[House Hearing, 117 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
SLEEPING DANGER: THE ROCK `N PLAY
AND FAILURES IN INFANT
PRODUCT SAFETY
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON
OVERSIGHT AND REFORM
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
JUNE 7, 2021
__________
Serial No. 117-26
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Oversight and Reform
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available on: govinfo.gov,
oversight.house.gov or
docs.house.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
44-872 PDF WASHINGTON : 2021
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND REFORM
CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York, Chairwoman
Eleanor Holmes Norton, District of James Comer, Kentucky, Ranking
Columbia Minority Member
Stephen F. Lynch, Massachusetts Jim Jordan, Ohio
Jim Cooper, Tennessee Paul A. Gosar, Arizona
Gerald E. Connolly, Virginia Virginia Foxx, North Carolina
Raja Krishnamoorthi, Illinois Jody B. Hice, Georgia
Jamie Raskin, Maryland Glenn Grothman, Wisconsin
Ro Khanna, California Michael Cloud, Texas
Kweisi Mfume, Maryland Bob Gibbs, Ohio
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, New York Clay Higgins, Louisiana
Rashida Tlaib, Michigan Ralph Norman, South Carolina
Katie Porter, California Pete Sessions, Texas
Cori Bush, Missouri Fred Keller, Pennsylvania
Danny K. Davis, Illinois Andy Biggs, Arizona
Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Florida Andrew Clyde, Georgia
Peter Welch, Vermont Nancy Mace, South Carolina
Henry C. ``Hank'' Johnson, Jr., Scott Franklin, Florida
Georgia Jake LaTurner, Kansas
John P. Sarbanes, Maryland Pat Fallon, Texas
Jackie Speier, California Yvette Herrell, New Mexico
Robin L. Kelly, Illinois Byron Donalds, Florida
Brenda L. Lawrence, Michigan
Mark DeSaulnier, California
Jimmy Gomez, California
Ayanna Pressley, Massachusetts
Mike Quigley, Illinois
Russ Anello, Staff Director
Cassie Fields, Chief Oversight Counsel
Elisa LaNier, Chief Clerk
Contact Number: 202-225-5051
Mark Marin, Minority Staff Director
------
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on June 7, 2021..................................... 1
Witnesses
Ynon Kreiz, Chief Executive Officer, Mattel Inc.
Oral Statement............................................... 5
Chuck Scothon, Senior Vice President and General Manager, Fisher-
Price, Global Head of Infant and Preschool, Mattel Inc.
Oral Statement............................................... 6
Opening statements and the prepared statements for the witnesses
are available in the U.S. House of Representatives Repository
at: docs.house.gov.
INDEX OF DOCUMENTS
----------
Documents entered during the hearing by Unanimous Consent (UC),
and Questions for the Record (QFR's) are listed below.
* UC - Letter from Consumer Reports; submitted by Rep. Raskin.
* UC - Letter from Consumer Reports; submitted by Chairwoman
Maloney.
* UC - Letters From Erika Richter, mother, on failures in
infant safety product; submitted by Chairwoman Maloney.
* UC - Letter from CFA, KID, Public Citizen Combined; submitted
by Chairwoman Maloney.
* UC - Committee on Oversight and Reform Staff Report;
submitted by Chairwoman Maloney.
* QFRs to: Mr. Kreiz; submitted by Rep. Davis.
* QFRs to: Mr. Scothon; submitted by Rep. Davis.
Documents are available at: docs.house.gov.
SLEEPING DANGER: THE ROCK `N PLAY
AND FAILURES IN INFANT
PRODUCT SAFETY
----------
Monday, June 7, 2021
House of Representatives,
Committee on Oversight and Reform,
Washington, D.C.
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 11:07 a.m., in
room 2154, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Carolyn B.
Maloney v[chairwoman of the committee] presiding.
Present: Representatives Maloney, Norton, Lynch, Connolly,
Krishnamoorthi, Raskin, Khanna, Mfume, Tlaib, Porter, Davis,
Wasserman Schultz, Johnson, Sarbanes, Speier, Kelly,
DeSaulnier, Pressley, Foxx, Grothman, Cloud, Norman, Sessions,
Keller, Biggs, Franklin, Fallon, and Donalds.
Chairwoman Maloney. The meeting will come to order.
Without objection, the chair is authorized to declare a
recess of the committee at any time. I now recognize myself for
an opening statement.
Today's hearing addresses the tragic consequences of
companies selling dangerous consumer products and the Federal
Government's failure to protect Americans from these products.
Specifically we will examine the Rock 'n Play, an infant
sleeping product sold by Mattel under the Fisher-Price brand.
In the 10 years that this product was sold on the market, at
least 50 infants died while using it. That is at least 50 young
lives cut short, the families shattered by the tragic loss of a
child. Yet Mattel and its subsidiary, Fisher-Price, walked away
with more than $200 million.
In 2019, this committee launched an exhaustive
investigation into how the Rock 'n Play was developed,
marketed, and later recalled. Our staff conducted interviews
and reviewed thousands of pages of documents. This morning we
are going to be releasing this report which you can get on the
core website and my congressional website. What we found was
absolutely shocking. It is a national scandal.
When Mattel released the Rock 'n Play in 2009, it was the
only product of its kind on the market. Pediatricians had
advised for years that infants should sleep on a firm, flat
crib mattress to prevent death or injury. But Rock 'n Play was
a padded seat, holding infants at a 30-degree angle. Even
though this new design conflicted with safety guidelines, our
investigation shows that Mattel did not consult with a single
pediatrician or conduct a single scientific study to find out
if it was safe for babies to sleep at an angle. Internal
documents also show that over the decade this product was sold,
Mattel repeatedly ignored urgent warnings from international
regulators, pediatricians, and even its own customers that the
Rock 'n Play was unsafe.
For example, in 2010, a regulator in Australia warned
Mattel that using this product as a sleeper, quote, ``is at
odds with widely accepted and promoted best practices,'' end
quote.
In 2011, the company was banned from marketing the Rock 'n
Play as a sleeper in Canada because of safety concerns.
And in 2013, the American pediatricians, one American
pediatrician, wrote and said, and I quote, ``I am concerned
that parents are using this product as a routine sleeping area
for their babies. This is unsafe,'' end quote.
Mattel also received a steady drumbeat of reports that
infants as young as two months old had stopped breathing or
even died in the Rock 'n Play. Mattel employees admitted to the
committee that the company knew about these deaths and
injuries, but Mattel claimed that its product was not the
problem.
In 2018, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, or CPSC,
finally became concerned about the number of infant deaths in
Rock 'n Play and demanded information about the product from
the company. But rather than take action to warn consumers,
Mattel pushed back against CPSC's concerns in private for
nearly a year to try to avoid a recall. Mattel kept denying
that there was any problem with Rock 'n Play, even as more and
more infants died.
The CPSC was legally prohibited from warning the public
about the dangers with the Rock 'n Play during these
negotiations. That is because the Consumer Product Safety Act
makes it extremely difficult for the agency to disclose
information about dangerous products without the consent of the
manufacturer. In fact, Mattel only agreed to recall it after it
became clear that the Consumer Reports was about to publish a
very damning evidence that dozens of infants died using the
Rock 'n Play. The committee's investigation makes clear that
Mattel and its subsidiary, Fisher-Price, put profits over
people with tragic results.
On Friday we learned that Mattel is recalling two more
inclined infant products that the company marketed for sleep,
the Rock 'n Glide Soother and Soothe 'n Play Glider, after four
infants rolled over in the rock in glide and suffocated. In
other words, they died because of the exact same dangerous
product design as the infants who died in Rock 'n Play. It is
shocking that Mattel did not remove those products from the
market sooner, given the devastating consequences of keeping
the Rock 'n Play on the market.
Stronger regulation can prevent these tragedies. Current
law cedes far too much power to the corporations selling
consumer products, while tying the hands of the government
agency charged with keeping people safe. The law allows many
companies to be subject to only voluntary standards that they
helped create, rather than mandatory safety rules. And it does
not give the CPSC the tools it needs to prevent dangerous
products from being released to the public or to remove
products from the market when they are proven to be dangerous.
We must strengthen our Nation's consumer protection laws
and empower the CPSC to do its job so that companies making
money off a product don't have the final word on whether it is
safe. I encourage my colleagues to carefully review the
findings from the committee's investigation and to work
together on a bipartisan basis to better protect Americans from
dangerous products.
I want to close by playing video statements from two
parents who want to share their experience about their
terrible, immeasurable loss. The video.
Mr. Johnson. If the video is running, we're not able to see
it.
Chairwoman Maloney. We're not seeing it here either. There
seems to be a technical problem. Are they correcting it? They
are fixing the technical problem right now. I apologize for the
delay.
We can come back to it after Mr. Cloud speaks. I now
recognize Mr. Cloud for an opening statement.
Mr. Cloud.
Mr. Cloud. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Hello. Can you hear me?
Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. Appreciate you having this
hearing today.
Appearing before us today are two of the top executives
from Fisher-Price and its parent company, Mattel, who will
speak to a product that has been the focus of an ongoing
investigation by this committee since 2019. The Rock 'n Play
Sleeper is a product that seems to have prioritized profits
over safety of the most vulnerable newborn infants and their
families. I hope that they will continue to convince us that
this is, in fact, not the case.
Overwhelmingly it appears that the use of inclined sleepers
is not safe for unintended infant sleep. And the questions this
committee faces are whether Fisher-Price knew the risks to
infants when first marketing the product, whether it made
attempts to change its strategy upon learning its product
contributed to the deaths of over two dozen infants, and
whether legislative changes need to be made to bolster consumer
protection laws to such tragedies to ensure that they're not
repeated.
Last week the Consumer Product Safety Commission deemed
inclined sleepers to be unsafe for use for infants. From our
own investigation it appears Fisher-Price either failed to
conduct or simply ignored research that would indicate from the
outset that marketing a product such as a Rock 'n Play Sleeper
as an appropriate place for infants to sleep was ill-conceived
and dangerous. Fisher-Price consulted with a single physician
who has since been prohibited from practices medicine. No
pediatricians were consulted about the creation of this
product, and it's difficult to come up with a legitimate reason
for why that was. What is the reason Fisher-Price could have
for not bringing in a wide-ranging medical expertise and
experience?
Additionally, alarm bells were not set off inside Fisher-
Price when its development team first learned children had died
using their product and there was no mechanism in place to
investigate. Dozens of children have died in connection with
the Rock 'n Play Sleeper. And if Fisher-Price was negligent or
reckless in its marketing, it should have to pay heavily for
the loss of life it caused.
I do think it's important to bring up at this moment as
well, however, that no amount of compensation can account for
the loss of a child. But the use of this committee, as opposed
to the courts, which are better suited as delivering a specific
remedy to the victims and assigning specific punishment to bad-
acting companies, should be considered as well. If we're
looking at product safety as a policy, we should expand the
scope of this hearing and include other products so we can make
a broad-based legislative policy.
There are hundreds of other things affecting the lives of
thousands of Americans that they are waiting for this committee
to address as well. For comparison, last Congress this
committee held hearings on unaccompanied minors at our southern
border, the stockpiling and distributing of PPE, the Trump
administration's response to COVID, the Trump administration's
Afghan strategy, the Syria policy. We discussed contracting for
the response to rapidly building respirators and had a hearing
criticizing the Warp Speed effort that brought us the vaccine.
It would be one thing if these issues had already been
resolved but the border crisis is worse than ever and we have
more children in custody than ever before. Progress on peace in
the Middle East has been reversed. Revelations coming out about
the origins of the COVID-19 are worth looking at by this
committee.
But this committee has held no hearing on the awarding of a
half-billion-dollar contract to Family Endeavors, a company run
by a former Biden transition official. This committee has held
no hearings on our southwestern border which saw over 1,000
apprehensions in February, 173 in March, 178 in April, with
seemingly no end in sight.
This committee has not responded or requested Dr. Anthony
Fauci or anyone at NIH to come and testify on the origins of
COVID-19, in spite of new revelations. We've not held a hearing
on the ongoing Antifa violence in Portland. We have not held a
hearing on why there's such a rush to cover up those who
discussed and talked about different contrasting ideas and
theories regarded to the COVID-19, both within government and
within the media.
This committee has not held a hearing on China, big tech,
world broadband, or any other important bipartisan topics that
daily affect the lives of thousands in our Nation. These issues
address real threats to the security of our Nation and
address--affect the lives of many thousands in our Nation.
But this is an important hearing, however. And I'm thankful
that we are taking it up. I look forward to asking questions
today, and I really do hope that our witnesses are able to
provide some explanation for what appears to be a horrible
tragedy that their companies had the power to prevent.
Thank you, and I yield back.
Chairwoman Maloney. The gentleman yields back.
I want to see if we've corrected our technical challenges.
Can we see the statement from the two parents now? If not, we
will go to Mr. Krishnamoorthi for an opening statement.
[Video shown.]
Chairwoman Maloney. Thank you for your very, very strong
statements. And we will strengthen protections for American
families.
Mr. Krishnamoorthi, you are now recognized for one minute.
Mr. Krishnamoorthi. Thank you, Chairwoman Maloney. Thank
you for holding this hearing.
This is an investigation that we started with Chairman
Cummings, and I know that he'd be proud of the work we're doing
today. We've investigated a number of companies that make
products for babies, companies that are household names like
Johnson & Johnson, Gerber, and now Fisher-Price. Each time
we've expected these companies to take greater precautions,
given their intended users. Each time we've expected companies
to change or remove products when their dangers became
apparent, and each time we've been gravelly disappointed.
Fisher-Price put the Rock 'n Play Sleeper on the market,
ignoring safety concerns prior to its launch. And when private
reports came in that the product was linked to babies' deaths,
Fisher-Price ignored those reports, too. Only when media
outlets like Consumer Reports publicized the danger of their
products did Fisher-Price take them off the market.
Companies like Fisher-Price and Mattel have demonstrated
that they cannot, they cannot be left to police themselves.
Unfortunately, regulators must continue to step up and
carefully regulate products for babies and children. Today's
hearing will illuminate why.
Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and I yield back.
Chairwoman Maloney. The gentleman yields back.
The witnesses will be unmuted so that we can swear them in.
I would like to first introduce. Our first witness today is
Ynon Kreiz who is the CEO of Mattel. Our second witness is
Chuck Scothon who is the senior vice president and general
manager of Fisher-Price.
Please raise your right hands.
Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to
give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth,
so help you God?
Let the record show that the witnesses answered in the
affirmative. Thank you. Without objection, your written
statements will be made part of the record.
