Neck circumference measurement for children

This blog entry is part of a series on The Essential Guide to Children's Clothing Sizes. 

Hello, I want to surprise my Grandsons with "hero" capes. What would be an average neck measurement for a 7 year? What would be an average neck measurement for an 11 year old? Thank you, Agnes Scales

I have received many questions about how to find the average neck measurement for children, especially infant children. The neck circumference measurement can be difficult to find for many reasons.

The 1939 Study

Ruth O'Brien, appointed by the Department of Agriculture and the U.S. Home Economics Department, created and executed an innovative body measurement study of children. As the study was developed, there were likely many discussions on what body measurements should be taken. The study report clearly states that some body measurements were excluded, despite the desire to not exclude anything. The reasons for exclusion varied. Consideration was given to the amount of time needed to measure each child. The more measurements taken, the longer it would take. Also remember, the study subjects were children. You can imagine that many children, especially the infants, would not tolerate a long measurement session. Then multiply that time with the need to measure thousands of children.

A decision was made to eliminate certain body measurements from the study, particularly for the infant size range. The excluded measurements were the neck base or circumference, hand width and length, and foot width and length. This decision has made it difficult to know the neck circumference for infants ever since.

Later Studies

Another body measurement study was conducted in the 1970's. This study was an anthropometric study to obtain body measurements that can be used for product design such as car seats, bicycles, etc. This study included hand width and length and foot width and length measurements. It did not include the neck circumference.

The ASTM D4910 chart has included a neck circumference measurement for infants for a long time, though it is not entirely clear how it was added. The ASTM charts have incorporated the SizeUSA study, which did measure the neck circumference for infants. In theory the measurements have some backing.

The British size study included the neck circumference measurement.

Where to find neck circumference measurements

Neck circumference measurements can be found on measurement standards available for purchase at astm.org. Search for these standards:

D4910 - Infants

D6860 - Boys, sizes 6-24

D6192 - Girls, sizes 2-20

D6829 - Juniors, size 0-19

Neck base/circumference measurements can be found on the withdrawn measurement standards for:

PS45-71 - Young men

PS36-70 - Boys

PS54-72 - Girls

My book the Essential Guide to Children's Clothing Sizes includes an infant size chart which contains a derived neck circumference measurement. The book also includes complete copies of the withdrawn measurement standards in one place. The withdrawn measurement standards are no longer easily available on the Internet.

Why the neck circumference measurement might be needed

In general, the neck circumference measurement is NOT needed to draft basic block patterns. If you look at any pattern drafting manual, the neck measurement is not used. Do not let the lack of this measurement stop you from moving forward.

However, there are times when the neck circumference measurement may be useful. Some products, like necklaces may need this measurement. But even there, it may not be needed. A designer should take the step to "try-on" the product.

Be careful of an over reliance on one specific body measurement. There are many variables in which that measurement may not match your child. If working on a project for a specific child, either measure the child or measure the neckline from a piece of clothing. A piece of clothing will get you close to what measurement will be needed.

Neck circumference and obesity

Neck circumference is now a screening diagnostic for childhood obesity. In the last few years a study was conducted to confirm that the neck circumference has a correlation with other body measurements, such as waist circumference, and to confirm obesity. The goal of the study was to confirm the relationship and use of neck circumference in diagnostic criteria for obesity. The study does acknowledge certain deficiencies such as small sample size in one geographic location. Still, the use of the neck circumference in this way seems logical. Likely doctors will start to use this body measurement in screenings in the future.

How to find body measurement charts for children

This blog entry is part of a series on The Essential Guide to Children's Clothing Sizes.

There are a lot of children's body measurement charts floating around the Internet. But are they reliable? The answer to that question is difficult to determine. I have looked at some of the free charts out there and some are pretty good and others definitely have some anomalies. While I won't single out any particular chart, I would urge some caution on relying on whatever you can find freely on the Internet.

Some of the anomalies include inconsistent body measurements and differences between sizes. This may sound odd because you would expect that a size should measure what it measures. Having read a few measurement studies, the raw data that backs up body measurements are inconsistent between the sizes. But that raw data is difficult to work with, especially when it comes to grading. So statisticians and data analysts take the raw data and average it out. Then they take the average body measurements and adjust the numbers up or down small amounts to obtain numbers that are easy to work with as a convenience for pattern making and grading. This type of data manipulation does not result in fit anomalies as might be expected despite cries of vanity sizing and inaccuracies.

It's hard to say how these free charts available on the Internet came about. I suspect many of them are based off of cribbed data from various retailers. Some may be based on measuring some children. Some may be straight from official measurement studies. Regardless, caution is warranted.

You can use the free charts on the Internet, if you choose. It may be a place to start. It may also be a source of frustration if things aren't working quite right in your product development.

However, there are places to acquire body measurement charts. Some free, some not.

ASTM is an organization that develops standards, including body measurement standards. However, there standards are not free and contain restrictions on their use. This is the place for the most up-to-date measurement standards with sizing studies to back most of it up. Search for these standards on the Internet to find them.

D4910 - Size standard for infants, sizes preemie -24M

D6860 - Size standard for Boys, sizes 6-24, Husky

D6192 - Size standard for Girls, sizes 2-20, (Regular and Slim), plus sizes

D6829 - Size standard for Juniors, size 0-19

The U.S. government created a series of body measurement standards, which were in use into the 1980's. They were later withdrawn in favor of the ASTM standards. However, these charts are in the public domain and can still be found with some difficulty. In recent years the government has even pulled these from the Internet. They may still be found at government document repositories located within various libraries around the country or requested through standards.gov. I include complete copies of these standards in my book The Essential Guide to Children's Clothing Sizes. I created cleaned up versions of these standards that are easier to read in the appendix. I also include missing measurements from the original standard, which are the neck circumference, hand, and foot lengths and widths.

