Old Navy Recalls Boy's Jacket, Offers $5 Gift Card

This Old Navy boys windbreaker has a waist drawstring, a big “no no” according to the CPSC’s children’s clothing safety guidelines. You can either cut the drawstring out, or return the jacket to Old Navy for a full refund and get a $5 gift card for your trouble, meaning you’ve essentially been paid $5 to let your kid to wear a jacket.

For additional information, contact Old Navy at (866) 580-9930 between 9 a.m. and 9 p.m. ET Monday through Friday, Saturday between 12 p.m. and 7 p.m. ET, and Sunday between 12 p.m. and 6 p.m. ET, email custserv@oldnavy.com, or visit www.oldnavy.com.

Old Navy Recalls Boys’ Jackets; Drawstring at Waist Poses Entrapment Hazard


Edit Your Comment

  1. viriiman says:

    Old Nacy? Who’s she?

  2. new and troubling questions says:

    I’m actually surprised that’s considered a safety hazard…I remember having a few jackets like that, with drawstrings, when I was a kid, and I don’t think it ever got caught on the school bus and injured me. Next up: shoelaces being recalled due to risk of tripping.

  3. kimsama says:

    @viriiman: She’s driving the bus.

  4. girlfriend 6.0 says:

    How many times does that situation really happen on a bus though? I mean, when I was younger, there was a bus monitor who would be first one off to let children cross and then would wait until all the kids were safely away from the bus and then get back on.

  5. Rando says:

    Wtf? How is that a safety hazard?

  6. clickertrainer says:

    Nacy = Old Navy bred to Macy’s

  7. tange1 says:

    Spelling? ‘Nacy’ = ‘Navy’?

  8. SaveMeJeebus says:

    I’m sure the jacket itself would disintegrate well before the draw-string could actually trap the kid. This is “Old Nacy” we are talking about here.

  9. ChrisC1234 says:

    @viriiman: I think it’s one of those look-alike Rip-off brands in China.

  10. DrGirlfriend says:

    Someone should be named Old Nacy. It’s just too awesome.

    @msb2: It’s clearly happening to the child in the drawing. No one thinks of the poor children in drawings, and all the injuries they have to sustain just to show us every possible way in which we can hurt ourselves.

  11. freshyill says:

    Also, where are these buses that let kids off on the driver’s side?

  12. mopar_man says:

    In all the years I rode a bus, I never saw this happen. And if it had happened, the driver always watched to make sure everybody was clear of the bus before taking off.

  13. DeeJayQueue says:

    I wonder what that kid’s gonna say when they let his drawstring go?

    And the Cow Says…. MooooooO!

  14. Benny Gesserit says:

    Um. Why is this news?

    They get a full refund on the jacket in addition to the gift card. OK, it’s a bit on the cheapskate side. What did you expect, a refund and a free jacket?

    The headline’s really misleading. Shame on you, consumerist.

  15. spinachdip says:

    I love the logic that some people employ here – “I’ve never seen it happen, so how could it be a safety hazard?”

    Anyhoo from [www.kidsource.com]

    From January 1985 through September 1995, CPSC received reports of 17 deaths and 42 non- fatal incidents involving the entanglement of children’s clothing drawstrings….

    …CPSC’s drawstring guidelines do not represent a standard or mandatory requirement set by the agency. And, while CPSC does not sanction them as the only method of minimizing drawstring injuries, CPSC believes that these guidelines will help prevent children from strangling by their clothing drawstrings.

    So yeah, it’s obviously not a common occurrence, but it happens.

  16. protest says:

    seriously, are we as a population getting stupider?* or is all this overblown safety crap to avoid actions by our more litigious citizens.

    *purposefully incorrect.

  17. spinachdip says:

    @Jim (The Canuck One): What exactly is misleading about the headline?

    And it’s news because, I don’t know, a major retail chain is recalling a product. Would you prefer that news of safety recalls were suppressed?

  18. Sidecutter says:

    “you’ve essentially been paid $5 to let your kid to wear a jacket.”

    Proofreading? Please? Make it a position on staff to proofread the article headlines and text and correct them. I beg of you.

