               Annoyed Librarian
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
Most Commented On
Archives
Blog
Link This | Email this | Blog This | Comments (33)
The Children are Worth ItJanuary 12, 2009 This story seems to be getting a bit of attention. In a perfect example of the crisis-driven shortsightedness typical of democratically elected politicians, the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA) passed overwhelmingly last August and takes effect in February. There's no one I trust more to protect my consumer safety than a bunch of politicians in DC, and I for one am glad they have my back. Well, not my back, but my children's backs, except my children don't have backs, or rather my backs have no children. Anyway, you get the idea.From the article: "On February 10, the new law gets teeth. After that day, all products for children under 12 — books, games, toys, sports equipment, furniture, clothes, DVDs, and just about every other conceivable children’s gadget and gewgaw — must be tested for lead, and fall below a new 600 part-per-million limit, or face the landfill. Thanks to a September 12 memo from the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), the lead limit applies not only to new products, but also to inventory already on store shelves." It seems that consumer products for children are presumed guilty until proven innocent. Publishers, the ALA, and other folk concerned with books are worried, because the typically incautious, overly simplistic law technically means that even children's books will all have to be tested for lead to make sure they're safe enough for children's consumption. Not being a metallurgist, I wasn't aware that books had any lead content, but I really couldn't say. If they do, maybe that's what people mean by "heavy reading." "The CPSIA, intended to keep lead out of toys, may well also keep books out of libraries, says Emily Sheketoff, associate executive director of the American Library Association. 'We are very busy trying to come up with a way to make it not apply to libraries,' saidSheketoff. But unless she succeeds in lobbying Capitol Hill for an exemption, she believes libraries have two choices under the CPSIA: 'Either they take all the children’s books off the shelves,”'she says, “or they ban children from the library.'" What a choice! If it were me, I'd go with the latter option: banning children from the library. Think about it. Children are noisy, dirty, and smelly. They make messes, and they don't even pay taxes. Why not ban them from libraries? Then all the adults who like to read kiddie books but haven't already become children's librarians can have free run of the stacks. The other choice would be fine with me, too, though. I never go into that section of the library, and all those thin books look hard to shelve accurately anyway. If this choice is really what we face unless the ALA succeeds in lobbying Congress for an exemption, then I have a feeling one or the other is going to happen, because I can't think of any issues that the ALA has ever successfully lobbied for. They lobbied against CIPA and DOPA, after all. Midwinter's coming up, so maybe the ALA Council could pass a resolution. That would bring quick and effective action, just like the resolutions against the confirmation of Justice Alito and the Patriot Act! And we all remember how the genocide in Darfur came to an abrupt halt after the ALA Council resolution against that. The ALA is always so hysterical, though. They give us these two options merely to get us all in a tizzy, when they know these aren't the only two options. Probably they just don't care if our youngsters die of lead poisoning in libraries. That's why they're bamboozling us with all this pettifoggery, if that's what one does with pettifoggery. There is another option, of course. Libraries could just test books for lead. I don't know why this hasn't occurred to anyone. To be fair, it has occurred to some publishers, but they mistakenly tested for soluble lead content instead of total lead content, which didn't satisfy the two people at the CPSC. So libraries would definitely need to test for total lead content. It's really not that difficult, as this fact sheet from someone or other attests. (I'm pretty sure this fact sheet is reliable, because it came up near the top in my Google search.) There's a cheap test for lead that just involves dipping an applicator into some sort of gunk and spreading it on the book. The only problem is that the test isn't reliable, plus you have to wash the affected item thoroughly after the test. Thus, we'll be forced to admit, this test isn't at all practicable for libraries. It'd be a shame to save a book because it had no lead only to discard it because it was water-damaged. But there are reliable tests for total lead content that merely require removing part of the object for a sample and shipping it to a laboratory for analysis. That's not so big a deal. Libraries can just snip a page from each book, keep careful track of which pages go to which books, ship the pages off to the laboratories for analysis, and pay somewhere "between $5 - $35 per sample for this type of analysis." Given that range of choice, if I were the librarian in charge of the project, I'd choose the low end, but that's just me. I have no idea about the typical collection size for a typical children's library, but let's say 10,000 books just for fun. At the low end, we're talking a mere $50,000 to test the books for lead in each library, and the worst case scenario would require just $350,000 to test such a collection. Is this too much to pay to ensure the safety of our children? It's just possible that the ALA will finally succeed in lobbying Congress, but just in case their track record stays the same, libraries should start saving their pennies and finding the cheapest labs they can. It might seem onerous and unnecessary, but no amount of government-inspired busywork and expense is too much when we consider that this is for the safety of our children. They're worth it. The children, after all, are our future, just like the last generation of children are our present. I'll leave you to draw your own conclusions. Posted by Annoyed Librarian on January 12, 2009 | Comments (33)
January 12, 2009
In response to: The Children are Worth It Marcia Brady commented: This whole lead thing would explain why my sister Cindy was always acting so fruity. Thanks for heads up.