CS151-50 - Children

PS45-71 - Young Men

PS36-70 - Boys

PS54-72 - Girls

It is true that the withdrawn standards are a bit out of date. However, even the purchased, most up-to-date measurement charts from ASTM are based on this earlier standard. ASTM has added some sizes and refined some of the body measurements, but the similarities are still there. In other words, you can use the withdrawn standards as a good starting point in your product development and not be too far off. You will at least have a better foundation than using body measurement charts from unknown sources with questionable measurement data.

For this and more, see The Essential Guide to Children's Clothing Sizes.

Can children's clothing sizes be improved?

This blog is part of a series about The Essential Guide To Children's Clothing.

Any person that shops for children's clothing often becomes frustrated in their shopping experience. There appears to be a disconnect between what the retailer or brand are stating is one size and what the child actually fits. Why does this happen? Is there a better way?

It is true that age based size labels are sometimes inaccurate, or at least appear inaccurate. A child's body size and shape is influenced by a lot of different factors. Those factors include genetics, ethnicity, income demographic, diet, and nutrition. Children's clothing sizes vary because of this and other factors.

Manufacturers specialize on product type and a customer profile. This is true even in children's clothing. There is a size standard which exists for children's clothing, but manufacturers and designers will adapt or modify their product to fit their customer profile. This is not a bad thing. Children are individuals with their own unique characteristics. 

Many people complain that there needs to be a clear standard and by conforming to that standard we will solve sizing problems. Is it realistic to compel the industry to conform to a single size standard for children? By doing this, you will be guaranteed to never find clothing that fits all children at all times. There would always be a child that will not find clothing that fits if there is only one standard. Flexibility is needed in such a diverse marketplace. So while there is a general size standard that can be purchased, it may or may not be followed all that closely.

There are ways to make things easier for customers. Providing clear size charts and how to measure guides in the retail store and online can help customers select the right size. While it may be frustrating, customers have the ability to shop the market for alternate brands or sizes that fit their child. Variation is actually a good thing.

For this and more, see The Essential Guide to Children's Clothing Sizes.

How did children's clothing sizes originate?

This blog entry is part of a series on The Essential Guide to Children's Clothing Sizes.

If you were to shop for children's clothing in any department or big box store, you will find the clothing arranged by sizes and age. Baby/Infant, Toddler, 4-6x, and 7-16 sizes are sub-categories of children's clothing sizes that have an association with the age of a child.

In the early 1900's, children's clothing sizes were even more general. There were two simple general sizes - infant and child. At that time children's clothing was still made at home. As the industrial revolution continued to gain steam, children's clothing eventually became available in retail stores. Retailers quickly realized they needed a way to market children's clothing to parents. They also wanted to provide a wider range of sizes so they could sell more product. With the influence of George F. Earnshaw and the trade organizations that existed at that time, retailers and manufacturers adopted a size system for children's clothing with size labels based on age.

Age based sizing became the de facto standard for children's clothing in the United States. It is a system that evolved almost naturally for practical reasons. It was easy to understand by everyone including manufacturers, retailers, and customers. It was a practical way to organize and market product.

This system continued without any confirmation from any sizing studies for many years. So in that vain, the U.S. Home Economics Department and the U.S. Department of Agriculture commissioned a body measurement study of children in the 1930's. The goal of the study was to understand, improve, and formalize children's clothing sizes. This study both confirmed what the industry was already doing but also suggested an entirely different size organization and labeling system. For a more complete explanation, refer to the Essential Guide to Children's Clothing Sizes.

The 1930's study was ground breaking. Nothing like it had ever been done previously, and it became the method that all future body measurement studies followed. Europe appears to have their own children's clothing sizes, but the reality is even Europe and Great Britain used the 1939 study results as the basis for their size systems. Europe and Great Britain have since switched to metric measurements and have also conducted their own body measurement studies. Regardless, there is a lot of similarity to the U.S. system.

For this and more, see The Essential Guide to Children's Clothing Sizes.

The Essential Guide to Children's Clothing Sizes Book Trailer!

 This video gives some sneak peaks about what is in the book! Available for purchase at Amazon and MelanderDesigns.com.

The Essential Guide to Children's Clothing Sizes and How to Grade Them

I am excited to announce my new book, The Essential Guide to Children's Clothing Sizes and How to Grade Them. This book explains children's clothing sizes in the United States, how they came about, and what sizes are used today. This book includes many things that have never been included in books on children's clothing design in the past.

• A break down and explanation of children's clothing sizes from Preemie to size 16, including boys sizes.
• A brief overview of difficulties in the industry, including obesity, and sleepwear
• An explanation of how create your own grade rules.
• Step-by-step instructions on how to grade basic styles, including grade rule charts.
• Body measurement charts for infants to size 14, including slim and plus sizes for older children.
• The infant measurement chart includes head circumference, neck circumference, hand length and width, foot length and width -- measurements that are hard to find.
• Extra grade rule charts that include Newborn and size 9 months.
• CAD grade rule charts
• Complete measurement studies with additional body measurements, grade rules and references for infants, toddlers, 4-6x, girls (7-14), boys, and young men.

