Handcrafting nontoxic wooden toys

Posted on Feb 05, 2009 by Susie Collins in Blog, Media/Videos, Products

We love the idea of handcrafted, nontoxic wooden toys, right? But crafters of goods for children will soon be impacted by the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act or CPSIA, which was designed to protect kids from lead and phthalates but could bankrupt artisans.

Toymaker Amber Dusick aka woodmouse has her wood shop in her garage in downtown LA. After the birth of her son, this one time farm girl from Minnesota became nostalgic for the toys from her past: simple, natural toys that would inspire creativity and imaginative play, made from materials that wouldn’t stick around in a landfill for thousands of years.

Link

In a related story, Change.org reports on the problems with the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act, or CPSIA, which is scheduled to go into effect this month. Following the lead scare with products from China, CPSIA mandates that all products for kids from new and used clothing, books, toys, and bicycles, to jewelry, all children’s products would need to be tested for lead and phthalates, and marked indelibly with tracking information. Normally, we would think this is a good idea, right? But handcrafters of goods like wooden toys say the cost of the required testing would bankrupt them.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Tags: Art, Children's Health, Healthy Living, Home, Nontoxic, Video, Work

7 Responses to “Handcrafting nontoxic wooden toys”

Leslie

05. Feb, 2009

That is so neat – makes me want to get a wood burning tool! I wonder what type of non toxic paint she uses?

Reply to this comment
Ruth

05. Feb, 2009

I don’t know what the answer is, but I sure hate to see home-based artists go
under because of this ruling….the testing should be provided by others, not the
artisans….and the cost passed on to the buyers. Whole lotta changes coming!!!

Reply to this comment
Jasmine

05. Feb, 2009

I love the idea of open-ended toys. Too many toys today limit a child’s imagination and creativity.

Reply to this comment
Susie Collins

05. Feb, 2009

Leslie, I wondered that, too– what paint is that? It’s so bright and beautiful. Maybe we can find out more about her work somewhere… Also, I was wondering if there was smoke from the burning that might bother someone with mcs–?? It’s such a cool idea to use that for the lines.

Ruth, it looks like there is such an uprising that there will probably be some sort of amendment to the law to keep kids safe without hurting handcrafters and cottage industry. But the anger this generated gives you some idea of what’s coming as the laws tighten up on toxic chemicals in the marketplace. This was just the smallest business sector imaginable– just think what will happen when the big guys don’t like what’s happening and it starts to cost them. You are right, we ain’t seen nothin’ yet.

Jasmine, Yay! Building blocks, arts and crafts, pretend! Here’s a great article on open-ended toys http://www.parentmap.com/content/view/876

Reply to this comment
Jasmine

05. Feb, 2009

Sweet, thanks for the article.

Reply to this comment
Diane

06. Feb, 2009

We absolutely love to buy wooden toys for our 2 year old toddler. I sure hope this CPSIA doesn’t put all these toy makers out of business.

Reply to this comment
Susie Collins

06. Feb, 2009

Diane, Thank you for your comment, but I am wondering if it is spam. Are you truly interested in making sure that there are no toxic chemicals in children’s toys? Our discussion here on The Canary Report is about the importance of producing nontoxic consumer goods, and the importance of testing and regulating toxic chemicals in the marketplace. In this particular discussion about children’s toys, the foremost danger is not the possibility of putting people out of business, the foremost danger is the possibility of exposing children and the public to toxic chemicals, in this case lead and phthalates. The solution is to find the win-win, where the chemical testing and regulations are in place, the public is protected, and business and chemical manufacturers are held accountable for the safety of their products. If an amendment is made to protect handcrafters from the cost of testing for lead and phthalates, then the regulation should not be removed, it should, as Ruth suggested, be aimed at another step in the production of the goods. And if the cost needs to be passed on to the consumer, I for one would be more than happy to pay more for goods to ensure my health and safety.

Reply to this comment