# I hate..



## TheAJs (Jun 29, 2007)

... the "Babies Sleep Safest Alone" campaign that is going on in New York State right now. I hate that I have to hear this "ad" every time I am listening to the radio. The fear tactics and the leaving out of important information really irks me.







: I just wanted to vent someplace where I know I would be understood.


----------



## NotTheOnlyOne (Oct 23, 2006)

they havent started that where I live yet, I am dreading it. I know it's coming.


----------



## bottomsup (Jul 6, 2007)

Ok. Let me preface this by saying, yes, I think it would be better to have a "How to Co-Sleep Safely" campaign, similar to the back-to-sleep and other crib safety info out there.

But every time a thread like this comes up, I want to pull my hair.

The fact is, these campaigns are aimed at people who are in most cases not co-sleeping out of desire. They cannot afford cribs, they know nothing about co-sleeping safely, and I'm sorry, but their children are in danger. The kinds of cases that spur these campaigns are not aimed at you and me, or any other parent educated about co-sleeping safely.

They are aimed at those who place babies on adult beds or in beds with other children because they cannot afford a crib or do not have the space, and do not really think about how to co-sleep safely because they don't want to in the first place, and just go with what they know.

I do think it would be better in some cases to just have a co-sleeping safely campaign, but even here, I see often a breathtaking lack of regard for safe sleeping, so I can imagine how those recommendations would go over in the general public...

My rec.: don't take it personally.


----------



## uptowngirl (Jun 9, 2008)

I am curious about whether there are cases in which DSS comes after the parent if they are co-sleeping and something (god forbid) were to happen....even a fall or something. We didn't co-sleep for very long ( I sleep horribly with anyone--even my dh), but I always wondered if they (DSS) are paving the way to intervene in co-sleeping situations. The campaign sounds a little worrisome....


----------



## MamaBear21107 (Jan 20, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *bottomsup* 
Ok. Let me preface this by saying, yes, I think it would be better to have a "How to Co-Sleep Safely" campaign, similar to the back-to-sleep and other crib safety info out there.

But every time a thread like this comes up, I want to pull my hair.

The fact is, these campaigns are aimed at people who are in most cases not co-sleeping out of desire. They cannot afford cribs, they know nothing about co-sleeping safely, and I'm sorry, but their children are in danger. The kinds of cases that spur these campaigns are not aimed at you and me, or any other parent educated about co-sleeping safely.

They are aimed at those who place babies on adult beds or in beds with other children because they cannot afford a crib or do not have the space, and do not really think about how to co-sleep safely because they don't want to in the first place, and just go with what they know.

I do think it would be better in some cases to just have a co-sleeping safely campaign, but even here, I see often a breathtaking lack of regard for safe sleeping, so I can imagine how those recommendations would go over in the general public...

My rec.: don't take it personally.









:
The problem is, with a campaign like this, there is false info being put out there, (not to mention that not cosleeping also hurts breastfeeding, and people that don't have money for a crib certainly do not have money for formula either) with this campaign getting put out there in the general public, the general public becomes misinformed....I REALLY do not see how this helps anyone. There should be a "Safe Sleeping" campaign instead. This is more realistic, healthier for everyone, and not anymore work than a "babies Sleep Safest Alone" campaign.


----------



## MyBoysBlue (Apr 27, 2007)

It also deters new parents from looking into cosleeping as an option because they have been told it's not safe. So they don't even look into it.


----------



## bottomsup (Jul 6, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *MamaBear21107* 







:
The problem is, with a campaign like this, there is false info being put out there, (not to mention that not cosleeping also hurts breastfeeding, and people that don't have money for a crib certainly do not have money for formula either) with this campaign getting put out there in the general public, the general public becomes misinformed....I REALLY do not see how this helps anyone. There should be a "Safe Sleeping" campaign instead. This is more realistic, healthier for everyone, and not anymore work than a "babies Sleep Safest Alone" campaign.

I am a co-sleeper. I love it. But I have tons of mom friends who breastfeed and do NOT co-sleep, and it works out fine. More than fine. Not co-sleeping does not harm BFing, though it can help it. I also have friends who co-sleep and FF, so really, the two do not have to be connected.

Personally, I do not care if other people co-sleep, not in the way I wish they would BF or not spank, or not CIO. Co-sleeping is a truly a decision the whole family makes together, and all members need to be considered, and there are perfectly happy babies who do not share their beds with mom and dad.

My main point---I just cannot get worked up over these campaigns. I assume they probably do help some families, I am going to co-sleep regardless, I do not care what other people think, and like anything else, if parents want to learn more, it is their responsibility in the end.

Oh--and I do not think for one minute CPS or DYFS or DSS are cooking up these anti Co-sleeping campaigns to create more reasons to come after babies and families.


----------



## TheAJs (Jun 29, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *bottomsup* 
The fact is, these campaigns are aimed at people who are in most cases not co-sleeping out of desire. They cannot afford cribs, they know nothing about co-sleeping safely, and I'm sorry, but their children are in danger. The kinds of cases that spur these campaigns are not aimed at you and me, or any other parent educated about co-sleeping safely.

They are aimed at those who place babies on adult beds or in beds with other children because they cannot afford a crib or do not have the space, and do not really think about how to co-sleep safely because they don't want to in the first place, and just go with what they know.

No. They are not. Have you heard the commercial? A baby cries in the night and the dad says "oh, I'll just bring the baby to bed with us" and mom says "Good idea".

These campaigns are aimed at all parents who are thinking about about bringing their babies to bed with them! And they no doubt illicit guilty feelings in those that are! We have been safely cosleeping for 15 months and yet when I hear that commercial, a little voice inside my head wants to pipe up and say "are you sure that's the right thing? The guy on the radio says it's not!" They leave out important information, like the dangerous circumstances that often lead to deaths.. drugs, alcohol, too many pillows and blankets...

"23 babies died last year..." Really... well I want to know how many died in a crib!!!!!!!!


----------



## Leilalu (May 29, 2004)

what the campaign does not address is very important:

for families that are mindful of a new baby, they may also want to make sure said baby does gag himself on spit up in his sleep. My new baby tries to do this.
crib mattresses are full of toxins and the offgass can be deadly.
babies usually do not have a set breathing pattern. Sleeping in close proximity to mama helps create a steady breathing pattern all night long.

I'm sorry, but I think there should be a real campaign about co-sleeping safely. If it was, maybe it wouldn't be so taboo and people who didn't know how to do it safely would be the minority. Sure, it's not for everyone, but at least those people could take it or leave it. People have co-slept since time began. Neolithic people didn't have nurseries set up.

Educating about the wrong thing does not save babies, being informed saves babies.


----------



## bottomsup (Jul 6, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Leilalu* 
what the campaign does not address is very important:

for families that are mindful of a new baby, they may also want to make sure said baby does gag himself on spit up in his sleep. My new baby tries to do this.
crib mattresses are full of toxins and the offgass can be deadly.
babies usually do not have a set breathing pattern. Sleeping in close proximity to mama helps create a steady breathing pattern all night long.

I'm sorry, but I think there should be a real campaign about co-sleeping safely. If it was, maybe it wouldn't be so taboo and people who didn't know how to do it safely would be the minority. Sure, it's not for everyone, but at least those people could take it or leave it. People have co-slept since time began. Neolithic people didn't have nurseries set up.

Educating about the wrong thing does not save babies, being informed saves babies.

This is why I want to tear my hair out. Quotes like this imply that a parent who does not co-sleep is somehow responsible for a SIDS death because the baby slept alone. SIDS rates are very low, anyway, so while it is a terrible thing to happen, parents are not taking crazy risks by not co-sleeping.

And adult mattresses are just as full of off gassing and toxins.

I agree a sleeping safely campaign would be more fair, but again you have to realize the target audience is not always willing or able to do so safely. For many reasons.

I


----------



## Kiddoson (Nov 19, 2001)

Originally Posted by Leilalu
what the campaign does not address is very important:

for families that are mindful of a new baby, they may also want to make sure said baby does gag himself on spit up in his sleep. My new baby tries to do this.
crib mattresses are full of toxins and the offgass can be deadly.
babies usually do not have a set breathing pattern. Sleeping in close proximity to mama helps create a steady breathing pattern all night long.

I'm sorry, but I think there should be a real campaign about co-sleeping safely. If it was, maybe it wouldn't be so taboo and people who didn't know how to do it safely would be the minority. Sure, it's not for everyone, but at least those people could take it or leave it. People have co-slept since time began. Neolithic people didn't have nurseries set up.

Educating about the wrong thing does not save babies, being informed saves babies.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *bottomsup* 
This is why I want to tear my hair out. Quotes like this imply that a parent who does not co-sleep is somehow responsible for a SIDS death because the baby slept alone. SIDS rates are very low, anyway, so while it is a terrible thing to happen, parents are not taking crazy risks by not co-sleeping.

And adult mattresses are just as full of off gassing and toxins.

I agree a sleeping safely campaign would be more fair, but again you have to realize the target audience is not always willing or able to do so safely. For many reasons.

