As much as I am involved in the improvement of toy safety, and as much as I "feel" for the small, cottage, hand-made toy industry, it only takes one unfortunate incident to permanently injure or kill a small child. I shudder in horror every time I see hand-made toys (wood, plush and other) in those little country stores, knowing that they have small parts that can easily detach and perhaps choke an infant. This does not even include the fact that OTC paints and surface finishers used may contain dangerous levels of lead or other harmful elements.
I am completely supportive of private enterprise but products still have to be safe.

Also worth noting is that this increased cost associated with redundant testing will affect larger companies. Haba has decided that it will not be cost effective to sell their wonderful jewelry in the U.S. anymore. Now the consumer loses because creations that fall under the category of "toy" will no longer be available in the marketplace

In response to Fred:

I see where you're coming from in that it only takes one unfortunate mistake to injure or kill or small child. However, you can not place full blame for this on the toymaker or shop owner--where are the parents in this? Shouldn't all parents monitor the toys they give their children to play with? I am a maker of plush animals that I do not intend for children to play with--my items are meant as display art--but I know some people buy my products for children. I am constantly asked if my items are "baby safe." I say no every time, but that doesn't mean that something I made won't end up in the hands of a child. Should I then be blamed if something happens to a child?

I already get asked about testing for my board games. When possible, I assure them that each and every game is inspected (because I assemble most of them at this point). I have had to reassure parents that there were no lead paints used in my games, because there was no paint.

There needs to be an equal burden between consumers and manufacturers.

"Let the buyer beware" said nothing about the responsibility of the seller, though when there are dangers an average consumer might not know about, consumers should be able to depend upon a responsible manufacturer, a seasoned reviewer, a conscientious retailer, and if necessary, an informing set of policies before a punitive restriction from the government.

If a parent doesn't know that their child of a certain age will put things in his or her mouth so that those things are kept out of reach, no warning labels will make a difference.

I know a lot of people get incensed when we don't protect children's safety at all costs, but as a Taoist, I believe that every situation requires a balance.

Laws that are designed to quiet paranoia and assume that ANY manufacturer would allow a harmful product into the marketplace would be fine. Fine except that the time and expense of testing, like the discounts required by chain stores, the price of liability insurance, the cost of TV advertising, and a number of other indulgences required for success will be the realm of the few large, old guard companies that can afford them.

And the spirits of diversity and innovation in the toy stores whimper mournfully.

In response to Jessica: I cannot disagree with your logic, Jessica. However, the unfortunate fact is that the majority of parents in the US are uneducated when it comes to awareness of safety for infants. That is why babies continue to die; in cribs that are placed too close to window blind/curtain cords; from being smothered by their own parents while asleep and, yes, by choking on small objects. Unfortunately, for every one of us, like you and me and thousands of others in the toy/children's products industry, who are aware of infant safety, there are many more thousands of others who are not aware. I applaud you for having an awareness of infant safety but, in my book, there is no excuse for products that are manifestly suitable for infants, that are bound to end up in a crib or playpen, being in the market place. Even with the many product safety regulations already in place, as long as the majority of parents remain ignorant of the dangers there will continue to be a need for regulations to protect our children.

Just a post script to my 12/31 note to Jessica - I neglected to comment on the question at the end of your 12/15 remarks. The answer is, no, in all fairness you should not be blamed. However, if a child is seriously injured or dies as a result of a hazard caused by one of your products, whether you cautioned the buyer or not, there is more than a reasonable chance that the parents may sue....