All Ikea instructions say to attach dressers to the wall, but there's no mention of that. Where's the personal accountability?
Many other issues with their claims.
29 Reviews
Flawed premise
alinesilveira-0476112 December 2019
Biased
Balleviggo7 December 2019
Warning: Spoilers
I was interested to see if this episode would show all sides of the story. It did not.
IKEA instructions are very clear about anchoring your furniture and there is a big warning sign in the manual. The parents shown in the episode did not anchor their furniture and blame IKEA. This is like going to Starbucks and drinking a hot coffee that has a "warning: hot" disclaimer on it, and then blaming Starbucks for burning yourself because you didn't read the warning.
Instead of focusing on informing people in the dangers of not anchoring their furniture, this documentary is just extremely slanted against IKEA. This episode is just a perfect portrayal of America's sue-happy culture where everyone just wants someone to blame for their own problems.
IKEA instructions are very clear about anchoring your furniture and there is a big warning sign in the manual. The parents shown in the episode did not anchor their furniture and blame IKEA. This is like going to Starbucks and drinking a hot coffee that has a "warning: hot" disclaimer on it, and then blaming Starbucks for burning yourself because you didn't read the warning.
Instead of focusing on informing people in the dangers of not anchoring their furniture, this documentary is just extremely slanted against IKEA. This episode is just a perfect portrayal of America's sue-happy culture where everyone just wants someone to blame for their own problems.
So Bothered By This!
redfx229 December 2019
Warning: Spoilers
I wanted to see the impact of "fast furniture", and how other manufacturers are dealing with it. I wanted to know more about alternative companies producing furniture that's sustainable, I wanted to know how badly the landfills are with furniture, and I wanted to hear opinions of people who own cheap furniture and are happy with them.
Instead, this episode was like 5 stories thrown into one episode jumping from how angry American manufacturers are blaming cheap furniture for their own demise, an actual interesting story on how trees are cut down illegally, but then jumps back to irresponsible parents that failed to read manuals for furniture. Oh, added bonus, it was also talking about how the IKEA founder was a bad person.
I'm just more pissed off that these parents didn't have any personal responsibility. They could've anchored the dresser (as said in the manual) OR simply pay 3 times more for better quality furniture that supposedly won't tip over, OR don't put such tall pieces of furniture in children's rooms. Instead, they wanted to be cheap and then won't admit that they were wrong... even more wrong than the manufacturers they're blaming. The same manufacturers that are selling these lightweight cheap furniture because most people nowadays can't afford $600 desks, $5000 couches, and $1000 dressers.
Now, if the parents sued about lead based materials in toys, contaminated baby formula or something like that, it would be more understanding. While I'm not happy that people have died from these accidents (especially children), the parents just seemed so stupid that I can't sympathize. Overall, this episode could've been so much better. The content was silly and the whole thing was so anti-IKEA entirely. I'm also writing this from my $50 cheap Target desk with my $20 IKEA lamp on.
Instead, this episode was like 5 stories thrown into one episode jumping from how angry American manufacturers are blaming cheap furniture for their own demise, an actual interesting story on how trees are cut down illegally, but then jumps back to irresponsible parents that failed to read manuals for furniture. Oh, added bonus, it was also talking about how the IKEA founder was a bad person.
I'm just more pissed off that these parents didn't have any personal responsibility. They could've anchored the dresser (as said in the manual) OR simply pay 3 times more for better quality furniture that supposedly won't tip over, OR don't put such tall pieces of furniture in children's rooms. Instead, they wanted to be cheap and then won't admit that they were wrong... even more wrong than the manufacturers they're blaming. The same manufacturers that are selling these lightweight cheap furniture because most people nowadays can't afford $600 desks, $5000 couches, and $1000 dressers.
Now, if the parents sued about lead based materials in toys, contaminated baby formula or something like that, it would be more understanding. While I'm not happy that people have died from these accidents (especially children), the parents just seemed so stupid that I can't sympathize. Overall, this episode could've been so much better. The content was silly and the whole thing was so anti-IKEA entirely. I'm also writing this from my $50 cheap Target desk with my $20 IKEA lamp on.
