Posted On: August 31, 2009

Millions of Window Shades and Blinds Recalled Following Child Strangulation Deaths and Injuries

A number of strangulation injuries and deaths involving young children has compelled the Consumer Product Safety Commission and six companies to recall about 5.5 million roll-up window blinds and shades. The companies involved in the recall are Vertical Land Inc., Lutron Shading Solutions, Lewis Hyman Inc., IKEA, Victoria Classics, and Pottery Barn Kids/Williams-Sonoma, Inc.

The largest recall comes from Lewis Hyman. The company is recalling 4.2 million oval roll-up blinds and 600,000 Woolrich Roman shades following two child strangulation deaths. Last year, a 13-month-old boy died after his head got caught between the cloth on the back of one of the shades and the exposed inner cord. The year before, a 1-year-old boy died when he was strangled by one of the blinds’ lifting loops, which had dropped into his crib.

09325c.jpg

After one mother found a 2-year-old hanging from a Melina Roman blinds’ looped bead chain, IKEA is recalling 120,000 of the blinds that were sold between 2006 and 2008. Fortunately, the mother was able to free the child before he was strangled to death.

Potter Barn Kids/Williams-Sonoma is recalling 85,000 Roman shades following 6 reports of kids getting wrapped in the shades' exposed inner cords. The strangulation-related accidents occurred between 2006 and 2008. The cords had wrapped around the children’s necks. Fortunately, there were no permanent injuries.

Vertical Land is recalling approximately 15,400 Horizontal Blinds, 800 Cellular Shades, and 16,400 Vertical Blinds. The Horizontal Blinds are missing the inner cord stop device that keep children from being able to pull the cords down. In 2006, a 4-year-old girl was strangled. The vertical blind cord’s loop was not attached to the floor or wall.

Victoria Classics is recalling 163,000 matchstick bamboo shades and thermal sailcloth Roman shades because kids might get hurt or strangled because of the way the shades are designed. Lutron Shading Solutions is recalling 245,000 roller shades because the looped beaded chain poses a strangulation risk. There are, so far, no reports of injuries.

One would think that window blinds and shades are harmless products designed to prevent strangers from looking into a room or to keep a room cool when the heat outside gets too hot. Unfortunately, certain window shades and blinds can pose a child safety hazard if they are not designed with specific safety measures in mind to prevent such deadly accidents from happening.

According to the CPSC, about 300 kids have been involved strangulation accidents involving window cords since 1981—that’s about 1 fatality a month. The Oregon Health Sciences University says that only 1 in 2 deaths are reported. In 50% of the reported cases, children (8 months – age 4) were discovered hanging in the cords’ loops. Other strangulation incidents involved the pull cords wrapping around the kids’ necks.

Poorly designed products that come with hidden hazards can be fatal to consumers—especially young children. While recalling the products is a good step toward fixing the problem, it won’t remedy the loss for the families whose children have died because of a defective window shade or another faulty consumer product.

Please contact our products liability law firm today about your injuries to children case.

Children continue dying as window coverings causing strangulation stay up, KATU, August 28, 2009

Six companies recall window blinds and shades after deaths and near-strangulations, Los Angeles Times, August 26, 2009


Related Web Resources:
Recalls, CPSC

Parents for Window Blind Safety

Posted On: August 25, 2009

Child Car Safety Seats Can Deprive Babies of Oxygen

While child car safety seats are a must for newborns riding in cars, the seats can also cause a baby to experience breathing problems. Infants have to be placed in an upright position when in a child safety seat. However, according to a new study published in Pediatrics, this can cause the baby’s chest wall to become compressed, decreasing airway size and lowering oxygen levels in the blood.

T. Bernard Kinane, Massachusetts General Hospital’s chief of pulmonary pediatrics, says that 20% of newborns that are placed in car beds and car seats may experience mild respiratory compromise. This can increase the chances that an infant will experience breathing problems.

The study examined 200 healthy newborns. Each baby was placed in a car bed for 60 minutes, a hospital crib for 30 minutes, and a car seat for 60 minutes. The infants' oxygen levels were lower when they were in the car beds and car seats than when they were in the hospital cribs. In a car seat, the babies’ average oxygen saturation level was 95.7%, 96.3% in a car bed, and 97.9% in a hospital crib.

This is important to note, as many parents will take the car seat out the vehicle and let their babies sleep in them. Researchers are now telling parents to only use car beds and car seats for travel and definitely not as a replacement for a child’s bed.

While some physicians have said that the side effects are relatively mild and long-term consequences are unlikely, Kinane is recommending that child safety seat makers redesign infant car seats so that chest compression doesn’t happen. He says that one way to do this is to install a new seat back and new buckles so that the baby’s head can fall back.

Selena Silva, of the Child Passenger Safety Program at Children’s Hospital, says that an infant car seat’s reclining angle should be at around 45 degrees to keep the baby’s airway open and prevent slumping. This angle has been crash-tested.

Child Safety Seats
The makers of child safety seats must make sure that their products are safe for use. This means that the seats will ensure the greatest amount of protection for babies and other young children during a car crash. A child car safety seat should also not be designed in a way that could cause a baby's health to suffer. Manufacturers also need to warn of any possible injuries or health issues that may result from use.

