RECALL: Baby Walkers

[Truffles]

See site for a picture.

http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml03/03182.html

NEWS from CPSC
U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission
Office of Information and Public Affairs Washington, DC 20207
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
September 10, 2003
Release # 03-182 Company Phone Number: (866) 992-5766
CPSC Consumer Hotline: (800) 638-2772
CPSC Media Contact: (301) 504-7908

CPSC, SunTech Enterprises Inc. Announce Recall Baby Walkers

WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission announces
the following recall in voluntary cooperation with the firm below.
Consumers should stop using recalled products immediately unless
otherwise instructed.

Name of product: "Sun Kids" and "Happy Baby" Baby Walkers

Units: About 4,100

Manufacturer: SunTech Enterprises Inc., City of Commerce, Calif.

Hazard: The walkers will fit through a standard doorway and are not
designed to stop at the edge of a step. Babies using these walkers can
be seriously injured or killed if they fall down stairs.

Incidents/Injuries: No injuries have been reported relating to these
walkers.

Description: The recalled baby walkers are made with a plastic frame
supported by six or eight wheels on the bottom. The walkers are blue,
pink or bright green with a padded seat and an activity tray. "SUN KIDS"
or "HAPPY BABY" labels appear on some of the walkers.

Sold at: Small retailers and flea markets in Texas and California sold
the walkers from November 2002 through April 2003 for between $15 and $25.

Manufactured in: Taiwan

Remedy: Return to the store where purchased or contact the firm to
receive a refund.

Consumer Contact: SunTech Enterprises Inc. at (866) 992-5766 between 8
a.m. and 5 p.m. PT Monday through Friday.

--
Brigitte aa #2145
edd #3 February 15, 2004
http://www.babiesonline.com/babies/j/joshuaandkaterina/

"Readers are plentiful; thinkers are rare."
~ Harriet Martineau

[Phoebe & Allyson]

Nina wrote:

> the suction cups dont work on non-skid tubs,
> which most tubs nowadays are,

My baby bathtub says in big letters "do not use in bathtubs
with non-skid surfaces." I also disagree with the comment
that most tubs are non-skid, based on the zillion tubs we
looked at when we built the house 3 years ago, most of which
were not non-skid.

> I could understand how a parent
> could run out of the room for a second to get a towel or answer the
> phone, thinking the baby is safe in a restraining device (otherwise,
> what's the purpose of the product!).

The baby bathtub I have says in big letters "Always keep
baby within arm's reach." You can't build a baby bathtub
that will keep an unattended child from drowning.

Phoebe :)

[Nina]

Ilse Witch wrote:
> Nina wrote:
>
>> The show also mentioned a product that hads not been recalled, but
>> should be:
>> baby bath seats, such as the Swivel Bath Seat by Safety 1st.
>> There have been numerous deaths when babies are left momentarily.
>
>
> Really, I thought that by now everybody knows that a kid/infant
> has to be supervised AT ALL TIMES when it's in a bathtub, no
> matter how many safety devices are in place. A child cannot cry
> out under water, babies can drown in a mere 2 inches, and
> therefore an adult must always be present and alert.
>
> DS once slipped from my grip, even while I was in the tub
> with him. He is used to swimming and trained to go under water,
> but I will never forget the look of surprise and fear on his
> face that time. I got him the next second, and he was perfectly
> fine, didn't even cry and thought it a fun game. But the thought
> of what could have happened if I had just turned my back at that
> moment scared the hell out of me.
>
> However, you are right that there should be more awareness of
> child safety when it comes to toys, and even clothes. We have
> already gotten rid of a few things that had small parts that
> were coming off (choking hazards). OTOH Lego Duplo is sold
> for kids older than 18m, since it is said to contain small
> parts, but DS is playing with that for months now. It seems
> like there is no consistent policy on this whatsoever.
>

I guess where I come down on this is that children are dying. So it
seems not all parents know. Not all parents are going to get the baby
bath seat with the box/instructions. Not all parents can even read
English. This is why mine won't go to Goodwill.

The other point I am taking from this is that a baby bath seat that can
tip over and can allow a baby to slide through is not a safety device at
all, rather a convenience device. (On the show, they said it is NOT
safer to use the baby bath seat than not to use one).

However, I think the product can easily appear to be a safety device.
Not to mention that the company name, prominently displayed on the box,
is "Safety First". I suspect that some parents get the impression that
it IS a safety device, and those parents, who wouldn't leave a baby
alone in a tub, might leave a baby in a bath seat for a moment. I think
that is what is happening.

I'm not saying that we can completely protect people from all things all
the time, but I think if a noticeable number of children are dying,
there is a problem. In my peripheral experience on an Environmental,
Health and Safety team, I came to learn that consideration of the way
end users use things is part of the safety issue.