Terribly biased and poorly made episode
nicoleraphaelafan9 December 2019
Warning: Spoilers
The only part worth watching was the one about the impact made on trees in Romania, and by extension, the rest of the world.
The rest of the episode about the angry parents just frustrating to watch. I'm shocked that netflix greenlit it. 1) not everyone who have these dressers have children . 2) those who do... if you spend extra money and time baby proofing the rest of your house, why stop at the dresser (just because you think it is large and heavy and safe? That's your own wrong judgement call). 3) if you'd like to, buy heavier furniture.
I don't agree with fast-furniture but my ikea furniture have lasted me close to 6 years now and still going strong. If it is fast furniture that is the problem, look to changing peoples' mindsets not blame the furniture industry. No demand = no supply.
And seeing that SO MANY people now rent accommodation and move every few years, light and cheap furniture that still looks great is a great option to have. Don't want to be moving that 60year old antique passed down from grandma up 3 flights of stairs that's for sure.
The rest of the episode about the angry parents just frustrating to watch. I'm shocked that netflix greenlit it. 1) not everyone who have these dressers have children . 2) those who do... if you spend extra money and time baby proofing the rest of your house, why stop at the dresser (just because you think it is large and heavy and safe? That's your own wrong judgement call). 3) if you'd like to, buy heavier furniture.
I don't agree with fast-furniture but my ikea furniture have lasted me close to 6 years now and still going strong. If it is fast furniture that is the problem, look to changing peoples' mindsets not blame the furniture industry. No demand = no supply.
And seeing that SO MANY people now rent accommodation and move every few years, light and cheap furniture that still looks great is a great option to have. Don't want to be moving that 60year old antique passed down from grandma up 3 flights of stairs that's for sure.
Something's not right here
peterkowalski4 February 2020
The third episode is a mixed bag; I confess having very mixed emotions while watching it. On one side, there is the tragedy that's not up for discussion - small kids being crushed to death by a piece of furniture. There are also experts who say - this should not be on the customers, instead - on the manufacturer to produce a safe product.
Fine enough.
And then the narrator reveals IKEA knew about the dangers way back when (and decided to sell the furniture anyway), and put warnings and recommendations in the instructions of assembly.
If that is indeed the case - isn't the customer responsible here? They bought the piece of furniture knowing full well they are to assemble it on their end, and adhere to manufacturer's instructions and warnings.
And as such - again, not dumbing down the tragedy here, nor defending multinational corporations - it's hard to blame the manufacturer. If I buy a knife and cut myself with it, can I take the manufacturer to court, saying it was too sharp?
An episode so bad that it persuaded me of the opposite point
120watts21 January 2020
Warning: Spoilers
This episode should never have made it past the editor's desk. It was basically an hour-long drive-by smear of IKEA lacking even the most elementary coherence and substantiation.
First, the flow - there was none. It felt like something you would have made in high school media studies class. Essentially, the episode consisted of four or five mini-stories, with minimal to no logical segues between them.
The only one of these that was actually interesting was the one about illegal forest harvesting in Romania. They should have just built the whole episode around that.
Instead, we are treated to boring, amateurish and at times absurd sequences that answered none of the questions that a genuinely curious, unbiased viewer might have.
IKEA's history and corporate affairs... I found out the founder was a Nazi supporter as a teenager during the war, and later was apologetic about it - seemingly sincerely, according to the person interviewed. Did this tie into the story at all - no, but I guess the producer's thinking was "everyone hates Nazis, am I right?" Then we learned that the founder became very wealthy and the company was finding ways to pay fewer taxes. My next question was how they compare to the Apples and Amazons of the world - but, of course, that would require actual analysis and research and so was not on offer. So, the conclusion from this part of the film was that IKEA is a multinational corporation for good and ill. Ok, thanks.
