Impossible Standards

West Sussex Trading Standards and Sussex Police branded the cot, which had been endorsed by the National Childbirth Trust, “unsafe and dangerous” when the side was half down, the inquest heard.

Bednest has since modified the design to stop the sides from being kept in that position. Instructions have now been put on its website and warning labels placed on the cot.

A tragedy indeed, but the company’s taken swift action, and is to be congratu…

Oh. Hang on.

Ms Schofield added: “I do not want to create panic amongst consumers but it’s clear to me infants under six months should not be left in any crib where the side has been partially lowered and death in these circumstances could occur in a matter of seconds. It would be irrelevant whether a baby was being supervised or not.”

Ms Schofield said the existing industry standards concerning bedside cots were not “fit for purpose” and she would be writing to the secretary of state for business, energy and industrial strategy to notify them of her concerns as well as notifying the European Committee for Standardisation.

So, the company presumably adhered to the existing standards at the time.

The Roseman family was given the cot second hand by a family member without instructions. They fear the cot is still on the market second hand and Bednest had been unable to contact the owners of 3,300 of them in order to issue a modification to the crib.

So getting some publicity out would be a good idea. All’s well that ends well, and all that.

Grace’s father Gideon Roseman said: “I do not think anyone should be buying any products from a company as despicable as Bednest.”

Wait, what? They complied with regulations at the time, they have put labels on (before the standards are ratified), they’ve put it all over their website. What more can they possibly do?

What makes them ‘despicable’ for failing to see a hitherto-unrealised danger? After all, you too failed to foresee it.

But no, they are ‘a company’, and we’ve all been told that they are the root of all evil. And clearly, some have taken that on board.

6 comments for “Impossible Standards

  1. Errol
    December 23, 2016 at 10:28 am

    Ironic that she blames the company, yet not the EU, the group who forbid our own trading standards from inspecting goods for sale and who ratified this cot for sale.

    The fault, again, is the EUs. But of course, they don’t know about this because they’re deliberately kept in the dark about the truth.

  2. John Parker
    December 23, 2016 at 10:39 am

    It sounds to me as if the company failed to offer the family “adequate” financial compensation

    • December 31, 2016 at 8:30 am

      Yes, I believe so too. The stuff about the company ‘blaming the other child’ is just chaff.

  3. December 23, 2016 at 2:39 pm

    Seems to me as though the coroner has been watchingh one too many episodes of that daft BBC ‘Coroner’; the ones where she singlehandedly discovers the bad guy / good guy / bad female guy / whatever, or who did what; to whom, and when.

    As depicted in the photo, The happy mother is watching the infant, who lies in the cot with the side down; but the question which must be asked of the ‘anguished parents’ is the simple question: ‘why was the cot side simply not lifted up, if the parent was leaving the bed / cot area in the first place. Any sensible parent is aware that small babies have a habit of rolling over, squirming etc.; so why was the ‘deadly’ cot side not slid up and fastened?

    • ivan
      December 23, 2016 at 8:39 pm

      Mike, that requires a critical brain function – thought – and most of the modern generation have given that function to some faceless authority or the government to do it for them.

  4. Ted Treen
    December 23, 2016 at 4:32 pm

    Heaping opprobrium on another party is a usual reaction when the alternative is to accept blame and responsibility oneself. This is unfortunately a widespread aspect of human nature.

Comments are closed.