I will be doing a series over the coming weeks highlighting the above list with sneak peaks at what is in the book. This book is essential for anyone that designs and manufactures children's clothing. The book is currently available for purchase on Amazon or as an ebook on Payhip.

Who manufactures a size 9 months for baby clothes?

I have been intensely working on a project that requires me to study measurement charts and grading charts for children's clothing. It is not the most exciting thing to analyze, I must admit. There has been one size that has been the most difficult to understand and that is the size 9 months for babies.

Traditionally, there never was a size 9 months. The infant size range was arranged:

3M - 6M - 12M - 18M - 24M - 36M

Over time that arrangement dropped the 36M, making the 12M the middle size for sampling and grading. At some point a NB (newborn) and 9M was added. I have not found the reasoning for the additional sizes or exactly when they were added. At least with the NB, it makes some common sense as it is clothing for newly born children. Babies very quickly move through these early infant sizes, so many times the clothes are simple t-shirts and bodysuits. Size 9M, from a measurement standpoint, appears to be a half-size. Something between the 6M and 12M. You could say the 9M should fit a 9 month old baby and perhaps that is the intent.

The problem comes with how to incorporate the size 9M into a normal infant size range offering. It throws off the middle size 12M in sampling and grading. With the addition of the 9M, the 9M becomes the middle size.

NB - 3M - 6M - 9M - 12M - 18M - 24M

No one samples in a size 9M. No one. In fact, it would make grading difficult to do so - just look at the traditional grading charts by Jack Handford.

And that left me wondering. How many brands actually produce a size 9M? While my quick survey is not scientific, it revealed some interesting points.

Manufacturers of sleepwear, t-shirts, bodysuits, or lounge wear, tend to produce only certain sizes and they tend to arrange them:

0-3M, 3-6M, 6-9M

Of course there are variations. Manufacturers of special occasion dresses tend to produce only a few sizes too.

12M - 18M - 24M

There are variations there too. When I worked for a brand that produced christening apparel, we produced all the sizes from NB - 24M. Size 9M was not one of our top selling sizes.

BabyGap does not produce size 9M for any of their styles. They stick to the traditional size range:

3M - 6M - 12M - 18M - 24M

But they arrange their sizes so it looks like they have their bases covered.

Up to 7lb (NB),  0-3M, 3-6M, 6M-12M, 12M-18M, 18M-24M

So what is the point of all this? When you are developing your children's clothing line, you do not need to produce every size. There is a great temptation to offer every style in every size. The reality is that if the big brands aren't doing it, neither do you. A lot depends on the style and your customer. Who do you hang with? Who is your competition? What sizes do they produce? Once you know the answers to those questions, you can focus your efforts.

What about the size 9M? Unless your customer requires that size, it is probably best to skip it or at least make it appear that it is included within a size label like 6M-12M. Some private label programs may require a size 9M. If that is the case, it is a simple matter to split the grade rule between a 6M and a 12M to add the size.

A question on the drawstring rule and children's clothing

I received a question about drawstrings* and elastic waists.

I want to design skirts with elastic waists and a ties that are sewn in by the hem, which then connect to a bow. Is this not acceptable to the Drawstring rule CPSIA? So confused on this. If isn't acceptable, can I do a skirt with elastic waists and sew a bow in the middle?

In the United States there is a safety rule about drawstrings on children's upper outerwear.** This rule does not allow drawstrings in hoods or waists of jackets or hoodies, for example. A drawstring is a cord with or without a toggle that is inserted in a channel. The intent of a drawstring is to cinch up a waist or hood opening to make it smaller. This rule was enacted because children have died when the toggle or knot on the drawstring became entangled on playground equipment and bus doors. It appears the CPSC has added a bit of clarity to the original rule. You actually can have drawstrings so long as the drawstring does not extend more than three inches and has been securely stitched through in the middle of the channel so it cannot be pulled out.

This hoodie uses ribbing to help it fit closer around the head, instead of a drawstring.

But if I were you, I would avoid using drawstrings altogether in children's clothing. The reason is rather simple. There continue to be drawstring recalls even with almost no reports of injury or death. As of 2012, there have been more than 130 recalls involving drawstrings. The most recent is of a rain poncho. In this example it's clear there are no toggles or knots on the drawstring, the string is just too long (no reports of injury). The rule covers children 2T-16, but there have been recalls on infant clothing too. There was an odd recall of an elastic waist belt on a jacket (no injuries).

The recent rule revision appears to focus almost entirely on upper outerwear like jackets, sweaters, and hoodies. But historically there have been recalls on pants with drawstring waists. For this reason, I do not recommend drawstrings on any children's clothing. The risk is too great. Even though the majority of the recalls in the last 10 years have had no injuries or death, there have been a few. Also, the CPSC seems to inconsistently apply the rule, including the apparent exception of a three inch extension. There is just no way to predict what might happen.

To answer the first question above, I would try to avoid sewing things onto the ends of ties. That seems to fall into the drawstring with toggles or knots category. I think a bow sewn securely through on top of an elastic waist should be ok.

Waist ties and belts have not been involved in any product recalls, as far as I know, and are not included in this rule. Girls dresses, in particular, frequently have waist ties or belts. Even though the rule excludes this type of application, I would still exercise caution. Waist ties should only be long enough to tie with tails that are not too long. The tail of a belt or waist tie should not extend below the hem of a dress or touch the floor - it could become a trip hazard. Also, be sure there are no knots or toggles on the ends.