If you think your child was injured or became sick because of the way a child car safety seat was designed, a car seat defect, or because the child car safety seat malfunctioned, you may have grounds for filing a products liability lawsuit.

Infant car seats can trim babies' oxygen levels, CNN, August 24, 2009

nfant car seat no substitute for crib: study, CBC, August 24, 2009


Related Web Resources:
Pediatrics

Car Safety Seats: A Guide for Families 2009, American Academy of Pediatrics

Posted On: August 19, 2009

CPSC Recalls Child Trailers, Little Tikes Products, Doorway Jumpers, and Baby Hammocks to Prevent Child Injuries

In an effort to prevent child injuries, the Consumer Product Safety Commission recently recalled a number of products. Just today, the CPSC, along with Burley Design, LLC, recalled approximately 2,700 2009 d’lite ST and Solo ST Child Trailers.

Fortunately, no injuries have been reported, but the trailer’s internal sleeve on the axle assembly could loosen. If this happens, one of the wheels might separate from the trailer. This could cause the trailer or the bicycle pulling the trailer to tip over. The bicyclist or any children riding in the trailer could get hurt, even sustaining a head injury, cuts, bruises, a back injury, a neck injury, or another type of injury if they are involved in a fall accident. The child or adult could also get hurt in a car accident if the trailer’s wheel were to come off in the street and a motor vehicle were to strike the trailer and/or bike.

09310a.jpg

Last Thursday, the CPSC announced the recall of some 1.6 million Little Tikes™ Workshops Sets and Trucks. The CPSC and manufacturer Little Tikes are worried that the oversized, plastic nails that come with both products might pose a choking hazard. Already, one child was sent to the hospital for injuries but fortunately made a full recovery.

Another product that is causing the CPSC and its manufacturer, Graco Children’s Products Inc., choking hazard worries is the Jump ‘n Jive™ Doorway Jumper. Some 2,400 jumpers were recalled on August 6. The jumpers come with detachable toys that are attached to the straps of the jumper with hook and loop fabric strips. Because the toys can come off the jumper, there is concern that a baby seated in the jumper might put the toy in his or her mouth, try to swallow it, and choke.

Already, there has been a report of one child taking the fabric strip and putting it in the mouth. Fortunately, the child did not get hurt.

The risk of fall accidents and strangulation injuries played a key role in the CPSC recall of some 200 La Siesta Yayita Baby Hammocks, distributed by Kaplan Early Learning Company, and about 265 Yayita Baby Hammocks, distributed by Nova Natural Toys & Crafts LLC. If the baby hammock flips over while the infant is in it, the infant might fall or get caught in the restraint straps while upside down, risking strangulation. There are no reports of injuries.

If your son or daughter was injured because of a defective toy, defective furniture, defective clothing, a defective nursery product, or another type of faulty product, an experienced products liability law firm can help you file your injuries to children and minor lawsuit. Children are vulnerable and prone to serious injuries to begin with that they don’t need to increase that risk with a defective product.

Our products liability law firm believes it is important to hold the makers of toys and other kids products liable for your child’s injuries or death.

Recall: Burley Design bicycle child trailers, The Oregonian, August 19, 2009

Little Tikes recalls 1.6 million toys, CNNMoney, August 13, 2009

Jump ‘n Jive Doorway Jumpers Recalled by Graco Due to Choking Hazard, CPSC, August 6, 2009

Kaplan baby hammocks recalled, UPI, August 4, 2009


Related Web Resources:
Consumer Product Safety Commission

Child safety, Consumer Reports

Posted On: August 15, 2009

Defective Tire Lawsuit Can Proceed in Arizona Even if Rollover Accident Occurred in Mexico, Says Court

The Arizona Court of Appeals says that a local woman who was hurt and lost her mother and daughter in a Mexico car accident can sue Continental Tire North America in the state of Arizona. Attorneys for the tire company wanted the auto products liability lawsuit to be argued in Mexico where the rollover accident happened.

Court documents state that the car accident victim, Maria Pozo Parra, was driving her motor vehicle in Yuma County when the tread in one of her tires separated. Pozo Parra then lost control of the vehicle, which rolled over. She and three other passengers were ejected from the auto. They all sustained injuries. Pozo Parra's mother and one of her daughters were killed in the rollover accident. She is suing the tire maker and the dealer that she bought the tire from for products liability.

As part of their argument that the case be tried abroad, the defendants claimed that the Arizona tire defects lawsuit had a “tenuous” connection to the state. The tire dealer is based in Arizona.

A judge in Maricopa County Superior Court agreed with the defendants and tossed out the Arizona defective tire lawsuit. Appellate Judge Diane Johnsen, however, said that the defendants' arguments could not overcome Arizona law, which lets plaintiffs decide where they want to file their civil claims.

Tire Tread Separation
Tire tread separation can lead to tire blowouts, which can cause a motorist to lose control of the vehicle. This can result in deadly rollover accidents and other kinds of auto collisions. A tire blow out can be especially dangerous when the vehicle is traveling at high speeds or if the auto, such as many sport utility vehicles, has a high gravity center.