[Phoebe & Allyson]

Nina wrote:

> If you are referring to the baby bath seat, what do you base that on?
> That doesn't ring true, assuming the unattended time is no more than a
> few minutes.

If a baby can drown (regardless of whether in a seat or a
ring) if left unattended for 30 minutes, then the baby can
drown if left unattended for 3 minutes. You might be 10
times as likely to have a drowning in 30 minutes, but you've
got no guarantees in 3 minutes. And really, you've got no
guarantees in 30 seconds.

Phoebe :)

[Nina]

Phoebe & Allyson wrote:
> Nina wrote:
>
>> If you are referring to the baby bath seat, what do you base that on?
>> That doesn't ring true, assuming the unattended time is no more than a
>> few minutes.
>
>
> If a baby can drown (regardless of whether in a seat or a ring) if left
> unattended for 30 minutes, then the baby can drown if left unattended
> for 3 minutes. You might be 10 times as likely to have a drowning in 30
> minutes, but you've got no guarantees in 3 minutes. And really, you've
> got no guarantees in 30 seconds.
>
> Phoebe :)
>

That's true.

I was thinking the following might have prevented the deaths:

1) a strap (something like on a high chair), so that the baby can't slip
through the leg holes.

2) a weighted and wider bottom

I suspect some parents occasionally leave their children alone in a high
chair for a moment (I could be wrong) for a moment but not for 30
minutes, when the child's resulting agitation, rocking, and
squirmishness could cause the chair to tip over or the child to fall out.

That was what I was thinking, although your point is well taken.

[dragonlady]

In article >,
Nina > wrote:

> Phoebe & Allyson wrote:
> > Nina wrote:
> >
> >> If you are referring to the baby bath seat, what do you base that on?
> >> That doesn't ring true, assuming the unattended time is no more than a
> >> few minutes.
> >
> >
> > If a baby can drown (regardless of whether in a seat or a ring) if left
> > unattended for 30 minutes, then the baby can drown if left unattended
> > for 3 minutes. You might be 10 times as likely to have a drowning in 30
> > minutes, but you've got no guarantees in 3 minutes. And really, you've
> > got no guarantees in 30 seconds.
> >
> > Phoebe :)
> >
>
> That's true.
>
> I was thinking the following might have prevented the deaths:
>
> 1) a strap (something like on a high chair), so that the baby can't slip
> through the leg holes.
>
> 2) a weighted and wider bottom
>
> I suspect some parents occasionally leave their children alone in a high
> chair for a moment (I could be wrong) for a moment but not for 30
> minutes, when the child's resulting agitation, rocking, and
> squirmishness could cause the chair to tip over or the child to fall out.
>
> That was what I was thinking, although your point is well taken.
>

And I'm thinking that anything that makes it seem like it might actually
be a safety device might encourage parents to leave their babies in the
tub more often, as though they actually COULD be safe.



meh
--
Children won't care how much you know until they know how much you care

[Leann and Donald]

> I guess where I come down on this is that children are dying. So it
> seems not all parents know. Not all parents are going to get the baby
> bath seat with the box/instructions. Not all parents can even read
> English. This is why mine won't go to Goodwill.

I tried bringing a baby bathtub to Goodwill and they will not take any bath
items.

Leann

[Nina]

dragonlady wrote:
> In article >,
> Nina > wrote:
>
>
>>Phoebe & Allyson wrote:
>>
>>>Nina wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>If you are referring to the baby bath seat, what do you base that on?
>>>>That doesn't ring true, assuming the unattended time is no more than a
>>>>few minutes.
>>>
>>>
>>>If a baby can drown (regardless of whether in a seat or a ring) if left
>>>unattended for 30 minutes, then the baby can drown if left unattended
>>>for 3 minutes. You might be 10 times as likely to have a drowning in 30
>>>minutes, but you've got no guarantees in 3 minutes. And really, you've
>>>got no guarantees in 30 seconds.
>>>
>>>Phoebe :)
>>>
>>
>>That's true.
>>
>>I was thinking the following might have prevented the deaths:
>>
>>1) a strap (something like on a high chair), so that the baby can't slip
>>through the leg holes.
>>
>>2) a weighted and wider bottom
>>
>>I suspect some parents occasionally leave their children alone in a high
>>chair for a moment (I could be wrong) for a moment but not for 30
>>minutes, when the child's resulting agitation, rocking, and
>>squirmishness could cause the chair to tip over or the child to fall out.
>>
>>That was what I was thinking, although your point is well taken.
>>
>
>
> And I'm thinking that anything that makes it seem like it might actually
> be a safety device might encourage parents to leave their babies in the
> tub more often, as though they actually COULD be safe.
>
>
>
> meh

Since that's exactly what is happening now (it appears to some parents
to be a safety device), this sounds like an argument for taking the
product off the market, which is my preference (unless they can redesign
it to truly prevent the drowning deaths that have been ocurring).