  19. AlteredBeast (blaming the OP one article at a time.) says:

    I like how in the drawing the kid is looking back at the bus like “oh, crap!”

  20. astrochimp says:

    Wait, don’t this jackets have sleeves as well? Sleeves catch on things, too! I demand satisfaction in the form of more recalls and gift cards!

  21. UnicornMaster says:

    $5 at Old Navy, that’s got to buy you like 2 pairs of sweatpants! Wait, don’t sweatpants have drawstrings in the same area? (Recall?) Is that bad? What if they get caught on the waist drawstrings from the jacket? Can you imagine some little kid peeing in his pants because he can’t get the pants separated from the jacket?

  22. moosetoga says:

    Attention Consumerist: You might want to let your editor to find a new job.

  23. Myron says:

    @spinachdip: Rational thought is discouraged here. It irritates the slow kids. Please stop it.

  24. Asvetic says:

    @Sidecutter: I second that motion!

  25. DrGirlfriend says:

    @DeanOfAllTrades: When I was in 1st grade, I once peed my pants because my belt was too complicated and I couldn’t get it off in time. I now insist on a recall of all belts.

  26. phantomfly says:

    Love that diagram!

  27. ancientsociety says:

    Drawstrings are now a “safety hazard” for kids? WTF!? Is EVERYTHING a safety hazard for kids today? What is wrong with this coutry?

    I weep for our nation’s youth, they’re going to grown up to be pussies…

  28. kc-guy says:

    So it’s a stupid reason for a recall– the point is it’s out there, and Old Navy is taking an exceptional step up in responsibility.

    Imagine Wal-mart taking this kind of action towards the Chineese Poision Train.

    I could rake it in with Thomas the Tank and Aqua Dot recalls– I might even make enough to afford real GHB!

  29. ninjatales says:

    Who woulda thought that Luke Wilson’s Idiocracy movie where he wakes up in the future and everybody’s stupid is going to become reality?

    How bout recalling Nalgene bottles because they could create a similar problem.

    Or ensuring all electrical cables to be easily snappable and the electricity blocked in case a kid decides to strangle him/herself.

    Or how about having people drive 1MPH if you have kids in tow because driving is UNSAFE AT ANY SPEED (but 1MPH because you gotta get there somehow).

    Really dumb. People who push for these measures are only bringing us closer to a future of stupid moronic citizens.

  30. BigNutty says:

    This is a safety issue for the kids that are being raised by idiot parents.

  31. kimsama says:

    @ninjatales: I agree! I’m thinking we need to weed out the stupid/slow children.

    Release the leopards!

  32. kimsama says:

    Oh, P.S. sarcasm

  33. spinachdip says:

    Why are you people getting so worked up? Old Navy decided it didn’t want a product out there with a potentially, albeit unlikely, fatal safety hazard, so it announced a voluntary recall, and offered customers a small reward for their trouble. It wasn’t mandated by CPSC or the government, and it’s up to the parents to return the jackets. Why are you so against consumers and corporations making their own decisions?

    Granted, it’s an overreaction over such a seemingly minor issue, but it’s nothing compare to the foaming-mouth “OMG we’re a nation of idiots and pansies!!!” reaction from you lot. Get a grip.

  34. Gev says:

    @spinachdip: The way the headline is worded implies that you’re not going to get a refund, but merely a $5 gift card.

    At least that’s the way I read it.

  35. spinachdip says:

    @Gev: Understood. Based on my knowledge of recalls, a refund or exchange is implied.

  36. jaredharley says:

    The part I don’t get is this:

    You can either cut the drawstring out, or return the jacket to Old Navy for a full refund and get a $5 gift card for your trouble, meaning you’ve essentially been paid $5 to let your kid to wear a jacket.

    No, I’ve been paid $5 for NOT letting my kid wear it…

    The way I see it is that Old Navy is paying you $5 to bring it back… they COULD just issue you a refund and be done with it, but they’re giving shoppers an additional $5 for the trouble of bringing it back.