Now for IKEA's suppliers' harvesting practices. The Romania story was interesting, but my takeaway was that IKEA stopped using them after the problems came to light. I guess maybe they should have done that earlier? In any case, this story should have been developed much farther. What does sound forest management look like? How does harvesting differentially impact old-growth forests vs. Newer ones? What are some examples of companies that are doing it right? What is the impact of disposable furniture in landfills? Barely a peep on any of this. In the end I was left with the impression that they were beating up on IKEA for what they acknowledged was an industry-wide issue... I guess the big dog is always the easiest target.
Now, what about the American furniture manufacturer in the Appalachians that is under strain because of low-cost foreign competition? Predictably, the story here was US-good, foreigners-bad. This segment was completely absurd for anyone who pauses to think for half a minute. First of all, huge swathes of Appalachian old-growth forests were historically clear cut by these same US companies - no irony there, right? Second, their more expensive furniture presumably requires better quality wood (like mature hardwood), which has a greater environmental impact, no? Third, does anyone think these small-time companies are more likely to make big payouts to families when their furniture causes injuries, like IKEA did? Good luck with that! Of course, the film didn't even mention any of these things, but really, you have to think the viewer is a total dope to expect them not to pause to think about the irony here. The only part that could have been interesting - the reference to dumping (selling below cost to gain market share) - was brought up once in passing and never revisited. They did show some scenes of that US factory and... I'm not an expert on manufacturing, but boy did that workplace look under-mechanized and inefficient. Maybe if you have barely modernized in 40 years there are other causes of your misfortune than foreign competitors that sell people products they actually want, at a price they can afford. But I digress.
We also learned about the Consumer Products Safety Commission - whose purpose is to advance consumer safety by coordinating recalls and developing safety standards. This was interspersed with a lot of commentary from concerned parents about how voluntary standards are a joke, because they are not mandatory. Ok, but the point of voluntary standards is generally to be a marker of standardized quality, so that consumers have an informed choice between higher quality, more expensive products and cheaper, flimsier ones. I don't think most of us who buy IKEA are under any illusion as to whether we are buying a Cadillac. The really interesting angle here would have been to explore the analysis that CPSC does - what are the factors and considerations they analyze when deciding whether a product like this has an acceptable or unacceptable level of risk? Like - where do you draw the line between "coffee is hot" and "ban lead paint?" In fairness, I can see why CPSC only provided talking heads for this segment, because at this point, the episode had devolved into a total farce.
The most outrageous segment was saved for the climax, as we were provided inside access to a gathering of parents whose toddlers had tragically died due to tippy dressers. Everyone can sympathize with this tragedy, but holy cow was this piece a joke. No mention of the parents taking any responsibility at all for their kids' safety, not even in the slightest. Like, if you have a toddler and choose to put cheap, tippy furniture in their room and leave them alone, maybe at the very least anchor the thing to the wall *like it says to do in the instructions.* Ironically, the film tried to implicate IKEA by showing an old manual which said to affix your furniture to the wall to prevent it from tipping - this was wound into some inchoate conspiracy talk of how "they knew all along" whereas what it really showed was that the parents knew all along. Naturally, the parents deserve compassion but when they craft the whole story around blaming someone else, take no personal responsibility, get paid an eight-figure settlement in cash, and then STILL go on TV to fume about IKEA's negligence - well, it's all a bit too much. To top it all off, there's a scene where the parents are all together mourning their children and agitating for justice - then in the background you can see they're having a nice dinner party with the wine flowing. Not really their fault... but the director really wasn't thinking here, was he? Oh, and then there's that dad who was quiet the whole time but finally chimes in to say that IKEA's voluntary Malm dresser recall is not advertised sufficiently, because what about all of the people out there who don't watch TV, listen to the radio, read the newspapers, watch YouTube or have social media - how will they find out?? Good grief.
In conclusion, this episode gets 2/10 only because of the 5 minutes of semi-suspenseful footage in the Carpathian Mountains.
The real irony is that coming into the episode, I was open-minded to learn about whether IKEA really was responsible for these falling dressers, but despite the producer's best efforts to show they were, the amateurish execution of the episode and shameless bias led me to conclude that if this is all there is to it, there's probably not much to it. So, I guess they accomplished something.