With that, Mr. Kreiz, are you now recognized for your
testimony.
STATEMENT OF YNON KREIZ, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, MATTEL INC.
Mr. Kreiz. Chairwoman Maloney, Ranking Member Comer, and
members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to
appear before you today to discuss Mattel's approach to
consumer product safety.
Mattel is a leading global toy company with a mission to
create innovative products and experiences that inspire,
entertain, and develop children through play. Since our
founding in 1945, Mattel has been proud to be a trusted partner
in empowering children to explore the wonder of childhood and
reach their full potential.
Fisher-Price was founded over 90 years ago and was acquired
by Mattel in 1993. Fisher-Price's purpose is to be the most
trusted brand for parents and caregivers for babies, toddlers,
and preschoolers. We take our heritage as a trusted partner to
parents and families very seriously, and we earn that trust by
being true to our mission and purpose and operating with
integrity. This requires that we act as responsible corporate
citizens, pursue social, economic, and environmental
sustainable, and promote equity, diversity, and inclusion.
I joined in company in April 2018 as chairman and CEO. And
since my first day, I've always been impressed with the
attention to detail and the emphasis on quality and safety. I
am fully committed personally to ensuring that we continue to
make quality products that are safe for babies and children,
and I will continue to hold that as our highest priority above
everything else.
On behalf of myself and everyone at Mattel, I want to
convey my deep and sincere condolences to parents and anyone
affected by the heartbreaking tragedies we will discuss today.
I'm a father of four children, and I can only imagine that
there cannot be a more terrible loss than that of a child.
Product quality and safety are at the heart of everything
we do. Today Mattel maintains a department of approximately 450
professionals focused on product safety and quality. Our
internal experts oversee safety assessments and product
development and manufacturing, adherence to Federal
requirements and other standards, communication with the CPSC,
and monitoring of safety incidents reported to us about our
products.
Equally important, we never stop improving our safety
policies and practices and establishing new ones. Over the last
year and a half, we made significant progress to strengthen our
capabilities and have added respected leaders in quality safety
and compliance, created the Medical and Scientific Safety
Council, and launched the Safe Start education campaign for
parents and caregivers.
My colleague, Chuck Scothon, is here with me today. Chuck
is a 30-year industry veteran, two decades of that with Fisher-
Price. He's one of the most experienced leaders in the toy
industry, working on products for babies, toddlers, and
preschoolers. Chuck will provide you with more of the detail
surrounding the development of the Rock 'n Play and our
decision to recall it, as well as our decision to recall the
two gliders last week.
Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you about
Mattel's and Fisher-Price's extensive efforts to promote
consumer product safety. I am happy to answer your questions.
Chairwoman Maloney. The gentleman yields back.
Thank you.
Mr. Scothon, you are from recognized for your testimony.
STATEMENT OF CHUCK SCOTHON, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT AND GENERAL
MANAGER OF FISHER PRICE, GLOBAL HEAD OF INFANT AND PRESCHOOL,
MATTEL INC.
Mr. Scothon. Chairwoman Maloney, Ranking Member Comer, and
members of the committee, I want to thank you for the
opportunity to be here today to discuss Mattel and Fisher-
Price's consumer product safety efforts.
At the outset I echo Mr. Kreiz's comments and convey my
deepest condolences to families who have faced the terrible
loss of a child. I also share Mr. Kreiz's view about the
foundational importance of trust in Fisher-Price and the safety
of our products. I have placed my trust in Fisher-Price
personally. Fisher-Price played a key role in my daughter's
childhood. And until the Rock 'n Play recall, this item was the
gift that I gave to friends and expecting parents. The Rock 'n
Play was also used extensively by Fisher-Price employees and
their families.
I assure you that everyone at Fisher-Price believes that
every product we offer is safe and we do not and would never
sell any product about which we thought otherwise. As a trusted
partner to parents, we recognize that one of the most important
parts of a baby's development is sleep. Newborns can sleep as
much as 18 hours a day, while infants will normally sleep 12 to
15 hours each day in that first year. Recognizing that a baby
can fall asleep almost anywhere, it is why there are products
designed specifically for overnight, unsupervised sleep. The
difference between products intended for sleep and those that
are not is an important distinction and relates to the products
that we're discussing today.
The Rock 'n Play was designed, marketed, and sold as a
product intended for sleep. When introduced, it met the CPSC
and consensus standards applicable to bassinets. Beyond meeting
those standards, Fisher-Price conducted extensive research and
analysis to assess the Rock 'n Play safety prior to the
introduction including consulting with a medical doctor with
expertise in biomechanics, evaluating many different aspects in
our extensive testing in our laboratories, and conducting in-
home tests with families in the communities around our
headquarters in Buffalo, New York.
After the product launch, Fisher-Price regularly examined
and analyzed any safety incident that was reported and
regularly shared the reports of fatalities and serious incident
with the CPSC for its own analysis. We asked two top doctors to
evaluate the safety of the product specifically related to
observing the breathing of an infant sleeping in an incline in
the product. These doctors confirmed the Rock 'n Play Sleeper
was safe when used in accordance with the warnings and
instructions.
In 2018, we had extensive discussions with the CPSC about
the Rock 'n Play and asked one of the top engineering firms to
assess independently whether infants were at risk of rolling
over when using the product. We are confident that all of our
products are safe when used as intended in accordance with the
warnings and instructions. At the same time we take into
account reports of injuries that are associated with other
patterns of use.
In light of the risks of accidents in the use of inclined
sleepers, the safety restraints were not used, we decided two
years ago to recall the Rock 'n Play voluntarily as the best
way to reduce this risk.
Recently we considered a similar situation with the 4-in-1
Rock 'n Glide Soother. Although this is not a sleeping product,
the data indicated a risk of accidents if the safety restraints
were not used or children were left unsupervised. Based on
this, we decided to recall the glider which we announced last
Friday.
We also recalled the 2-in-1 Soothe 'n Play Glider, even
though there are no reported fatalities associated with this
product, because it is similar to the 4-in-1 Glider.
Importantly, with these two actions, we no longer make any
products in either the inclined sleep category or the glider
category. And we have no intention of doing so in the future.
I look forward to providing additional information about
Fisher-Price's commitment to the safety of our products. Thank
you, and I would be happy to answer your questions.
Chairwoman Maloney. The gentleman yields back.
Thank you, and I now recognize myself for five minutes for
questions.
Mr. Kreiz, the report that the committee released today is
based on interviews and internal documents from your company,
Mattel. And these internal sources are damning. They show
Mattel did not do any independent research as to the safety to
see if Rock 'n Play was safe for sleeping before starting to
sell it in 2009.
They show that Mattel did not consult a single licensed
pediatrician to make sure that the product was safe. And they
show that Rock 'n Play, after it came to market, they ignored,
Mattel ignored, a pediatrician's warning in writing and brushed
off reports from mothers who had lost their children, that
babies had stopped breathing, and even died from the product.
They were warned from foreign countries that had taken it off
the market.
And the documents show that after the Consumer Product
Safety Commission raised concerns with Mattel in 2018, your
company fought back for nearly a year, even though you knew at
least 14 infants had died in your product, 14 babies lost.
This is a national scandal. It is breathtakingly
irresponsible. It is corporate conduct that cannot be tolerated
and has to change in the future.
Mr. Kreiz, on behalf of Mattel, will you accept
responsibility for this tragedy and apologize to the dozens of
families whose children died using your product?
Mr. Kreiz. Well, let me first say that our hearts go out to
every family who suffered a loss. The Rock 'n Play Sleeper was
safe when used in accordance with its instructions and safety
warnings. The sleeper was designed and developed following
extensive research, medical advice, safety analysis, and more
than a year of testing and reviews. The product met or exceeded
all applicable regulatory standards. As recent as 2017, the
CPSC proposed the ASTM standards for 30 degree sleeper as a
Federal law.
After the product launched, different independent medical
and other expert analyses verified that it was safe when used
in accordance with the instructions and warnings. Two studies
confirmed that the Rock 'n Play Sleeper was as safe or safer
than other sleep environment such as cribs and bassinets, and
one of these studies found that the product had----
Chairwoman Maloney. Reclaiming my time, reclaiming my time,
the bottom line is 50 children, infants, died, 50. You did not
conduct any studies. You didn't even--you didn't even talk to a
licensed pediatrician. You didn't even talk to the medical
profession. You didn't do anything but pump it out there and
sell it, and your actions weren't just irresponsible. I believe
they were motivated by the company's bottom line.
I'd like to put a chart up for the internal 2013 Fisher-
Price presentation, showing revenue from the Rock 'n Play from
2009 to 2012 and a forecast of 2013 revenue.
Can we put this up, the revenue projections? Well, we're
seeming to have technical problems.
In 2010, Rock 'n Play generated over $5 million in revenue.
Just three years later it was projected to generate over $26
million, an increase of more than 500 percent.
Mr. Kreiz, how much revenue did Mattel or Fisher-Price
receive in total from Rock 'n Play from 2009 to 2019? Can you
give us a number?
Mr. Kreiz. I don't have the number in front of me but I can
assure you----
Chairwoman Maloney. OK. Reclaiming my time.
Why don't you look it up? Our documents confirm that Mattel
received $200 million from selling this dangerous product, 50--
over 50 documented lives lost. Your company knew about these
deaths at Rock 'n Play in 2012, our documents show. And, yes or
no, if the public had learned about these deaths starting in
2012, would that have negatively impacted your company's
revenue?
We just heard from two mothers who lost their children, and
they definitely would not have bought this product if they had
known about these deaths.
Well, he seems to have lost----
Mr. Kreiz. I'm sorry.
Chairwoman Maloney.--his voice.
Mr. Kreiz. I thought you were----
Chairwoman Maloney. Mattel clearly had a financial
incentive to keep this information under wraps, even if it
meant dozens more babies might be injured or die. That is why
the decision to disclose safety information to the public
should not be in the hands of corporations. It should not.
The government should be able to release this information.
We intend to change the law to allow that to happen. We must
strengthen the Consumer Product Safety Act to give the CPSC the
tools it needs to protect consumers, to protect consumers over
profits. Thank you.
I now recognize Mr. Cloud for five minutes.
Mr. Cloud.
Mr. Cloud. Thank you, Chairwoman.
Mr. Kreiz, you became CEO in April 2018 and the voluntary
recall was just a year later in 2019. Is that correct?
Mr. Kreiz. Correct.
Mr. Cloud. And were you involved in the decision to recall
the Rock 'n Play or aware of it before it was announced?
Mr. Kreiz. Yes, I was.
Mr. Cloud. What went into the decision to recall?
Mr. Kreiz. By the time we decided to recall the product, it
became apparent that there's a pattern of use were based on the
data that we collected that the product was not used in
accordance with the instructions and warnings. And although the
accidents were rare and well below the national SIDS rate, we
recalled the product in the best interest of the consumers and
to avoid further additional incidents.
Mr. Cloud. OK. Previously, though, there had been pushback
from authorities in Canada, the UK, and Australia. Do you think
aggressively in retrospect aggressively marketing the Rock 'n
Play as a sleeper in the U.S. was the right thing to do?
Mr. Kreiz. We consult with all regulators in all
jurisdictions and meet or exceed every--every standard. In the
U.S. the product was approved. We met or, rather, we met all
standards, all applicable standards. And with that, we did
everything we believe in the best interest of consumers. We
will never, never compromise the safety of consumers above
profits or any financial consideration.
Consumer safety and product quality is by far the highest
priority for Mattel, and we're very committed to that. This is
our--this is part of our DNA and we will continue to withhold
that, you know, for hopefully for the many, many next
generations.
Mr. Cloud. You mentioned a lot of research went into the
product development and consulting with physicians. You know,
as far as our investigation, the understanding is, is that you
consulted one physician who later lost his license, who made
tremendously outrageous claims about safety and pediatricians
recommend babies to sleep in a car seat overnight for months or
even a year. I mean, Did that not raise any red flags? Do we
have wrong information here? Why was only this one physician
who seemed kind of outside of the box of mainstream medical
thought the only one advising?
Mr. Kreiz. We did consult a medical doctor with expertise
in biomechanics and that who was board-certified in family
medicine which included pediatrics. At the time when we
consulted with him, he gave us good advice. And we relied on
his position. Later what you described came to light, and it's
fair to say we would not use him if we knew of these findings.
That said, we did use and leverage our extensive safety
capabilities. As I mentioned in my opening remarks, we employ
450 employees that are dedicated to product safety. We operate
eight accredited state-of-the-art labs to evaluate our toys for
safety, quality, and durability. And we have our own Play Lab
where we observe interaction with our product.
So we believe that the product was safe when used in
accordance with the instruction. Later studies also confirmed
that the product was safe. These studies were conducted in
2016, 2018, and as recent as last year after we recalled the
product.
Mr. Cloud. You mentioned they're safe. But, of course, we
have, you know, many families who would disagree obviously with
the tragic loss of life. What is Mattel, Fisher-Price learning
from this experience? What are we going to do better? And then
what as policymakers do we need to do to ensure that this kind
of thing does not happen?
Mr. Kreiz. Yes, we share the pain of every family that
suffered the loss. Unfortunately, injuries are often associated
with other risk factors and we are familiar with the SIDS
phenomenon which is the nightmare of every new parents. This is
a terrible tragedy that happens often and, you know, where
babies died in an unexplained manner.
Our jobs is to continue to prioritize safety, to work in
collaboration with the CPSC, to share every data and every
piece of information that we have, and to understand what can
we do in our product to design better safety mechanism and
continue to collaborate with parents and emphasize the
importance of following instructions.
I can tell you that at Mattel we recently formed the
Medical and Scientific Safety Council that is comprised of
renowned pediatricians, five pediatricians. This council meets
regularly with our internal safety teams to provide
professional opinions, different advice, and recommendation to
Fisher-Price about the safe and proper use of our products.
So we are learning as well. We are evolving our practices.
We will never stop improving what we can do and--and, you know,
prioritize and make sure that our product are held at the
highest standard in terms of safety and quality.
Mr. Cloud. Thank you.
I have more questions, but I think I'm out of time.
Chairwoman Maloney. The gentleman yields back.
The gentlelady from the District of Columbia, Ms. Eleanor
Holmes Norton, is now recognized for five minutes.
Ms. Norton. Thank you, Madam Chair, for this important
hearing.
The notion that one cannot disclose danger of a product of
this kind without the consent of the manufacturer is something
the committee needs to look into. We have to be fair to both
parties. That is not fair to both parties.
