When Product Recalls Speak, but No One Listens

Kids in Danger is a consumer advocacy group that focuses on the issues of consumer and child safety, as well as children's product safety.  In an article posted on their website on September 1, 2011, they discussed their concerns with the low success rate of both voluntary or mandated product safety recalls.

Appalled by the diminutive effectiveness (less than 1%) of one individual corrective action plan summary for an infant play yard, the article continues to stress that a lot of work needs to be done to improve the safety of children's products in the marketplace today. Regarding product safety recalls, they suggest a three part solution to improving the performance of product safety alerts: 1)  Design safe products, 2) Submit the products to rigorous testing, and 3) Conduct effective recalls.  


It is very important to note that a product that is tested to any given toy or children's product safety standard at a third-party laboratory does not mean that the product is "safe."  Product safety is more than an "X" rubber stamped on a piece of paper. Let's be honest - How many consumers go into the local toy store and ask to see the test report that shows the product being considered for purchase has been properly tested?  How many would know how to read the report even if it was presented to them.  That's right, less than 1% would ask and even less would be able to interpret the report properly.  Consumers assume that a product on the store shelves has been tested and complies with the existing safety standards. 

Logo:  CPSC

In this day and age it is more likely than not that a children's product has been tested to the applicable safety standard.  Manufacturers, distributors, and even retailers should be sure that they are confident that the product they are offering to the public is as safe as possible. Product design, risk assessment for foreseeable use & misuse, consistent production quality, supply chain transparency, clear user instructions, suitable labeling (not over-labeling), packaging & marketing, caregiver vigilance and consumer knowledge of typical child development landmarks all play into children's product safety.  History shows that the majority of children's products recalled by CPSC did have the required physical and chemical lab testing completed at some point. Past that, any one of those aforementioned factors played into the scenario somehow to create an unintentional hazard.


Having designed and implemented several CPSC recalls myself, it could be said that the slow and minimal results mentioned in the KID article are actually much lower than normally experienced. Still, it is sadly true that if any corrective action plan gets a 25-28% effective rate it is considered acceptable.  That means that about 75% of the product in the hands of the consumer is in the "unknown zone."  It is either perfectly safe or potentially unsafe. The unknown zone is an uncomfortable place for any manufacturer. 

Photo: Fisher Price

To be honest, this miserable recall effectiveness rate is NOT always for lack of effort on the part of the manufacturer.  Past sending out letters to customers, website warnings, store posters, press releases and local news reports, a manufacturer relies on the responsiveness of the consumer. What is it saying about consumers of toys and children's products when, after all these attempts to educate them about the potential product hazard, they still look the other way?
Even listening to the typical sensationalistic and often inaccurate media reports of injury or deaths does not seem to be enough to hit home. KID recognizes an important factor. Child safety is often being left to a single press release and to the extent to which a manufacturer is able to notify their customers. 


They ask the question: "...how can manufacturers best reach you when a product is recalled?  What would make you take the time to participate in a recall?" 


You are invited to respond to that question by emailing Kids in Danger at email@KidsInDanger.org.

Recall, Safety Alert, or Parenting 101?

When is a product recall really a “recall?’  Definitions of the word recall include:  to call back, order home or withdraw.  The definition seems clear enough.  If a product is in the marketplace and it has a defect that endangers the public safety, the manufacturer should “call back” the item to prevent possible injury.  Recently however, the Consumer Product Safety Commission seemed to redefine the word recall. 

Take the recent “recall” announced on February 11^th for Summer Infant ‘s baby video monitors.   The company received reports of the strangulation deaths of two infants caused by the electrical cords of the monitor wrapping around the infant’s neck and cutting off their air supply.  Since 2004 CPSC has received notification of seven infant deaths involving the cords on baby monitors in general. 

Normally “recalls” are used when a product defect is found, or when the product does not comply with an existing safety regulation.  Neither of these is true in the case of the baby monitor involved.  In fact, the monitors were placed on the infant crib or on the wall over the crib where the cords were within reach of the child.  Parental or caregiver responsibility has to be considered in this case. 

The manufacturer of the monitors is not asking for the monitors back from consumer; they are simply asking the consumer to call to receive a set of warning labels that more clearly advise not to place the monitor too close to baby’s crib or play area.  According to CPSC Commissioner Nancy Nord, the response to this “recall” has been minimal, and in some cases the response has been anger or frustration that they were frightened into thinking their monitor was defective.

On her blog, Commissioner Nord indicates that the reason she was given for the use of the term “recall” for this scenario was that “this is the only way to get media attention—unless we call it a recall, no one will pay attention to us.”  Really?  Does our government really think the US consumer buys that?  Given the very poor response to this “recall” so far, it appears that a Safety Alert and clear information on the safe placement of ANYTHING with hanging cords near babies would have been sufficient. Not only that, but if you purchased a monitor, heard “recall” and then found out the solution was a set of paper labels…well, what would your response be? 

Once you begin to pollute the field of product recalls with every type of warning or educational program, you have begun to slide down a very slippery slope.  At what point does the consumer just stop listening?

Leave your comments below.  Has the constant barrage of product recalls since 2007 made you question product safety overall?  How much time do you spend reading warning labels on products?