First, the flow - there was none. It felt like something you would have made in high school media studies class. Essentially, the episode consisted of four or five mini-stories, with minimal to no logical segues between them.
The only one of these that was actually interesting was the one about illegal forest harvesting in Romania. They should have just built the whole episode around that.
Instead, we are treated to boring, amateurish and at times absurd sequences that answered none of the questions that a genuinely curious, unbiased viewer might have.
IKEA's history and corporate affairs... I found out the founder was a Nazi supporter as a teenager during the war, and later was apologetic about it - seemingly sincerely, according to the person interviewed. Did this tie into the story at all - no, but I guess the producer's thinking was "everyone hates Nazis, am I right?" Then we learned that the founder became very wealthy and the company was finding ways to pay fewer taxes. My next question was how they compare to the Apples and Amazons of the world - but, of course, that would require actual analysis and research and so was not on offer. So, the conclusion from this part of the film was that IKEA is a multinational corporation for good and ill. Ok, thanks.
Now for IKEA's suppliers' harvesting practices. The Romania story was interesting, but my takeaway was that IKEA stopped using them after the problems came to light. I guess maybe they should have done that earlier? In any case, this story should have been developed much farther. What does sound forest management look like? How does harvesting differentially impact old-growth forests vs. Newer ones? What are some examples of companies that are doing it right? What is the impact of disposable furniture in landfills? Barely a peep on any of this. In the end I was left with the impression that they were beating up on IKEA for what they acknowledged was an industry-wide issue... I guess the big dog is always the easiest target.
Now, what about the American furniture manufacturer in the Appalachians that is under strain because of low-cost foreign competition? Predictably, the story here was US-good, foreigners-bad. This segment was completely absurd for anyone who pauses to think for half a minute. First of all, huge swathes of Appalachian old-growth forests were historically clear cut by these same US companies - no irony there, right? Second, their more expensive furniture presumably requires better quality wood (like mature hardwood), which has a greater environmental impact, no? Third, does anyone think these small-time companies are more likely to make big payouts to families when their furniture causes injuries, like IKEA did? Good luck with that! Of course, the film didn't even mention any of these things, but really, you have to think the viewer is a total dope to expect them not to pause to think about the irony here. The only part that could have been interesting - the reference to dumping (selling below cost to gain market share) - was brought up once in passing and never revisited. They did show some scenes of that US factory and... I'm not an expert on manufacturing, but boy did that workplace look under-mechanized and inefficient. Maybe if you have barely modernized in 40 years there are other causes of your misfortune than foreign competitors that sell people products they actually want, at a price they can afford. But I digress.
We also learned about the Consumer Products Safety Commission - whose purpose is to advance consumer safety by coordinating recalls and developing safety standards. This was interspersed with a lot of commentary from concerned parents about how voluntary standards are a joke, because they are not mandatory. Ok, but the point of voluntary standards is generally to be a marker of standardized quality, so that consumers have an informed choice between higher quality, more expensive products and cheaper, flimsier ones. I don't think most of us who buy IKEA are under any illusion as to whether we are buying a Cadillac. The really interesting angle here would have been to explore the analysis that CPSC does - what are the factors and considerations they analyze when deciding whether a product like this has an acceptable or unacceptable level of risk? Like - where do you draw the line between "coffee is hot" and "ban lead paint?" In fairness, I can see why CPSC only provided talking heads for this segment, because at this point, the episode had devolved into a total farce.