BTW, there is an ASTM standard for drawstrings, ASTM F1816. It costs $42 to buy a copy of this rule.

*I'm not a lawyer. The statements above are my opinion and should not be construed as legal advice on how to comply with government regulations. If you are manufacturing children's products, you should seek legal advice, follow all applicable rules, and seek out a certified testing laboratory as required.

**The CPSC has updated their website since I last visited and they have made it even more difficult to find safety rules with their "robot regulator". You have to jump through a questionnaire to find the safety rule you are looking for. This is the direct link to the drawstring rule, however long it remains a valid link.

Home sewing patterns for newborns

I received this question about commercial sewing patterns:

Supposedly the XXS size on commercial patterns (McCalls, Simplicity, Butterick) is supposed to be for babies 7 lbs or less, but they swallow newborns up. If you read around the Internet, there are lots of frustrated grandmothers and mothers-to-be that want to sew for their new or expected baby, but can't find a pattern that will fit. I read that doll clothing patterns don't work because the neck is wrong for a human infant. I tried buying vintage layette patterns from Etsy and they were just as bad. I want to know how to downsize a commercial XXS dress or romper pattern so it fits a NEW 7-8 lb baby. I am sick of gowns and knit sleepers. - Pam

It has been a long time since I have sewn children's clothing from commercial sewing patterns. What I do remember is they are big. Too big. The proportions are bit off too. I don't know why either. Those companies have their own pattern blocks and I suspect they have not really updated or checked them in a long time.

Design school does not spend all that much time on children's clothing. I know there are few pattern making manuals that really get the sizing right, though sizing (exact measurements) is less of an issue than you might think. Regardless of where you start, you will have to make adjustments for fit. Only one manual even addresses infant clothing, and that book is Metric Pattern Cutting for Children's Wear and Babywear by Winifred Aldrich. I have a previous edition, but it covers most of what you might need. For Americans, the book is in metric. I didn't really have a problem drafting basic blocks using metric. You just need a metric ruler, though I did convert back and forth to see if I was on target. But even after drafting your basic blocks, you will need to make adjustments to the pattern until you get the fit you want. I have learned quite a bit by trial and error over many years.


For the home sewist, this is probably not all that practical. There is not really an easy way to size down a home sewing pattern that already has proportion issues (even Burda, which I prefer over the others). The biggest problem with some of the sewing patterns are tops are too wide, pant legs are too short just as examples. You could begin by folding out some of the width. But I can't say how much as it would probably depend on the style and desired size. In other words, no matter what, there will be a bit of back and forth. I guess my advice would be don't be afraid to experiment. Measure your baby and the sewing pattern and reduce width and length as needed. It is a bit of a challenge to measure a baby, but it really is the only way to arrive at your end goal. I wish there was some other way. Perhaps there are some indie sewing patterns for newborns? Please leave suggestions if you know of any.

Understanding pattern grading for children's clothing

I'm catching up with some questions and comments. It's been a while since I've answered a grading question.

My brain is spinning with all the reading I've been doing on this subject. Can you please explain to me why I couldn't grade within my separate size ranges by grading, for example, 3-6 with one particular grade rule and then taking then changing my grade rule for the next section? Would this not be taking the difference growth rates and such into account? I feel like there's probably a reason that I haven't quite grasped yet. Thanks so much.

Grading women's clothing is different from grading children's clothing. Women's clothing is graded with either a 1 1/2" or 2" grade between the sizes. This grade rule refers to the change in circumference measurements between the sizes. There is a lot of criticism for this grade rule because it appears to not have a connection to actual body measurements. That assumption is not strictly true, but it is true this practice is a convenience for the industry. It is too difficult to mass produce clothing and create a custom fit for an individual woman. This grading convention has historically proven to fit the most women in the most efficient way.

Men's clothing has many more sizes. These sizes are given size names that correspond to actual body measurements such as waist, pant leg inseam, or neck and sleeve. The circumference difference is usually 1 inch but it may be 2 inches for larger sizes.

Children's clothing is different. Children grow exponentially from birth. Their growth makes it difficult to group children into size groups, but over 70 years ago a measurement study managed to give us enough measurement data to do just that. That measurement data shows that the change between children's sizes is not even. This is true regardless of how sizes are arranged or named. The circumference measurement difference may range between 1/2" to 1" or more. There are similar irregularities in length grades. Children's clothing brands interpret measurements in their own way, so you will see variation in the marketplace.

Speaking to this particular question. If you group your children's sizes so they are called 0-3M, 3-6M, 6-9M, etc., your grade rule will still vary between the sizes. But there will be no grade change between a 3M and a 6M in the size called 3-6M. When developing a grade rule for this kind of size system, I interpret the sizes like this:

0-3M = 3M
3-6M = 6M
6-9M = 9M

You can call your sizes whatever you choose, but for pattern making and grading you have to assign a meaning to that size. Interpreting sizes with a size label of 0-3M as a single size 3M is the easiest way to develop grade rules and it seems to work.

Natalie Christening Gown pt. 2 : Heirloom sewing details

I finished the gown a few weeks ago but have been busy with other projects; Chinese New Year, Valentine and DD2 second birthday. The gown came out very well for being my first heirloom project and would recommend this pattern (Natalie in Sew Beautiful issue 135 March/April 2011) to anyone else looking for a beginner project.

There was no lace insertion but strips of lace were sewn together to create a wide lace border at the bottom of the skirt. I used this website for tips and hints on how to do this.

