Baby Diaper Packaging

[Kari]

I was at the store and couldn't help but notice that the baby diapers are different.

Not the diapers themselves.

But the age of kids used on the packaging appear to be older.

Is this to send a message to parents...

Making them feel that if their child is 3-5 (that's my guess) it's okay to still wear diapers?

Remember how they got rid of the Iconic Pampers baby about 10 years ago?

Is this why they did it? Or am I just reading too much into this?

[square_duck]

Well, like it says in your signature......

"There's no age limit on that box of Pampers"

[drynot]

It does make perfect sense from a companies perspective to keep your target demographic in diapers for as long as possible.

[daddy-jonny]

i was gonna ask the same thing.. i mean some kids on these diaper packages look to be about 4-5

[ABigDL]

they are easier to photograph.. more cooperative.

[Kari]

Wonder what the John Rosemond & his lemmings feel about it?

That man must hate diapers.

Or be a closet AB/DL overcompensating with denial

[square_duck]

You will also notice that non of the packages actually picture the child actually 'wearing' the package contents

The packaging "implies' that te are for children, but doesn't state a 'age' but just a size and weight.

Diapers, they aren't just for babies anymore,,

[Little BabyDoll Christine]

That is what they used to do with the old rubber panty packaginb. the when it got past something like "X-LARGE 25-35 LBS", the would do something like "over 36 Lbs: Big Baby" or "Super Toddler over 35 Lbs" I can just imagine them doing it with age or full wieght. "Super Baby 36-105 Lbs" or 4 to 12 Yrs Husky Toddler". Anybody want to consider THOSE fantasies? Just imagine your parents bringing that home when you are 7 and showing them to you and saying "These will fit you if I need to use them on you". I often wondered why they never measured them by waist size or age or gave the full weight range, Now I think I know

[Yvhuce]

Past a certain age, weight no longer indicates how big the waist should be. It would make more sense for diapers to use waist measurements...

[Little Faerie]

Having had children I tend to be decent at guessing ages, the girl on the largest package size looks to be about 3, which is the typical upper age of diapers. I attempted training my daughter at that age but she was still in pull ups until age 5 because otherwise I was doing way too much daily laundry. Oh, she'd use the potty from age 2 1/2, but not consistently, or without having been asked. It was sort of random. I don't know HOW many incidences of wet pants in kindergarten I had to deal with, I lost count. She is older now, and sometimes I still have to remind her because she just flat forgets until we're 5 miles down the road or she's so busy playing. Thank goodness she isn't a bedwetter too... I have enough sheets to deal with on my own! My mother complains that I was the exact same except that I wet the bed on top of all that... maybe it's karma lol. But yeah, those kids look the right ages to be in those... the younger one is probably about 2 1/2.

[missyD]

As Drynot noted, it makes huge sense for companies to keep their target demographic as large as possible, - those pictures make a parent think that is okay to keep kids in diapers til when they are bigger. -------unlike my mother who had me trained well before i was a year no wonder i'm a mess !-------------------

and oh, yes, i remember as a child, buying myself plastic pants - sealtex super size soft vinyl pants, for .79 at woolworths, but they still had a photo of a little baby on them ( which was okay by me)