Comments on: Jennifer Garner’s Sweet Jewelry for Daughter Violet

By: Karen

Karen — Fri, 23 Mar 2007 20:50:37 +0000

400.00 for a necklace for a child???? UGH, not in my lifetime!!!!

By: Shel

Shel — Fri, 23 Mar 2007 19:15:29 +0000

She doesn’t have to “let” the baby chew on the necklace. If you have children or have even spent time around infants and toddlers, you should know that everything they can get their hands on goes in the mouth. Unless you are watching your child every second of every day (and that’s highly improbable) then yes, anything within reaching distance can be a choking hazard.

By: VANESSA

VANESSA — Fri, 23 Mar 2007 18:54:42 +0000

Yeah, this is defintely a choking hazzard. What if the chain gets stuck to something, like the playpen, or crib, or chair, and chokes the baby. Even doctor’s say not to put chains on a baby.

By: Frab

Frab — Fri, 23 Mar 2007 12:52:08 +0000

Thanks Julie, I was just gonna point that out- she’s not gonna let her baby chew on it. I think it’s a cute keepsake.

By: Sue

Sue — Thu, 22 Mar 2007 23:15:27 +0000

despite how the article is written, I highly doubt that the necklace is for a baby to wear….. it’s likely it is for Jennifer herself or for her little girl to wear when she gets older…. I just looked at the Emma-Jane and Tan line as suggested above and none of the jewelry is marketed for children or infant wear…. but it looks great as something I’d like to buy for myself or for gifts, for the adults or young adults in my life…

By: Julie

Julie — Thu, 22 Mar 2007 22:27:33 +0000

A lot of parents buy a special gold charm or gold cross for small children as a keepsake. They only wear it on special occasions, like a church dedication or a party, and then it’s saved for when they’re older, and sometimes even for when they have kids. I doubt she’s going to let Violet gnaw on it and play with it.

By: sarah

sarah — Thu, 22 Mar 2007 21:48:13 +0000

that’s a little ridiculous for an infant to have a diamond and gold necklace but i guess they are rich

By: Shel

Shel — Thu, 22 Mar 2007 21:07:29 +0000

Holy cow, that’s a definite choking hazard, especially if the charm somehow detaches while the kid chews on the necklace (and you know if you have kids that that is a distinct possibility). Save the necklaces for ages 5 and up. But it is too cute, so maybe Jen can keep it in a jewelry box for when her daughter is older.

By: Alice

Alice — Thu, 22 Mar 2007 20:47:19 +0000

I think its a sweet necklace but for some reason, I just never liked the idea of jewelery on babies, even earrings. It just seems so unnecessary.

By: Dawn

Dawn — Thu, 22 Mar 2007 20:21:54 +0000

400 dollars for a little girl who would rather have that shinny jewlery from a vending machine seems silly. But i guess if you got it flaunt it.

By: TB

TB — Thu, 22 Mar 2007 20:19:41 +0000

Jennifer needs to spend that money on new shoes, have you seen the latest busted tennis shoes she wears.

By: May

May — Thu, 22 Mar 2007 20:17:34 +0000

If I had a little girl I would definetly but it, but J you are right it does seem like chokin hazzard. I changed my mind. I would rather have it in a earring or bracelet. I totally agree with J.

By: Shauna

Shauna — Thu, 22 Mar 2007 19:54:54 +0000

How adorable!!! I would buy one for myself since I don’t have any kids yet.

By: j

Thu, 22 Mar 2007 19:43:57 +0000

can anyone say ‘choking hazzard’ ?!? i can see MAYBE earrings or a bracelet, but a necklace is ignorant to put on a child that small…

By: KT from Cda

KT from Cda — Thu, 22 Mar 2007 19:32:44 +0000

It’s cute but a little too much mulla.