FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Drawstring regulations
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Fashion-Incubator User Forum Forum Index -> CPSIA & Consumer Safety
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Esther
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 17 Mar 2006
Posts: 1877
Location: ID Spudville

PostPosted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 8:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

re: Buttonhole elastic.

Most of the casing could be regular elastic. Part of it could be buttonhole elastic which would cinch up the rest of it and secured with a securely attached button. It would take some playing around to figure it out but it would allow for someone to release the button and then have enough room to do the diaper changes. It might or might not be less labor than a placket, but would help keep the same aesthetic.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Alison Cummins
Official Archivist
Official Archivist


Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Posts: 2300
Location: Canada QC Montreal

PostPosted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 10:31 am    Post subject: Re: Drawstring regulations Reply with quote

Patricia Barnett wrote:
We make what we call a Cuddle Gown. I stress that this is not intended for sleepwear, and I secure the ribbon to where it cannot be removed. I just don't want to start out breaking a law.


Patricia, have you consulted with a lawyer knowledgeable in the area and confirmed that “stressing that a Cuddle Gown is not intended for sleepwear” will actually protect you legally?

Infants who do not yet sit or crawl are of an age where they sleep quite a bit and are not usually changed into special pyjamas for naps. It seems to me that it would be very difficult to make a case that anything a child this age wears is not sleepwear.

Infants who do sit or crawl are not likely to wear a Cuddle Gown except as sleepwear.

One of the reasons people really like sack nighties is precisely for their nightime utility. Easy access to diapers is especially important at two in the morning and they prevent older babies from climbing out of their cribs when they wake up.

I love the concept and think they should be legal. I suspect, however, that such a coveted item is not on the market precisely because it is illegal under US laws regulating children’s sleepwear.

If you have confirmed that your disclaimer will protect you I’m really pleased, because that means that this practical old-fashioned “sleeping bag” will become generally available again.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Emily Kruger
Guest





PostPosted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 10:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

This will likely not be helpful commentary, .... this is coming from frustration as someone trying develop an infant clothing line, but also a mom...the very thing they are trying to get rid of (drawstrings of any type) are actually very helpful when trying to get a proper fit on babies or kids. Does anyone know the statistics regarding death/serious accidents and drawstrings? I have never seen a story publicized about it when it happens, but hear these anectodes when legislators are explaining their support for the new laws/regs. It just seems that they are legislating for a VERY small number of accidents, that are actually probably due to negligence elsewhere...

I just don't see why the ribbon at the base of the gown would be dangerous if it is tacked in. Plus, in the event of waistbands/dress drawstrings/etc, couldn't elastic also be a hazard? At least when compared against short drawstrings that are tacked in? And, aren't buttons, etc technically choking hazards too? I'm just a bit at a loss of how removing a drawstring and replacing it with button elastic is actually safer...(this is not a dig to anyone that recommended it...I appreciate that people are trying to find solutions to accomodate the guidelines...I just think the guidelines go overboard).

Sorry for the rant, but I am trying to figure out what is allowed, which is obviously clear as mud. And, I am struggling with the rationale behind the regs....

Patricia, if I had known about your cuddle gowns when my daughter was a young infant, I absolutely would have purchased one if the ribbon was tacked in...and I am a safety-paranoid mom.... I know that doesn't get you anywhere, but I really think they're cute and hope you are able to work it out so you can keep the ribbon in.
Back to top
Alison Cummins
Official Archivist
Official Archivist


Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Posts: 2300
Location: Canada QC Montreal

PostPosted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 11:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just to be clear, my comment above about children’s sleepwear regulations was not made with drawstrings in mind. I was thinking about the law requiring that children’s sleepwear be tight-fitting.

