Government moves against Nap Nanny over infant deaths
WASHINGTON — The government is taking action against the makers of a portable baby recliner called the Nap Nanny because of five infant deaths.
The Consumer Product Safety Commission filed an administrative complaint Wednesday alleging that the new model of the Nap Nanny, called the Chill, and two earlier versions “pose a substantial risk of injury and death to infants.”
The commission is seeking an order that would require Nap Nanny maker Baby Matters LLC of Berwyn in Chester County to notify the public about what the agency deems a serious product defect. The agency wants the company to offer consumers a full refund.
The first two versions of the foam recliner were recalled in July 2010 when the agency was aware of one death and 22 reports of infants hanging out or falling over the side of the Nap Nanny even though most of the infant had been placed in the recliner's harness. Since then, the agency has learned of four more deaths. Four are linked to the first versions of the recliner, and one to the newer model.
On its website, Baby Matters says that “Nap Nanny has gone out of business and therefore is no longer selling any product.” No returns, changes to recent orders or cancellations will be accepted, the website says.
In all, CPSC says it has received more than 70 reports of children nearly falling out of the recliner.
The commission filed the complaint after discussions with the company broke down over a recall plan.
The Nap Nanny was designed to mimic the curves of a baby car seat, elevating an infant slightly to help reduce reflux, gas, stuffiness or other problems.
Five thousand Nap Nanny Generation One and 50,000 Generation Two models were sold between 2009 and early 2012.
About 100,000 Chill models have been sold since January 2011.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Chevron settles fatal shale gas well fire lawsuit for $5M
- Task force to plot ways of easing gas glut in Pennsylvania via pipelines
- IRS cybersecurity breach touches lives of homebuyers, others
- UPMC offering buyouts to 3,500 employees in cost-cutting move
- Pitt study suggests health law attracting young to balance insurers’ risks
- Shoppers pay premium for organic chicken
- Many Americans have no retirement savings, Fed survey shows
- Shareholder vote causes ATI to review executive pay packages
- Tight supply pushes home prices higher
- Automakers do U-turn on infotainment systems
- Exxon, Chevron shareholders reject big oil restrictions