I didn't have an edger foot for my machine and so I tried my blindstitch foot. It worked ok but in the end found I had better or more control with my regular foot. Decreasing upper thread tension is a must otherwise the lace will become puckery. The hardest row was the last one which was sewing a gathered lace edge to entredeux. I gathered the lace by pulling one of top header threads in the lace. I had to sew really slow and adjust the gathers as I went with a straight pin. The presser foot wanted to keep pulling out the gathers but it worked out in the end just lots of patience.

One change I made to the construction was finishing the edge of the dupioni skirt before adding the lace band. According to heirloom sewing, the lace would be attached using a narrow zigzag roll described here as flat lace to flat fabric technique. This method rolls the fabric very narrowly while attaching the lace. I have worked with dupioni and feared the unraveling would cause some problems with this, at least to my inexperience heirloom sewing skills. I instead opted to serge the bottom edge first and then overlap the top lace edge over the serger stitching with a narrow zigzag. I don't think anyone will notice.

Here is the end result, enjoy.

Update: Baby was blessed this last Sunday, June 2, 2013

Maria in her dress

Natalie Christening Gown pt. 1 : Prep work

I am very excited to be able to join Esther's blog. As she mentioned, I am costume designer by trade but  currently have taken some time off to raise my girls. Before children, I worked as a university professor teaching costume design, theatre technology, and special effects makeup. I have recently started to dabble in tutu making and have done some freelance work in that area. Hopefully, my posts will be of interest.

So right now I am working on a Christening/blessing gown for baby #3. I decided to go the heirloom route. The pattern is from Sew Beautiful issue 135 March/April 2011, the Natalie Christening Gown. I have never done anything heirloom before except for making some 19th century women's blouses for various theatrical productions. Materials I am using are silk dupioni, French cotton laces, silk ribbon and glass beads. I haven't bought all the lace yet but will need to soon. The cost of this project is a bit on the expensive side. I think the cost of the laces will end up being the most expensive items. I goal is to have this finished by the end of the month.

Below are some pics of what I have done so far (Hopefully, you can make out the details, photographing white is tricky).

 Center Front panel traced onto fabric using pencil (This is marking cutting lines so no worries of it showing through once sewn). Center front is marked using a disappearing ink pen.

I chose to pencil mark the embroidery pattern.

Detail of finished ribbon embroidery. Still debating on adding more but will look at it when the dress is sewn together. 

A question on newborn sewing patterns

Pam had this question

Supposedly the XXS size on commercial patterns (McCalls, Simplicity, 
Butterick) is supposed to be for babies 7 lbs or less, but they swallow 
newborns up.  If you read around the Internet, there are lots of frustrated 
grandmothers and mothers-to-be that want to sew for their new or expected  baby, but can't find a pattern that will fit.  I read that doll clothing  patterns don't work because the neck is wrong for a human infant. I tried buying vintage layette patterns from Etsy and they were just as bad.  I  want to know how to downsize a commercial XXS dress or romper pattern so it fits a NEW 7-8 lb baby.

I had similar challenges sewing an infant shirt from a Butterick pattern. You are right that the sizing is just not right. You are also right that doll clothing patterns are not proportionally correct either.

There really is no easy way to fix the sizing issue. Perhaps the easiest would be to fold out some of the extra width and length to make the pattern smaller? Maybe try grading the pattern smaller -- though that won't solve the other problems that probably exist in your pattern. I can't really tell you how much to reduce the pattern because I don't know what pattern you are using. Even then, it would hard to advise you because I ended up redrafting the pattern I used above to even get it to work right.

One suggestion is to go to a thrift store and buy clothing in the size you want, take it apart and trace it off. Don't forget to add in proper seam allowances - as the existing seams have probably been trimmed off.

Designing and grading for a large size range

I get the following question from time to time:

I am a self taught pattern drafter, drafting patterns for myself and my 
kids for years.  I decided to turn this into a business recently and am 
creating a line of children's patterns for the home sewer.  My size range 
is 6m-10 and this is where my question is... Can you help me understand the process of redrafting the SAME style/pattern in my different base sizes?  I  get that I can't just take a size 5 and grade all the other sizes from 
there.  I own several popular pattern drafting books as well as 2 different 
grading books and I can't seem to find this information anywhere.  Any 
information you can provide me would be SO HELPFUL.  I am guessing there is some precise way to redraft my base sizes so the design doesn't change much.  Can you shed some light on how they do this in the business?  THANK YOU!

There are several things. First, it is not unusual when designing children's clothing to cover a large size range. The reality is it is much more work than you would think. I would recommend reviewing my previous blog entries on grading, especially Creating a Grading Standard (also read the other grading tutorials, they'll be helpful).

Unfortunately, there is no other precise way to redraft your sample or base sizes except good old-fashioned pattern drafting. If you have some basic pattern blocks for each size range, then it is no big deal. Just starting out, though, it is a lot of work. It will take less time and become easier over time, so no worries. One thing to pay attention to are proportions. You may need to alter the design to accommodate the size while still giving the impression of the same overall design idea.

Warning: Tagless labels in baby clothes and the CPSIA

My sister sent me an update on the problem. It appears that the re-formulated paints may include latex tainted paint, similar to silk screen paint. My niece had another reaction even worse than previous because her entire back flared up red. The pediatrician suggested my niece now has a latex allergy and possible nickel allergy. Latex allergies can develop over time with multiple exposures.