The most outrageous segment was saved for the climax, as we were provided inside access to a gathering of parents whose toddlers had tragically died due to tippy dressers. Everyone can sympathize with this tragedy, but holy cow was this piece a joke. No mention of the parents taking any responsibility at all for their kids' safety, not even in the slightest. Like, if you have a toddler and choose to put cheap, tippy furniture in their room and leave them alone, maybe at the very least anchor the thing to the wall *like it says to do in the instructions.* Ironically, the film tried to implicate IKEA by showing an old manual which said to affix your furniture to the wall to prevent it from tipping - this was wound into some inchoate conspiracy talk of how "they knew all along" whereas what it really showed was that the parents knew all along. Naturally, the parents deserve compassion but when they craft the whole story around blaming someone else, take no personal responsibility, get paid an eight-figure settlement in cash, and then STILL go on TV to fume about IKEA's negligence - well, it's all a bit too much. To top it all off, there's a scene where the parents are all together mourning their children and agitating for justice - then in the background you can see they're having a nice dinner party with the wine flowing. Not really their fault... but the director really wasn't thinking here, was he? Oh, and then there's that dad who was quiet the whole time but finally chimes in to say that IKEA's voluntary Malm dresser recall is not advertised sufficiently, because what about all of the people out there who don't watch TV, listen to the radio, read the newspapers, watch YouTube or have social media - how will they find out?? Good grief.
In conclusion, this episode gets 2/10 only because of the 5 minutes of semi-suspenseful footage in the Carpathian Mountains.
The real irony is that coming into the episode, I was open-minded to learn about whether IKEA really was responsible for these falling dressers, but despite the producer's best efforts to show they were, the amateurish execution of the episode and shameless bias led me to conclude that if this is all there is to it, there's probably not much to it. So, I guess they accomplished something.
Fearmongering sells and Netflix knows it
tourtt35 December 2019
Biased and poorly made
janchi-588-98650912 December 2019
Warning: Spoilers
This document is waste of time. It is blaming company for selling functional and cheap furniture and no blame is shared on parents that do not childproof their home. I feel their pain, but you are responsible too. In the document is a joke to watch outdated old school US furniture company complaining about high tech giants for taking their market share. You can clearly see poor safety and working conditions at their plant, but they have the guts to come on camera and blame the competition for steeling their business. Where is OSHA?
And btw, that Swedish company in the document is using wood and paper only carrying FSC certification. Thats the highest world standard for sustainable forestry sourcing, taking in consideration sourcing social aspects as well environment.
American propaganda much?! The USA should stop rewarding stupidity
archie-sb4 March 2020
This was just awful and ridiculous. Those parents made me sit in my car, spent 2 hours driving to Ikea just to buy that drawer, and btw. It's an awesome drawer.
I feel sorry for the other kids raised by that family.
Absolutely ridiculous
nikol-panagiotis21 January 2020
It would be an insult to call the particular episode a documentary. It struggles to make an impossible argument by offering all sorts of unrelated evidence and ignoring basic facts. It really does not get any more biased than this. And the unfortunate thing is due to this the credibility of every other claim in the episode and in the series now needs to be questioned.
An episode about parents not following installation instructions.
kseries-2321028 December 2019
Warning: Spoilers
It's a little all over the place. Deforestation, nazis, hate on ikea...
Tip over risk furniture has been a problem for decades. As a parent, you strap your furniture to the wall...period. If you want inexpensive/cheap furniture you have to do the work required to make it as safe as a hand built, solid wood equivalent.
When did we start blaming others due to our inability to read instructions?
I feel for these families, but at the same time, I've strapped EVERY piece of furniture my kids ever had.
This episode was really bad...
Tip over risk furniture has been a problem for decades. As a parent, you strap your furniture to the wall...period. If you want inexpensive/cheap furniture you have to do the work required to make it as safe as a hand built, solid wood equivalent.
When did we start blaming others due to our inability to read instructions?
I feel for these families, but at the same time, I've strapped EVERY piece of furniture my kids ever had.
This episode was really bad...
Biased and incoherent
tamas-b11 December 2019
Warning: Spoilers
As the title suggests, the episode starts off by showcasing accidents where people (children) got killed by tipping dressers.
We then get to know that traditional furniture manufacturers are losing business, illegally and irresponsibly supplied lumber endangers forests, IKEA founder was a nazi, and we finally come full circle with angry parents suing fast furniture companies for killing their children. As stupid as it reads, it is the actual arch of the episode.
So are dressers killing children because of deforestation or because it is the evil plan of a Swedish nazi?