I

I don't see where she implys this. she even states co-sleeing is not for everyone. And the breathing patterns is fact, not opinion. What about the mom who is compelled to shake her baby out of frustration because they won't sleep alone? that's a risk too...


----------



## MamaBear21107 (Jan 20, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *bottomsup* 
I am a co-sleeper. I love it. But I have tons of mom friends who breastfeed and do NOT co-sleep, and it works out fine. More than fine. Not co-sleeping does not harm BFing, though it can help it. I also have friends who co-sleep and FF, so really, the two do not have to be connected.

Personally, I do not care if other people co-sleep, not in the way I wish they would BF or not spank, or not CIO. Co-sleeping is a truly a decision the whole family makes together, and all members need to be considered, and there are perfectly happy babies who do not share their beds with mom and dad.

My main point---I just cannot get worked up over these campaigns. I assume they probably do help some families, I am going to co-sleep regardless, I do not care what other people think, and like anything else, if parents want to learn more, it is their responsibility in the end.

Oh--and I do not think for one minute CPS or DYFS or DSS are cooking up these anti Co-sleeping campaigns to create more reasons to come after babies and families.

When i said that it hurts breastfeeding i was thinking of a situation where the baby is in their own room, and parents in another...that would have hurt breastfeeding for me _personally_, but you are right, it doesn't help it, but it doesn't hurt it.

That being said, it doesn't bother me one bit if someone chooses not to cosleep- it certainly is not for everyone....however, I don't like "experts"







: telling me that what I'm doing isn't safe for my LO.
But much more importantly, this campaign is just another thing that "experts" are telling new mamas that is FALSE info...there is so much of that out there already. if you choose not to cosleep, fine, but you shouldn't feel guilted out of doing it if you feel that it is best for your family. (As you said, it is truly a personal decision) And IMO a very natural one.
But, again, IMO, this campaign is a waste of time, money and effort and is not _helping_ anyone.


----------



## bottomsup (Jul 6, 2007)

Oh my god, the hysteria here is insane. So shaken baby only happens because baby won't sleep alone? Please. If a mother is going to do that, anything will set her off.

"babies usually do not have a set breathing pattern. Sleeping in close proximity to mama helps create a steady breathing pattern all night long."

So..the implication that if mom does not sleep next to baby to help regulate her sleeping then...it is there. The implication is clear.

I love co-sleeping. I advocate for it...to people I know who will be mindful.

But let's take the radio ad example. Dad says in the middle of the night, spur of the moment, let's bring baby to bed. Parents who do not usually co-sleep do do this in the middle of the night exhaustion. Are they thinking about the safety of their bed? Their covers? If they are too exhausted to be mindful of baby in bed? Any other unsafe condition?

I am sorry, but it is a legitimate concern.

Look, I love co-sleeping. And it is a real pain in the butt to do if you do it safely. Again, I know people around here often proudly state how they do not follow any of the recommendations, save the drugs and alcohol. They allow babies to sleep with smokers, in beds not dropped to the floors, with covers, with pillowtops, with no rails, etc etc.

If educated co-sleepers do not follow the recommendations, and in fact often state that they are a bunch of overcautious hooey nonsense, then why advocate for a campaign to do it safely or to cite risk factors?

I think many people, here and elsewhere, do not want to make the effort to do it safely, so these campaigns are almost necessary to drive through the point to thoughtless parents.

And again, who cares where other parents sleep their babies? It is not abusive or neglectful like CIO, or sub optimally healthy like formula? it is just another way to sleep, and no one is coming after you personally.

Finally, do not dismiss 23 infant deaths at the hands of negligent parents just because other babies died in cribs.


----------



## veganone (May 10, 2007)

No one is "dismissing" babies who died due to unsafe sleeping conditions... Poeple are pointing out that the number "23 babies" is totally not relevant to the argument that co-sleeping is unsafe unless you look at it in comparison to crib sleeping deaths. EVERY SINGLE BABY DEATH IS TRAGIC.

My issue with campaigns like this are:

1) It does nothing to teach parents how to co-sleep safely, so the ones who still do it out of desperation or necessity are still going to be doing it unsafely. Trust me, when my daughter would sleep NO other way, I did it out of necessity even though we had a lovely nursery all set up AND an Amby baby hammock. If I hadn't known any better, we would have done it unsafely.

2) It furthers (actually, legitimizes) the hysteria about co-sleeping so that people like us, who do it safely, are stigmatized. I can't tell you how horrified some people are that we co-sleep. People actually think I am endangering the life of my child every single night.

3) Unsafe sleeping situations are bad for babies. This isn't SIDS awareness (don't overheat, don't smoke, no soft bedding). This implies that if you put a kid in a crib, she's safe. That's not the case.

We're saying SAFE SLEEING (crib or co) would be a much better campaign.

ETA - Frankly, if the argument is that this campaign is for people who can't afford a crib, then a safe co-sleeping campaign would be better, no? This isn't buying people cribs. If they really can't afford it, all this does is make them paranoid about bringing their baby into their bed with them. For low-income people, I'd think safe co-sleeping would be the best solution of all since they don't have to buy anything in most cases.


----------



## mommy2caroline (May 9, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Kiddoson* 
I don't see where she implys this. she even states co-sleeing is not for everyone. And the breathing patterns is fact, not opinion. What about the mom who is compelled to shake her baby out of frustration because they won't sleep alone? that's a risk too...

Yeah that. The breathing patterns are scientific fact. The AAP even acknowledges this by stating that babies should sleep in their parents' bedrooms for the first six months. So when a parent chooses to put baby in a crib down the hall, risks are being taken. The number of SIDS deaths in co-sleeping cultures is virtually nil. I would want to be informed of that if I didn't already know it - that a crib-sleeping baby in another room has a higher risk of SIDS. Telling people the facts is necessary - and if the facts hurt people's feelings or "make them feel guilty," then they need to stop being so PC about it. Take factual info., evaluate it and determine what works best for your situation, and make a decision. And that may mean not cosleeping, which is fine as long as it's a choice the parents are comfortable making.

And definitely, the risk of shaken baby syndrome could be increased by a parent trying to force her baby to sleep alone. I know my first wouldn't have done it and I would have been at my breaking point from sheer exhaustion and frustration. Ads that tell us to work against biology are sure to just cause frustration in many people!

I do see that maybe the ads are targeted at low-income people who only cosleep because they can't afford a crib. But what are the repercussions for the rest of us? It's going to spread a mentality of "alone is the safest way for infants to sleep" which is first of all, totally inaccurate, and secondly, could cause CPS to get involved. Not because CPS is cooking up these ads themselves because they don't already have enough to do, but because well-meaning people who are influenced by the ads will begin reporting family members and friends for co-sleeping.


----------



## mommy2caroline (May 9, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *bottomsup* 
"babies usually do not have a set breathing pattern. Sleeping in close proximity to mama helps create a steady breathing pattern all night long."

So..the implication that if mom does not sleep next to baby to help regulate her sleeping then...it is there. The implication is clear.

This is an example of the PC hype. Because a *fact* might make somebody feel guilty, we shouldn't say it?

It is just a plain and simple fact that babies have immature breathing patterns and are better regulated when sleeping next to their mothers. It is a scientific fact, period. People can take whatever implications they want from that. Personally, I leave my baby napping alone when I have to get up and tend to my older child. I have tried putting my baby to bed ahead of me and dh a few times (though she's having none of that!







). I know that she is safer sleeping with me - yet I do take these small risks at times. And I'm not going to feel guilty doing it. I have taken the factual information and chosen to have my baby sleep next to/on me for 95% of the time in the first six months. The 5% of the time that she doesn't, I am taking a risk, and I have no problem admitting that - the facts show that I am taking a risk.

Facts are to educate people - then they can make their own choices with the information rather that to not know the facts and then say, "I wish I had known..." in retrospect.


----------



## bottomsup (Jul 6, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *veganone* 
No one is "dismissing" babies who died due to unsafe sleeping conditions... Poeple are pointing out that the number "23 babies" is totally not relevant to the argument that co-sleeping is unsafe unless you look at it in comparison to crib sleeping deaths. EVERY SINGLE BABY DEATH IS TRAGIC.

My issue with campaigns like this are:

1) It does nothing to teach parents how to co-sleep safely, so the ones who still do it out of desperation or necessity are still going to be doing it unsafely. Trust me, when my daughter would sleep NO other way, I did it out of necessity even though we had a lovely nursery all set up AND an Amby baby hammock. If I hadn't known any better, we would have done it unsafely.

2) It furthers (actually, legitimizes) the hysteria about co-sleeping so that people like us, who do it safely, are stigmatized. I can't tell you how horrified some people are that we co-sleep. People actually think I am endangering the life of my child every single night.

3) Unsafe sleeping situations are bad for babies. This isn't SIDS awareness (don't overheat, don't smoke, no soft bedding). This implies that if you put a kid in a crib, she's safe. That's not the case.

We're saying SAFE SLEEING (crib or co) would be a much better campaign.