Well over two years ago, Carter's and the CPSC issued an advisory to parents about tagless or heat transfer labels located in the back neck of their clothing. They had received reports that the labels were causing allergic reactions and irritation. The advisory stated that the reported incidents were rare and a small percentage of the thousands of units produced. The affected product was primarily the Fall 2007 line. This means the product was manufactured early 2007 or late 2006.

It is difficult to know what ingredient in the labels is causing the reaction. Some have suggested formaldehyde. Others suggest it is the pthalates, which exist at a far higher concentration than other products. It is puzzling that with documented problems that neither Carter's or the CPSC have done a more thorough investigation. Instead the CPSC is bogged down with debates over the amount of lead in the brass ball of an ink pen or whether a bicycle manufacture can use lead in a tire valve. Surely the CPSIA, that ultimate guardian of children's safety would not have allowed this kind of problem to persist. One has to wonder where the consumer protection groups are on this? Why aren't they making a big stink?

You would think that a product that proved to be a problem would have been resolved by now. No. Carter's released their Spring 2009 line with a reformulated ink and label style - two years later. Because there was no product recall there is an untold amount of product still floating around. (Even with a recall, there would still be a lot of product out there because recalls rarely recover 100% of sold merchandise).

You can accuse me of hysteria or panic if you choose. I'm most guilty of cynicism about federal regulations that don't seem to actually accomplish intended goals. But the reason I am writing this is because my youngest niece suffered a reaction to a tagless label. I was even more incensed when I saw this picture.

You see this label does not even belong to Carter's. It's an Arizona Jean Co. bodysuit, a private label product for JCPenny. The brown around the label is actually my niece's blood! You can see the rash on her back below.

My sister purchased the bodysuit in Fall of 2008 in anticipation of need later in 2009. It wasn't after her baby had worn the bodysuit a few times that she realized the source of the problem. My sister reported the problem to JCPenny and was told she would be refunded her money and receive new product. She was also advised to report the problem to the CPSC herself (which she is doing). Huh? Since I have worked on private label programs for JCPenny, I know how meticulous and thorough they are with safety. This is surprising to say the least.

This is all rather troubling. Doesn't the CPSC require companies to report safety problems immediately? Of course the CPSC may receive a report but how long will it take for them to react, especially now? This problem illustrates how upside down the whole system has become*. We focus all of our energy in silly debates about ink pens, ban rhinestones with no bio-available lead and spend all of our time recalling toys with minuscule amounts of lead - all with no reported injuries. Compare that with the many reports of injuries related to these labels, and we get, well, nothing.


Spring 2009 is two years after the initial reports. Why so long? Why not switch to traditional labeling in the interim? Carter's claims they went tagless to improve the comfort factor - no scratchy label. Well, a scratchy label can be cut out and the problem removed. A tagless label on a baby's bodysuit is not easily removed and must be thrown out. After all this, I think I prefer traditional labels.

*In fairness, the CPSC is working on a consumer database to report incidents as required by law. They are in the process of comment gathering and workshops. Problems can be reported now, but the information required by the CPSIA is not publicly available. If anything, the CPSC should look at a complete overhaul of their entire website which is a disorganized mess. But that is an argument for another day.

Metric pattern cutting for children's wear and babywear - 4th Edition

Winifred Aldrich has released an updated edition of her pattern making book. Besides having a much nicer cover design, it reportedly contains a revised organization and emphasis on flat pattern making. I find this change interesting because more and more design entrepreneurs are utilizing flat pattern making today and this confirms my personal experiences in the industry.

From the abstract at Amazon:

Today’s popularity of easy-fitting styles and knitted fabrics means that basic ‘flat’ pattern cutting is used to construct the majority of children’s wear and babywear and this type of cutting is therefore emphasized in this new edition. Shaped blocks and garments, cut to fit the body form, are still included, and are placed in chapters covering some school uniform garments or more expensive fashion or formal clothes.

One primary difference between flat versus fitted pattern making is that the patterns have the same shape for the front and back pieces. For example, the armhole shaping is symmetrical. Creating patterns in this way results in a looser, more casual fit and it is appropriate for a lot of children's clothing. Even so, I see more of a modified flat method in actual use. Patterns are modified so that they aren't quite so boxy and more fitted. Yet, they retain some symmetry between front and back pieces.

Comparing pattern shaping and children's sizes follow-up

Kathleen suggested that I post an update on a previous grading post I did about a year ago. You can read what I wrote previously at When Patterns Collide. In that post I suggested that it would be possible to combine the 24M and 2T and the 4T and the 4. My reasoning being that the 24M and the 2T are essentially the same sizes - why differentiate them? The subject is a little complex and perhaps controversial - at least to pattern making geeks. My goal was to reduce the work load. I was drafting and grading all of my patterns by hand. I am incredibly slow grading by hand. In addition, I was trying to solve one particular sizing problem that shows up in childrenswear, that is hard to illustrate. Since I shut down my Prairie Roses line, I am not knee deep in pattern making as I was a year ago. But perhaps it may be helpful to explain what I ended up doing.