Um, so I did a teeny bit of googling (I’m supposed to be working), after having just talked out of my butt with no supporting research:
http://www.babyshopmagazine.com/fall03/sleepwear.htm

Quote:
Where can I find the requirements for children’s sleepwear?
The regulations are published in the Code of Federal Relations in Title 16, Part 1616 for children’s sleepwear sized 7 through 14. The two rules contain basically the same requirements, with the main difference being the sizes of the garments covered by each.

What is children’s sleepwear?
Children’s sleepwear is any article of clothing, such as a nightgown, pajama, robe, or loungewear, that is sized above 9 months and up to size 14 and that is intended to be worn primarily for sleeping or activities related to sleeping. To determine whether a garment is sleepwear, the Commission considers:
1) The nature of the garment and its suitability for sleeping or activities related to sleeping;
2) How the garment is promoted and distributed; and
3) The likelihood that the garment will be used by children primarily for sleeping or activities related to sleeping in substantial number of cases.

Underwear and diapers are not children’s sleepwear.
A garment sized nine months or smaller intended for use by infants is not required to meet the standard if:
1) It is one-piece garment and is not longer than 25 ¾ inches, or it is a two-piece garment and has no piece longer than 15 ¾ inches;
and
2) It has a label stating in months the age of the children for whom it is intended.
Even though these types of garments are exempt form the requirements of this rule, they must still meet the flammability requirements for clothing textiles, 16 C.F.R. 1610 and vinyl plastic film, 16 C.F.R. 1611.


So it sounds like cuddle gowns are fine as long as they are made of fire-retardant fabric and are shorter than 25.75 inches.

So that just leaves you with the drawstring issue. Cool! Forget I ever said anything.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Patricia
Guest





PostPosted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 12:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Okay, I think all I have done is come full circle, from taking the ribbon out to leaving it in. My daughter (partner) thinks I'm losing my mind since I call her about every thirty minutes with a different answer.

Alison, I have read the regulations that you showed, because the issue of tight fitting and flame-retardant had me concerned. I have done a lot of looking, American Apparel, etc., and their gowns are not flame-retardent, but they also state that they are not intended as sleepwear. I too look at the gown and think, "Why are they not everywhere?" I think every gown I have ever seen or used has simply had elastic at the bottom.

I am going to experiment tonight with a placket, but I honestly don't know that I feel much better about a snap or button than I do a ribbon. What ever idea I can come up with so far does not beat out the convenience of the ribbon.

Patricia
Back to top
Alison Cummins
Official Archivist
Official Archivist


Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Posts: 2300
Location: Canada QC Montreal

PostPosted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 1:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Patricia,

I think the American Apparel t-shirts are covered in “underwear and diapers are not considered sleepwear.” Once you attach the gown part I’m pretty sure you are out of the underwear category. If they are legally defined as not underwear, then they have to be shorter than 25 ¾ inches and meet flamabillity requirements.

RE drawstrings: one [url=http://health.howstuffworks.com/how-to-choose-clothes-for-a-child2.htm ]site [/url]I saw stated, “The advantage of gowns is that they allow for easier diaper changing. They also allow an older infant more freedom of movement. However, in the past, the strings at the bottom of these garments were sometimes found to get wrapped around infants' toes and ankles, cutting off circulation. In newer gowns, enclosed strips of plastic take the place of the strings so no loose ends can cut off circulation.”
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Alison Cummins
Official Archivist
Official Archivist


Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Posts: 2300
Location: Canada QC Montreal

PostPosted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 1:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

... on the other hand:

Quote:
Should all of the items in your layette be flame-resistant? That usually isn't possible, as according to the Consumer Product Safety Commission, "the rules for flame resistance or snug fit do not apply to sleepwear for sizes nine months and under because infants that wear these sizes are insufficiently mobile to expose themselves to an open flame." So it's OK to put your newborn or younger infant to sleep in cotton clothing that isn't flame resistant.


Which is interesting, because above it says that snug fit doesn’t apply to small babies but flammability does.