ETA - Frankly, if the argument is that this campaign is for people who can't afford a crib, then a safe co-sleeping campaign would be better, no? This isn't buying people cribs. If they really can't afford it, all this does is make them paranoid about bringing their baby into their bed with them. For low-income people, I'd think safe co-sleeping would be the best solution of all since they don't have to buy anything in most cases.

*See my posts above about the possible futility of safe co-sleeping campaigns. The gist: people here often do not bother with the recommendations, so we expect reluctant co-sleepers to do the same? And unprepared co-sleepers. And yes, the number of deaths in cribs and adult beds is always relevant.*

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mommy2caroline* 
Yeah that. The breathing patterns are scientific fact. The AAP even acknowledges this by stating that babies should sleep in their parents' bedrooms for the first six months. So when a parent chooses to put baby in a crib down the hall, risks are being taken. The number of SIDS deaths in co-sleeping cultures is virtually nil. I would want to be informed of that if I didn't already know it - that a crib-sleeping baby in another room has a higher risk of SIDS. Telling people the facts is necessary - and if the facts hurt people's feelings or "make them feel guilty," then they need to stop being so PC about it. Take factual info., evaluate it and determine what works best for your situation, and make a decision. And that may mean not cosleeping, which is fine as long as it's a choice the parents are comfortable making.

And definitely, the risk of shaken baby syndrome could be increased by a parent trying to force her baby to sleep alone. I know my first wouldn't have done it and I would have been at my breaking point from sheer exhaustion and frustration. Ads that tell us to work against biology are sure to just cause frustration in many people!

I do see that maybe the ads are targeted at low-income people who only cosleep because they can't afford a crib. But what are the repercussions for the rest of us? It's going to spread a mentality of "alone is the safest way for infants to sleep" which is first of all, totally inaccurate, and secondly, could cause CPS to get involved. Not because CPS is cooking up these ads themselves because they don't already have enough to do, but because well-meaning people who are influenced by the ads will begin reporting family members and friends for co-sleeping.


*More examples of hysteria. Shaken baby has to do with rage, and who is to say that same mother wouldn't shake a co-sleeping baby after it has woken for the 100th time in a night right next to her? Another straw man.

And really, can it be proven that a baby is indeed safer in a bed than in the crib? I would wager not. I would imagine that if both were done safely, it would come out close to equal.

As for CPS, I do not even know how to respond to this. If family and friends are going to report for co-sleeping, then 1) parents are either co-sleeping very dangerously and should be reported, or 2) the family and friends and neighbors would have found a reason to report anyway because they have an axe to grind.

*

*Quote:*


Originally Posted by *mommy2caroline* 
This is an example of the PC hype. Because a *fact* might make somebody feel guilty, we shouldn't say it?

It is just a plain and simple fact that babies have immature breathing patterns and are better regulated when sleeping next to their mothers. It is a scientific fact, period. People can take whatever implications they want from that. Personally, I leave my baby napping alone when I have to get up and tend to my older child. I have tried putting my baby to bed ahead of me and dh a few times (though she's having none of that!







). I know that she is safer sleeping with me - yet I do take these small risks at times. And I'm not going to feel guilty doing it. I have taken the factual information and chosen to have my baby sleep next to/on me for 95% of the time in the first six months. The 5% of the time that she doesn't, I am taking a risk, and I have no problem admitting that - the facts show that I am taking a risk.

Facts are to educate people - then they can make their own choices with the information rather that to not know the facts and then say, "I wish I had known..." in retrospect.

And spare me the PC facts are just facts spiel. The number one cause of death in young children is the car. So a mother driving safely with a harnessed child should feel guilty because she took a risk putting her child in a car? No way. And no way should anyone imply that a mother should feel guilty for taking a far more infinitesimal risk by putting baby in a crib. And no one, not even those campaigns, have said to put baby in a completely separate room. Or even spoke poorly about co-sleepers, just putting baby on the same surface. That is a straw man you are trying to build and it fails.

Look, as I said, I am rah rah co-sleeping. But that doesn't mean I don't see the other side, and if you are going to try arguing, I would avoid logical fallacies, conspiracy theories, and taking it so personally. We all get bent out of shape when FF moms get mad and upset at the Breast is Best campaign--they feel attacked, but they are not. Same here.

In the end, it is up to the parent to go beyond and research more. If they choose not to, oh well. I mean, Isn't that what all of you have done here--learned more than your doctor, mother, PSA have taught you?


----------



## Leilalu (May 29, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *bottomsup* 
Oh my god, the hysteria here is insane. So shaken baby only happens because baby won't sleep alone? Please. If a mother is going to do that, anything will set her off.

"babies usually do not have a set breathing pattern. Sleeping in close proximity to mama helps create a steady breathing pattern all night long."

So..the implication that if mom does not sleep next to baby to help regulate her sleeping then...it is there. The implication is clear.

I love co-sleeping. I advocate for it...to people I know who will be mindful.

But let's take the radio ad example. Dad says in the middle of the night, spur of the moment, let's bring baby to bed. Parents who do not usually co-sleep do do this in the middle of the night exhaustion. Are they thinking about the safety of their bed? Their covers? If they are too exhausted to be mindful of baby in bed? Any other unsafe condition?

I am sorry, but it is a legitimate concern.

Look, I love co-sleeping. And it is a real pain in the butt to do if you do it safely. Again, I know people around here often proudly state how they do not follow any of the recommendations, save the drugs and alcohol. They allow babies to sleep with smokers, in beds not dropped to the floors, with covers, with pillowtops, with no rails, etc etc.

If educated co-sleepers do not follow the recommendations, and in fact often state that they are a bunch of overcautious hooey nonsense, then why advocate for a campaign to do it safely or to cite risk factors?

I think many people, here and elsewhere, do not want to make the effort to do it safely, so these campaigns are almost necessary to drive through the point to thoughtless parents.

And again, who cares where other parents sleep their babies? It is not abusive or neglectful like CIO, or sub optimally healthy like formula? it is just another way to sleep, and no one is coming after you personally.

Finally, do not dismiss 23 infant deaths at the hands of negligent parents just because other babies died in cribs.


As far as breathing goes- you can't argue nature. Babies are meant to be close to mama. Period. And if the baby were to get sick from any offgassing, mom is closer and will know sooner.

As far as the "co-sleeping may not be a safe option for everyone" argument, which is, I am assuming, what you were saying- well, this is where mindfulness and education comes in. Co-sleeping is not for everyone. There are many types of situations where it would never be safe, as it is. But I believe babies are best when in close proximity to the mother at night-which is a long time, like half a day!

No one is dismissing the babies who died in bed because of the ones who died in cribs. I think the point is that mainstream media wants to paint a picture that is just inaccurate.

I guess I don't understand your angle?


----------



## Breeder (May 28, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *bottomsup* 
As for CPS, I do not even know how to respond to this. If family and friends are going to report for co-sleeping, then 1) parents are either co-sleeping very dangerously and should be reported, or 2) the family and friends and neighbors would have found a reason to report anyway because they have an axe to grind.

You can report all you want to CPS for any reason...that is true. However if there is a public campaign regarding co-sleeping as unsafe and CPS regards co-sleeping as unsafe, when CPS shows up at your door and does not find a crib - what will happen then? (Playing Devil's Advocate here)

Point being it doesn't matter WHY anyone would report you to CPS, it's what happens afterward. If someone just has "an axe to grind" they can report you for whatever and it's pretty easy to prove that your kids are well-fed, well-treated and healthy. If they report you for something you ARE doing that despite facts to the contrary has been announced as unsafe - then they could say you ARE putting your child in danger.

I doubt they would take your child or put you in jail, but they could force you to buy a crib to show that you have a "safe" sleeping area for your baby.


----------



## bottomsup (Jul 6, 2007)

I give up. Because whatever I say here sounds anti-co sleeping, which is not the case. I also feel like very few people are reading, since I keep reiterating the same points.

Let me sum, then I am out.

1) Co-sleeping is awesome. If you are mindful. The ads are targeted to people who are in fact, not mindful

2) Co-sleeping safely would be a WONDERFUL campaign, but since so many educated co-sleepers around here flout the rules, it seems like a futile effort. People are co-sleeping dangerously. It does not take an entire education campaign to figure out that an adult bed with tons of covers and gaps and high off the floor is bad. In the end, the campaign IS probably useless, because people are going to continue anyway.

3) As far as I know, co-sleeping is NOT illegal, so CPS cannot come after you. However, some of the situations that these campaigns are in response to are neglectful/abusive, so I say call away. But I guess you could be onto something---I have heard SEVERAL times in this forum suggestions to call CPS on people who CIO young infants, so I guess it could happen.

4) The campaign has nothing to do with you, anymore than Breast is Best is out to get formula feeding moms and attack. Don't worry it, don't sweat it, and try to step back from your own P.O.V. and see why a campaign like this happens.

5) Analyze all acts, data, etc. and do not be smug about co-sleeping being safer yadda yadda. It is a mimimal benefit when compared to other risks, like getting in a car.

