Parenting after 35

The great drop-side crib debate is finally over!

Re: The great drop-side crib debate is finally over!

  • It's awesome to see that our government can act so quickly on such matters. <eyeroll>

    Warning No formatter is installed for the format bbhtml
  • Loading the player...
  • I guess Aaron's crib is destined to be firewood.

     

    image

    Bronx Zoo: Summer 2013

    image


    To read my blog, click on the giraffe pic below!
    image
  • Ooooh Robyn.. you're an outlaw now!!
    Warning No formatter is installed for the format bbhtml
  • Oooh Robyn.  You're an outlaw now!!
    Warning No formatter is installed for the format bbhtml
  • Why did they have to include a photo of such a cute baby in the article?
     image
    image
  • imageM.Amy:
    Why did they have to include a photo of such a cute baby in the article?

    This! I feel so bad...

    Warning No formatter is installed for the format bbhtml
  • Rachel's daycare has dropside cribs. I guess they will be buying all new ones in the next year.
    Warning No formatter is installed for the format bbhtml
  • I have mixed feelings about this.... I appreciate the governments desire to help protect our families, but am sick of having minuscule things legislated!

    We were given an antique heirloom crib when pregnant that we ultimately chose not to use. While we were trying to decide I took the time to actually look into the gov. statistics on injuries and deaths from cribs, and these reports are incredibly misleading!

    The article said that there were 30 deaths in the past DECADE, not 30 a year, but 30 in a decade. According to the numbers I read in my research every reported death involved cribs that were damaged or altered. Some were even held together with string and tape!

    I'll try to find the link and post it, but, while *every* loss is significant, it seems that outlawing an item that has an average of 3 deaths a year (and according to the US Gov reports almost every one of those three were using a damaged and improperly repaired version) is extreme when we still allow other products that far exceed that mortality rate. (Hellooooo smoking!)

    image
  • imagekimisuejoia:

    I have mixed feelings about this.... I appreciate the governments desire to help protect our families, but am sick of having minuscule things legislated!

    We were given an antique heirloom crib when pregnant that we ultimately chose not to use. While we were trying to decide I took the time to actually look into the gov. statistics on injuries and deaths from cribs, and these reports are incredibly misleading!

    The article said that there were 30 deaths in the past DECADE, not 30 a year, but 30 in a decade. According to the numbers I read in my research every reported death involved cribs that were damaged or altered. Some were even held together with string and tape!

    I'll try to find the link and post it, but, while *every* loss is significant, it seems that outlawing an item that has an average of 3 deaths a year (and according to the US Gov reports almost every one of those three were using a damaged and improperly repaired version) is extreme when we still allow other products that far exceed that mortality rate. (Hellooooo smoking!)

    Well, I sort of agree with you.  On the one hand I don't mind the feds legislating unsafe products (if lawsuits aren't enough incentive for crib manufacturers to make their products less prone to tampering/modifying then the gov't does need to step in), however, I'm from Canada where a ton of baby products have been banned, including sit-in walkers, and I think it gets a little ridiculous.  They should ban stupid parents from reproducing rather than banning some products that have the potential to be used unsafely.  Simon's favorite toy in the world was his sit-in walker, he put more miles on that thing in a few months than some people put on their cars.  I never let him use it near stairways and he never got hurt in it...simple!  Same with the Bumbo.  Who would leave their kid in a Bumbo on a table and walk away?  But I guess my point is that the U.S. is much more reasonable about legislating products than other countries and I don't think I would call the drop-rail crib a "miniscule" thing.  Now, if the deaths were due to parents leaving the rail down and the baby falling out of the crib, that would be a ridiculous reason to ban them. 

    Image and video hosting by TinyPic Baby Birthday Ticker Ticker
  • imagemtnrider:
      But I guess my point is that the U.S. is much more reasonable about legislating products than other countries and I don't think I would call the drop-rail crib a "miniscule" thing.  Now, if the deaths were due to parents leaving the rail down and the baby falling out of the crib, that would be a ridiculous reason to ban them. 

    When I did the research, almost every death from a drop-side crib was because the crib was damaged and the parents rigged it so they could keep using it. The cribs were taped and tied up with string in some cases! That to me is parental irresponsibility, not manufacturer irresponsibility. 

    There are other issues with drop-side cribs, and it is a good thing to no longer sell them, it just bugs me to have the government legislate things like this... 

    image
  • I'm totally OK with this particular recall. 

    Cribs are something we leave our kids in for many hours- unattended... and assume they are safe.  I don't want there to be any chance that they aren't safe.

    it's so different than the bumbos, etc.... b/c every parent leaves a baby in a crib on it's own... only dumb parents leave their kids in a bumbo on a table, etc.

    there is no true need for drop side cribs -- shorter people can get a shorter profile crib, etc... so why risk it?  Sure- 3 kids per year isn't a lot-- but if your kid was one of those 3 it would be enough for you to want them banned.  How many deaths = worthy of a ban?  I think it's sick to think of a quantity of deaths of babies as a pre-req for banning something.

     

  • imageGoldie_Locks_5:

     How many deaths = worthy of a ban?  I think it's sick to think of a quantity of deaths of babies as a pre-req for banning something.

     

    So using this same logic then we need to ban hotdogs, popcorn, peanuts, automobiles, swimming pools, and pretty much every toy currently made out of plastic.

    My point is these deaths are horrific, but I don't think that the government should be legislating common sense. If they ban everything that has caused the death of a child then there will not be a whole lot left.

     

     

    image
This discussion has been closed.
Choose Another Board
Search Boards
"
"