We know that mistakes were made from the beginning, that
Mattel did not consult a pediatrician, when it was designing
Rock 'n Play, to confirm that it was safe. Even more alarming,
when a pediatrician did reach out to the company to raise
alarms that Rock 'n Play was not safe for infant sleep,
apparently nothing was done.
In February 2013, our information is that a pediatrician,
Dr. Benaroch, contacted Fisher-Price to raise concerns about
the numerous ways that Rock 'n Play design conflicted with, of
all places, the American Academy of Pediatrics' guidelines for
safe infant sleep.
And this was after the company had already received a
report from a parent, perhaps like the parents we heard from
this morning, whose baby had stopped breathing while in the
Rock 'n Play. Company documents show that Mattel ignored Dr.
Benaroch's warning. In fact, Dr. Benaroch requested to speak to
Mattel's senior director of product safety. But the company
declined to make her available.
Now we have an email responding to Dr. Benaroch. A Fisher-
Price employer wrote this. We encourage consumers who have
questions or concerns about providing safe sleep environment
for their babies to discuss these issues with their doctors and
pediatricians.
Dr. Scothon, a Fisher-Price employee told the committee
that it was highly unusual for a pediatrician to contact the
company, warning that a product was unsafe. Did Fisher-Price
have any--make any changes to the design of Rock 'n Play in
response to Dr. Benaroch's warning?
Mr. Scothon. Thank you for the question.
Looking at that instance, we were focused on ensuring that
the product adhered to the policies or the--excuse me the--
standards of the bassinet standard. We certainly took it into
account. I believe people engaged with Dr. Benaroch----
Ms. Norton. But you didn't make any changes.
Mr. Scothon. We did make any deliberate changes to the
product at that time because it didn't--OK.
Ms. Norton. Thank you. My time is limited.
Did Fisher-Price issue any sort of warning to the public
based on Dr. Benaroch's concerns?
Mr. Scothon. We did not, again, because it adhered to the
bassinet standard.
Ms. Norton. Dr. Kreiz, let me turn to you.
Mattel and Fisher-Price encouraged consumers to consult
their pediatricians--I just read--I just issued--I just
indicated that--about providing a safe sleeping environment for
their babies. Isn't that right?
Mr. Kreiz. Correct.
Ms. Norton. At the same time, the company was ignoring a
pediatrician who was raising concerns about Rock 'n Play, that
it did not provide a safe sleep environment for babies. In
retrospect, let's just look back for a moment. Do you think
Mattel took Dr. Benaroch's warning seriously enough?
Mr. Kreiz. I'm aware of that interaction and I know we took
his recommendation and considered those seriously. That said,
as my colleague just mentioned, we did not see an issue with
what he raised because the product did meet the bassinet
standard. And while we did consider his observation, we did not
agree with them.
Ms. Norton. Mattel's decision not to take Dr. Benaroch's
warning seriously seems to me to be inexcusable. It also
demonstrates why it is important that we repeal section 6(b) of
the Consumer Product Safety Act and stop letting corporations
hide behind the law to hide deaths associated with their
products from the public.
Dr. Benaroch knew in 2013 the Rock 'n Play was dangerous.
At that time Mattel also knew that infants had died in Rock 'n
Play. Perhaps if the public knew as well, Dr. Benaroch's
warning would not have fallen on deaf ears.
Let me thank you, again, Madam Chair, for this very
important hearing.
And I yield back.
Chairwoman Maloney. The gentlelady yields back.
I now recognize the gentlewoman from North Carolina, Ms.
Foxx.
You are now recognized for five minutes, Ms. Foxx.
Ms. Foxx. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
And I thank our witnesses for being with us today.
Mr. Scothon, beyond consultation for safety, did Fisher-
Price conduct any research about changing the marketing of the
product from a sleeper to a soother might affect consumer
interest in the product?
Mr. Scothon. Yes, there was a study done as we were
evaluating the situation. There was a study done. I can't
remember the year that it was done but yes.
Ms. Foxx. OK. What's the difference between a sleeper and a
soother besides marketing?
Mr. Scothon. So, again, what that speaks to is very much
what I said in my opening statement which is there's products
that are designed for long-term overnight sleep where a child
may be left unattended or the parent may be sleeping and then
there are other products which would be intended for a place
where you can place a child. They may fall asleep or nap or
fall asleep quickly, but they're usually right next to the
parent or very close to the parent. So the distinction between
a soother and a sleeper would be the application and the use.
Given that we had designed the Rock 'n Play Sleeper for
overnight sleep, we're designing it to adhere to the bassinets
standard, that was really our focus as we were trying to look
at designing the product to the standard that met the bassinet
standard.
Ms. Foxx. Thank you.
What role does marketing play in how a consumer uses the
product?
Mr. Scothon. Well, the marketing of a product is really
intended to focus on for parents the intended use. So, again,
there are places where, when you're parents, as a young parent,
you may be putting your child down for a moment in time, those
are things that you would look at such, they're what I'll call
short-term or parking places. There are other long-term sleep,
and we really talk about the benefits of both because
ultimately parenting is a challenging time. We are designing
the safest places to really help parents during those early
months when babies are sleeping so much, and we really focus on
making sure that we design those products in awareness that
children may fall asleep everywhere but designing them with the
right intent for either use.
Ms. Foxx. Thank you.
Does Fisher-Price currently have a soother on the market?
Mr. Scothon. I'm trying to remember specifically. We do not
have--the gliders, we may be using the name ``soothe'' here and
there but, no. There--well, soothers are in many different
places but the soother is the gliders is what we've been
calling them to date and we just removed those from the market.
Ms. Foxx. How does the soother--well, you just said the
soother currently on the market but the one you just removed
from the market, how did it differ from the Rock 'n Play
Sleeper?
Mr. Scothon. Certainly. So when you look at those two
products, both the 4-in-1 Glider, and as well as the 2-in-1
Glider, both gliders have been removed from the marketplace.
Those have--the Rock 'n Play had a hard back or flat surface to
it, very similar to that. Was really designed based on the
bassinet standard. The Rock 'n Play was at an angle
approximately 23 to 26 degrees.
The glider is more of a soft shell and that will move front
to back or toe to head or side to side, depending on the
orientation of the product. So it allows the infant to rest and
sit next to mom typically when she's in, you know, doing one of
the things that a parent is doing and they need some free hands
but it keeps and entertains the babe by rocking them and
soothing them.
Ms. Foxx. Have there been deaths associated with any
Fisher-Price soother or similar products currently on the
market?
Mr. Scothon. With regard to the glider or soother, again,
we've removed those as referenced by the four fatalities that
we referred to as the recall and that soother would be the ones
that, yes, so no.
Ms. Foxx. Just four? Is that--do you know of any other
soothers where there have been deaths?
Mr. Scothon. Well, the question there would be the
definition or the term ``soother.'' Again, we focus on
products--we make many different platforms or products, as we
refer to them. So there are gliders. There are swings. There
are other incidents like any consumer product category where we
do--we are aware of incident or fatalities related to other
products. We have turned all of that and communicate that
within 24 hours to the CPSC in all of that information.
We report both weekly to the CPSC, as well as within 24
hours of learning of an incident. So we are aware of other
incidents related to other product categories that we make, as
we always are. And the two that right now we have recalled and
removed from the market would be the glider and the Rock 'n
Play Sleeper.
Ms. Foxx. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
I yield back.
Chairwoman Maloney. The gentlelady yields back.
And the gentleman from Massachusetts, Mr. Lynch, is
recognized for five minutes.
Mr. Lynch. Thank you, Madam Chair.
I'd like to ask some questions about the safety standards
surrounding this product. You know, a July 2020 Consumer
Reports found that 96 percent of the American people believe
that products that they buy for their home are governed by
mandatory safety standards that are set by the government. But
as we know on this committee, for the vast majority of products
on the market, that is simply not true. Most products including
the Rock 'n Play are only governed by voluntary standards set
by an organization called ASTM International, the formerly the
American Standard--excuse me--the American Society for Testing
and Materials.
Mr. Scothon, I understand the Rock 'n Play, the Rock 'n
Glide, and the Soothe 'n Play Glider were all subject to
voluntary standards set by ASTM international. Is that right?
Mr. Scothon. They were. Yes, they were set by the ASTM
standards as well the CPSC guidelines where appropriate.
Mr. Lynch. Right. And ASTM is comprised of--and again, I
hate to use acronyms, but the American Society for Testing
Material International is comprised of a bunch of different
groups, and individuals, including product manufacturers, like
yourselves, testing labs, some consumer advocates and others.
But what many consumers don't know is that through the ASTM
committees, manufacturers like yourself can influence the
voluntary standards that are set for their own products. Is
that correct?
Mr. Scothon. We are involved in those standards. It is a
consensus-based organization, which takes into account all of
the different expertise from all of the different individuals.
So, the consensus is really designed to ensure that no single
company or group can influence.
Mr. Lynch. Right. But Mattel employees, including the
people who helped design the Rock 'n Play, actually sit on the
ASTM committees that design standards for infant products,
don't they?
Mr. Scothon. They are involved in the ASTM standard setting
process, correct.
Mr. Lynch. Right. And when they participate in ASTM's work
to set safety standards, they are doing so as representatives
of the company, and not as independent individuals. Is that
correct?
Mr. Scothon. Well, they are representatives of the company,
but, typically, their roles are to facilitate the process, to
focus on getting the groups together, to aggregating and
putting all the information together, and coming back with
consensus points of view. Again, as a consensus process, the
role that is played is a bit more around the process. But,
again, the focus is always around making the safest product, to
delivering and being on the safest standards to make sure that
we keep the consumer safe.
Mr. Lynch. But you're a business, right? I mean, look,
let's take the average price of one of these Rock 'n Plays. I
think it retailed anywhere between $50 and $80 apiece. Let's
take the average $65. So, you multiply that by the 4.7 million
units sold, and that's what we got on the recall numbers. 4.7
million units, $65, that's over $300 million. So, you have an
employee sitting on the standards committee, and there's a
tremendous financial incentive for that individual to work on
your behalf in setting the voluntary standards. Isn't that
correct?
Mr. Scothon. Well, I would differ slightly, but, yes, I
understand the view. But what I would say is this, the safety
teams, these individuals that are on our 450 safety and quality
team members, do not actually report into myself or the
business. We keep those separate. So, while I'm aware of what
they are doing, we try to keep them as independent as possible
to ensure that they are looking through the best ones.
Mr. Lynch. Come on. Wouldn't it be easier, wouldn't it be
better, wouldn't it be more credible if we had, you know, just
objective--we had people from companies that were not, you
know, incentivized to support a standard that made a lot of
money for the companies they worked for? I mean, don't you see
a conflict there? I mean, I do. It is glaring to me that the
people who designed the Rock 'n Play are sitting on a board to
establish the voluntary standards for safety for these
families, for these kids.
Mr. Scothon. I understand those individuals, obviously,
come with a significant amount of information and awareness,
both background and current. The ASTM, as I understand it, is
open to many people contributing. That's why the CPSC is there,
that's why child advocacy groups are there, and there is a
consensus standard.
Mr. Lynch. But you also have testing firms that also stand
to make a lot of money if they have a good relationship with
you, the manufacturer. Isn't that correct?
Mr. Scothon. Again, I'm not close to the relationships, but
I understand the point.
Mr. Lynch. Yes. OK.
Madam Chair, my time has expired. I yield back.
Chairwoman Maloney. The gentleman yields back. The
gentleman from Wisconsin, Mr. Grothman, is recognized for five
minutes. Mr. Grothman.
Mr. Grothman. Thank you much. I just do want to briefly
followup on what Congressman Cloud said. I really wish this
committee would have a hearing on the COVID. We haven't had one
in a long time. I think the failure to push Ivermectin, failure
to push vitamin D, has resulted in tens of thousands of excess
deaths. I'm just begging the chairman to hold a hearing on
that.
Now, with regard to the witnesses we have here, could one
of you explain to me how the children died in this? Were they
suffocated? Just give any a general--when I look at it, how did
the children die?
Mr. Scothon. Congressman, I will take that to start. Mr.
Kreiz can add as he may. But when you look at all of the
incident data--and this is what we started back in 2010 up and
through, even 2000 at the time of recall--we were consistently
looking at every individual accident, both individually and
collectively. There are many contributing factors to this. And
throughout that process----
Mr. Grothman. All right. Did the child--how did they die?
Did they tip over? Did they suffocate? Was it their head went
forward? What happened?
Mr. Scothon. Again, in many instances we continue to
investigate and we're investigating those. There was no single
cause that we could find. There were theories around, questions
around things, like the rate of incline. And we did research
around that, to determine the breathing and whether there was
any impact on that, which we did not see. There were questions
of rollover as related to the product. We did studies with
exponent on that. A world-renowned firm who could not show us
the rollover incident when used properly. So as we continue to
go through it, there was no pattern and the data did not
subject a product attribution issue. There were----
Mr. Grothman. Even used improperly. What could I do to use
it improperly to cause a child's death?
Mr. Scothon. Well, when we speak to that, the intent is to
suggest it, to make sure that you use the restraint systems.
The restraint systems are intended to ensure that a child would
not roll over. It is both on the product itself and----
Mr. Grothman. So the child that passed away, did they roll
over?
Mr. Scothon. Again, we don't have data that suggested
rollover. There was concerns on that. The data typically would
show us, you know, the difference between statements and
medical examiner reports. We could not find incidents where a
child rolled over when using the restraint.
Mr. Grothman. Well, not getting far here.
Some of the notes we have here indicate that most of the
children who died, died early on, you know, during the 10-year
period or whatever it was on the market. Is that accurate?
Mr. Scothon. It's hard to specifically state a window. What
I would--look----
Mr. Grothman. You don't know when the children died even?
You must know that.
Mr. Scothon. With regard to, you know, the incidents
themselves, I'm sorry, sir, I'm--what----
Mr. Grothman. You don't know that children primarily died
in 1909, 1910, or 1918, 1990. You don't know that?
Mr. Scothon. No. I'm sorry. The pattern--and I
misunderstood the question, so I apologize for that. The
incident rate up until approximately February, we were aware of
approximately 14 in 2018. We were aware of 14 incidents through
2018. That is when we filed the 15(b) report with the CPSC.
Throughout the course of those previous years, we were
notifying the CPSC upon learning of any incident. Immediately
we--go ahead.
Mr. Grothman. How many children have died totally in this
toy or whatever? How many total died?
