justhatched says:
I'm a parent and I do not want to buy clothing/pajamas for my children that have been treated with chemicals to make them "flame resistant". If it's illegal, why do many children's pajamas have tags that say "this item is intended to be snug-fitting, it is not flame reistant"?
........
You're absolutely right! Thank you for reminding me- I shouldn't have just said they were illegal and not been more specific about it because there are exceptions. My apologies to DoReMiHandmade for assuming that her fabric would fall into that category!!! Like Dobby the House Elf I am smacking myself for giving out bad information.
I found a link to the CPSC page that's an overview on the Children's Sleepwear Regulations:
http://www.cpsc.gov/businfo/regsumsleepwear.pdfIt starts like this:
To protect children from burns, these rules require that children’s sleepwear must be flame resistant and selfextinguish if a flame from a candle, match, lighter or a similar item causes it to catch fire. The rules cover all children’s sleepwear above size 9 months and up to size 14 and require that
(1) the fabric and garments must pass certain flammability tests; or
(2) be "tight fitting" as defined by specified dimensions.
Then it talks about where to find the requirements and how the tests should be performed & how you have to test the fabric and then test the prototypes before selling them. Explains how to make tight-fitting sleepwear (the actual Regulation is REALLY picky, w/all the exact dimensions. Which is interesting, 'cause kids GROW, it's not always going to fit them the same way, and the people dressing them aren't going to measure the space between their armpit and the sleeve. My mom usually bought things a size too big so I could wear them longer. Mom, how could you!)
It mentions the FTC labeling laws too. It's a summary, but a good place to start.
If you Google 16 CFR (that means Code of Federal Regulations) Part 1610 and 1615
mostly deal with clothing textiles. There are 3 different classes of flammability, 2 can be used for clothing and one can't.
16 CFR 1610 lists fabrics that are exempt from testing because they already know they will pass: acrylic, modacrylic, nylon, olefin, polyester, wool. (I had to look it up again- too much to remember!) So not a lot of natural to choose from unfortunately. Maybe there are non-chemical flame retardants? I don't know, that would be interesting to check into. It does seem a real shame to use all-natural and/or organic materials and still have to treat them with chemicals after they're woven.
I remember the first time we read through the testing procedure at work. Do what to the what now? They make everything sound so complex. Basically, you set something on fire and keep track of how long it takes for it to burn a certain amount. Am I weird to think it would be kind of fun to work in a testing facility, and get to try to destroy things all day? I wonder if people who do that have lower stress, it sounds therapeutic. :-) (probably not for real, too much math involved.)