Or is it plausible that putting a 6-drawer dresser in your child's room without making it safe means that you as a parent are actually responsible? The episode (very) briefly touches on the simple fact that you cannot cheat physics. A fully loaded dresser will likely tip if your child pulls all the drawers and climbs on it, irrespective of the manufacturer. That is why you anchor furniture or do not put tall pieces in the kid's room.
The message of the documentary that IKEA is to be blamed is outrageous. If you drive your car into the wall, you do not blame the manufacturer. If you do not anchor your tall furniture despite the multiple warnings in the manual and the necessary parts supplied, you should not blame IKEA.
We then get to know that traditional furniture manufacturers are losing business, illegally and irresponsibly supplied lumber endangers forests, IKEA founder was a nazi, and we finally come full circle with angry parents suing fast furniture companies for killing their children. As stupid as it reads, it is the actual arch of the episode.
So are dressers killing children because of deforestation or because it is the evil plan of a Swedish nazi?
Or is it plausible that putting a 6-drawer dresser in your child's room without making it safe means that you as a parent are actually responsible? The episode (very) briefly touches on the simple fact that you cannot cheat physics. A fully loaded dresser will likely tip if your child pulls all the drawers and climbs on it, irrespective of the manufacturer. That is why you anchor furniture or do not put tall pieces in the kid's room.
The message of the documentary that IKEA is to be blamed is outrageous. If you drive your car into the wall, you do not blame the manufacturer. If you do not anchor your tall furniture despite the multiple warnings in the manual and the necessary parts supplied, you should not blame IKEA.
American propaganda
pnter26 December 2019
"America is the best and foreign products are evil!" is what I got out of watching this. Not a single mention of the instructions coming with IKEA furniture to secure them to the walls. It was one long bashing of IKEA and, in true American style, without any personal accountability. Anything bad that happens is the fault of some company they can sue...
Personal Responsibility
BrendenBourne14 July 2021
Is the concept of having personal responsibility - as a parent for the safety of your children - dead?
IKEA provides equipment for fastening furniture to the wall with all their even slightly high furniture and advises that it MUST be used. I even got the fasteners with a 1.5-foot tall TV stand which is literally physically impossible to topple over.
I have seen "solid" dressers also fall over. It's a matter of physics - if a drawer near the top is full and heavy and gets pulled out, it changes the centre of gravity, and makes it more likely that the force of, say, a child climbing will cause it to topple.
This episode is just complete BS that appeals to emotion to push an unrelated agenda.
IKEA provides equipment for fastening furniture to the wall with all their even slightly high furniture and advises that it MUST be used. I even got the fasteners with a 1.5-foot tall TV stand which is literally physically impossible to topple over.
I have seen "solid" dressers also fall over. It's a matter of physics - if a drawer near the top is full and heavy and gets pulled out, it changes the centre of gravity, and makes it more likely that the force of, say, a child climbing will cause it to topple.
This episode is just complete BS that appeals to emotion to push an unrelated agenda.
American families trying to blame companies for their negligence.
miguellibanio2 January 2020
Warning: Spoilers
It really had potential.
The virgin forest exploitation is a serious problem and I think they could investigate a lot more into it. But the producers had other plans in mind...
I understand that the burden of losing a child is heartbreaking. But you can't just throw the blame on a foreign company so you can feel better with yourself. I've had IKEA furniture for all of my adult life and it has always had warnings about the danger of tipping over and most of the things have kits to fix your furniture to the wall.
Very Irritating Subject.
sandrazapata-434751 January 2020
Warning: Spoilers
The story starts decently, then they diverge with how IKEA's founder was a Nazi supporter and how they are destroying the Romanian forests.
The subject is just irritating! People cannot sue companies for the misuse of their products. A dresser is NOT for climbing!!! While I feel bad for the loss of these families, that does not take from the fact that they are negligent. They should take better care of their kids and educate them so they don't climb dangerous objects. It's common sense.
If I leave a knife on the counter and my toddler grabs it from the blade (a misuse!!!)... AM I supposed to sue the manufacturer because my toddler cut him/herself???