Mr. Scothon. Today, we are aware of approximately, I
believe the number is currently 97. Although, those numbers
change as we are also finding that some of the products that
had been attributed to the Rock 'n Play were not Fisher-Price
or incline sleep. So the data, one of the things, sir, and it
is why it is making it more difficult is typically when we find
an incident report, the data is very inconsistent. It is
sometimes inaccurate or incorrect. That is why we investigate
things individually. And that is what----
Mr. Grothman. Sorry. They only give us five minutes here.
Is 97, is that for all over the world or just the United
States?
Mr. Scothon. I believe that is a U.S. number.
Mr. Grothman. OK. So it could be significantly more. How
many other countries was this marketed in?
Mr. Scothon. No.
Mr. Scothon. I would have to get back to you specifically
on that. And by the way, I believe that actually is a worldwide
number. I apologize for the Zoom thing. I apologize. But it was
a worldwide number.
Mr. Grothman. OK. Finally it says here, in Canada banned
this in 2011. Do you have any other toys out there right now
that Canada has banned, but you're still selling in the U.S.?
Mr. Scothon. No. I don't believe so. No.
Mr. Grothman. OK. It seems a little unusual. So it was
banned in Australia, or came down on it in 2010, Canada in
2011, and for another 9 to 10 years, you just kept going. Is
that unusual? It was banned in one country, but you keep
selling it here?
Mr. Scothon. Our focus is on making sure that the products
adhere to the regulatory standards of each regulation or
country. So where this did, you know, in the U.S. it was
consistent with the ASTM bassinet standards, so we sold it
here. There were other markets where they did not have a
bassinet standard that met that, and we adhered to those
policies as well. So we always followed the local market
standards as we did here.
Mr. Grothman. OK.
Thank you for the additional time.
Chairwoman Maloney. The gentleman yields back. And I did
want to respond to his statement that the committee has not had
enough hearings on COVID. We have a subcommittee that is
dedicated totally to looking at the COVID crisis. We've had Dr.
Fauci twice before this committee. And at our last hearing,
which was roughly 2-1/2 weeks ago, we looked at a $260
million--$600 million contract to a company that was not able
to produce a single shot in the arm yet to help vaccinate
people in our country because of management problems. But I
appreciate his concern.
I now call upon the gentleman from the great state of
Virginia, Mr. Connolly. You are now recognized for five
minutes.
Mr. Connolly. I thank the chairwoman from the great state
of New York.
Mr. Kreiz and Mr. Scothon, do you have children?
Mr. Scothon. I do.
Mr. Kreiz. I do. I have four children.
Mr. Connolly. Yes. So, you can certainly understand the
incredible pain of the loss of a child, what a tragedy, even
one child being lost, perhaps because of your product. The pain
of a parent in suffering that loss. Certainly you can relate to
that?
Mr. Kreiz. Absolutely. I can tell you I can't even imagine
the terrible loss of a child. This is----
Mr. Connolly. Yes. Well, according to Mr. Scothon, we've
lost at least 97, and that's 97 sets of parents, and
grandparents, and siblings who no longer have a loved one. They
relied on you, and maybe, as Mr. Lynch suggests, they believed
falsely that a product wouldn't come to market without it
having been certified as safe by the Consumer Products Safety
Commission, which, of course, actually under the law, doesn't
really do that. It can look at a product after it comes on the
market, but not before it comes on the market. That's really
your job.
Mr. Kreiz you talked about having 450 product safety
personnel. You talked about a committee, a review committee.
You talked about consulting parents and other professionals.
You talked about a professional pilot test playground for
products. And yet, with all of that, 97 children died, and you,
ultimately, decided to recall a product. What went wrong with
your process? Because clearly something went wrong.
Mr. Kreiz. Well, as I said in my opening remarks along the
different conversations today, we believe the Sleeper, the Rock
'n Play Sleeper was safe when used in accordance with the
instructions and safety warnings. At no point, we had any
reason to believe----
Mr. Connolly. Mr. Kreiz, excuse me because of time. Excuse
me for interrupting. OK. We'll stipulate you say you believed
it was safe. But there were warning signs. Our investigation
shows that one of your own product safety executives urged more
study because he thought there were inherent dangers with the
product. And as we just heard, in 2011, Canada banned this
product. How many warning signs were required before you
decide, you know what, the better side of safety really
prevails, and we're going to, you know, we're going to pull
back that product so that there aren't more losses of lives.
Mr. Kreiz. We shared every information with the CPSC beyond
the requirements of the Consumer Product Safety Act. We
conducted multiple studies and surveys. I referred earlier to
our study that was done by two doctors in 2016 that confirmed
that the Rock 'n Play incline was safe at the 30-degree angle
when used with instructions.
Mr. Connolly. Is it your testimony right now that it is--
OK. The logical extension of what you're saying is that product
is still safe, but you recalled it anyhow. Why did you recall
it if it is still safe? Because you had all of these reviews
that said it was safe if used properly.
Mr. Kreiz. The reason we recalled it is because we saw a
pattern of use in the data that came to us. And as I mentioned
before, the incident were below the SIDS rate. We decided to
recall it to avoid the risk of additional incidents that could
involve use of the product in accordance with instructions.
Mr. Connolly. Well, at the very least, don't you think you
could be charged with the fact that were you awfully late to
the game in making that decision? I mean, is there an
acceptable death quota before you decide to remove a product
because of loss of life? We're talking babies here.
Mr. Kreiz. Even one loss of life is too many.
Mr. Connolly. Right. So why didn't you pause and recall a
product then? And if you wanted to wait, why didn't you at
least see the warning flag from Canada that clearly disagreed
with your assessment that it was an inherently safe product if
used properly.
Mr. Kreiz. The reason is because every step along the way
all the study, and research, and information that we gathered
did not show that the product was unsafe. And we continued to
investigate every incident and share it with the CPSC.
Mr. Connolly. Madam Chairwoman, my time is up. I would
simply observe, I think that's an argument that is overtaken by
events when we've had the loss of--an admitted loss of 97
children, and their grieving families. This product should have
been recalled long before it was by this company. And the
argument that it is safe, if used properly, clearly is belied
by the facts on the ground, tragic facts on the ground.
I yield back.
Chairwoman Maloney. I thank the gentleman for raising that
concern and really responding to the witnesses today. And I'd
like to also join you in responding to some of their statements
today. Fisher-Price claims that its inclined products are safe
if they are not used for overnight sleep, as instructed, and
blames parents for product misuse. 97 deaths because of, quote,
``product misuse.'' But the company marketed the Glide Soother,
and Rock 'n Glide Soother, an inclined product, that was just
recalled because of four infant deaths expressly for sleep. So,
the company can't have it both ways.
And I'd now like to recognize the gentleman from
Pennsylvania, Mr. Keller, you're recognized for five minutes.
Mr. Keller. Thank you, Madam Chair. The role of this
committee is to examine pertinent issues facing the American
people, certainly, the safety of America's infants is paramount
importance to all of us. However, this committee has done
nothing to address the issues that will also impact all
Americans, including these children, such as a growing crisis
at our southern border, rampant inflation, and continued labor
shortages due to the administration's outrageous spending, and
failure to reopen the American economy, and get Americans back
to work.
While the issue of infant safety is an important one, I
wonder why the committee is using its power to consider decade-
old litigation, already addressed by the court system, instead
of focusing its efforts on the many crises affecting the
American people today.
That being said, parents should not have to second-guess
the safety of their childcare products, and the death of any
child at the hands of faulty design is unacceptable and it is a
tragedy.
In its October 2009 release, Mattel advertised that the
Rock 'n Play, a baby can sleep at a comfortable incline all
night long. However, healthcare professionals were not
consulted regarding the design, nor ratified the benefits
advertised for the product. In fact, the American Academy of
Pediatrics advised a firm crib mattress covered by a sheet is
the recommended sleeping surface.
So Mr. Scothon, as head of the Infant & Preschool division
at Fisher-Price, do you think products that claim to have such
revolutionary health benefits, especially concerning infants,
should be reviewed by healthcare professionals before being put
out into the market?
Mr. Scothon. Sir, I believe that we will do, and will
continue to do, everything we can to keep things safe. As a
matter of fact, we've just recently created the MSSC, which is
an advisory panel that we have brought on to ensure that we
have additional consultation as it relates to new products.
So, we are committed to both safe products, constant
evaluation of that data through our safety professionals, our
safety group, as well as our product design experience. And we
are committed, where necessary and appropriate, to also get
that external support, those eyes to help us continue to
improve on the process, because we ultimately believe that our
job and our goal is always to make the safest products for
families.
We are committed to doing that, it is what we have done for
90 years, and it is what we are committed to doing for the
future.
Mr. Keller. So you've done that, and that's a mechanism
that you have put in place to ensure the products are reviewed
by medical experts. So you will have medical experts on your
panel?
Mr. Scothon. Yes. What we refer to as the Mattel Scientific
and Safety Committee. There are five pediatricians that will be
involved in our safety review process looking at many products
that are not, what I will call standards products, that we make
that would be potentially unique. And they will be reviewing
those products as part of our safety review process.
Mr. Keller. Also from your perspective, is there anything
Congress can be doing to work with Federal agencies to clarify
the various rules associated with consumer safety of the
products your company makes?
Mr. Scothon. Look, I think that's a very important
question. It's why we're here today, to talk about how to
continue to evolve and improve the safety. Because ultimately,
we, you, the CPSC, we all have the same intent, which is
keeping consumers safe.
I believe that, you know, I don't want to say specifically
what can be done, but I would say we'd be more than willing to
work with you to figure out how we can continue to improve
those processes, just as this hearing is intended to do today.
Mr. Keller. Thank you.
I appreciate the opportunity to speak today, Madam Chair.
And I yield back.
Chairwoman Maloney. The gentleman yields back. And the
gentleman from Illinois, Mr. Krishnamoorthi, is now recognized
for five minutes.
Mr. Krishnamoorthi. Thank you, Madam Chair.
I think that the statement was made, Mr. Scothon, you said
that essentially the Rock 'n Play comported with the bassinet
standard. Didn't you?
Mr. Scothon. That's correct. At the time of launch, it was
part of the bassinet standard.
Mr. Krishnamoorthi. And I'm looking at the CPSC website
right now, and the final rule clearly states that the standard
limits, the allowable angle to 10 degrees incline. So, your
Rock 'n Play absolutely did not, did not comport with the
bassinet final rule.
Mr. Scothon, the Rock 'n Play is an incline sleeper. Isn't
it?
Mr. Scothon. Yes. It is an incline sleeper.
Mr. Krishnamoorthi. And the baby would sleep at an incline,
not flat on its back, correct?
Mr. Scothon. It was at an incline, but the back of the seat
was flat, not curved.
Mr. Krishnamoorthi. But it was not horizontal flat,
correct?
Mr. Scothon. That's correct.
Mr. Krishnamoorthi. OK. Good. And you said Rock 'n Play was
introduced in 2009, correct?
Mr. Scothon. That is correct.
Mr. Krishnamoorthi. In 2005, four years before the Rock 'n
Play was introduced, the American Academy of Pediatrics in
guidelines on preventing SIDS, you probably can't see it, but
basically, it says ``New guidelines on preventing SIDS,'' said
``infants should be placed for sleep in a 'supine position'
wholly on the back for every sleep. I didn't know what supine
meant. I looked it up in a medical dictionary, it means, quote,
``lying flat on your back, looking up.''
So, it looks like you ignored the American Academy of
Pediatrics' recommendation that basically babies sleep flat on
their back as opposed to an incline.
Now, let's go to 2010. Foreign authorities recognized
similar problems. When you sought to sell the Rock 'n Play in
Australia, the Australian authorities wrote back in an email in
June 18, 2010, that the sleeper was at odds, your sleeper was
at odds with widely accepted and promoted best practices that
these types of products should not be used as an infant bedding
alternative. You don't dispute they wrote you that in 2010,
correct?
Mr. Scothon. I do not dispute that. No.
Mr. Krishnamoorthi. And in 2011, the U.K. Royal College of
Midwives told you that, quote, ``It would not endorse the
product as a sleeper because it would only be suitable for
short periods of supervised wakefulness.''
Then, that same year in 2011, the Canadian regulator sent
you negative signals, too. They said the product could only be
sold as a, quote-unquote, ``soothing seat,'' which, as you
explained earlier in your testimony to Mrs. Foxx, is something
that cannot be used a sleeper. And in 2011, the Rock 'n Play
was withdrawn from the Canadian market as well as a sleeper,
correct?
Mr. Scothon. That's correct. Once again, we always adhere
to----
Mr. Krishnamoorthi. So again, now let's just go to the
tape. So, in 2010, Australia rejects it as a sleeper; 2011,
U.K. groups reject it as a sleeper; in 2011, Canadian
regulators reject it as a sleeper. But you kept selling in the
U.S.
Now can you please bring up COR staff the 2018
presentation, Fisher-Price presentation? OK, what we're looking
at here is market research that you did in 2018. There's a
little typo at the top, it should be 2018. And basically, it
has feedback from moms on the right-hand side which we
highlighted. Let me just point you to a few of them. Quote,
``It's on an incline and I have read that babies should not
sleep on an incline unattended. It is obviously very unsafe.
Babies need a flat surface to sleep on. No incline!''
Exclamation point. The next one down. ``It is not approved as a
safe sleeping surface.'' Sir, you did not stop selling the Rock
'n Play in 2018, correct?
Mr. Scothon. That's correct. We were in discussions----
Mr. Krishnamoorthi. You, instead, kept selling it, despite
what the moms were telling you. And you only recalled it on
April 12, 2019, four days after the Consumer Reports published
the deaths linked to your particular product.
Now I know you've adopted a blame-the-parents defense. And
it's just appalling what Mr. Kreiz keeps saying, that the
parents are to blame for what happened here. Mr. Scothon, what
bothers me especially is what caused you to stop selling the
Rock 'n Play. It wasn't the warnings from the health experts,
and the pediatricians in 2005. It wasn't the Australian
Government and the Canadian Government that rejected your
sleeper in 2010 and 2011. It wasn't the moms who complain about
the safety of your sleeper in 2018. It wasn't even the deaths,
the 97 deaths associated with your Rock 'n Play Sleeper. No, it
wasn't any of that. Instead, what it was is Consumer Reports
publishing a report about the deaths. You only acted because
you got caught red-handed, knowingly selling a dangerous
product. Sir, integrity is what you are when no one's looking.
And this episode demonstrates a shocking, shocking lack of
corporate integrity.
I yield back.
Chairwoman Maloney. The gentleman from Arizona, Mr. Biggs,
is recognized for five minutes.