Originally, I broke up my sizes into these ranges:

3M, 6M, 9M, 12M, 18M, 24M - sample size 12M

2T, 3T, 4T - sample size 3T

4, 5, 6, 6x - sample size 5

These ranges are rather typical of what you will find in retail stores. When developing my patterns, I have to make and grade the patterns for each size range separately. You cannot make one set of patterns in one size and grade them up and down all the way. It won't work because that many sizes will cause minute grading errors and strange fit, especially on the smallest and largest sizes. As you define your grading and size measurements, you will find that the 24M and 2T and the 4T and 4 overlap. I followed the Jack Handford grading rules, which are pretty darn good, but end up with a result like this:

In the picture above, the size 4 is laying on top of the size 4T. The size 4T is actually too long in length and too wide. I double checked all of my grading and there was no mistake. The size 4T was graded off my 3T and the size 4 off of the 5. The shaping of the sample size pattern pieces varied a little. The toddler was a little boxier because toddlers don't have any waist shaping, whereas a 5 year old does. If I were to leave my patterns this way, someone will eventually hang the two sizes next to each other and think there was some kind of manufacturing mistake. I needed to fix my patterns so that each size is incrementally bigger.

To do this, I rearranged my size ranges, combining some sizes:

3M, 6M, 9M, 12M, 18M - sample size 12M

24M/2T, 3T, 4T/4 - sample size 3T

5, 6, 6x - sample size 5

The next thing I did was reworked the shaping of my toddler sizes to look more like the 4-6x range. I pulled the waist in some and made the armhole smaller. I made these shaping changes because I found that my toddler patterns were just a little too big. Now, I can lay all of my bodice pattern pieces in order and they get incrementally larger from the 3M to the 6x. Your patterns may look different, but it is worth comparing the sizes on the outside edges of your ranges to make sure you don't have something weird show up like I did.

Even though I combined some sizes, I kept this behind the scenes. My customers still saw all of the sizes separated out. If someone ordered a size 24M and another ordered a 2T, the dress would be exactly the same except for the size tag. I offered all of the sizes on my website so that customers would see something familiar. Perhaps it seems a little dishonest? I don't think so because in the real world a 24M child is the same size as a 2T and I was willing to take the chance. For what its worth, no one ever complained or returned those sizes for fit issues.

Now, I don't know that what I did is "the way it should be done". In the past though, I have had people question why the 24M was larger than the 2T and I had no explanation. Once I worked through grading all of my patterns by hand, it started to click in my head. The relationship of the shape of the pattern pieces, the grade, and body measurements are all connected.

The problem with Exemptions and the CPSIA

I think I have been a part of a very minor group of protesters who want a repeal of the CPSIA 2008. The idea has generally been quashed because it doesn't give the appearance "of playing along" or "of being cooperative". See, everyone wants the safest products for children so they are willing to play along with stricter regulations. Perhaps some new safety rules are needed, but the CPSIA is a bureaucratic, chaotic mess.

A repeal may be near impossible to get. It would require vote hungry lawmakers to admit they made a mistake. Who wants to admit they didn't read the darn thing before voting on it? We know most of them didn't because they by and large act with shock when their constituents tell them the truth. What lawmakers want to face angry constituents who insist on stronger regulation to protect children? No, they all patted themselves on the back because they did something to protect a vulnerable population. It was feel good legislation built on a foundation of emotionalism and fear mongering.

So anyway, every industry touched by this wants an exemption. Bicycle makers can't make strong welds without lead. Clothing has little to no lead, which washes out). Book makers use soy ink, so few books would have lead. Electronic devices have internal lead which is inaccessible, micro cottages want permission because they do one-of-a-kind or sell to a very small customer base (small exposure). Resale shops could never test all of their random product. All of these are legitimate reason to exempt a particular industry. If the exemptions we need are granted, we will kind of be back where we started pre-CPSIA.

The CPSC has issued a couple of exemptions. Though the exemptions are largely lip service without any real meat behind them. For example the natural materials exemption. Natural materials such as wood and cotton are exempt as long as they are left in their natural state. Well such an exemption doesn't really help the textile industry because nearly all textiles are processed in some way. White cottons have been bleached and/or dyed white. Such actions mean that the exemption no longer applies. Have you seen unbleached and unprocessed cotton? It's not all that attractive. But if you can build a clothing company around unbleached cotton muslin with unfinished wood buttons, be my guest.

Let's face another fact. Lead is a natural element of our planet. So according to the exemption (if we were to take the extreme interpretation), we could sell unprocessed lead because it is a natural material. But that wouldn't make sense, now would it.

The next exemption on resale stores is another problem. Perhaps the CPSC was begining to feel the pressure. But if you read the actual press release, resale stores are not really off the hook. They can continue their business, but if they do happen to sell product that does not conform they still face criminal prosecution. Floating around twitter is this statement:

Thrift exempt is like telling your kid they don't need to brush teeth, but spanking them if they have bad breath!

Resale shops could still have the CPSC police show up at their door. (I guess we could trust the CPSC when they say they won't target thrift stores, but the language of the law and the exemption hasn't changed. IOW, the door is still open that they could inspect your business if and when they have enough money and CPSC police). All it would take is a guerilla group or investigative reporter to go into any shop with an XRF gun and turn you in. Really, there are regular retail shops dealing with this scenario now.

So Resale shops exercise their business at their own risk. And really, most retailers will be operating like this on February 10, 2009. The hammer won't necessarily fall on that day, but it will when a CPSC policeman or bureaucrat wants to look like they accomplished something.

We never needed this new legislation. I know it sounds unbelievable that Congress really didn't need to act. The CPSC already had sufficient power to enact new safety rules. They had this power when the agency was created in the 1970's to develop safety standards, issue recalls, and ban certain products. If new lead regulation was needed, the agency could have acted on its own. It had that power. The idea that it required an "act of congress" to create new regulations was false. Perhaps Congress could have passed something that said, "We are increasing the fines and we expect new regulations that address concerns with lead in toys to be enacted within the next year." Maybe Nancy Nord didn't want to stick her neck out and actually accomplish something other than lobbyist paid trips.