January 12, 2009
In response to: The Children are Worth It Annoyed and Fed Up commented: "The CPSIA, intended to keep lead out of toys, may well also keep books out of libraries, says Emily Sheketoff, associate executive director of the American Library Association. 'We are very busy trying to come up with a way to make it not apply to libraries,' saidSheketoff. But unless she succeeds in lobbying Capitol Hill for an exemption, she believes libraries have two choices under the CPSIA: 'Either they take all the children’s books off the shelves,”'she says, “or they ban children from the library.'" First of all, who is producing the alleged lead in books, LIBRARIES or BOOK PUBLISHERS??? We don't even know there IS lead in these! If ANYONE should have to defend themselves it should be Publishers, not "Libraries". ALA, then, AS IT APPEARS, is lobbrying in behalf of American Publishers, but won't lift a finger to help LIBRARIANS. THROW THE BUMS OUT! Question; are persions connected with ALA getting paid under the table to lobby for other groups? I think Congress should turn the tables and ask ALA what they're doing mixed up in this. What do they KNOW about lead in books? Just literally put them on the hot seat.
January 12, 2009
In response to: The Children are Worth It Annoyed and Anonymous commented: If a company in China produces defective products and sells them, say toys painted in lead paint, to an American firm for sale and distribution, without the firm being aware, who is at fault? In this case the libary is not printing and distributing books. I would like to nominate Ms. Sheketoff for the Annoyed Libarians Assn. Magaret Dumont Award [look her up on Wiki] for Library Busybody of the Year. ;-/
January 12, 2009
In response to: The Children are Worth It Million commented: <i>It's just possible that the ALA will finally succeed in lobbying Congress, but just in case their track record stays the same, libraries should start saving their pennies and finding the cheapest labs they can.</i>
January 12, 2009
In response to: The Children are Worth It anonymous commented: Forget the books.<br></br>Just test the Wii consoles. It's what the kids are there for anyway.
January 12, 2009
In response to: The Children are Worth It Dan Kleinman of SafeLibraries.org commented: I applaud the ALA on this one on my blog. See "ALA Uses Common Sense on CPSIA Child Safety Issue; Congratulations to Emily Sheketoff and the ALA Washington Office."
January 13, 2009
In response to: The Children are Worth It The Professor commented: These are indeed interesting issues. But the real question remains today just as it has for the last 20 years:
January 13, 2009
In response to: The Children are Worth It Herman Munster commented: That's easy: Ginger.
January 13, 2009
In response to: The Children are Worth It Shay commented: This is easy - just tell your kids to stop licking the books!
January 13, 2009
In response to: The Children are Worth It VNS commented: Ginger is the one you keep on the island Mary Ann is who you get off the island with.
January 13, 2009
In response to: The Children are Worth It whoever commented: Ginger or Mary Ann?
January 13, 2009
In response to: The Children are Worth It anonymous commented: Colbert Nation on lead-free ink, see tinyurlDOTcom/8sz3rk
January 13, 2009
In response to: The Children are Worth It AlwasyWanted2B commented: Mary Ann, Tina Lousie has not aged well
January 13, 2009
In response to: The Children are Worth It Durcell commented: Mary Ann.
January 13, 2009
In response to: The Children are Worth It former librarian commented: If this was passed in August, where was all the hoopla by the ALA and others to start work on an amendment or exception immediately? Why are we hearing about the repercussions of this law only weeks before it goes in to effect?