Mr. Biggs. I thank the chair for allowing me to take my
five minutes. I thank the witnesses for being here. And I
appreciate this hearing today.
I don't defend the company's actions in any way. And I also
am concerned. Ninety-seven deaths of infants is something that
really tugs at the heartstrings of every parent and
grandparent.
But I want to read to you a letter that I wrote to you,
Madam Chair. It was written about 15 hours ago now. Dear
chairwoman Maloney. Today, the House Committee on Oversight and
Reform will hold a committee hearing for which committee
members, and maybe not all committee members, certainly I felt
this way, are woefully unprepared. If you have a serious
expectation that committee members will be able to discuss the
topic and learn from the witnesses, you should reschedule the
hearing until a later date. Why? Because on Friday, May 28,
2021, the committee gave notice of this hearing titled,
``Sleeping Danger: The Rock 'n Play and Failures in Infant
Product Safety.'' According to your published guidance, the
committee ``launched an investigation into the safety and
regulation of Fisher-Price's Rock 'n Play and other infant
incline sleep products,'' closed quote, in August 2019. And the
purpose of this hearing, as you stated in your guidance, is to,
quote, ``examine findings from the committee's investigation,''
closed quote.
Yet, when I wrote the letter about 12, 15 hours ago, I
hadn't received the report from this committee. In fact, you
said in your opening statement that you released it today. I
received it at 5:40 a.m., Arizona time, which is where I am.
That meant, it came out into my office in D.C. at 8:40 a.m.
Holding a hearing to examine findings that are not made
available to committee members in time to adequately prepare is
an utter waste of time.
Do you want to have a productive hearing, rather than
another piece of political theater, you will please reschedule
this hearing until the report is released. And now, of course,
it has been released at 5:40 a.m., Arizona time.
Sadly, it looks like this hearing is just a distraction to
keep us from focusing on the real needs of the Nation, or other
needs of the Nation. I'm not saying this is a de minimis
hearing. What I'm saying is there are other issues as well,
such as ending the crisis at the southern border, finding the
origins of the COVID-19 virus, or stopping drastic inflation of
the Biden administration's policies, and others that I've
requested hearings on from you, Madam Chair.
So, I look at this, and I'd say, I am learning a lot as I
listen today, but I didn't have a chance to actually go through
your report, and then investigate it further. For instance,
when the previous speaker said supine doesn't mean horizontal--
supine means horizontal. It actually means laying on one's
back. It doesn't even necessarily mean horizontal. I would like
to know more of what that is and how it figures into this
particular matter that we're at.
Your opening statement, Madam Chair, resembled more of a
closing statement at a class action lawsuit, which, it is my
understanding, that there is litigation ongoing in this matter.
What we're reviewing is specified allegations about a specific
company that deserved specified remedies that you get through
the court system.
I am content that we are doing this hearing. I would have
liked to have the report, so I could read it, analyze it, and
pour over it, the way I read every other guidance regarding
this particular hearing.
I have found that it looks to me like people's minds are
already made up. And mine was more I want to get to the bottom
of this and understand what's going on. I think I've been
regrettably denied that opportunity because of the failure to
release the report. I don't know when the witnesses received
the report, or if they have received the report yet.
And so, I have two questions for the witnesses. And I don't
know who wants to take it, but have either of you received a
copy of the report from the committee?
Mr. Kreiz. It came in this morning.
Mr. Biggs. You got this this morning? Did you have a chance
to review it and include and prepare based on what you saw in
preparation for this hearing?
Mr. Kreiz. Our advisers received apparently last night. I
saw some of it this morning, but I have not had the opportunity
to review it.
Mr. Biggs. Second question. How many of these units did you
sell before you took it off the market worldwide?
Mr. Scothon. 4.7 million, 4.7 million.
Mr. Biggs. 4.7 million. Were there any other incidents
reported besides the reported deaths?
Mr. Scothon. There were incidents. I don't know the
specifics on those. We'll call other incidents they were not
death related. I would have to get you the detail on that.
Mr. Biggs. I wish you would.
And I thank the Madam Chair for the time. I appreciate it.
Chairwoman Maloney. I thank the gentleman for raising your
concerns. And I recognize myself to respond.
This was a two-year effort, and the minority staff, the
Republicans and Democrats, worked together on this report. For
every single interview, staff members from both the Republican
and Democratic side were present. And the text of the report
was a bipartisan one in which they both cooperated.
It's true that the report was just released this morning to
Democrats and Republicans at the same time. Mr. Comer and I got
it roughly two days before that. And the hearing really is on
the subject matter, just not on the report itself, but on the
subject matter of this hearing. And I would say that your
colleagues, our colleagues on both sides of the aisle, are
asking very thoughtful and pointed questions just based on
that. But if you're concerned that you did not have appropriate
time to prepare, we could have another meeting or another
hearing on this at a later time that's convenient for you, and
for which you feel you can have more time to respond.
This is a very, very serious matter. The loss of a child
that could have been prevented if these products had been
tested and taken off the market when they were aware that
children were dying. We are working on legislation to give more
teeth to the CPSC so that they can enforce safety standards
going forward. We look forward to working with you and your
colleagues in a bipartisan way on this legislation to make sure
that this never happens again.
Mr. Biggs. Would the chair yield?
Chairwoman Maloney. I look forward to working with you in
the future.
I yield back.
Mr. Biggs. Madam Chair, would you yield time?
Chairwoman Maloney. Yes, I will yield.
Mr. Biggs. Thank you, Madam Chair. I would only say that
the reason that it was vexing for me is because I hadn't been
on this committee until January of this year, No. 1. No. 2, one
of the reasons for holding this hearing is stated in the
chairwoman's notification of the hearing, was to examine
findings from the committee's investigation. That report is, I
assume, the findings of the committee's investigation. That's
why it was so imperative, and I would have liked to have more
time.
I appreciate it. And I yield back.
Chairwoman Maloney. We will be delighted to give you more
time and have another hearing if you so wish.
I will now recognize Mr. Raskin. You're now recognized for
five minutes.
Mr. Raskin. Madam Chair, thank you very much for calling
this important hearing. And if you're being accused of acting
like a lawyer for 97 American families who lost a child to this
product, then that's nothing for you to be ashamed of. I would
much rather be accused of being a lawyer for those families
than acting as a pro bono counsel for this corporation.
Mr. Kreiz, I want to ask you, we're looking at this
nightmare of 97 families who lost an infant in using your
product. And you've said repeatedly that the product's safe
when used with its instructions and its warnings. And when you
say that, I hear you to be blaming the parents for what went
wrong. What did the parents do wrong that caused the deaths of
their own children?
Mr. Kreiz. Well, we absolutely do not blame the parents.
This is not the parent's fault. I never said it, and we don't
believe it's the parents' fault. It is about using the product
in line with instructions and safety warnings. And there are
different reasons, or different causes, that could have brought
terrible losses and terrible accidents. And I mentioned earlier
the phenomenon of SIDS, which is one situation where young
babies die suddenly in an unexpected manner. This is a
nightmare for every young parent. In addition, in some cases,
babies were not strapped, and that is an important part of the
safety and warning instructions. So, we feel it is our
continuous commitment to work with parents and other----
Mr. Raskin. OK. Mr. Kreiz, I'm going to reclaim my time
here because we're limited.
Last week we learned that Fisher-Price is recalling two
more incline products that you had marketed for sleep. Four
infants died in one of the products, the Rock 'n Glide Soother.
The announcement came two days after the CPSC passed a new rule
banning all incline sleep products, because they are unsafe for
children. I would like to enter into the record a letter that
the committee received from Consumer Reports dated June 4,
2021. Consumer Reports wrote that in November 2019, it sent a
letter to you, Mr. Kreiz, urging Mattel to stop selling all
incline products marketed for sleep, and to immediately recall
all incline sleepers.
Mr. Raskin. The following week Mr. Scothon, you wrote back,
stating that the company would not recall those products,
including the Rock 'n Glide Soother, because, quote, ``It has
not been marketed for overnight sleep.'' Mr. Kreiz, how many
infants had died in the Rock 'n Glide Soother by the time
Consumer Reports sent you this letter?
Mr. Kreiz. Well, we were aware of four fatalities, all of
which all of those cases unfortunately were found, and this is
according to the investigation report from the CPSC, in all
four incidents, the infants were unrestrained and left for
overnight or unsupervised sleep.
Mr. Raskin. Well, two of them died before the letter was
sent to you by Consumer Reports. And then after you refused to
recall the product, two more died. And we know not just through
scientific studies and data, but from the number of infants who
died in your company's incline products, that it's not safe for
infants to sleep at any incline at any time, day or night,
whether you call it napping or something else.
Mr. Scothon, your letter to Consumer Reports stated the
Rock 'n Glide was not marketed for overnight sleep. But in the
company's own marketing materials, the product was marketed
for, quote, ``napping'' and, quote, ``while your baby gets
rocked to sleep.''
In Ms. Thompson's video that we watched at the start of the
hearing, she said that she put her son, Alexander, in the Rock
'n Play for 10 minutes, and when she checked on him, he had
stop breathing, and he had died. Does Fisher-Price now
acknowledge that the length of an infant's sleep time is
irrelevant if the sleep position is unsafe? Mr. Kreiz, what is
your answer to that?
Mr. Kreiz. Well, let me first say that we did not know of
any fatalities at the time of receiving the letter. We found of
those cases, the first case we found in January 2020.
Mr. Raskin. But the whole reason they sent you the letter
was because of the fatalities. Do you believe the company was
wrong not to recall the Rock 'n Glide earlier before we lost
two more children?
Mr. Kreiz. What every loss is a tragedy. And we continue to
collaborate with the CPSC to understand what is behind those
incidents. And we still believe that the Glider was safe when
used in accordance with instructions.
Mr. Raskin. Do you have any other incline products that are
still being marketed for sleep, still on the market?
Mr. Kreiz. No.
Mr. Raskin. You will have taken them all off?
Mr. Kreiz. Correct.
Mr. Raskin. Well, Madam Chair, I just want to say this
company had overwhelming evidence it was unsafe for babies to
sleep at an incline, even for short periods. They've been told
by a number of foreign countries. They've been told by a number
doctors. They have warned by Consumer Reports. If they chose to
keep their inclined products marketed for sleep on the market,
this demonstrates the absolute recklessness, at least, if not a
deliberate defiance of the facts. And this is a terrible
tragedy.
I hope that all of our colleagues, and I hope that these
witnesses will recognize, this is what government is for. We
need regulation because these companies overwhelmingly put
profit first. And that's the way that our system works. But we
cannot entrust to these companies the safety of our children.
This is why we need government.
I yield back to you, Madam Chair.
Chairwoman Maloney. The gentleman yields back.
Mr. Cloud. Madam Chair.
Chairwoman Maloney. To startup, Mr. Donalds is recognized
for five minutes. Mr. Donalds.
Mr. Cloud. Madam Chair. Madam Chair. Madam Chair.
Chairwoman Maloney. Whose seeks recognition?
Mr. Cloud. Michael Cloud.
Chairwoman Maloney. Michael Cloud, you're now recognized.
Mr. Cloud. The committee staff just asked me, for the
purposes of correcting the record, to bring up the fact that
the minority staff was not involved in producing the report.
They were not invited to do so. They were able to attend some
briefings along the way. But as the report's cover suggests, it
says it's prepared for the chairwoman. It does not mention the
chairman. And, so, just for the purposes of correcting the
report, I wanted to acknowledge Mr. Biggs' point.
Thank you very much. I yield back.
Chairwoman Maloney. So noted.
The gentleman from Florida, Mr. Donalds, is recognized for
five minutes. Mr. Donalds.
Mr. Donalds. Thank you, Madam Chair. First, I want to
associate myself with the comments that were stated by Mr.
Biggs. It would have been nice if I actually had a chance to
actually read this report before coming into this hearing, you
know, but it is what it is, and we're here now.
The second thing I would say, Madam Chair, is obviously I
have three sons, let's start there. I justly actually just
dropped my oldest off at college on Saturday. And, so I know
what it is to raise your children from when, you know, they are
infants, watching them sleep, trying to find something,
anything to help your children sleep. I've been through it. My
oldest was easy. He could sleep just about anywhere so it was
really not a big deal. My younger two sons, I mean, for lack of
a better phrase, it was kind of a nightmare to find the right
solution for them specifically to be able to get a two-hour
nap, let alone an overnight sleep.
And, so, my wife and I went through a lot of products. We
went through a lot of different things. I think my youngest
son, we actually did use an incline sleeper in his crib. And it
was tough, you know. We understand the possibilities of
rollover. But when a child won't sleep, unfortunately a lot of
parents who feel the pressure, whether it's just ultra-fatigue,
crying, trying to find a way to just get your child to be
comfortable. And it is very trying for a lot of parents.
So that's just my own personal stories. I know we used an
incline sleeper for our youngest son. And we had to take some
additional steps past what the manufacturer said on the
product.
The reason why I want to state that is because, don't get
me wrong, but the topic of this hearing is important. Nobody
wants to lose a child, let alone an infant. That's a tragedy I
can't even come to grips with or even understand. But I think
it's important for the chairwoman and the majority to
understand, that there are other issues affecting our country
which are impacting children. My colleagues have said some of
them.
The origins of the coronavirus, which seems like more and
more every day, it does look like it was leaked out of a lab,
and we're not even talking about that in this hearing.
Hopefully, that's something that the majority chooses to hear
and actually discuss, have a robust discussion in the Oversight
Committee, especially considering if anything had to do with
any grants that may or may not have been authorized or written
out of the executive branch, that would be very helpful to
understand, especially what's going on in southern border.
I was actually with Representative Cloud for my second trip
to the border. I was there last week. And you do have young
children who are in holding facilities, whether it's with
Border Patrol, or whether it is Health and Human Services. You
have young kids who are being basically moved by the current
administration all over the United States on coach buses, or on
airplanes, to other facilities that are being licensed or
basically being used through contract by HHS. It would be
important for the Oversight Committee to actually get to the
bottom of that, because you do have a situation where you have
children, infants up to 6 to 10, to 17 years old, who are
crossing our border with smugglers. They are not crossing with
parents. I've been down there. I've seen it.
You have some who are crossing with parents, but the vast
majority are crossing with smugglers. They are unaccompanied
minors and they are ending up in our facilities. You see kids
cry, you see the type of things you would never want to see
your child go through. And there are many, many children who
are experiencing that. I think that these are things that this
committee should definitely be looking into as well.
But that being said, you know, Mr. Scothon I think that's
how you pronounce your name. Is that right, Scothon?