People should take responsibility for their actions and negligence! People should understand that we cannot sue anybody for anything that pops in our minds!
The subject is just irritating! People cannot sue companies for the misuse of their products. A dresser is NOT for climbing!!! While I feel bad for the loss of these families, that does not take from the fact that they are negligent. They should take better care of their kids and educate them so they don't climb dangerous objects. It's common sense.
If I leave a knife on the counter and my toddler grabs it from the blade (a misuse!!!)... AM I supposed to sue the manufacturer because my toddler cut him/herself???
People should take responsibility for their actions and negligence! People should understand that we cannot sue anybody for anything that pops in our minds!
This isn't a documentary
bccbzxhz27 September 2020
Awful episode, they make a good point on deforestation and fast furniture. But then the focus shift to furnitures falling over? Doesn't everyone know that furnitures can fall? AND YOU NEED TO SECURE THEM IF YOU HAVE A CHILD? This isn't even a documentary anymore with the bias and trying everything to make a storyline and sob story.
Excuse me? What?!
slein12628 June 2022
Warning: Spoilers
This entire episode refuses to even consider what has caused these accidents. The parents. They even show that IKEA has, since the furniture's launch in 2002, included an instruction for how to secure it to a wall, and that it should not be around children. Ridiculous.
The documentary goes on to talk about the fact that IKEA aren't as sustainable as they themselves claim. Okay? Interesting! Then they go on to not go in to details at all, and go back to disgruntled parents whom are unable to take any responsibility for their own mistakes.
IKEA furnitures might be the biggest supplier of furnitures, as they are the cheapest. If you want better anything in this world, you have to pay more. In this instance though, all the parents needed to do was fasten the furniture. Terrible documentary episode. Rest of series is decent!
The documentary goes on to talk about the fact that IKEA aren't as sustainable as they themselves claim. Okay? Interesting! Then they go on to not go in to details at all, and go back to disgruntled parents whom are unable to take any responsibility for their own mistakes.
IKEA furnitures might be the biggest supplier of furnitures, as they are the cheapest. If you want better anything in this world, you have to pay more. In this instance though, all the parents needed to do was fasten the furniture. Terrible documentary episode. Rest of series is decent!
Scare culture at its finest
linskye1 December 2021
329 million Americans, 30 die from furniture tipping over, all of a sudden IKEA (largest furniture store) is horrible???
5,000 people die from choking on food, let's stop eating food and take vitamins instead.
A riskless life is a prison. Freak accidents happen. These parents were notified on the instructions, they weren't careful. That's on them, not furniture companies.
5,000 people die from choking on food, let's stop eating food and take vitamins instead.
A riskless life is a prison. Freak accidents happen. These parents were notified on the instructions, they weren't careful. That's on them, not furniture companies.
Stupid parents should read instructions
alelombo14 October 2020
very poor message
krisz-t510 November 2020
Its an episode about sad parents who didnt follow the instructions to secure a piece of furniture to the wall as it should be. trying to find excuses after a sad incident they could have easily prevent. im not sure if the episode is about to finggerpoint on how ikea business model is not sustainable compared to a 50people us furniture company or about these complaining parents... not sure the message. confusing and misleading.
Lacks common sense
ratkutti29 December 2019
Broken by Netflix rightfully questions wood source & lessened quality/lifetime of furnitures; marketing & tax evasion.
But it's utter stupidity to blame IKEA for parents being careless. If you keep dressers accessible for toddlers and they pull, it'll tip over; it's obvious. It's sad what happened to those innocent kids but those parents blaming the company and their business model only have themselves to blame for either purchasing something that is DIY or for not having a constant vigle until the baby/kid is at least a child.
But it's utter stupidity to blame IKEA for parents being careless. If you keep dressers accessible for toddlers and they pull, it'll tip over; it's obvious. It's sad what happened to those innocent kids but those parents blaming the company and their business model only have themselves to blame for either purchasing something that is DIY or for not having a constant vigle until the baby/kid is at least a child.
parents sue company for their own stupidity
dianahabankova22 January 2020
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
