Jacobsen Books Open Letter to HSLDA

Posted by Valerie on January 19, 2009

Dear Mr. J. Michael Smith,

I’ve read the HSLDA response to CPSIA, and I wonder if HSLDA contacted and interviewed any homeschooling supply manufacturers or retail companies servicing homeschooling families before crafting that response. My husband and I are homeschooling parents of eleven children, and our family has sold used books, toys, games, and science supplies to the homeschooling community since 1995.

We do not believe that the impact on homeschooling families will be minimal. First, we believe CPSIA will hurt homeschooling manufacturers. Most homeschooling supply manufacturers are small batch industries. Small batch manufacturing already puts homeschooling supply manufacturers and publishers at a pricing disadvantage, due to low batch size. CPSIA will visibly affect market prices and market viability for many homeschooling books and supplies. CPSIA is also very likely to make it more difficult for small, new companies to bring new homeschooling products to the market. (Other homeschoolers know that our needs are different from the needs and interests of an institutional classroom. We like their products best, as a rule.)

Second, I do not know of any homeschooling retailer who considers this a minor issue. All of us retailers now have a burden to “be confident” that all of our products come in at under 600 ppm lead, not as whole products, but in each individual component. How can we know? Those of us who sell new and used homeschooling books and supplies have no way (short of mass-testing) of knowing whether our inventory complies or not. We retailers have no idea if our microscopes, wood puzzles, and learning toys and games comply with new guidelines that really have no basis in research. I can’t test, and based on what I’ve read of early testing by others, it looks like between 1 in 3 and 1 in 5 existing educational products may not comply with the new standards.

Third, it’s also the understanding of many of us retailers that CPSIA has created a large burden of potential liability. Many of us are afraid that we might sell an educational supply that could be used improperly by its new owner. We fear that if injury results from a lack of parental supervision, we retailers will now be liable.

Please visit the Rick Woldenberg’s blog at Learning Resources for more information from an honest retailer’s perspective.

Fourth, as a homeschooling mother of eleven children, I expect to see a significant impact on my family as the prices of all children’s products rise–while product diversity decreases. We homeschooling mothers tend to buy for our children beyond the Mattel/Hasbro/Little Tikes mainstream. We tend to buy educational supplies and toys that would never thrive on the shelves of Wal-Mart; we rely on small manufacturers for much of what we use to educate our children. We would like to see our suppliers remain free to sell what we want to buy. We homeschooling moms also tend to rely heavily on thrift stores, and many of us see the “don’t test”/”must comply” “clarification” as burdening them excessively.

Finally, I think that if we homeschooling parents concede that the government has every right to dictate what we can and cannot buy and sell, then CPSIA will not necessarily be the full extent to which they will take that “right.”

I sincerely doubt that the impact will be minimal. I have read that already three German companies of Waldorf and Montessori-style toys, including Selecta, have withdrawn from the U. S. market over CPSIA. Their toys are perceived by us consumers as unusually safe and are certified by strict European standards, but these companies cannot bear the burden of increased testing necessary to sell here in the USA. We’ll miss them.

I also see homeschooling suppliers severely decreasing their product lines and changing their business models as a result of CPSIA. As one example, please see Hope Chest Legacy. This wonderful company, run by a homeschooling family, is selling all of their bound books at clearance and going to “safer” e-book publishing only because they can’t afford testing costs and perceived liabilities under this new legislation. Minimal impact? I have also heard from a large number of used booksellers who are now refusing to carry any children’s books at all–and for this very reason. They feel uncertain and unsafe, where they were once confidently legal.

My husband and I own a small bookstore where we also sell homeschooling supplies–math manipulatives, science equipment, educational games, and more. After looking at pictures of items of items that have failed testing so far, I now have no confidence and no idea what complies in my non-book inventory. Of my book inventory, I’m far from 100% certain regarding about 10% of my book inventory. Should I be forced, by my government, to look around at a roomful of wonderful educational products and wonder what is contraband? Wonder what might possibly harm a child if misused?

We have no evidence of harm from any products beyond jewelry and lead paint from China. Why, then, regulate products with no evidence of danger or risk? Why test everything? Why threaten every children’s manufacturer and retailer with increased regulation, increased costs, and increased liability? We don’t agree that the impact will be minimal. Please do take another look at this issue and talk to some homeschooling manufacturers, publishers, and retailers. Tell them exactly what the law requires of them for their businesses–and then ask them how they expect compliance to change their product selection and pricing. I think you’ll hear answers that will indicate an impact on our community that will be more than “minimal.”

Please consider the possibility that maybe homeschooling parents would prefer to speak now than to have regrets later.