Mr. Scothon. Scothon.
Mr. Donalds. Scothon. My apologies. My question for you is,
for the record, what are the actual safety protocols for the
Rock 'n Play Sleeper? How is it actually supposed to be
utilized?
Mr. Scothon. The Rock 'n Play Sleeper was a sleeper
intended for long-term, overnight, or unsupervised sleep. The
intent was to put the baby on the back, use the restraints.
Mr. Donalds. Let me ask this question. Define the
restraints. What are the actual restraints? Because restraints,
that sounds good in a committee. What is it actually?
Mr. Scothon. Thank you. It is basically a small harness, it
goes around the waist, it fits up between the legs, hits around
the waist to the slide and clips in. So it is basically two
clips around a triangular pad that would fit over the belly and
between the legs.
Mr. Donalds. So, in some respects, it is like an upside
down five-point harness, in some respects? Is that about right?
Mr. Scothon. In some respects it's a three-point, not a
five-point. We do the three point to keep it lower on the waist
and below.
Mr. Donalds. The clips that you basically buckle the child
in with into the restraints harness, are those adjustable?
Mr. Scothon. They are.
Mr. Donalds. How many deaths have occurred associated with
your products?
Mr. Scothon. Again, as I shared I believe right now we have
a report of 97, we are investigating those. Four have been
shown right now not to be our product. We are continuing to
investigate. At the time of the recall, it was 32. That was the
number.
Mr. Donalds. Are you currently in litigation in court
associated with these deaths?
Mr. Scothon. We are. We are in conversations with--yes?
Mr. Donalds. OK. Last question, of the ones that you've
been able to go and investigate, how many of these deaths have
occurred where the harness, or the restraint was not utilized?
Mr. Scothon. I don't have that specific number at this
time. And I wouldn't want to give you a specific quote to that
at this point.
Mr. Donalds. All right. I'm done.
I yield back, Madam Chair.
Chairwoman Maloney. The gentleman yields back.
And the chair recognizes the herself to really respond
briefly to his heartfelt comments. It's true we should be
focusing on COVID. In fact, the leader created a subcommittee
just dedicated to COVID led by very talented and dedicated
Representative from South Carolina, Congressman Clyburn.
We've had a series of meetings very focused on getting help
out to people, supplies they need and vaccinations. I believe
that his leadership and President Biden has been extraordinary
in centralizing the distribution of vaccines, giving them out
to the people. The President has called for a 70-percent
vaccination rate. We are working very hard in New York to meet
that rate. We will meet it, I believe, by July 4th. And I
understand a number of other states are working with the
Federal Government. We can't open up and be safe until
everyone's vaccinated. We have all dedicated ourselves to
working on it.
He rightfully expressed concern about the border. We have
conducted studies on the separation of children at the border.
We are working, trying to find their parents. No paperwork was
saved for this. No paperwork at all. So, it's very hard to find
the parents. In some cases, the parents of--we've documented,
they've already been deported, and the children we are trying
to figure out how to put them back together again. I want to
compliment one of the members of our committee, Jackie Speier,
who has led several journeys to the border with Members, myself
included, on many of the challenges there.
And we are in the midst, now, of a study on the
sterilization of women against their will, immigrants who came
it our country that were put into forced sterilization, which I
believe is cruel and unusual punishment. Maybe we should have a
meeting and go down to the border and to the facilities, and
meet with these women. We invite you to join us. I thank you
for raising those issues. And we are working on----
Mr. Donalds. Madam Chair?
Chairwoman Maloney. And I must say, very importantly, we
are looking at sole source, no-bid contracts that were just
negotiated and given to people. Our last hearing was over $600
million that was given to a company, sole source, no-bid
contract, to develop vaccines; only they haven't, to this date,
even developed one successful vaccine that we can trust to put
into people's arms. So we're working very hard in many of the
areas that the gentleman mentioned, and we ask you to join us.
And I now call on----
Mr. Donalds. Will the chairwoman yield?
Chairwoman Maloney.--Illinois, the gentleman from Illinois,
Mr. Davis, you are now recognized.
Mr. Donalds. Will the chairwoman yield?
Chairwoman Maloney. I am yielding to Mr. Davis.
Mr. Davis. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
Mr. Donalds. The chairwoman won't yield.
Mr. Davis [continuing]. For calling this very important
hearing, and I certainly appreciate our witnesses for being
with us.
The Rock 'n Play was recalled in April 2019, but documents
obtained by the committee shows that Mattel began receiving
reports that infants had died in the Rock 'n Play as early as
2012. On October 26, 2012, Mattel received a report from a
consumer who said that a year earlier, in October 2011, her
two-month-old son, and I quote, ``had stopped breathing,'' end
of quote, while in the Rock 'n Play.
The consumer told Mattel that she believed, and I quote
again, ``Due to the slant in the product, his head may have
been positioned in his chest at the time. She picked him up,
and thankfully he began breathing again. The mother wrote to
Mattel because she loved the convenience of the Rock 'n Play,
and was considering using it for her next child, but she was
worried about the safety of the design.
She then asked whether the company had made any changes. A
Mattel employee told the mother that the company had not made
any changes, offered her a refund, and asked her to ship the
Rock 'n Play back to the company. Internal documents show that
a Mattel employee made a note on the report dated June 2013,
more than six months later, which simply read, quote again,
``No further contact. Closing case.''
Mr. Scothon, is this how Mattel typically handles these
type of reports?
Mr. Scothon. Sir, whenever we get a report, we do our best
to investigate, and find out, and look at every report
individually. So, I can't speak to that one incident. I was not
involved directly with that incident. What I can tell you is,
when we elevate and escalate anything that might be considered
a safety contact or phone call into our safety process, and it
elevates and activates the ability for us to go back, engage
with those and really implement the safety overview process to
better understand the situation.
Mr. Davis. Let me ask, did you conduct any additional
research or testing to make sure that the Rock 'n Play was safe
for use?
Mr. Scothon. We have done extensive testing, both from the
beginning, prior to the product launch. We followed that up
with additional continued observational research study
throughout. In 2016, we did additional study with regard to the
rate--excuse me, the degree of incline and the impact on
breathing as it was shown not to have any impact at all.
Mr. Davis. Thank you.
Did Mattel take any steps to warn consumers about the
possible danger reported in that case?
Mr. Scothon. Specific to that case, I'm not aware of any
steps that were taken to talk to the consumer. What I can say
is we were obviously were investigating that case. When we
could not make contact further, that may be why it was closed,
that case specifically. But what I can tell you is going back
to the beginning, whenever we get a report of safety, we
implement our safety processes. We engage with the consumers.
We try to understand more----
Mr. Davis. My time is running. So let me ask you this: Less
than two months after the report we just discussed, Mattel
received another report about an infant who had died in the
Rock 'n Play. And according to internal documents, the company
tried to followup with the consumer twice, received no
response, closed the case. Does the company do any other
research to try and rectify or deal with that situation?
Mr. Scothon. Once again, sir, we will make contact and make
the efforts to reach those consumers. We immediately also
communicate back to the CPSC with all of our information to
make sure that they are notified within 24 hours of what we are
to see if they have any information.
Mr. Davis. Let me--my time is about to run out, Mr. Kreiz.
Let me ask you, based on the reports we just discussed, do you
think your company took the potential safety issues with the
Rock 'n Play seriously enough when you first began receiving
these troubling reports?
Mr. Kreiz. I am absolutely convinced that we did everything
we could to ensure that our products are safe, and that we
looked at every case to understand if there is anything we can
do to change or to protect----
Mr. Davis. Well, I'm not really convinced that that's what
totally happened. And I think that there's no reason why the
manufacturers should be allowed to shield information from the
public about deaths associated with their products. Americans
have a right to know whether the products they are buying may
pose a danger to them or their families. I think a legend
corporation can do better.
Madam Chairman, I know my time has expired, but I'd like to
submit two additional questions for the record and get a
response in writing.
And I yield back.
Chairwoman Maloney. So ordered. Thank you.
The gentleman yields back.
Chairwoman Maloney. The gentleman from Texas, Mr. Fallon,
is recognized for five minutes. Mr. Fallon.
Mr. Fallon. Madam Chair, thank you. I yield one minute to
my colleague, Representative Donalds, from Florida.
Representative Donalds?
Mr. Donalds. Oh, I'm here. I was waiting for the
chairwoman. I didn't hear her, so I was trying to be respectful
of the committee.
OK. Well, I will say this and add this in it. Thank you,
Mr. Fallon, for yielding some time to me.
I do understand that the administration has been doing what
it feels is best when it comes to making sure people get shots
in arms. But we have a real theory going on right now, an
active one, about whether the coronavirus came from a lab in
Wuhan Province. Instead of us just waiting for the
administration to figure out and do some investigation, this
committee should be doing this. Like I said, I'm just a new
member so I'm not on the special committee led by Mr. Clyburn.
I don't know what they are doing in their committee. I think it
is important that the Oversight Committee actually step into
these issues as well and begin to actually study them, and have
hearings on them, and get to the bottom of stuff as well. We
shouldn't just push it off to some select committee, because
what I've found in observing Congress is that multiple
committees tend to investigate things when Congress decides
that it wants to investigate things. So that's what I'll say.
I'll stop there.
And I yield back to Mr. Fallon.
Mr. Fallon. Thank you.
And Madam Chair, thank you for the time. I'd like to
associate my remarks with Representative Biggs and
Representative Donalds. Historically, decades, and even in a
century from now, folks are going to be looking at how the
United States handled the coronavirus, and I really believe the
Biden border crisis. And these are things that would be
wonderful if this committee, and we are really perfectly poised
to deal with things just like this.
The lab leak theory is the story of the century. Is it
true? And we should do everything we can to foster finding out
the truth. And also with the Biden border crisis, having
visited the border, being a border states, the things that
frighten me are the drugs cartels are de facto in charge of our
southern border and they create misery. And I think everybody
on this committee, and for that matter, the folks in our
Chamber, nobody is going to sympathize with the drug cartels.
So how active are they? Because the folks that are coming from
Central America, so many of them are being provided free
transit, and then working essentially as indentured servants.
I've also read because, again, we are a border state, and I
have been researching this for over a decade, that a very high
percentage of women that migrate from Southern Mexico and
Central America are either raped or sexually assaulted along
the journey. These are the kinds of things that I think
everybody on this committee would be in favor of getting to the
bottom and stopping evil. So I wanted to thank my colleagues
for their remarks.
I'm trying to get my arms around this and simplify things.
I know it's difficult, as a former business owner, to operate
in a very imperfect world, and particularly when you're making
and producing products that infants will use. And,
unfortunately, there are tragedies that will occur. And I
thought initially reading the material that we're talking about
single digits here. Ninety-seven is an alarming number, a
frightening number. And, so, I wanted to ask quickly and I
don't have a lot of time, but Mr. Kreiz, did you just say in
your testimony about 30 minutes ago that you were personally
unaware of any fatalities until 2020? Did I get that right?
Mr. Kreiz. That was only in relation to the glider, the 4-
in-1 Glider, not the Rock 'n Play.
Mr. Fallon. OK. So when were you made aware of some
fatalities with the Rock 'n Play was it the sleeper?
Mr. Kreiz. Yes, the company first learned about it in 2012.
Mr. Fallon. 2012.
Is that when--were you the CEO then? Were you working?
Mr. Kreiz. No. I joined the company in April 2018.
Mr. Fallon. 2018. OK. Thank you. All right.
So Mr. Scothon, were you--how long have you been with the
company?
Mr. Scothon. My total tenure with the company is 20 years.
I was with Mattel up until approximately 2011, 2012, left, and
came back in January 2018 as the head of Fisher-Price.
Mr. Fallon. OK. So you were there when Australia, I guess--
did they ban it or did they even allow it to be there in the
first place?
Mr. Scothon. Yes, so to be clear, I did not have
responsibility on Fisher-Price during that period in time. I
was in a Mattel role but not on the infant and preschool
business but I can speak to that. It's my understanding that we
were reaching out. We were considering the launch of the
product, and it was the Australian regulatory group that was
not comfortable with that. And as we do with many products, we
work with the local regulation groups to understand and be
aligned. As a result, we did not launch the product in
Australia.
Mr. Fallon. OK. And so and my time is pretty much up.
But I just wanted to say real quickly that it concerns me
greatly that an American company would see that and have full
knowledge that Australia and Canada wouldn't allow this product
to be sold and yet I just don't think--maybe it was the legal
thing that, you know, legally you could sell the product in the
United States. I just don't feel it was the moral thing to do
when you're talking about 97 deaths. That's tremendous.
And, Madam Chair, my time is up. So I'll yield back.
Mr. Raskin. [Presiding.] Thank you.
The gentleman's time is expired.
Ms. Wasserman Schultz is recognized for your five minutes
of questioning.
Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And I want to thank the chairwoman and the leadership of
this committee for not just being a one-track mind when it
comes to the issues that the Committee on Oversight and Reform
focus on. Ninety-seven babies, as Mr. Fallon just noted, is a
stunning number.
And, in fact, in 2005, a full four years before the Rock 'n
Play was released on the market, the American Academy of
Pediatrics released safe sleep guidelines, advising that babies
should be wholly on their backs for sleep and that a, quote,
``firm crib mattress covered by a sheet is the recommended
sleeping surface.'' In fact, I put up the definition of
``supine.'' The worked ``horizontal'' is nowhere in it. It is
face up, on your back. That's the definition.
With an inclined seat and plush padding, the Rock 'n Play
clearly defied safe sleeping recommendations and it was
released in 2009. It was--when it was released in 2009, it was
the only product on the market designed for infants to sleep at
an angle, settling on a 30-degree incline for the Rock 'n
Play's seat back.
Mr. Scothon, briefly, how did Mattel land on the 30-degree
incline for the Rock 'n Play seat back?
Mr. Scothon. So, the Rock 'n Play was extensively
researched and developed. We used both expertise that we had
in-house. We looked at external studies that had been done on
other product categories to understand inclines and reports. We
spoke to an outside medical family practitioner with a focus on
biomechanics. And it was at that point that the 30 degree and
under, that was done in partnership as well. That was where our
first started----
Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Reclaiming my time, in fact, that
outside expert has since lost his medical license and was
completely discredited in many cases in which he served as an
expert witness.
You know, the committee conducted interviews with several
Mattel employees, none of whom could confirm how or why the
company settled on a 30-degree angle, other than in reference
to products that were not intended for sleep.
