in the past) would pass... but the act doesn't specify that fabrics are exempt.
The economic impacts this law has on business in America cannot be understated. One gentleman has gone so far as to dub the day the testing provisions go into effect (Feb 10, 2009) "National Bankruptcy Day", because any business that hasn't tested its products will be unable to even liquidate its inventory (since untested products are assumed to be full of lead and thus hazardous), leading to mass bankruptcies. That's NOT what our already-shrinking economy needs right now.
The law was well-intentioned, to keep children from getting sick and dying from lead poisoning. But it ignores the fact that the vast majority of lead-tainted products were from large manufacturers, almost universally imported from Asia, and instead puts this impossible testing standard squarely on the backs of small American businesses, the very ones that Americans want to shop with right now for their record of safety and honesty. What this act will end up doing is making it impossible for small businesses to compete (since the costs of testing will have to be passed on to consumers, and small businesses will pay disproportionately compared to big ones), and limiting the choices Americans have in their shopping.
These sites offer more information:
If you value small businesses and handmade products, I urge you to contact your representatives, sign the petition above, and email the CPSC and let them know that this act is *not* what you want. Handmade products are historically far safer than imported, mass-produced ones, yet the latter will be all that is left in the marketplace if the act goes into effect as written.
I haven't bought new fabrics in several months... and I certainly won't be doing so until I know for sure what the ramifications of the law will be for my business. So right now, what's on the site is what I will have until further notice.
If the law goes into effect as written, I will have to stop selling what I currently have. That's pretty much the long and short of it. I can't afford to have my current inventory tested. I do plan to buy a few rolls of organic, undyed fabrics, and have them tested, if I can find a lab that has spots open (unlikely, given the volume of testing that needs to be done by Feb. 10). If I can't have them tested, I am hopeful that their organic certifications will be sufficient; fibers like hemp, silk, cotton, and tencel are not at risk for lead contamination by their very nature, and a policy that makes no exceptions for such materials is simply bad policy and unlikely to stand up in court (which it is likely to face). This does, of course, mean that my inventory will be severely limited -- no colors, and very few choices in fiber content. And organic fabrics are considerably more expensive than standard ones, which means my prices will have to go up. I will try to soften the blow as much as I can, and keep my prices as low as possible, but there's only so much I can do when my costs increase.
I am hoping that OKO-Tex certifications (that's the rigorous testing done in the EU) will be made valid in the US. Currently, even though OKO-tex certifications are more stringent than what the CPSIA requires, the US does not recognize them. This is just dumb. Pretty much all the European wraps pass OKO-tex standards, so I will likely put more capital into buying wraps and turning them into slings. If challenged, OKO-tex certifications should stand up in court; it would be ludicrous for them not to. Of course, woven wraps are not inexpensive, but they do make fabulous slings, and would offer colors and patterns that would otherwise be completely unavailable after Feb. 10.
I truly hope that some sanity will be injected into the legislation, and that the CPSC will recognize that even dyed fabrics contain little to no lead (certainly far less than the 100 parts per million that will eventually become the highest acceptable level) and that I will be able to offer a wider selection again. I can't make that assumption now, though, and so all I can do is suggest that if you have your eye on a sling from my current inventory, you make the purchase soon, as I won't be able to offer them after February 10.
So, that was five years ago. What has the CPSIA really done? Well, they did clarify the ruling to exempt the majority of fabrics from lead and phthalates testing, because experts were able to show those in control that fabrics really do not contain measurable levels of lead or phthalates. Some fabrics do need to be tested -- those that use metallic surface treatments and those with plasticised treatments -- but most printed and dyed fabrics are exempt and do not need to be tested. What did stay in effect was the requirement to have tracking labels (permanently attached labels that include a date of manufacture, some kind of batch number that can be used by the manufacturer to determine what's in the product, and contact information for the manufacturer) and registration cards that the consumer should fill in and return to the manufacturer in case a recall becomes necessary. The manufacturer also needs to keep track of the components that go into the sling (things like the dates fabrics were purchased, if they were purchased in different batches; same rings or other hardware), but that's on the manufacturing side and is something the consumer doesn't really see. The manufacturer also needs to be able to provide a certificate of compliance to any resellers of their products.
The other major piece for baby carrier makers was the requirement for standardized testing. It's been a long process getting these standards into an acceptable form, but the standard for mei tais and SSCs will go into effect in September of this year, and the one for ring slings and wraps is in the process of being finalized and will go into effect in mid 2015 or so. This is yet another hurdle for small-batch producers, and the costs and other associated headaches that testing will add are likely to drive many smaller manufacturers out of business. However, when the standard is finalized, I will be submitting all my slings for testing and will subsequently tweak the product lines accordingly. It is important to me that my slings are compliant with all existing laws.
If you have questions about carrier safety and current requirements, I've written this condensed guideline for consumers. If you would like more detailed information, please visit the BCIA's Manufacturing 101 page (which I wrote).