6) If a baby is loved and taken care, and sleeps in same room ideally, who cares if he co-sleeps. It doesn't work for everybody, even here. How many threads have mothers out of their minds? It is not, TO ME, as important as nursing, not CIOing, looking after health, being loving. Etc.

7) If they ever do try to pass a no co-sleeping ever law, then I will get worked up. Until then...it is just the logician in me. I think many here see only evil, not the situations and reasons these campaigns exist as they do.

Shrug. I'm out. Not a battle I care about--I am not out to defend them, just trying to be fair.


----------



## donutmolly (Jun 9, 2005)

_2) Co-sleeping safely would be a WONDERFUL campaign, but since so many educated co-sleepers around here flout the rules, it seems like a futile effort. People are co-sleeping dangerously. It does not take an entire education campaign to figure out that an adult bed with tons of covers and gaps and high off the floor is bad. In the end, the campaign IS probably useless, because people are going to continue anyway._

Your "rules" about co-sleeping seem to be very extreme... maybe the reason you see so many folks "flouting" your safe cosleeping rules is because you have too many. Things that are fine for you to do, if they make you feel safe -- but do not necessary to ensure the safety of every infant, nor necessary to do with each infant at each stage. (For example, everything I have read recommends against bed rails because they provide an entrapment risk... and seem rather unnecessary if your mattress is on the floor.)

I do get your point however, since public safety campaigns like simple black and white concepts, (like back to sleep... no ifs, ands or buts) rather than shades of gray (here are some things you should do to keep your baby safe in your bed: a, b, c, d...) it would be difficult to imagine a safe sleeping campaign that was truly effective.

But let's be real, extended breastfeeding is not against the law either, but kids have been removed from their homes for this, and it has been used as a reason to limit moms' custody in visitation, etc. I think this campaign sets a dangerous precedent, not to mention the guilt trip it does bring on committed, safe co-sleepers. Whether it's aimed at us or not.


----------



## mommy2caroline (May 9, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *bottomsup* 
I give up. Because whatever I say here sounds anti-co sleeping, which is not the case. I also feel like very few people are reading, since I keep reiterating the same points.

You say you are trying to see both points of view - those who co-sleep and those who don't. But you also say that, since others here voice a differing opinion, you think we're not reading your posts. That's insulting - you think that because we have a different viewpoint, then we must be ignoring your posts? How about we just disagree? You can try to see our POV and that it is different from yours rather than suggesting we must not be reading your words, because if we were, surely we'd just say, "Oh, totally agreed," and move on. ???

The bottom line is that it is a fact that baby's breathing is regulated by the mother. This makes SIDS deaths nearly unheard of when mother sleeps next to baby. This is fact. Therefore, a baby who sleeps next to mother (non-drugged mother, etc.) is statistically less likely to suffer a stop-breathing episode than one who is sleeping alone. That's the main issue. The co-sleeping ad campaign is completely wrong then in saying "babies sleep safest alone." Alone means alone - not near somebody else. Maybe they should have an ad showing the baby in a separate crib but right next to the parents' bed, if they want to imply that they just mean in a separate bed rather than totally alone. We can argue that the ad campaign is good/bad, we can argue about the choice to co-sleep, but the fact of the baby's immature breathing being regulated by mother cannot be disputed - because it is a biological, scientific occurrance.


----------



## mommy2caroline (May 9, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *donutmolly* 
But let's be real, extended breastfeeding is not against the law either, but kids have been removed from their homes for this, and it has been used as a reason to limit moms' custody in visitation, etc. I think this campaign sets a dangerous precedent









:


----------



## bottomsup (Jul 6, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mommy2caroline* 
You say you are trying to see both points of view - those who co-sleep and those who don't. But you also say that, since others here voice a differing opinion, you think we're not reading your posts. That's insulting - you think that because we have a different viewpoint, then we must be ignoring your posts? How about we just disagree? You can try to see our POV and that it is different from yours rather than suggesting we must not be reading your words, because if we were, surely we'd just say, "Oh, totally agreed," and move on. ???

The bottom line is that it is a fact that baby's breathing is regulated by the mother. This makes SIDS deaths nearly unheard of when mother sleeps next to baby. This is fact. Therefore, a baby who sleeps next to mother (non-drugged mother, etc.) is statistically less likely to suffer a stop-breathing episode than one who is sleeping alone. That's the main issue. The co-sleeping ad campaign is completely wrong then in saying "babies sleep safest alone." Alone means alone - not near somebody else. Maybe they should have an ad showing the baby in a separate crib but right next to the parents' bed, if they want to imply that they just mean in a separate bed rather than totally alone. We can argue that the ad campaign is good/bad, we can argue about the choice to co-sleep, but the fact of the baby's immature breathing being regulated by mother cannot be disputed - because it is a biological, scientific occurrance.


Oh brother. And now you are picking at semantics. First, my statement about not reading has nothing to do with agreeing or disagreeing with me, but rather, people asking me questions that I have previously answered.

Secondly, no one is going to come after your baby for co-sleeping anymore than they are going to come after you for tummy sleeping after the relentless Back To Sleep campaign.

Thirdly, those co-sleeping rules are not mine, they are Dr. Sears et al. I do not follow all of them, but I think you mitigate the increased protection (which is already small to begin with) from SIDS by co-sleeping by doing so unsafely. I never denied the benefit, just said that it is small enough, as is the actual risk of SIDS, that if you choose crib sleeping, your baby will be fine. You take greater risks getting in the car every day with your baby.

And no, I do not think altering my comfort and layout of my room to accommodate my baby is "extreme." I think it is "extreme" to not make those changes and take the chance, but that is just IMO.

Finally, here is the actual campaign. Read it carefully. Nothing about baby sleeping all alone locked in his crib in his room. Some annoying "Never" and "Always" language to be sure, but nothing terribly inaccurate or end of the world. Bolding Mine.

"Babies are safest when they sleep alone, on their backs.

Sleeping with your baby, ("co-sleeping ") *can* (note, not always is) be dangerous. If an adult or child rolls over on a baby, the baby can be hurt or even suffocated. (* this is true

It's particularly dangerous to sleep with a baby on a couch. Yup.
Sleeping with your baby is especially unsafe if other children also share the same bed. Also true

Babies should never be allowed to sleep with anyone who:

* Is overweight.
* Has been drinking alcohol.
* Has used marijuana or other drugs.
* Has taken medication that makes you sleepy.
* Is ill or extremely tired.
Note, not anyone. Ever. A kind of concession to safe co-sleeping

Put Your Baby 'Back to Sleep'

Always put your baby to sleep alone in a crib, on his back. Always here is getting stronger. I see how annoying that can be

Cribs don't cause "crib death" - also known as Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS). SIDS can happen anywhere a baby is sleeping.

Take these steps to keep baby safe:

* Put him to sleep on his back - it greatly reduces the risk of SIDS.
* Make sure your baby's crib has a firm mattress that fits snugly with no space between the mattress and the side of the crib, so the baby can't be trapped.
* Keep your baby's crib free of pillows, bumpers, fluffy quilts and stuffed toys. Keep blankets away from baby's head.
* Never put your baby to sleep on an adult bed, sofa, waterbed, sheepskin, or other soft mattress-even for a nap. here is the never. I agree with this if baby is sleeping alone, esp. for the last three options. Obviously disagree with rest.
* In an emergency, if you don't have a crib, put baby to sleep in a firm, enclosed space, such as a playpen or stroller, with no loose bedding or pillows.
* Don't let your baby get too warm. Keep the room temperature between 65 and 70 degrees.
Most of the above are the samerules that apply to co-sleeping (or at least should). Except for the obvious don't put the baby in adult bed.

You don't have to sleep in the same bed to keep your baby close at night:

* Place your baby's crib or bassinet in your room, near your bed.
* When your baby wakes up crying, walk around holding him close to you. Check to see if he's hungry or needs a diaper change. Try a pacifier. Then put him back to sleep alone in his crib on his back. Ok, obviously silly. Try nursing, rocking, loving, singing, cooing, and if you have a safe set up, then bring him to bed. But I maintain that there are parents in a sleep induced fog who will bring baby back to a bed that is not safe or set up for her, so I see this point*


----------



## mommy2caroline (May 9, 2007)

Well, I'm glad to hear that the ad does mention that you can put the crib next to the adult bed.

I realize that SIDS is rare, but the number of SIDS deaths alone in cribs far outweighs the number of co-sleeping deaths caused by smothering. So I think it's even more important to address ways to prevent SIDS deaths. Even if the SIDS death rate is relatively low, each of those babies' lives matters and is worth the education on keeping baby close at night, IMO.

I'm not trying to be difficult here. I do feel like the use of phrases such as "oh brother" and "oh my god" are belittling to my opinion (and that of others), like our opinions are worthy of eye-rolling. So if I've come across as defensive, that is why.


----------



## Turquesa (May 30, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *TheAJs* 
... the "Babies Sleep Safest Alone" campaign that is going on in New York State right now. I hate that I have to hear this "ad" every time I am listening to the radio. The fear tactics and the leaving out of important information really irks me.







