The American Psychiatric Association (APA) has updated its Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, including with new information specifically addressed to individuals in the European Economic Area. As described in the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, this website utilizes cookies, including for the purpose of offering an optimal online experience and services tailored to your preferences.

Please read the entire Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. By closing this message, browsing this website, continuing the navigation, or otherwise continuing to use the APA's websites, you confirm that you understand and accept the terms of the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, including the utilization of cookies.

×
Professional NewsFull Access

Vermont Bear Consigned To Permanent Hibernation

Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1176/pn.40.5.00400014

A Vermont teddy bear recently found itself at the heart of a bitter controversy in which it has been accused of being anything but lovable.

The Vermont Teddy Bear Company thought it would be a cute idea to market a new bear that people might want to give to their loved one for Valentine's Day and named it the “Crazy for You” bear. The brouhaha over use of a term that many consider offensive to people with mental illness grew substantially, however, when marketing materials showed that “Crazy for You” bear would come dressed in a straitjacket that's embroidered with a small red heart in the front.

The bear also comes with commitment papers that show three boxes with check marks in each. The boxes say “can't eat,” “can't sleep,” and “my heart's racing,” followed by the phrase“ Crazy for you.”

The bear's ensemble quickly brought protests from representatives of advocacy groups such as NAMI-Vermont and the Vermont Association for Mental Health, as well as from the Vermont Psychiatric Association and at least one state legislator.

In a January 13 letter to the company's president, Elisabeth Robert, those organizations expressed their disappointment that after being informed of the stigmatizing nature of the new teddy bear, the company “decided to choose profit margin over public sensitivity.”

The groups asked to meet with Robert to explain “why this marketing strategy is so damaging to persons with mental illness. Specifically, the use of a straitjacket and commitment papers as symbols of love minimizes the plight of those who suffer from mental illness and their loved ones.”

They called on the company to stop marketing the teddy bear, which sold for $69.95. It was one of a series of 39 bears the company marketed as Valentine's Day gifts.

The Vermont Psychiatric Association's executive committee voted to ask Robert to resign as a member of the Board of Trustees of Fletcher Allen Health Care, the state's largest medical center.

On February 9, several Vermont newspapers reported that she had submitted her resignation to the Fletcher Allen board the previous day, saying that“ the recent controversy surrounding one of my company's teddy bears will detract from my ability to serve effectively.”

Editorials condemning the “Crazy for You” bear appeared on a Vermont television station and in the Burlington Free Press newspaper. Not everyone, however, found the bear stigmatizing or insulting. The largest newspaper in neighboring New Hampshire, the Manchester Union Leader, labeled the controversy an example of political correctness gone too far. In a January 30 editorial, the paper expressed its consternation that“ the sensitivity police in Vermont have nothing better to do this winter than examine teddy bears for possible offenses against the emotionally thin-skinned.”

Ignoring the symbolism of the straitjacket and commitment papers, the editorial focused on the word “crazy” and maintained that using it“ as a metaphor for love is hardly a human rights violation. If it were, we would have to go after poets, songwriters, and enraptured lovers as well as supposedly `insensitive' teddy bear makers.”

On January 28 Robert Appel, executive director of the Vermont Human Rights Commission, weighed in on the controversy. He accused the company of an“ apparent lack of understanding.. .of the real hurt and emotional turmoil” that continued marketing of the bear would cause those with psychiatric disorders.

Apparently not swayed by these and a growing chorus of other protests, Robert said her company planned to continue marketing the bear.

Despite her initial refusal to halt the bear's marketing, Robert may have had at least a partial change of heart after seeing the number and passion of the protests. She agreed to meet on February 1 with representatives of four advocacy groups including NAMI-Vermont and indicated at the meeting that she had decided that “Crazy for You” bear would no longer be offered for sale. She did not say it was because of the protests.

By February 4 the company's Web site at<http://store.yahoo.com/vtbear/valentines-day-gifts-ideas.html> said “Sorry, sold out” under the picture of “Crazy for You” bear. A company spokesperson announced on February 3 that the bear had sold out, and it would not be manufacturing any more of them. In addition, Robert said in a prepared statement that the bear “was not intended to diminish the serious nature of mental illness [but] was meant to convey the sentiment of love at Valentine's Day.”

Company spokesperson Nicole L'Hillier confirmed to Psychiatric News that while the protests against the teddy bear may have had an indirect impact on the decision to stop selling it, the decision was primarily due to the production run being sold out. She also noted that soon after the protests began, the company did pull advertising for this particular bear from the 500 radio stations that its marketers had targeted and stopped featuring it on its Web site's home page. The company did, however, include it among several dozen bears on the Valentine's Day gift page of its Web site.

Vermont psychiatrist and APA Board of Trustees member David Fassler, M.D., suggested, however, that the company is downplaying the impact of the protests. “There's no question in my mind that the overall public reaction and response caused the company to modify its plans for the product,” Fassler told Psychiatric News, “and I doubt we'll see this product again next year.” ▪