Defective design or manufacturing defects are two common causes of tire tread separation. Examples of common tire design defects:

• Insufficient nylon overlays
• Deficient skim stock

Some causes of tire manufacturing defects:

• Poor adhesion or bonding of tire components
• Poor quality control


Yuma tire lawsuit OK'd for Arizona, Yuma Sun, August 14, 2009


Related Web Resources:
Parra V. Continental Tire

Tire Defects, Safercar.gov

Posted On: August 11, 2009

Florida Auto Products Liability Lawsuit Accuses Toyota of Negligence in Fatal SUV Rollover Crash

The widower and children of a woman who died in an SUV rollover accident last May are suing Toyota Corporation and Courtesy Toyota of Brandon for wrongful death. Elisa Obediente, 56, died after losing control of her vehicle on Interstate 75 in Florida. According to police, she over-corrected her steering to avoid hitting another vehicle when making a lane change and her 1998 Toyota 4Runner rolled over multiple times.

The Florida auto products liability lawsuit contends that the defendants neglected to properly protect Obediente during the rollover crash. The plaintiffs are claiming that the SUV had inherent defects that could have been easily remedied, including roof rails, windshield headers, and pillars that might have prevented the severe roof crushthat occurred if they were made stronger. Because the roof did collapse inward, Obediente was partially ejected from the vehicle.

The plaintiffs’ Florida auto products liability lawyer maintains that Toyota could have easily installed Electronic Stability Control technology and that ESC could have helped the 56-year-old mother and wife to regain control of the car after over-steering. They also say other improvements could have been made at a low cost that might have prevented Obediente’s death.

Also, the Federal Registry had reportedly completed a study ranking the 4Runner as the second car most likely in its class to be involved in a rollover crash, Yet, according to the plaintiffs, Toyota failed to reveal the rollover risks and even suggested that customers purchase a tire and wheel package that actually could increase the chances of a 4Runner rolling over. They also say that the defendants knew as far back as the late 1960’s that these SUV’s were susceptible to roof crushes but they misled the public into believing that they had strengthened their vehicles to withstand such accidents.

The Florida wrongful death lawsuit also is accusing the defendants of falsifying test results to come up with inaccurate rollover crush force minimums to make it appear as if certain auto parts had been strengthened against higher roof crush forces.

The plaintiffs are seeking wrongful death compensation, as well as compensation for loss of care, financial support, companionship, love, moral support, and comfort.

Products Liability
Auto products liability cases can be brought when a design defect, manufacturing defect, or marketing defect contributed to a car crash that resulted in personal injury or wrongful death.

Woman dies after SUV rolls over on I-75, TBO.com, May 24, 2009

Toyota 4Runner SUV Rollover Lawsuit Filed Over Fatal Crash, About Lawsuits, August 10, 2009

Related Web Resources:
Toyota 4Runner Problems, AutoMotix.net

SUV Rollovers, BrainandSpinalCord.org

Posted On: August 4, 2009

Do Tanning Beds Cause Cancer?

According to international cancer experts, tanning beds can cause cancer. Analysis of some 20 studies have found that people who start using tanning beds before they turn 30 see a 75% increase in their chances of getting skin cancer. The new findings by the World Health Organization can be found in Lancet Oncology, a medical journal.

Whereas before scientists had spoken about tanning beds as “probable carcinogens" and that only one kind of ultraviolet radiation was considered lethal (tanning bed supporters have long maintained that the beds use a different kind of ultraviolet light than the light that comes from the sun), experts are now saying that all kinds of ultraviolet radiation are carcinogenic. This confirms that ultraviolet radiation and tanning beds definitely can cause cancer.

Most tanning beds’ lights emit ultra violet radiation that can lead to eye cancer and skin cancer. Tanning beds increase the risk of a person developing melanoma by 20% and also can cause benign skin cancers. Melanoma is the most serious kind of skin cancer and can prove fatal if not treated as quickly as possible.

Doctors are now confirming that as more people under 30 use tanning beds, more young adults are being diagnosed with cancer.

This new information is disturbing, considering that in the US alone over 28 million Americans a year go to about 25,000 tanning salons and other businesses where they can get their tans while indoors. The motivation has been that using a tanning bed is safer than getting a tan while baking under the sun.

If you are suffering from cancer because you used a tanning bed, you may have grounds for filing a products liability lawsuit against the manufacturer of the tanning bed. Tanning beds can also cause other injuries, including corneal burns, retinal damage, and sunburns, as well as lead to wrinkles and premature aging.

It is the responsibility of the tanning bed manufacturer to make sure that their products do not cause personal injuries.

Beware the risks of tanning beds, Miami Herald, August 5, 2009

Study: Tanning beds definitely cause cancer, AP, July 29, 2009


Related Web Resources:
World Health Organization

The Dangers of Tanning Beds: Five Fast Facts, My Skincare Connection

Melanoma, The Skin Cancer Foundation

Lancet Oncology

Continue reading " Do Tanning Beds Cause Cancer? " »