: I just wanted to vent someplace where I know I would be understood.









Agreed. It's based on out-of-context data and manipulated facts. James McKenna talks in his co-sleeping book about how some public health officials flat-out admitted that co-sleeping could be done safely . . . but they just wanted to "simplify" things with a thou-shalt-not message.

Look, public health and pediatric professionals talk to parents all the time about all of the ins and outs and gray areas of car seat safety, sun protection, and highchair use; they don't tell parents to abstain from car trips, lock their children permanently indoors, or eat off the floor. The assumption that parents cannot "handle" this "complex" information about safe co-sleeping is paternalistic at its core.

ETA: I really hope I'm not reamed for posting this. It's my own rant and I respect other opinions posted thus far


----------



## Leilalu (May 29, 2004)

I think the point is- we need to wake up. The fearmongering doesn't prevent companies from using chemicals and fire retardants and promoting vaccination and big pharma. All things which make sleeping dangerous when you are a newbie. Somewhere down the road, "they" decided to cover their bums and blame it on co-sleepers everywhere. Maybe that sounds extreme to you, but I am very bottom line.

Off my soapbox. Don't try to argue me, I'm outie







Just saying...


----------



## Cherry Alive (Mar 11, 2007)

SIDS can happen to anyone's baby. The problem with it is bc doctors don't pin down a cause there are be MANY causes. Unfortunately, like many health problems, everyone is obsessed with there being just one cause, and that is rarely the case. All people know about SIDS is the baby mysteriously stops breathing. This can be caused by a lot of things, and I wish folks wouldn't lump all the causes into SIDS. A dangerous sleeping environment (which can happen while the baby cosleeps or while the baby sleeps alone) should be called a dangerous sleeping environment. A dangerous sleeping pattern (ex- baby has sleep apnea) should be called a dangerous sleeping pattern. Genetic problems (bad heart) should be called genetic problems. It's a real shame this all gets lumped together into the same disorder.

My stepsister's half-sister died while cosleeping. It must have been very horrible for her mom, bc I remember everyone making a big deal out of it the fact she coslept, even though she was safely practicing it (she did it with all her other 4 kids and they turned out okay).

My folks coslept with me and I did fine. My folks didn't cosleep with my sister (she didn't adapt well to sharing the bed, they ended up keeping her crib in the bedroom) and she did fine. I don't know why it's got to be made into a war. It's a really personal decision that varies from family-to-family and baby-to-baby.


----------



## Twinklefae (Dec 13, 2006)

It's entirely and easily possible to have a "safe cosleeping" campaign. My province does. Here's the pamphlet we were given during prenatal classes by public health.

http://i194.photobucket.com/albums/z...osleeping1.jpg
http://i194.photobucket.com/albums/z...osleeping2.jpg

It was originally a trifold pamplet.


----------



## TheAJs (Jun 29, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *bottomsup* 
Finally, here is the actual campaign. Read it carefully. Nothing about baby sleeping all alone locked in his crib in his room. Some annoying "Never" and "Always" language to be sure, but nothing terribly inaccurate or end of the world. Bolding Mine.

"Babies are safest when they sleep alone, on their backs.

Sleeping with your baby, ("co-sleeping ") *can* (note, not always is) be dangerous. If an adult or child rolls over on a baby, the baby can be hurt or even suffocated. (* this is true

It's particularly dangerous to sleep with a baby on a couch. Yup.
Sleeping with your baby is especially unsafe if other children also share the same bed. Also true

Babies should never be allowed to sleep with anyone who:

* Is overweight.
* Has been drinking alcohol.
* Has used marijuana or other drugs.
* Has taken medication that makes you sleepy.
* Is ill or extremely tired.
Note, not anyone. Ever. A kind of concession to safe co-sleeping

Put Your Baby 'Back to Sleep'

Always put your baby to sleep alone in a crib, on his back. Always here is getting stronger. I see how annoying that can be

Cribs don't cause "crib death" - also known as Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS). SIDS can happen anywhere a baby is sleeping.

Take these steps to keep baby safe:

* Put him to sleep on his back - it greatly reduces the risk of SIDS.
* Make sure your baby's crib has a firm mattress that fits snugly with no space between the mattress and the side of the crib, so the baby can't be trapped.
* Keep your baby's crib free of pillows, bumpers, fluffy quilts and stuffed toys. Keep blankets away from baby's head.
* Never put your baby to sleep on an adult bed, sofa, waterbed, sheepskin, or other soft mattress-even for a nap. here is the never. I agree with this if baby is sleeping alone, esp. for the last three options. Obviously disagree with rest.
* In an emergency, if you don't have a crib, put baby to sleep in a firm, enclosed space, such as a playpen or stroller, with no loose bedding or pillows.
* Don't let your baby get too warm. Keep the room temperature between 65 and 70 degrees.
Most of the above are the samerules that apply to co-sleeping (or at least should). Except for the obvious don't put the baby in adult bed.

You don't have to sleep in the same bed to keep your baby close at night:

* Place your baby's crib or bassinet in your room, near your bed.
* When your baby wakes up crying, walk around holding him close to you. Check to see if he's hungry or needs a diaper change. Try a pacifier. Then put him back to sleep alone in his crib on his back. Ok, obviously silly. Try nursing, rocking, loving, singing, cooing, and if you have a safe set up, then bring him to bed. But I maintain that there are parents in a sleep induced fog who will bring baby back to a bed that is not safe or set up for her, so I see this point
*
*
*
*
This may be what the actual campaign says, but this is NOT what is said in the radio commercial that they are currently sweeping New York State with. They don't add any of those "conditions". They just flat out say "It is almost NEVER safe to let your baby sleep with you." Almost NEVER?! Does "almost never" mean this?

* Is overweight.
* Has been drinking alcohol.
* Has used marijuana or other drugs.
* Has taken medication that makes you sleepy.
* Is ill or extremely tired.

My daughters has "almost NEVER" slept with one of us who was in one of those conditions.

For those who want to learn more, they can go look up the details of the campaign, but the fact of the matter remains.. most people are NOT going to continue to research. A LOT of people I know believe just about everything they see on TV, hear on the radio or read in newspapers and even email. It is shameful that people can be so gullible, but that is exactly what campaigns like these are counting on.

I wish I could say that I DON'T care what other parents do, but it does pierce my heart to think that MANY parents choose to CIO because they think they *can't* co-sleep because they have been told that it is too dangerous. So they think that letting their tiny babies cry is OK, because it is for their safety. My DD has gotten so much comfort and joy from sleeping near us, as have both DH and I. It saddens me to think that so many families are missing out on such an amazing opportunity, and they don't even know.

THAT is why this campaign bothers me. It misinforms and it scares people.*


----------



## bottomsup (Jul 6, 2007)

I completely understand all of your points. Everyone here. I really do. And it is not that I disagree with many of them, either.' (BTW, the oh brother comment was in reference to the suggestion that I assumed you must not have read or you would just agree with me, not with the points).

Here is the thing. I have worked with at-risk communities. Tired, over worked, over stressed, over extended families. The sleeping conditions have been downright dangerous. They are not co-sleeping out of the warm and fuzzies, and co-sleeping probably isn't the right word. It is baby wherever baby can fit. In most of these cases, a crib is the safest place for these babies. I don't want to offend anyone, but I think sometimes we are a little elitist and cannot picture the situations I am describing or have seen.

Or maybe you can and still prefer a safety PSA. Which, IME, will fall on deaf ears in many cases. It takes more than a radio ad etc for that to work--there have to be advocates in the home to help out, to show, to support.

I guess I just don't feel as passionately about co-sleeping as I do CIO, BF, spanking, and other parenting decisions, which is where we diverge. I love it, but I do not advocate it to most people, because it is a decision that IMO, I repeat IMO, will not really affect the parent child relationship. I think non co-sleepers can be just as bonded and attached (with my bias that baby HAS to be in the same room!).

I see it this way. Let's say there is a safe driving/safe cars on the road PSA. It can get all nuanced and detail all the ways you can mod your old car to make it safe and pinpointed lessons on how to drive defensively, etc. Or it can just say--get a new car with all of the safety features and follow the rules of the road. Obviously, for the purpose of the PSA, #2, while not realistic, is more to the point, for people who do not have the time or energy or background to fix their own cars and learn real defensive driving. These are the same people the BSSA PSA is targeting.

That's the only point I am really trying to make.

Pax!








Meg


----------



## Kama82 (Mar 12, 2006)

You say a co sleeping safely campaign would fall on deaf ears so there is no point. What do you think is more likely though? That a family that is too poor to buy a crib will magically come up with the money for one and never bring their baby to bed with them again no matter how exhausted or desperate for sleep they are or that they will remember not to use blankets or pillows near the baby and to make sure baby doesn't sleep on the side of the bed between the parent and the wall ? Many poor peoples mattresses are already on the floor because they couldn't afford a bed frame.

