On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 8:07 PM, Darrin Howells
<dvhowells@verizon.net> wrote:
No
Peter, it isn't the parent's fault and the owner didn't switch the
netting. Corporate American can in fact be at fault
sometimes...
sorry Darrin, but the soccer goal was not designed as a jungle gym. there is no way that the manufacturer could have anticipated that it would be used for climbing. companies do not purposely set out to design manufacturer and sell a dangerous product. why would they want to kill off or damage their customers?
FYI,
the mother wasn't absentee, she saw it happen.
if she was there watching her child then why did she let him climb the netting. that is negligence.
The kid tried to climb the
back of the net like a ladder, probably like he saw on some commercial for the
Marines or on an episode of American Gladiator. He fell into the net and
the net closed around his throat. The mom tried to untangle the kid but
could not. She sent her other child into the house for scissors and the
kid died in her arms before he could be cut free.
If I
understood the story correctly, the netting openings are supposed to be no more
than 4 inches wide but instead were 5 inches.
nope the NPR report says
"According to
a report on National Public Radio,
the boy was killed after he climbed on the goal and fell through the
mesh. The cords contracted around his neck and his mother was unable to
save him. "The opening that these nylon mesh nets have is simply too
big," said Wolfson. "There needs to be a 4-inch space, but there's a
5-inch space."" Wolfson is Scott Wolfson of the CPSC.
"The Consumer Product Safety Commission has received two reports of head
entanglement in the netting, including the boy who died. The openings
in the netting are too large and thus pose a hazard"
once again 190,000 units have been sold in the past 6 years. According to the CPSC the larger problem is the goals tipping over. this blog has a photo of the packaging
http://blogs.consumerreports.org/safety/2008/09/soccer-goals.htmlto blame Corporate America is ridiculous. To say that a company purposely designs a dangerous item is wrong. The goals were designed for a certain age range not with a 20 month old toddler climbing the netting.
if the CPSC thought the items were dangerous then they should have issued design regulations when the items first went on the market. The CPSC is offered their advice after the fact.
So
yes, for this one child, we need to recall 190,000 units.
and what they are doing is "The CPSC is asking consumers to stop using the recalled soccer goals immediately, remove the nets and return them to
Regent Sports, the distributor, for a free replacement net."
I see no problem with replacing the nets, but to blame the manufacturer totally is worng.
the bigger problem is the fact that adults are not making sure that portable goals are properly secured.
"The bigger hazard with soccer goals is tip over, not strangulation.
The CPSC has long warned parents about the hazards of movable soccer
goals that can topple over and kill or injure children who climb on
them or hang from the crossbar."