Anyway, the CPSC has passed various regulations over the years. Flammability and sleepwear, painted metal, drawstrings, and children's jewelry. They even repealed one (Tris in pajamas). All this happened without much intervention from Congress. Does this agency not have a backbone? Let's repeal this act and let's allow industry and science be involved in the crafting the few rules that are needed.

A toddler sizing rant from a frustrated mom

This mom's blog about twins Hannah and Sophie gives another perspective on the children's sizing problem. I feel her frustration, and I can understand because as a pattern maker and designer I have difficulty getting the sizing right too. The comments on that particular entry suggest she start her own business selling clothes that fit.

If she were to start a business selling toddler slim clothes, she would discover the same difficulties as other children's fashion designers. Sizing is a big problem that falls all over the anthropometric map. Adult sizing is rather stable in the sense that adults reach a size and tend to stay there - disregarding weight gain or loss. You can categorize adults into sub-groups with similar body proportions and sizing. You can do that with children too but the sub-groups are transitional. Children grow as they age, changing from one group to the next in progression. Ideally, children's clothing allows for that transition in a smooth fashion. In reality, children will occasionally have clothes that are too short, too long, too wide, etc. It is impossible to accommodate them all because they don't all start from the same place. Genetics and individual circumstances play a big part.



This not offered as an excuse for the industry. Surely some creative DE could provide clothing for Hannah and Sophie that is comfortable and fits well. I suspect that the twins were premature because of TTTS. The girls appear to be thriving and doing well. Children born prematurely are a unique sub-group that falls outside the norms. They tend to be smaller and grow differently than other children. It would be an interesting challenge for someone to come up with a product line to help them. Any one up for it?

Comparing pattern shaping and children's sizes

As many children's wear designers know, children's clothing has a lot of sizes. It can become quite the dilemma when trying to decide which sizes to offer. Some DE's offer their styles in as many as 21 sizes. Way back in 2006 I suggested a theory to reduce the number of sizes by combining or eliminating some of them. You may want to go back and review the entry Too Many Sizes and other related entries to see how I have arrived at today.

Anyway, I have tried to put the theory into practice and I have made some progress. I only offer my styles in sizes 3M to 6x. I am still working on the grades for the 4-6x styles, so I am nearly there. My sizes break down like this:

3M, 6M, 9M*, 12M, 18M

24M/2T, 3T, 4T/4

5, 6, 6x

I don't really consider the 9M as a true size. It is a half size between the 6M and 12M and is graded by splitting the grade between the 6M and 12M. The 24M and 2T are essentially the same as are the 4T and 4 - those sizes have been combined for grading purposes. My website still delineates the combined sizes as separate sizes.

This blog entry is not a discussion on the why and wherefores of children's sizing - a surprisingly complex and controversial topic. Instead, I wanted to show a possible grading/pattern problem that shows up now and then. I have been grading and comparing my basic bodice blocks. You should do this too because someone will eventually see the problem and it will be more difficult to fix.

I have drafted my basic bodice block three times, in each of my sample sizes for each of my size ranges - 12M, 3T, 5. (BTW, you can't use the same pattern piece and grade it in all the sizes. Believe me, that is one large headache). The next step is to grade each range separately. Keep in mind that each sample size will have slightly different shaping, but the general shape and proportion should be related.

Before getting too far, the outer fringes of each size range should be compared. For example, the size 18M should be smaller than the 24M/2T and the size 4T/4 should be smaller than the 5. Originally, I had graded the size 4T and 4 separately. In other words the 4T was based off the 3T sample and the 4 was based off the 5. The reason I combined the 4T and 4 was because the shape and overall size was so similar it was a duplication in effort, and I also ran into the problem where the 4T was actually larger than the 4. If you do separate out the sizes than the 4T must be smaller than the 4. If you don't check your grades, someone will bring two dresses to you and say the patterns are wrong, size labels are switched or some other problem.

In the photos below you can see the problem more clearly. In the top picture, the size 4 is laying on top of the 4T. You can see the 4 is smaller than the 4T. In the bottom picture the 4T is on top of the 4 and it is clearly longer with a larger armhole.


To solve this problem, I have been reworking my toddler patterns. I started by combining sizes 4T and 4 so I have one less size to grade. Next my toddler bodices were redrafted to have a shape similar to the 5 (less boxy, smaller armhole). Finally, I regraded the toddler patterns. This is still a work in progress, but the results are much better - each size is progressively larger.

I had the same problem with my size 18M and 24M/2T. In this case it wasn't a grading problem. Instead my infant patterns were proportionally too long compared to the toddler. I fixed this by shortening the bodice slightly.

Anyway, the point is that you should make sure and check the sizes on the outer fringes of each size range and make adjustments so that each size is progressively larger. You can adjust the grade rules (much easier in CAD, btw) or change the shape of the patterns.

(I am ignoring the idea that in the real world an 18M child could be larger than a 24M child. If that is the case, a parent would buy a larger size than 18M and just complain about the craziness of US sizing standards. When I did private label programs for the big box retailers their grade/POM charts progressively got larger with each size. Logically it makes sense even if reality is very different. Anyway, you can allow your sizes to overlap if you want, you'll just need to have an explanation as to why when a sewing contractor becomes confused.).