Also a lot of people end up co sleeping accidently out of desperation. They already think that the best place for their baby is in a crib, a no co sleeping ever ad is not going to help them there, they are going to do the same thing they are already doing which is try to avoid purposely co sleeping by sitting up with baby in a chair or on a couch and they are so exhausted they end up falling asleep anyway.

A co sleeping safely campaign would be more helpful because it presents them with a reasonable alternative, if your baby isn't in a crib, do these things for safety and don't do these things that aren't safe. Instead of the only place for a baby is in a crib campaign that gives them no options.

On co sleeping deaths, how many of these 23 deaths were in families that weren't co sleeping safely? How many of these families had a crib and thought that was where the baby should be but didn't put them there for whatever reason?

The answer to a problem is never to take away peoples choices, it is to educate on the safety of the choices they have.

People all over the world do co sleep safely with no education at all by the way. It is because it is a cultural norm and they just know how to do it safely. They usually sleep on firm mattress or wooden planks and pallets with no pillow and minimal bedding. By attempting to eliminate peoples choices we are taking away the cultural norm and any chance that people have of getting "cultural" education from hearing friends talk about how they co sleep ect. Up to 50% of American families co sleep but how often do you hear people talk about it? They don't because they are closet co sleepers and it is easier to just claim you don't then to defend your choices to everyone who thinks that they know what is right because they heard an ad on the radio that said it isn't safe to co sleep.


----------



## mommy2caroline (May 9, 2007)

I do see your point there. I wish the ads would discuss how it is even safer if the baby sleeps in the same room w/ the parents, though. And I can see both sides of the simple ad vs. detailed ad. I see that may people aren't going to follow safe steps given in a detailed ad, but are we doing them a disservice in tailoring an ad to that audience, or would we do better with ads that encourage people to put more thought into their own personal lives? I tend to lean toward less gov't control and interference, meaning give people info and them let them make choices. It's really hard though when those choices may be harmful to babies who cannot speak up for themselves. I wonder in many cases which came first... does gov't see a need for something and take action to meet that need where the parents fail to? Or do people see the actions of the gov't and think, "Oh, they did the research for me," or "Well, the gov't dies that, it's not up to me as the parent..." It's probably some of both. Some parents are abdictating (is that the right word?) their rights as parents to make decisions, and some need all the help they can get because they won't look into the options themselves. If we forced more responsibility, maybe most parents would come around and figure out that they are primarily responsible for parenting choices, but it may take a few generations and have children hurt in the process... so what to do?


----------



## mommy2caroline (May 9, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Kama82* 
Instead of the only place for a baby is in a crib campaign that gives them no options.

Good points, Kama. And it makes me think... parents who feel like they have no alternative will often resort to CIO if they have a baby who isn't a willing crib-sleeper. They will either be sleep-deprived trying to get the baby to sleep in the crib, or they will use CIO. I haven't heard of too many babies who always willingly crib-sleep, although I know some do exist.

As a side note, I was having lunch at a restaurant today and heard a man sitting at the booth behind me talking about CIO with, I assume, his dd. He was saying, "Well, she liked to just lay on our chests. I put her in her crib for a nap, and she cried. I felt bad, but..." And he went on to say that she went to sleep after crying for 30 min., but, "well, she was older, old enough to pull up to a stand om things." It was sad to hear another example of parents going against their intuition... "I felt bad, but..."


----------



## Jaysfamily (Jun 5, 2008)

Before we had our son, I was extremely anti-cosleeping. Then, we had a preemie. Our routine with him was:

Fight to get him to latch
Nurse if possible
Then supplement (or syringe feed if he was too weak to eat)
Then pump
Time to go back to sleep, look at the clock...oh crap, it's time to start the routine again in 15 minutes.

Sometime during the 3rd night, after 3 days with only a total of an hour and half of sleep per night, I almost fell over from exhaustion on my 5lb baby! It was at that moment that I laid down next to him, made sure he was in a safe position, and angled myself so I'd fall away from him if I got into too deep of a sleep. The next day we looked up the recommended steps for safe cosleeping and applied them to our bedroom. I managed to get a couple of extra hours of sleep each night by not having to walk all over the house just to feed him. I am now a supporter of cosleeping, as long as the parents are comfortable with it and it works for the child too.

The attitude that mainstream society pushes of "if you sleep with your baby, you'll roll on top of them and they'll die" ended up being the unsafe advice for my family. I agree that a safe cosleeping campaign would go much further to keep children safe, and to help (some) parents maintain sanity without being guilt ridden. I know many parents that stuck to the medical advice and have, at some point or another, coslept in very dangerous situations with their children. Some moms even fell asleep sitting upright in a chair, with their babies on their laps....all because they were so exhausted that they just fell asleep while feeding their babies since they were terrified of cosleeping! This is one reason why the 'one-size fits all' parenting recommendations bug me. Each child and each parent is so different. Why not have a campaign that helps to educate parents to keep their child safe while allowing them to do what works best for their family, or that individual child????

It also seriously bugs me that unsafe crib sleeping is seen as safer than safe cosleeping. I know parents that have the crib filled with bumpers (some very fluffy ones too) and stuffed toys, and a blanket for their little babies. I just don't understand why that is viewed by some as the safer option than cosleeping on a low bed, with measures taken so the baby does not fall off, and with no fluffly blankets, and sober parents.

I also don't understand why suffocation deaths are lumped in with SIDS. I thought SIDS meant that there wasn't really a known cause as to why the baby died....that it just....died. If a baby suffocates on a pillow or blanket, then why isn't that classified as a suffocation death, rather than SIDS?? I have also heard that the study that many doctors use to say cosleeping is dangerous, included a death where the child rolled off the bed and into a bucket of water and drowned. Does anyone know if this is true or just a rumor, or which study that was?


----------



## mamaChe (Feb 14, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *bottomsup* 
Here is the thing. I have worked with at-risk communities. Tired, over worked, over stressed, over extended families. The sleeping conditions have been downright dangerous. They are not co-sleeping out of the warm and fuzzies, and co-sleeping probably isn't the right word. It is baby wherever baby can fit. In most of these cases, a crib is the safest place for these babies. I don't want to offend anyone, but I think sometimes we are a little elitist and cannot picture the situations I am describing or have seen.


Quote:


Originally Posted by *bottomsup* 
They are aimed at those who place babies on adult beds or in beds with other children because they cannot afford a crib or do not have the space, and do not really think about how to co-sleep safely because they don't want to in the first place, and just go with what they know.

Bottumsup, just wanted to say I was offended by your wording because it sounded to me like you believe that people who cannot afford a crib are also uneducated and do not want to keep their babies safe. This is an insulting and classist assumption. And I am referring to multiple posts where you have mentioned who the PSA was being aimed at. I mean, how do you know that they don't want to cosleep? Or that they aren't even thinking about keeping the baby safe? I don't want to offend you, but I think that you are being a little elitist in your views of the way other people live.

The "safe cosleeping rules" themselves are a product of western life, and are not followed (or even thought of) in other countries. Try telling someone who only has one bed in their home that sleeping with all of their children is too dangerous. And it's not because they are poor, that's just the way it was/is done.

I agree with Jaysfamily, there needs to be a campaign about doing what works best safely... then perhaps when people are just "going with what they know" then they would have a bunch of safe options to choose from.


----------



## bottomsup (Jul 6, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamaChe* 
Bottumsup, just wanted to say I was offended by your wording because it sounded to me like you believe that people who cannot afford a crib are also uneducated and do not want to keep their babies safe. This is an insulting and classist assumption. And I am referring to multiple posts where you have mentioned who the PSA was being aimed at. I mean, how do you know that they don't want to cosleep? Or that they aren't even thinking about keeping the baby safe? I don't want to offend you, but I think that you are being a little elitist in your views of the way other people live.

The "safe cosleeping rules" themselves are a product of western life, and are not followed (or even thought of) in other countries. Try telling someone who only has one bed in their home that sleeping with all of their children is too dangerous. And it's not because they are poor, that's just the way it was/is done.

I agree with Jaysfamily, there needs to be a campaign about doing what works best safely... then perhaps when people are just "going with what they know" then they would have a bunch of safe options to choose from.

Not at all what I am saying, and it is your right to be offended if reading comprehension is not your thing. I never said that poverty and lack of education go hand in hand. I said they are two factors, not always related, to unsafe sleeping conditions.

Further, you can be a smart, educated person and still be uneducated about some things. I am sure you do not know everything about everything. So please, save your class assumption indignation.

Also, safe co-sleeping as a by-product of Western culture cannot be dismissed. Sorry. If you are going to bring up other cultures who cannot afford several beds, then you need to be intellectually honest. They are not sleeping on dangerous, pillowtop, down comforter duvet super high beds with platforms yadda yadda. All of which are dangerous. And you know, neither did the neolithic and ancestral folks people like to cite around here, either. So we have to change with the times and the culture. Sorry if that offends you, too.

You know, I never personally attacked anyone here, and I take offense at your nasty tone. I am debating the campaign, not people. The closest I cam to something personal was to suggest it may be elitist not to be able to picture the conditions these campaigns respond to. Nothing what you just spewed.