Anyway. If you clearly understand the law as written and know for sure that you’re compliant, then you won’t need a disclaimer. If you are not compliant with the law, I don’t believe a disclaimer will help you.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Patricia
Guest





PostPosted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 1:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Allison,

Right now I use American Apparel to construct the gowns, and I use the t-shirts and their infant one-piece gowns, and neither one of these are flame-retardent. The thing is I don't intend for these gowns to be sleepwear. I mean for them to be something to bring the baby home from the hospital or to dress them in when everyone comes to see the baby. Maybe I should change the name from Cuddle Gowns to something like the old fashion Day Gowns.

I would not be as reluctant to put in a placket, but that will greatly increase the production cost. As they are now it's pretty simple. I just got a coverstitch machine and plan on having my own pattern and cutting out the use of someone else's tops.

Patricia
Back to top
Patricia
Guest





PostPosted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 1:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Alison,

I'm sorry I misspelled your name. I hate it when I do that.

Patricia
Back to top
Esther
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 17 Mar 2006
Posts: 1877
Location: ID Spudville

PostPosted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 5:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Emily,

Welcome to the world of CPSIA. The truth is, as I've explained before, Patricia could leave the ribbon in because the rules specifically refer to neck and waist. But, there have been ever increasing recalls due to drawstrings and ties some of which could be argued are not even drawstrings. Very few injuries have been reported but there have been a few deaths. There have been more deaths related to drawstrings than lead poisoning but fewer deaths/injuries than gas string trimmers. The drawstring issue is closely related to the window blind cords, which is why I suspect there will be every increasing rules. I can't say leave it in because that makes me liable for the advice so I have to recommend taking it out because of that 0.0001% chance there is a problem. Patricia will have to decide which direction to take as do all those who make children's clothing.

Bucket Hat
Party Hat
Decorative ribbon in cardigan
Blanket stitching

Perhaps the best way to get an answer is to go directly to the CPSC and ask them.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Patricia Barnett
Guest





PostPosted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 6:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Esther,

You are probably right in that the best thing to do is to go to the source itself, the CPSC. I have looked, and had all of you looking, and I can't find anything that says anything about the hem. I appreciate your advise and really had not considered the position questions like this place you in. I can still have a pattern made, and make changes to the hem later. The main part of the pattern I need is the knit top.

Patricia
Back to top
Rebecca Chiodi
Renewing Member
Renewing Member


Joined: 17 Aug 2009
Posts: 108
Location: NY Endicott

PostPosted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 8:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Now, I have one more question. Does this mean that the old fashioned baby bonnet is in violation? The ones that tie under the chin?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Laura Bernstein
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Oct 12, 2009 2:12 pm    Post subject: Drawstrings Reply with quote

Hello. You might find it useful to read about recent recalls due to drawstring concerns. In the past 18 months there have been a huge number of these recalls involving drawstrings in different locations on garments.
It may not be absolute law, but the history offers good insight into CPSC thinking.
The list of recalls is on the CPSC web site.
http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/category/child.html


Laura
Back to top
Emily Kruger
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Oct 12, 2009 2:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

OK, so now I am confused. I looked through the recall info and only found 1 instance of pants being recalled due to a drawstring entrapment issue...and, in that recall notice there was no reference to regulations regarding drawstrings in pants....I see tons of styles of pants with drawstrings.

So, are they concerned with drawstrings in pants? Or, the bottom drawstrings in tops?

Any thoughts/knowledge on how they differentiate would be appreciated.

(so, for example, a drawstring in a pants waistband, that is tacked in at the back, doesn't extend more then 3 inches in the front and has no knots/toggles on it should be fine, per what I see, shouldn't it?)

Thanks!
Back to top
Patricia
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Oct 12, 2009 2:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Emily,

I found the same thing that you did for the pants being tacked in the back, no knots, and the strings should extend no more than three inches when open, not drawn up.

Patricia
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Fashion-Incubator User Forum Forum Index -> CPSIA & Consumer Safety All times are GMT - 6 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Page 2 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group