- Nov 1, 2003
Hi psaddict!! Good question! I live in a 3 story 100 year old home. I affectionately call it the "baby deathtrap house". I have babygates and babygates and more babygates. I don''t own a babywalker for that very reason.Date: 12/19/2006 5:25:10 PM
You say the 6 month old fell down stairs in a child walker deathtrap.. it sounds like the deathtrap was the stairs, not the walker. It seems like having stairs in the home causes a lot of accidents, I know when I was 9 I fell down the stairs in my house and broke half of my front tooth off (permanent tooth, it''s half fake now!) Does this mean that parents who choose to have a 2 story home are evil? I also bonked my head at least once on my parents hard coffee table, while running around in the living room. Some people opt for those soft-topped coffee table/ottoman things. Does this mean they''re uncaring parents?
I think that there are just risks in childhood, and you can''t exactly turn your entire home into a padded cell. One parent may choose to let their child play with a toy you think is unsafe, and that parent may think that you''re exposing your child to unnecessary risk by having stairs in the home, or think that something you are doing is unsafe. I do think that manufacturers shouldn''t put out toys that are obviously dangerous such as lawn darts, but don''t see a problem with having a range of toys, some which some parents may choose to boycott, and others may not.
Well of course, this is the common sense part I mentioned.Date: 12/20/2006 12:43:15 AM
It seems to me, though, that you shouldn''t just trust that companies are only putting out safe toys. You have to look at a toy yourself and decide if you think it''s safe and appropriate for your child, or if it could be a bit hazardous if played with incorrectly, but they could use it with supervision. Like any game that involves throwing or hitting balls.. could be dangerous if the children are unsupervised.
By the time a company recalls a product, your child could have been playing with it for several months already. It seems like parents just have to look at the toy themselves, decide if it''s safe and how much supervision is needed.
AmenDate: 12/20/2006 12:43:15 AM
It seems to me, though, that you shouldn't just trust that companies are only putting out safe toys. You have to look at a toy yourself and decide if you think it's safe and appropriate for your child, or if it could be a bit hazardous if played with incorrectly, but they could use it with supervision. Like any game that involves throwing or hitting balls.. could be dangerous if the children are unsupervised.
By the time a company recalls a product, your child could have been playing with it for several months already. It seems like parents just have to look at the toy themselves, decide if it's safe and how much supervision is needed.
Date: 12/20/2006 6:31:48 AM
While I agree that perhaps I don''t get some things. I think that others don''t get some things either.
The concept of toy recals often is not that the toy was really dangerous (sometimes it is); but more often that the toy was used improperely or by the wrong age group.
Just look to the so called ''top 10 list'' that started this thread. Only a few of those toys were actually dangerous in and of themselves (could cause unexpected injury or harm when used as would be normally expected to be used).
As far as child profing a house: Am I going to eliminate a number of things - or restrict them to above 3 or 4 ft. Of course. Am I going to change my furnature because it has hard edges that a kid could bump there head on. No. Serious injuries are rarely caused by furnature or things that kids run into. Dosn''t mean they won''t bump their head or or bruse themselves. I veiw that part of growing up - learning that some things are ''hard'' and hurt if you run into them. The vast majority of the children in the world (billions of them) grew up bumping into hard furnature.
The perspective here is what is normal and reasonable protection, what is over protection, and what is too little protection. We may disagree on where to draw the lines; but my observation is that people who tend to overprotect also tend to overreact to issues - which results in kids growing up that do not know how to properly assess risk and take appropriate responsibility.
My question is to ask your parents or grandparents if what you are doing is reasonable from a protection standpoint. I''m betting they are not worried about a few bumps and bruses or a lot of the things that make the news these days as ''unsafe and deadly.''
I also agree with storm about how some people and kids are very responsible - and others are not. I suspect that in the first case the kids were taught that they have to be responsible for somethings - and that with their being responsible that they would get more responsible. I also suspect that most of those kids have had pleanty of various bumps and bruses along the way.
Date: 12/22/2006 8:25:24 PM
BTW: I child proofed my home by putting in the plug and putting high chemicals, then I watched my kids to make sure they did not run into things. Accidents happen, but so does common sense situations.
Atomic Energy Lab
Now Sky Dancers, there''s a dangerous toy. My daughter wanted this toy, and after I saw her play with it the first time, I packed it up and took it back to the store. When the ballerina comes twirling down with those pointy shoes, I could see it headed right for my daughter''s eye....that was the end of that.