----------



## mamaChe (Feb 14, 2008)

I'm sorry that you feel personally attacked. I also had a hard time coming to terms with my issues of class and race. It's natural and normal to feel this way. The tone, on the other hand, is something you are reading into. And I'm sorry also if reading comprehension is not your thing.

and you never did say that poverty and lack of education go hand in hand. Or that they didn't. You were just assuming that "those people" didn't think about how to cosleep safely. Something you wouldn't know unless you were one of those people. It sounded just a little too much like you were expecting these "bad" cosleepers to have had one more unplanned pregnancy and not enough money to do anything responsible to me to be comfortable with. Apologies if I was unfounded.

Also, I do get what you are saying about being intellectually honest, but I do not believe that all of those unsafe poor cosleepers are out there sleeping on featherbed mattresses either. Really, we could argue about this around in circles. Perhaps it could even be argued that if babe was in a crib he/she could freeze because no one could afford heat. I mean, if we're going to assume things let's just go all out.

I am also debating the campaign. But I am more offended that the solution is to make a blanket statement about how unsafe cosleeping is without giving people the FREEDOM OF CHOICE. I mean, if I was told to buy a new car because it was assumed that I couldn't figure out how to fix up my old one I would be pretty PO also. All I want is to know what there is to know and to be able to go from there without someone else telling me the "solution" because they don't trust my decision making capabilities.

And last but not least, last I checked my womb was securely where it is supposed to be, so you don't need to chalk this response up to hysteria.

ETA: Sorry for hijacking the thread folks. I'm done, thanks for the lively debate


----------



## llamalluv (Aug 24, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *TheAJs* 

"23 babies died last year..." Really... well I want to know how many died in a crib!!!!!!!!

Approximately 35 per year according to this article:

http://www.cpsc.gov/library/nursry00.pdf

Quote:

"About 35 of these deaths each year were associated with cribs. This is a decrease from an estimated 150 to 200 annual deaths associated with cribs in the early 1970s."
These numbers are as of 2000, however.


----------



## Septagram (Feb 8, 2008)

Bottomsup, I *am* one of those tired, over worked, over stressed, over extended families. We're only eating because of Food Stamps some months. We are a family of 4 living in a 1br apartment and surviving on about $1000 a month.

I have a 3mo baby, who sleeps in the King size bed with the whole family, including my 2 1/2 yo. Many nights the bed is a tangle of people. We have a blanket, we have pillows on the bed. It's on a frame, not on the floor. There are no rails.. And *gasp* I'm overweight and sometimes partake in a little doobage after the kids are asleep. Plus, to be perfectly honest, we couldn't afford to buy a crib even if we wanted one. I guess we have a death trap instead of a bed, eh?

That does not, however, mean that I'm uneducated or lack common sense, but I am not going to live in fear. Just think next time before you say something like that. It is offensive, whether you mean to be or not.


----------



## bottomsup (Jul 6, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Septagram* 
Bottomsup, I *am* one of those tired, over worked, over stressed, over extended families. We're only eating because of Food Stamps some months. We are a family of 4 living in a 1br apartment and surviving on about $1000 a month.

I have a 3mo baby, who sleeps in the King size bed with the whole family, including my 2 1/2 yo. Many nights the bed is a tangle of people. We have a blanket, we have pillows on the bed. It's on a frame, not on the floor. There are no rails.. And *gasp* I'm overweight and sometimes partake in a little doobage after the kids are asleep. Plus, to be perfectly honest, we couldn't afford to buy a crib even if we wanted one. I guess we have a death trap instead of a bed, eh?

That does not, however, mean that I'm uneducated or lack common sense, but I am not going to live in fear. Just think next time before you say something like that. It is offensive, whether you mean to be or not.

You're right. How can I argue with this. I mean, these are your choices. I hope this is a joke, and some kind of satire, though.

I do not know about education, but what you are doing certainly lacks common sense. If this is real. I am exhausted from another round of sleepless nights due to EIs, so I may be missing the nuance here.

If you choose to ignore all the warnings about drugs, pillows, high beds, etc. then that is your choice. Though if something goes wrong, I know you will not be the one who pays the price.

There is not living in fear and then there is making reasonable choices. I guess you are not doing, either.

I'll be honest--the arrangement you describe is exactly the kind of call I used to go on and find at-risk, and some times too late, dead babies. In most of those cases, the parents honestly had no idea what they were doing was dangerous. It seems you know the risks and choose to assume them.

I really don't know what to say...this kind of thinking sounds exactly to me like people who know breast is better, but can't be bothered. Or know that extended rear facing or at least waiting till a year is better, know all the research and choose otherwise. Or those whose doctors tell them to wait on solids till at least 4 months, but mama knows best, so the 6 week old gets cereal in a bottle.

Just because you are talking about co-sleeping doesn't make it any different or better in my opinion.


----------



## bottomsup (Jul 6, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Kama82* 
You say a co sleeping safely campaign would fall on deaf ears so there is no point. What do you think is more likely though? That a family that is too poor to buy a crib will magically come up with the money for one and never bring their baby to bed with them again no matter how exhausted or desperate for sleep they are or that they will remember not to use blankets or pillows near the baby and to make sure baby doesn't sleep on the side of the bed between the parent and the wall ? Many poor peoples mattresses are already on the floor because they couldn't afford a bed frame.

Also a lot of people end up co sleeping accidently out of desperation. They already think that the best place for their baby is in a crib, a no co sleeping ever ad is not going to help them there, they are going to do the same thing they are already doing which is try to avoid purposely co sleeping by sitting up with baby in a chair or on a couch and they are so exhausted they end up falling asleep anyway.

A co sleeping safely campaign would be more helpful because it presents them with a reasonable alternative, if your baby isn't in a crib, do these things for safety and don't do these things that aren't safe. Instead of the only place for a baby is in a crib campaign that gives them no options.

On co sleeping deaths, how many of these 23 deaths were in families that weren't co sleeping safely? How many of these families had a crib and thought that was where the baby should be but didn't put them there for whatever reason?
*
The answer to a problem is never to take away peoples choices, it is to educate on the safety of the choices they have.
*
People all over the world do co sleep safely with no education at all by the way. It is because it is a cultural norm and they just know how to do it safely. They usually sleep on firm mattress or wooden planks and pallets with no pillow and minimal bedding. By attempting to eliminate peoples choices we are taking away the cultural norm and any chance that people have of getting "cultural" education from hearing friends talk about how they co sleep ect. Up to 50% of American families co sleep but how often do you hear people talk about it? They don't because they are closet co sleepers and it is easier to just claim you don't then to defend your choices to everyone who thinks that they know what is right because they heard an ad on the radio that said it isn't safe to co sleep.


I do think your post is well thought out and well-said. The only thing with the bolded part is that no one is taking a choice away, not really. Just framing it as if there is only one. Subtle, I know, but still there.

Anyway, I found the rest of your post something I can get behind! I do agree, and as I have said many times in thread, I would love to see a sleeping safely campaign. I do agree with your first part, and good reminders are important and may just stick. I guess I went overboard on the deaf ears things, to an extent, but see the post above this one as perhaps an example of where I get frustrated.


----------



## mommy2caroline (May 9, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamaChe* 
I am also debating the campaign. But I am more offended that the solution is to make a blanket statement about how unsafe cosleeping is without giving people the FREEDOM OF CHOICE. I mean, if I was told to buy a new car because it was assumed that I couldn't figure out how to fix up my old one I would be pretty PO also. All I want is to know what there is to know and to be able to go from there without someone else telling me the "solution" because they don't trust my decision making capabilities.

I agree that it comes down to this in the end. As much as it may hurt in the beginning, ultimately people have to be allowed/made to find their own way. Those who lack the education or common sense may have to learn the hard way, but freedom of choice is ultimately for the common good of all.


----------



## Kama82 (Mar 12, 2006)

I recognize that there are circumstances that I may not understand here that were not outlined in the post but this post was written to paint a pretty unsafe picture.

I have rewritten this post about 15 different ways trying to avoid coming off as mean. The fact is I don't understand why anyone would take risks they didn't have to when things can be done to keep baby safe that cost nothing and are only minimally inconvenient.

Keeping blankets and pillows away from babies face.
Sleeping on the floor away from kids until drugs/alcohol wear off.
Moving bed off frame onto floor.

None of these changes have to be permanent, the special requirements for a bed for a newborn are different for a reason, they are weak and can't disentangle themselves from the same situations a 2 year old or even a 1 year old can.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Septagram* 
Bottomsup, I *am* one of those tired, over worked, over stressed, over extended families. We're only eating because of Food Stamps some months. We are a family of 4 living in a 1br apartment and surviving on about $1000 a month.