For example, Mattel's senior director for product safety
said the company, quote, ``relied on the research that was
available, showing where angles had been a problem like car
seats.'' Car seats have an angle of about 45 degrees, and
medical studies available at the time the Rock 'n Play was
released show they are not safe for infant sleep. A Fisher-
Price engineer who helped create the Rock 'n Play said that the
company decided on 30 degrees for the Rock 'n Play because it
is, quote, ``well below 45 degrees.''
Mr. Scothon, before bringing the Rock 'n Play to market,
did the company do any research to verify that a--to verify
that a 30-degree angle was safe for a product that would be
marketed for sleep? Yes or no, please.
Mr. Scothon. We did extensive research. I can't say that it
was verifying the 30-degree question.
Ms. Wasserman Schultz. OK. Thank you.
The committee interviewed Mattel's senior director of
product safety. When asked whether the company had done any
research to establish that a 30-degree angle was safe, he
responded, and I quote, ``I can't say I've seen research like
that. Typically at least in my experience you don't see
research saying things are safe. You know, people research
things that are not safe.''
Mr. Scothon, does that response align with your experience?
Mr. Scothon. That response certainly is reflective of how
we've looked at things in the past. I think as we've shown----
Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Reclaiming my time.
So in other words, Mattel relied only on research showing
what is not safe, rather than conducting its own research
showing that your product design is safe.
Mr. Kreiz, let me give you an opportunity to respond. Is
the statement by your employee a fair characterization of
Mattel's practice where they just focus on what wasn't safe,
not what was safe?
Mr. Kreiz. This is what the company did at the time, I
believe. But it is important to say that we also looked at
other studies and we did in 2018 a study by one of the top
engineering firms in the country that said, that concluded that
infant facilities occurred as frequently----
Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Reclaiming my time. Thank you.
You know, if most parents knew how Mattel had gone about
designing the Rock 'n Play, they never would have bought it for
their infants. I have three children of my own. I know it's
hard to get babies to sleep. I had twins. Trust me. I
understand. And busy moms and dads count on safe products from
trusted brands to help with that. Fisher-Price is, you know,
supposed to be among them but it's shameful what the company
did here. Just listen to the answers to my questions.
They focused not only what was safe but on what wasn't. And
if companies can't be trusted, the government has to have a
real ability to notify parents or quickly recall products. The
existing protections failed here. Parents deserve a lot more
from the companies designing products for our children and from
the laws designed to protect them, and I'm very eager to work
with the chairwoman and my colleagues on improving both.
Thank you. I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. Raskin. The gentlewoman yields her time back.
I now recognize Mr. Johnson for his five minutes of
questioning.
Mr. Johnson. I thank the chair.
Mr. Scothon, a baby's head is large and heavy in proportion
to the rest of the infant's body. Isn't that correct?
Mr. Scothon. Yes.
Mr. Johnson. And the baby's neck muscles are not strong
enough to support its head. Correct?
Mr. Scothon. Well, that's very much focused around the
development of a child.
Mr. Johnson. I mean, in general, an infant is not able to
support its head with its neck muscles. Isn't that correct?
Mr. Scothon. In the first few weeks of life, yes. That is
correct.
Mr. Johnson. And the Rock 'n Play's 30-degree incline
allows a baby's head to slump forward which can block the
baby's trachea and cause the baby to choke to death by
suffocation. The 97 babies who died, most of them died from
suffocation. Isn't that correct?
Mr. Scothon. Sir, first of all, the----
Mr. Johnson. Is that correct, yes or no?
Mr. Scothon. No. I do not----
Mr. Johnson. All right. OK. Thank you.
In April 2019, when the Consumer Product Safety Commission
and Mattel were negotiating the terms of the Rock 'n Play
recall, Mattel tried to insert language into the agreement,
stating that the Rock 'n Play's design had not caused dozens of
infant deaths that occurred while using the product. The
Consumer Product Safety Commission rejected that language, and
the Rock 'n Play was recalled in April 2019.
Isn't that correct, Mr. Kreiz?
Mr. Kreiz. I don't recall the specifics, but I trust what
you say.
Mr. Johnson. Is that your understanding, Mr. Scothon?
Mr. Scothon. Well, when we enter into a voluntary recall,
we are removing the product. So that's what I can recollect and
remember. I can't----
Mr. Johnson. Do you recall that--that there was language
which you sought to include which stated that the Rock 'n Play
was not the cause of death for the infants?
Mr. Scothon. Sir, when we're recalling a product, what
we're doing is removing it from the marketplace.
Mr. Johnson. I understand that. I'm just asking you a
question. Let me move on.
Mr. Scothon. Sorry.
Mr. Johnson. In October 2019 the Consumer Product Safety
Commission published an independent study conducted by Dr. Erin
Mannen, who is a baby biomechanics researchers, and a team of
pediatric experts and the study concluded that infant inclined
sleepers were unsafe for infant sleep and put infants at a
higher risk of suffocating than a firm crib mattress.
Last week based on--based in part on Dr. Mannen's research,
the Consumer Product Safety Commission passed a rule banning
all infant inclined sleepers because of the dangers that they
posed to infants.
Mr. Kreiz, do you agree that the new rule banning infant
inclined sleepers will help protect infants from suffocation in
the future?
Mr. Kreiz. My understanding was that Dr. Mannen's report
was false. It was wrong in that she placed the infants----
Mr. Johnson. You don't believe then that the new rule
banning infant inclined sleepers will help infants from
suffocating in the future?
Mr. Kreiz. Well, we're out of that business. I think it's
important to recognize the study----
Mr. Johnson. Do you think that that--do you think that that
new rule will protect infants from suffocation?
Mr. Kreiz. I believe that it's important to use product in
accordance with the product, what it was intended.
Mr. Johnson. OK. Well, let me ask you this. Do you
acknowledge that Rock 'n Play was not safe for infants?
Mr. Kreiz. We believe the product was safe when used in
accordance----
Mr. Johnson. Is that misused and that these infants
suffocated because the parents failed to follow the
instructions. I get that.
Mr. Kreiz. No, we don't blame the parents.
Mr. Johnson. Has Fisher-Price or Mattel issued any written
warnings to the millions of consumers who purchased the
recalled Rock 'n Play products, warning those consumers about
the inherent dangers of the Rock 'n Play and that they should
not put their babies in that Rock 'n Play?
Mr. Kreiz. Well, we work in collaboration and strong
cooperation with the CPSC and----
Mr. Johnson. Have you sent a notice to consumers, sir? Yes
or no.
Mr. Kreiz. No.
Mr. Johnson. Mr. Kreiz, is Fisher-Price or Mattel or any of
its affiliates or subsidiaries still selling the Rock 'n Play
in foreign countries? Yes or no.
Mr. Kreiz. Sir, just want to come back to my prior
question, we----
Mr. Johnson. Yes or no, are you still selling that Rock 'n
Play in foreign countries?
Mr. Kreiz. No.
Mr. Raskin. The gentleman's time is expired, but the
witness may answer that question.
Mr. Kreiz.
Mr. Kreiz. No, no, we don't.
And we did send a recall notice to consumers to correct my
prior answer.
Mr. Raskin. OK. Thank you. The gentleman's time is expired.
I now recognize Ms. Speier for her five minutes of
questioning.
Ms. Speier. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Kreiz, I realize you weren't the CEO of the company at
the time. But back in 2012, CPSC actually--or FDA, I should
say, warned customers to avoid any kind of contraption that was
being used for babies that was not totally flat. By then, your
product was linked to 13 deaths over 15 years. So, the FDA had
made that statement. You already had 15 deaths.
In 2013, you actually recalled 800,000 Rock 'n Plays
because of mold. So, death wasn't significant to recall the
Rock 'n Plays but mold was? Do you have a comment to that?
Mr. Kreiz. Sure. My understanding was that the mold recall
was about a product issue.
But, more importantly, when it comes to babies' safety, we
do not compromise, we do not take any risk, and we will always
go the extra length to confirm that our products are safe and
appropriate for usage. In the--as my understanding is that we
continued to analyze and investigate every specific incident--
--
Ms. Speier. Reclaiming my time, if this happened today and
it was an issue of mold versus death, would you have done the
same thing and not recalled the Rock 'n Plays?
Mr. Kreiz. Well, of course. Babies----
Ms. Speier. Yes or no, please. Yes or No. I have limited
time.
Mr. Kreiz. Yes. And we will always prioritize safety above
all.
Ms. Speier. All right. What about the fact that daycare
centers may still have these Rock 'n Plays? Have you recalled
them? Have you notified them, and have you recalled them?
Mr. Kreiz. Yes, we take extensive actions to promote the
recall in an effort to raise consumer awareness. We provide
information on our website. We use----
Ms. Speier. No. Are you recalling them? It's unclear
whether you're just noticing the public now. Or are you
recalling these products?
Mr. Kreiz. Yes, we have recalled it.
Ms. Speier. You have recalled them. So, you're refunding
money to all of these purchasers?
Mr. Kreiz. I'm sorry. Yes. Sorry. I got--now I understand
your question. We have recalled the product back in 2019 and
are proactively in the marketplace, ensuring that we reclaim
any product that is in the market that we can get--that we are
aware of.
Ms. Speier. Would you support--would you support an
amendment to the CPSC that would no longer provide the kind of
a gag rule that allows for deaths of products to not be
disclosed to the public?
Mr. Kreiz. We would be more than happy to collaborate with
the regulators to improve all--every aspect of consumer safety
and I'm here, committing to do that and work----
Ms. Speier. So, I guess my question is: Would you oppose
the repeal of that section 6(b) of the Consumer Product Safety
Act?
Mr. Kreiz. I would need to understand that better.
Ms. Speier. It's quite simple. Basically, it would allow
that the names and the information about products that are
linked to injuries and death be made public.
The only reason why you ended up recalling the Rock 'n Play
was because consumer--the Consumer Reports inadvertently got
the data from the CPSC that showed the deaths and once the
deaths were made public through consumer reports, then game
over.
So, the problem is that the public does not know. And my
question to you is: Do you have any other products that are
manufactured today that are in the marketplace that have been
linked to deaths of children?
Mr. Kreiz. Well, we recalled the gliders that were linked--
--
Ms. Speier. I understand that. I'm talking about any other
products that we, the American public, do not know about that
have caused or have been associated with the deaths of
children.
Mr. Kreiz. We share all information with the CPSC. I don't
have any further data than that, but I can tell you we work
transparently with the CPSC----
Ms. Speier. So, to the extent they already have the
information, would you be willing to allow them to release that
information to the general public and not be subject to this
section 6?
Mr. Kreiz. I think it's important to note that----
Ms. Speier. Yes or no, please.
Mr. Kreiz. Yes. But it's important to note that some of the
information that is in the market is inaccurate and not always
correct. And, of course, as I said, I'm saying here that we
will commit to work collaboratively with the regulators.
Ms. Speier. You just said, yes, you would allow the
Consumer Product Safety Commission to release the names and
information of any products associated with deaths that you
have manufactured. That's what you just said. Is that correct?
Mr. Kreiz. I said yes, but it's important that some of the
information is not accurate. And, therefore, it's important
that whatever is being released is vetted and confirmed before
it's being put out there.
Ms. Speier. Well, either a child has died or a child has
not died. And if associated with a product, then I think the
American public has the right to know.
I yield back.
Chairwoman Maloney. [Presiding.] The gentlelady from
Massachusetts, Ms. Pressley, is now recognized for five
minutes.
Ms. Pressley. Thank you, Madam Chair. And thank you for
convening this critically important hearing.
And also given your prioritization of children in this
committee, I thank you for your partnership on the Children's
Protection Act, centering the health and well-being of our
Nation's children.
You know, for too long the Federal Government has not
prioritized the safety and well-being of infants, toddlers, and
children in the regulatory process. We are here today because
our flawed system of consumer protection makes it far too easy
for corporations and manufacturers like Mattel to hide the
harmful and potentially deadly impacts of their products on the
infants, toddlers, and children who use them. Additionally,
because of a lack of oversight, companies may not even
adequately research whether or not their products are safe for
their intended and advertised use.
The Rock n' Play Sleeper, built to be an aid to parents
putting their babies to sleep fast and easy, resulted in more
than 50 deaths from suffocation and injuries. Just last month
or, rather, recently Fisher-Price executives told the committee
that the company did not conduct any additional safety reviews
of its infant products, despite the tragic loss resulting from
the Rock n' Play Sleeper.
Mr. Scothon, is it correct that Mattel did not conduct new
safety reviews of its other infant products when deaths from
the Rock 'n Play were first reported?
Mr. Scothon. What I can say is when deaths of the Rock 'n
Play were first reported, we investigated those extensively. We
continued to do research. And we applied any of those learnings
not just to anything that we might have found about we, again,
continued to find the products----
Ms. Pressley. I'm sorry. Reclaiming my time. I'll take that
as a no.
And the reason why I'm asking is just last week we learned
that Mattel has agreed to recall two additional infant
products, the Rock 'n Glide Soother and the Soothe 'n Play
Glider, because of multiple infant deaths.
Mr. Scothon, in light of these two recalls, has the company
published any plans to conduct a safety review of its infant
products that currently remain on the market?
Mr. Scothon. So, we are always looking at all of the
products that we market, that we sell, and we take those. The
learnings that apply to the 2-in-1 Glider related to seeing
that a product not intended for long-term sleep was being used
in that manner----
Ms. Pressley. Mr. Scothon, Mr. Scothon, it's a very simple
question. So, just yes or no, has the company published any
plans to conduct a safety review of its infant products that
currently remain on the market?
Mr. Scothon. We very not published any commitment to that
effect but----
Ms. Pressley. Thank you. Thank you.
Mr. Kreiz, Mattel and Fisher-Price are two of the most
recognized names in the world of infant and child products.
Your own company's materials produced to the committee site the
brand's name recognition as a competitive asset. Mr. Kreiz,
would you agree that name recognition is an asset for Mattel?
Yes or no?
Mr. Kreiz. Yes.
Ms. Pressley. And would you agree that consumers are more
likely to trust that products from brands they recognize by
name are safe and have been thoroughly vetted? Yes or no?
Mr. Kreiz. Yes.
Ms. Pressley. Given how your company has repeatedly abused
this trust, do you support regulatory reforms which will
prioritize the safety of children and make it easier for
products to be recalled? Yes or no?
Mr. Kreiz. I do not agree with your premise, respectfully.
Ms. Pressley. All right. Moving on. I'll take that as a no.
Parents understandably believe that when they buy products
for their babies, those products have been thoroughly tested
and are safe. They also believe and trust that rules and
regulations are in place to hold manufacturers accountable.