January 13, 2009
In response to: The Children are Worth It anonymous commented: re: Not being a metallurgist, I wasn't aware that books had any lead content, but I really couldn't say. If they do, maybe that's what people mean by "heavy reading."<< </p>
January 13, 2009
In response to: The Children are Worth It Skipper commented: I've got to go with Mary Ann. Ginger is way too high maintenance.
January 13, 2009
In response to: The Children are Worth It publiclibrarEwoman commented: Libraries also have toys (such as puzzles) for children... I would not be surprised if some of the puzzles in our children's department and toys in our early literacy kits have lead in them. And, kids do put them in their mouth, unfortunately. :-( But ultimately, I do think the manufacturer should be responsible.
January 13, 2009
In response to: The Children are Worth It Danny Partridge commented: I've done so many steroids that my equipment doesn't work so well, so I'd probably have to go with Mrs. Howell. But back in the day, I would have said Ginger, no question about it.
January 13, 2009
In response to: The Children are Worth It Concerned Librarian commented: The reason ALA didn't act sooner, is because this act was aimed at manufacturers, who were notified. The implications for libraries were not realized until recently.
January 13, 2009
In response to: The Children are Worth It Scooby Doo commented: <em>The reason ALA didn't act sooner, is because this act was aimed at manufacturers, who were notified. The implications for libraries were not realized until recently.</em>
January 13, 2009
In response to: The Children are Worth It cookiemonstr commented: Dang, does no one care that this applies to school libraries too?! Think of all the well-funded, well-stocked school libraries that will have to...well...if there still any open, they'll have to close! Wait, they already are closing because of education cuts? Nevermind.
January 13, 2009
In response to: The Children are Worth It Schlomo commented: My Annoyed Librarian action doll is 100% organic and made in Canada by a religious order.
January 13, 2009
In response to: The Children are Worth It Not Necessarily Amused commented: "If this was passed in August, where was all the hoopla by the ALA and others to start work on an amendment or exception immediately? Why are we hearing about the repercussions of this law only weeks before it goes in to effect?" If you've been reading this blog for a while before it came to LJ you'd realize this is typical of ALA. On the other hand, I'd suspect the publishers didn't fork up to the folks on East Huron until late in the game. Besides that, ALA may have felt the membership and public had forgotten about them and felt it necessary to carp about something in order to justify their salaries. Otherwise, we might get the impression it was all mindless coffee breaks and paper shuffling and meetings.
January 14, 2009
In response to: The Children are Worth It John Bonham commented: Does this mean that libraries will have to get rid of their Led Zeppelin CDs now?
January 14, 2009
In response to: The Children are Worth It Elisa commented: Or ditch all heavy metal music CDs?
January 14, 2009
In response to: The Children are Worth It Phil Collins commented: What about Steely Dan?
January 14, 2009
In response to: The Children are Worth It publiclibrarEwoman commented: Booooooooo. *Throws rotten tomatoes at Elisa and Phil.*
January 14, 2009
In response to: The Children are Worth It Ozzie Osbourne commented: Don't even think about removing those Iron Maiden records.
January 15, 2009
In response to: The Children are Worth It thinker commented: Talk about heavy metal music on this blog is the best thing that happened since that guy gave credit to the Royal New Zealand Navy.
January 23, 2009
In response to: The Children are Worth It M commented: I think you didn't notice that the act requirs 3rd party testing after Aug. A library cannot use a home testing kit. These labs are charging $100s per componant in an item, which can add up to several hundred per book in the library. Books which are not covered in plastic or have added charms have not been scientifically shown to be a risk for lead. Have you heard of libraries and schools suddenly being well funded?
January 23, 2009
In response to: The Children are Worth It M commented: Actually the CPSC nor congress notified small boutiques, thrift shops, craft shows, small manufacturers, booksellers, libraries or publishers of this at all. That is why people are still hearing about it now. Maybe if we knew in June we would have had time to work out a small business plan with them. Many are still unaware of it and those of us who are heard recently through word of mouth.
February 10, 2009
In response to: The Children are Worth It indajns commented: "If this was passed in August, where was all the hoopla by the ALA and others to start work on an amendment or exception immediately? Why are we hearing about the repercussions of this law only weeks before it goes in to effect?"
Advertisement
|
Advertisements
|
|
|
|