I have a 3mo baby, wlho sleeps in the King size bed with the whole family, including my 2 1/2 yo. Many nights the bed is a tangle of people. We have a blanket, we have pillows on the bed. It's on a frame, not on the floor. There are no rails.. And *gasp* I'm overweight and sometimes partake in a little doobage after the kids are asleep. Plus, to be perfectly honest, we couldn't afford to buy a crib even if we wanted one. I guess we have a death trap instead of a bed, eh?

That does not, however, mean that I'm uneducated or lack common sense, but I am not going to live in fear. Just think next time before you say something like that. It is offensive, whether you mean to be or not.


----------



## suga'lamb (Jun 14, 2008)

i just have to add that in philadelphia, part of their anti-cosleeping campaign does include providing cribs. hmmm, wonder who is providing all those cribs.
the campaign there is aggressive and totally fearmongering.

also, why would cosleeping guidelines be harder to convey to parents than crib safety guidelines? if we assume that parents can't or won't cosleep safely if given proper info, then wow, we must assume they are doing all manner of crazy unsafe things. i mean, it's not difficult to put your mattress on the floor, ditch the pillow, etc. how are we trusting parents to install their own car seats, or assembling a highchair, or bathing the babies.

why target cosleeping? i wonder if it goes back to corporations that manufacture all the gear you don't buy when you cosleep, who fund the studies that say cribs are the only safe alternative...


----------



## In Exile (Jan 12, 2007)

I am quite frankly fed up with governmental "let's pick the dumbest idiot imaginable and make up a campaign to parent those"- because that's exactly how is comes across. People that are drugged out of their mind will not change a single bit after a fearmongering campaign, nor will "those people" change anything.
And I'm also tired of relatives/neigbors/people anywhere that have NEVER coslept, let their babies CIO=and then judge those that cosleep. Just because they heard ads and heard that "though cookies shit" all their life and apply it to us.
That's exactly what happens.

Let's say you're drunk, drugged out of you mind etc- will a radio ad change any of your behaviour? No.
This just fosters more "those hippies better learn to behave and we'll spent more tax payers dollars and those lovely corporate donations to swamp people with the following trifecta: Circumcize because it's cleaner, vaccinate because that's why we're all alive and put your baby in a crib".

Wow, this is the US-can people still think for themselves? Or do they always need someone tell them what to do?

"Those" that truly endanger their children couldn't care LESS about an radio ad, seriuosly. It just bugs and judges everyone else that happens to cosleep because the lemminglike mass of people out there thinks just that. I really get freaked out by the governmental "let's teach them something" crap- rasing minimum wages and universal healthcare would do a lot more than dumbing down people.


----------



## veganone (May 10, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *suga'lamb* 

also, why would cosleeping guidelines be harder to convey to parents than crib safety guidelines? if we assume that parents can't or won't cosleep safely if given proper info, then wow, we must assume they are doing all manner of crazy unsafe things. i mean, it's not difficult to put your mattress on the floor, ditch the pillow, etc. how are we trusting parents to install their own car seats, or assembling a highchair, or bathing the babies.

why target cosleeping? i wonder if it goes back to corporations that manufacture all the gear you don't buy when you cosleep, who fund the studies that say cribs are the only safe alternative...

Exactly. Cribs are unsafe if you use them improperly - look that the difference in deaths from the 70s to 2000 below. It's not any harder to show people how to co-sleep safely than it is to use a crib safely. And, you are providing the information for the people who DO co-sleep out of necessity.


----------



## MamaBear21107 (Jan 20, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *In Exile* 
I am quite frankly fed up with governmental "let's pick the dumbest idiot imaginable and make up a campaign to parent those"- because that's exactly how is comes across. People that are drugged out of their mind will not change a single bit after a fearmongering campaign, nor will "those people" change anything.
And I'm also tired of relatives/neigbors/people anywhere that have NEVER coslept, let their babies CIO=and then judge those that cosleep. Just because they heard ads and heard that "though cookies shit" all their life and apply it to us.
That's exactly what happens.

Let's say you're drunk, drugged out of you mind etc- will a radio ad change any of your behaviour? No.
This just fosters more "those hippies better learn to behave and we'll spent more tax payers dollars and those lovely corporate donations to swamp people with the following trifecta: Circumcize because it's cleaner, vaccinate because that's why we're all alive and put your baby in a crib".

Wow, this is the US-can people still think for themselves? Or do they always need someone tell them what to do?

"Those" that truly endanger their children couldn't care LESS about an radio ad, seriuosly. It just bugs and judges everyone else that happens to cosleep because the lemminglike mass of people out there thinks just that. I really get freaked out by the governmental "let's teach them something" crap- rasing minimum wages and universal healthcare would do a lot more than dumbing down people.









: Exactly!!


----------



## srs (Nov 8, 2007)

My two cents:

personally, what I really hate about the campaign and similar literature is that it makes me think every single night "Please, don't let me kill my baby by rolling on her". We've been cosleeping for almost a year, out of necessity after I kept falling asleep unsafely with DD (trying to nurse in a chair in the middle of the night, etc). My DH thinks I'm being ridiculous, but seriously, I worry about this every night, and it only makes it worse to then see a tv ad saying that my baby isn't safe with me. I saw the Philly campaign ad at Christmas and it freaked me out and I put DD in the crib that night (which only lasted for about an hour, btw).
I admire that so many of you have such faith in your convictions regarding cosleeping, but for the rest of us, ads like this do influence opinions and decision making. And like bottomsup, I don't advocate for cosleeping, because I can't ensure that the people I'm recommending it to will do it safely, and I would hate to think that I endangered a baby's life.

So maybe I've just bought the government's propaganda, but there it is.


----------



## bottomsup (Jul 6, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *srs* 
My two cents:

personally, what I really hate about the campaign and similar literature is that it makes me think every single night "Please, don't let me kill my baby by rolling on her". We've been cosleeping for almost a year, out of necessity after I kept falling asleep unsafely with DD (trying to nurse in a chair in the middle of the night, etc). My DH thinks I'm being ridiculous, but seriously, I worry about this every night, and it only makes it worse to then see a tv ad saying that my baby isn't safe with me. I saw the Philly campaign ad at Christmas and it freaked me out and I put DD in the crib that night (which only lasted for about an hour, btw).
I admire that so many of you have such faith in your convictions regarding cosleeping, but for the rest of us, ads like this do influence opinions and decision making. And like bottomsup, I don't advocate for cosleeping, because I can't ensure that the people I'm recommending it to will do it safely, and I would hate to think that I endangered a baby's life.

So maybe I've just bought the government's propaganda, but there it is.

I think this is a valid point. If you are not comfortable, you are not comfortable.

Though to be honest, I have fewer worries about overlaying then I do about the covers, the high beds, the pillows, etc.

Also one thing to note about these ads: people are placing babies to sleep on couches and chairs, and that is just. not.safe. I really wish that would be emphasized more in the ads, rather than the overlaying issue.

I do not think these PSAs are anything more than a typical bureacraatic, panicked reaction to babies dying, and I think common sense plays a huge role in how we CHOOSE to react to them.

I think about Just Say No drug ads. I do not think drugs are evil, and I would have no problem with decriminalization.

However, I cannot see a drug PSA aimed at kids that says, Just Say No...Sometimes.

These PSAs are the same. If they advocate for sometimes co-sleeping safely, and a baby dies after a parent follows the recommendations, you know, sadly sometimes these things are out of our control, then who do you think is going to get the blame?

I do not see that they have much choice in how they choose to frame these things...maybe it is just me.


----------



## uptowngirl (Jun 9, 2008)

You know what's interesting to me? Is that co-sleeping on cotton futons is the norm in China, and SIDS is practically unheard of. The theory on this is that the US STILL uses dangerous plastic mattress covers and flame-retardant materials on mattresses, that produce toxic outgassing. The chemical has been found in the tissues of SIDS victims. It's also found at astronomical levels in the breastmilk of American women, compared to European women. Flame retardants on mattresses were banned in Europe many years ago. And what's the first thing we often do when pregnant? Buy a new mattress for baby--and sometimes for ourselves. The outgassing increases with body heat. So, maybe this is OT, but I just think that ONCE AGAIN, our government is "barking up the wrong tree" (as we say in the south) and blaming parents without looking at all of the information--and ways they could REALLY contribute to our safety.


----------



## Septagram (Feb 8, 2008)

Look, I understand what I said had a bit of the shock factor to it.. It was supposed to.









The fact is, many people don't follow the Co-Sleeping Commandments that were handed from on high. You said so yourself! There are a lot of variations here, you know.. It's not like we have a feather bed and the baby sinks in and is covered in blankets and pillows.

Also, I'm not going to bed and knocking out unconscious. Though DARE doesn't say this, there _is actually a difference between MJ and Crack._

Also, the toddler is separated from the baby by my husband, but some nights DS1 ends up at the foot of the bed, or if it's been a rough night, everyone just finds a spot to get a few hours of sleep.

I just find the "poor pitiful impoverished uneducated people" tone a bit much to take. It's uncalled for and unnecessary. Unless you have reviewed each case of those deceased babies and know for a fact that the trend shows that the babies who have died were in blanket strangling drug den death traps, then just spare me.


----------