  37. macinjosh says:


    This guy has saw fit to document it in great detail: [www.capnwacky.com]

  38. LVP says:

    In the mid to late 90’s a middle school age girl in my town was run over by the school bus as her draw strings were trapped in the stair railing and closed bus door. The children riding the bus screamed at the bus driver to stop as the girl ran with the bus. He would not stop. She ran until she could no longer keep up and was dragged a few hundred feet by the bus until the straps gave way and she was then run over by the bus.

  39. Trai_Dep says:

    Since briefs and boxers can be used to give wedgies, we must pass a Federal law mandating all boys (do girls ever get wedgies?!) go commando.

  40. Trai_Dep says:

    PS: the silhouette of Drawstring Boy, above, made me think of the pressing Wedgie issue. Maybe they can re-use the graphic for the impending ban? Economies of Scale!

  41. MonkeySwitch says:

    When I was in first grade, I pulled the drawstrings on the waist of my jacket as taught as I could and then tied them into a knot. When I was done being a weird kid, I tried to untie it and couldn’t so I started freaking out. I had to have my teacher cut it off for me.

  42. TechnoDestructo says:

    I’ve never had a draw string get tangled on anything.

    I have gotten POCKETS caught on things plenty of times.

    Ban pockets.

  43. caederus says:

    My son has this jacket… This afternoon after school he ripped the lining. Cool a replacement jacket and $5 old navy credit!

    We buy a bunch of cloths for his little brother at old navy. Who cares that the clothes only last 6 months, when a toddler grows out of his clothes every 3 months.

  44. SactoKev says:

    Wou’ve got that right. Childhood is when one is SUPPOSED to get hurt, so that later in life you can differentiate between a scraped knee and broken leg.

    Today’s children will, indeed, be pussies, and assume that every scraped knee is in fact a broken leg.

    These Democommies should just determine that life itself is hazardous, and ban it altogether.
    What happened to personal responsibility?

  45. TangDrinker says:

    @DeanOfAllTrades: I did buy a few pairs of sweatpants from Ol’Navy for my toddler – and they did have “drawstrings” – but they were fake. They still come untied – but they’re only like 4 inches long and sewn to the waist band. . I think it’s to be “cute” – like boy’s clothing needs to be cute.

  46. nonzenze says:

    We’re probably better off without a kid that can’t figure out how not to choke himself in a drawstring.

  47. TechnoDestructo says:


    It isn’t cute for the boy’s sake, it’s cute for the mother’s sake.

  48. spinachdip says:

    @LVP: Based on the comments in this thread:
    a) This didn’t actually happen because I didn’t see it happen, or it didn’t happen to me.
    b) If it did, it was because the girl was stupid or retarded, and therefore we’re better off that she’s dead.
    c) Her parents were stupid as well, and they therefore deserved this.

  49. Trai_Dep says:

    Well, to be fair, I think the snark in this thread is largely due to the fact that, to a near totality, everyone here, as a child (and adult), owned an article of clothing with a drawstring. And lived to tell the tale. Except for the nefarious undead commentators (we know who you are, brain-eaters and boy are we keeping our eyes on you!).

    It’s a tad absurd.

  50. spinachdip says:

    @trai_dep: To be clear, I am not a fan of fear mongering and panicking over statistical blips, and aware that there are acceptable risks, i.e. we could make things 100% safe, but it wouldn’t be worth the cost and trouble.

    But I’m also aware that those statistical blips represent real people, children whose parents didn’t love them any less than the other 99.9%.

    More to the point however, I’m not sure if the waist drawstrings are an acceptable risk. The cost of removing them is minimal, since they’re usually cosmetic anyway. So even if the risk is small, the cost of removing the risk is even smaller.

    Plus, this is a courtesy recall – it wasn’t mandated by either the government or CPSC. They basically said, “If you’re concerned enough, we’ll take it back and here’s $5 for your trouble.”

    So even if you think the recall is absurd, it’s nowhere near as absurd as the “Back in my days…” canards and the neo-Darwinism in this thread.e.

  51. Trai_Dep says:

    Good point. We got so involved over the absurdity of the moment that the main story, Old Navy voluntarily recalling a jacket that posed a minute tho real risk, is the right thing to do. Good call!

    (yeah, I’m still holding a grudge from when Lawn Darts were pulled from the market)

  52. LVP says:

    @spinachdip: It was in the local paper asshole.