However, the current consumer product safety system is failing
parents and families across the Nation. It is quite literally
costing us the lives of our children.
Today's hearing is devastating proof we cannot trust
companies to act with moral clarity, even when babies' lives
are on the line. And that is why we need to pass legislation
like the Children's Protection Act proposed by Chairwoman
Maloney and myself. We must hold companies accountable.
Thank you, and I yield back.
Chairwoman Maloney. The gentlelady from California, Ms.
Porter, is recognized for five minutes.
Ms. Katie Porter.
Ms. Porter. Thank you so much, Madam Chair.
Mr. Scothon, you served in a series of executive roles at
Fisher-Price, which is part of Mattel, from 2000 to 2012. And
those roles included developing and introducing the Rock 'n
Play to American consumers in 2009, while you were executive.
Fisher-Price marketed the Rock 'n Play as a safe, easy way for
exhausted parents on a budget to get their babies to sleep at
night. Is that correct?
Mr. Scothon. I was with Mattel during 2000 to 2012. I was
not involved in the Rock 'n Play development from 2009.
Ms. Porter. Only. But that is how Fisher-Price marketed the
product.
And let me tell you, as an exhausted parent on a budget who
wants their kids to go to sleep, babies to go to sleep, I can
understand why American consumers responded to that marketing
and purchased Rock 'n Play. Now it's been well-established at
this point that inclined sleep can be harmful, even deadly, to
infants. And today, Mr. Scothon, Fisher-Price and Mattel are no
longer selling any incline sleeper products. Is that correct?
Mr. Scothon. That is correct.
Ms. Porter. And you've recalled all incline sleepers, and
you've notified parents that they're dangerous. Is that
correct?
Mr. Scothon. The Rock 'n Play was our inclined sleeper
product. That was recalled in 2019, and we have done all the
outreach to due to prior to bringing the product back, yes.
Ms. Porter. Do--you mentioned--I asked about all incline
sleepers and you responded about the Rock 'n Play. Do you have
other inclined sleepers on the marketplace today?
Mr. Scothon. No. Once again, to clarify, there is an
inclined sleeper which is something that is considered for
long-term and overnight sleep and other products that are
intended where a baby may fall asleep but we suggest that are
then moved to a hard, flat surface. So, the Rock 'n Play----
Ms. Porter. So, babies--babies, like exhausted moms, can
fall asleep anywhere because they need sleep but, Mr. Scothon,
you're a marketing expert. So, I want to ask you a marketing
question, drawing on your expertise. If you wanted to sell
someone a product related to sleep, would you mention things
like counting sheep, catching some Z's, having sweet dreams?
Because sleeping and dreaming are pretty closely tied together
in folks' minds. You can't dream while you're awake. Correct?
Mr. Scothon. Yes.
Ms. Porter. OK. So, I want to ask you about a Fisher-Price
product that I found on Target's website. It is called the
Fisher-Price Sweet Snugapuppy, Sweet Snugapuppy Dreams Deluxe
Bouncer. Would a baby sleeping in this and fell asleep in this;
Dreams Deluxe Bouncer be at an incline?
Mr. Scothon. If a baby fell asleep, yes, they would be at
an incline.
Ms. Porter. OK. And they would be asleep in this incline
situation and it's marketed as Dreams Deluxe Bouncer but
nowhere in your sales information, on your website, on Target's
website, or Amazon's website does it say that a child should
not be allowed to sleep in it. In fact, in response to a
Question and A on the Mattel's website, it just says it
shouldn't be used for prolonged periods of sleep. What does
``prolonged'' mean?
Mr. Scothon. Well, the way--the fact is we know that babies
with the amount of hours that they sleep in a year will
occasionally fall asleep wherever they might be and that's why
we recommend and the warning statement state to not leave them
unsupervised, to move them, and don't use it for prolonged
sleep. And it's why we also----
Ms. Porter. Reclaiming my time.
Mr. Scothon. Yes.
Ms. Porter. How long can my child safely sleep at an
incline?
Mr. Scothon. Again, I don't have that specific number. I,
you know, what I would say is that----
Ms. Porter. How long----
Mr. Scothon [continuing]. If you were with your child----
Ms. Porter. Reclaiming my time, how long can they have
Sleep Snugapuppy dreams? Why are you marketing this as a
product that will give people dreams if it's not for sleeping?
Mr. Scothon. Again, we reference that as a product where a
baby will sit and play and soothe and I understand your point
but----
Ms. Porter. You market it, just reclaiming my time, Mr.
Scothon, you market it as a product where babies will dream a/
k/a sleep. And yet it is not safe for a baby to sleep in this
position. So, I have two questions for you. Will you commit to
parents and consumers right now to change the name of this
product to avoid and remove any mention of ``dreams'' or
``sleep'' from the name?
Mr. Scothon. Back in 2019, we removed any reference to
``sleep'' on all those products. I will commit to going back
through all of our current offering, evaluating everything, and
to ensure that we are as clear because, again, our commitment
is to safety and I will commit to going back through every item
to make sure we are sending the right message.
Ms. Porter. OK. Last question. Will you commit to including
in all future bouncer or similar products like this clear
information for the parents that their children should never be
allowed to sleep in these products? Because right now the only
way you can find that is visiting the Fisher-Price Q and A.
Will you put it on the product and in the description of the
product that it is not--children should never be allowed to
sleep?
Mr. Scothon. I--we do put that there. We have also
committed to the Safe Start campaign which is an educational
video campaign to help parents understand----
Ms. Porter. Mr. Scothon, it does not say on the Target web
page not to allow your baby to sleep in this product. And it's
called the Dreams Bouncer. Look at it. Look how cute the
Snugapuppy is. I feel like taking a nap right now.
Mr. Scothon, please don't market things about dreams or
sleep or counting sleep or catching some Z's if the product
isn't safe to sleep in. I'm sure it's a wonderful bouncer. I
raised my kids in Fisher-Price products. I care about your
company. I counted on your company. Please commit to taking
action so that other parents can count on their kids getting
safely to the teen years like mine have.
Thank you very much, and I yield back.
Chairwoman Maloney. The gentlelady's time has expired. She
yields back.
The gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Sarbanes, you are now
recognized for five minutes.
Mr. Sarbanes. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I want to
thank our witnesses for being here today.
Representative Krishnamoorthi, I think, touched on
something that has many of us on the committee anxious and that
is that there seems to be a breakdown in the culture there at
Mattel and Fisher-Price when it comes to safety which really is
about integrity and leadership at all levels, certainly coming
from the top. And I want to put a finer point on that.
The testimony today, the track record around this product,
and even to some degree your explanations of how we've gotten
to this point suggest to me that you view the loss of life, in
this case the loss of children's lives, as a cost of doing
business in this space. Because it doesn't seem as though,
until press reports or consumer reports or other outcrying
criticism caught up with you, that you were willing to make
some of the changes that you describe today and seek to reach a
higher level of safety standard.
Mr. Kreiz and Mr. Scothon, did you view loss of life as a
cost of doing business for Mattel and Fisher-Price?
Mr. Kreiz. Of course not. Safety is our highest priority.
And nothing, nothing is more important to us than the safety
and well-being of our consumers. And we--I can tell you that we
are confident that all of our products are safe when used as
intended in accordance with the warning and instructions.
We always operate with integrity, with the highest
integrity, with quality and safety as our most important
priority. And this is how we operate the company.
Mr. Sarbanes. Let me reclaim my time.
I think you described a safety committee that has now been
established. Can you tell me what that is again recently?
Mr. Kreiz. I'm sorry. Can you repeat the question?
Mr. Sarbanes. You mention a safety committee that has now
been established. What is that exactly?
Mr. Kreiz. This is a new committee composed of five
pediatricians that we formed recently to provide medical and
scientific advice to the company. The council meets regularly
with our internal safety teams to provide professional
opinions, advice, and recommendations.
Mr. Sarbanes. When was that established?
Mr. Kreiz. Earlier this year.
Mr. Sarbanes. When exactly? I mean, in the last month or
so?
Mr. Kreiz. I can't recall exactly. Around February or
March.
Mr. Sarbanes. Uh-huh. If safety has been historically the
highest priority--you keep saying that over and over again--why
is it that it took until the first months of this year after
all of this outcry and heightened accountability coming at you
to establish a safety committee with five pediatricians and
other experts, I gather? Why did it take this long if safety is
a cultural hallmark of your company?
Mr. Kreiz. Well, we always aim to improve. And I can tell
you that this committee specifically was been in the works for
many months before until we identified the right doctors, the
right pediatricians with the highest qualifications we could
find that we believe would be a very important support in our
safety practices.
Mr. Sarbanes. Well, what I understand from the record is
this search for the pediatricians, the highest standard and
expertise, is one that you had completely abandoned or never
actually undertaken previously, because the people advising you
on the particular product that we're looking at today didn't
seem to meet that standard.
So I'm glad you've done it but it troubles me that you only
set this thing up, in a sense, after the fact and I think the
standard by which you're seeking to operate now is in effect an
admission that the standard that you were using previously was
woefully inadequate.
And I'm going return what I said at the front of this call,
because I still think it's an accurate description. I think
until you got called out significantly on the dangers around
this product, the view from inside the company--now hopefully
it's not a cultural perspective but if it is, it needs to be
cleaned up. The view from inside the company is, if there's
loss of life, that's a cost of doing business.
With that, I yield back my time, Madam Chair.
Chairwoman Maloney. The gentleman yields back.
Before we close, I want to offer Mr. Cloud an opportunity
to offer any closing remarks he may have.
Mr. Cloud, you are now recognized.
Mr. Cloud. I just want to thank the chairwoman for this
topic. As you know, has been mentioned, this is an extremely
important topic. Nothing could be more concerning than safety,
security of our children when buying one of these products.
Also just want to echo we would love to be able to
collaborate on these sort of topics. And so as many committee
members have mentioned, the ability for us to be able to be
involved in the process, even from a committee level in
preparing reports and such, and to get them in advance in such
a way that we could have time to review them before hearings on
said reports would be extremely helpful.
And it's also been mentioned that there's a number of
topics that we were ready to address in the last--in the last
term under a different administration that this committee has
not been willing to take up during this term and they're as
much as important to the American people now as they were then.
Many of the issues have only gotten worse and, therefore, need
to be addressed even more and so I would just, as we continue
to move forward, continue to urge that those topics be taken up
in future committee hearings.
Thank you for the testimony today. Thank you for being here
to work with us on this issue. We look forward to continued
discussions on this.
Thank you very much, Chairwoman.
Chairwoman Maloney. The gentleman yields back and I thank
you and I now recognize myself.
I would like to thank our witnesses for their testimony
today and Mattel for cooperating with the committee's
investigation.
Before I close, I would like to enter into the record
letters and statements the committee received including one
from a mother whose daughter died while she was in a Rock 'n
Play and a--several others regarding the flaws in Federal
oversight of consumer product safety.
I ask unanimous consents that these materials be placed in
the record as part of the official hearing.
So ordered.
Chairwoman Maloney. I am appalled by the conduct of this
company in selling a product for 10 years, despite the company
knowing the risk to infants. Fisher-Price admitted here today
for the first time 97 infants died in the Rock 'n Play. That is
nearly twice the number of deaths previously reported, and it's
nearly seen times the number that Fisher-Price admitted to CPSC
in 2018 when it was fighting tooth and nail--they were fighting
to stop the recall.
It is clear that Fisher-Price has not been honest with the
American public, with the American parents about the danger of
this product.
So, Mr. Kreiz, Mr. Scothon, I am asking your company
provide complete records on every single death in the Rock n'
Play Sleeper you sold, regardless of where these babies died.
We also need records of all infants who died in your company's
other products including sleepers, rockers, or gliders.
Mr. Kreiz and Mr. Scothon, will you commit to providing
those documents to the committee by the end of the week? Will
you?
Mr. Kreiz. We're happy to cooperate and I can't commit to
provide all documents, if they're not available, but we will do
whatever we can to comply with your request.
Chairwoman Maloney. By the way, I want to be clear that I
hold the Federal Government to the very same standard. And just
this last week I reintroduced 3716, along with Congresswoman
Pressley, with whom I've worked on the Children's Protection
Act. Right now, Federal agencies are not required to analyze or
disclose the impact of regulatory changes on children, and they
rarely provide evidence that their policies do no harm to
Americans's youth.
Mr. Kreiz, do you think the Federal Government should be
required to perform such analysis and disclosures before
Federal rules go into effect? Mr. Kreiz.
Mr. Kreiz. We will do whatever we can do support your
actions and your recommendations. We share a common interest
and a common commitment to safety, and we will do whatever we
can from our side to support you and collaborate with you.
Chairwoman Maloney. Well, I firmly believe that this
rigorous analysis and transparency is critical, which is why
H.R. 3716 would require Federal agencies to undertake a
childhood trauma impact study before a rule is finalized to
ensure the health and well-being of all children are
prioritized.
These analyses would be conducted by review panels with
expertise in children's health and education, as well as
experience in advocating for the health and welfare of all
children.
It is absolutely crucial that the actions of industry and
government alike are informed by expert analysis when it comes
to the health and well-being of children before it is too late.
Had Mattel done adequate research before bringing this
product to market, if they had conducted interviews with
licensed pediatricians, disclosed infant deaths to the public
when they learned about them, or agreed to recall it earlier,
lives of children would have been saved.
With the two new recalls announced just last week, we now
know that Mattel also left other products on the market that
posed the same dangers as Rock 'n Play and more infants have
died. Enough is enough. We need to put people before profits.
The committee's investigation and today's testimony show
what happens when corporations hold the power to set the safety
standards for their own products, to withhold information from
consumers, and to delay recalls for months or even years to
protect their bottom line.
CPSC's new rule banning infant inclined sleepers is an
important step toward getting these dangerous products off the
market, but the new rule is not enough to protect consumers
from other dangerous products in the future.
CPSC needs stronger oversight and enforcement tools so that
parents can buy products for their children without fear of
lurking dangers. The Consumer Product Safety Act was enacted to
protect consumers, but it is clearly falling short and not
working. Congress must act to strengthen this law and protect
Americans from dangerous products.
Thank you and in closing I want to thank our panelists for
their remarks and I want to commend my colleagues for
participating in this important conversation.
With that and without objection, all members will have five
legislative days within which to submit extraneous materials
and to submit additional written questions for the witnesses to
the chair which will be forwarded to the witnesses for their
response. I ask our witnesses to please respond as promptly as
you can.
This hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 1:44 p.m., the committee was adjourned.]
[all]