# ARGGH!! New AAP recommendation against co-sleeping



## Quirky (Jun 18, 2002)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...100901598.html

Quote:

To minimize the risk of crib death, the nation's largest organization of pediatricians is recommending that babies be put to sleep with pacifiers and in their own beds, despite intense opposition from advocates of breast-feeding and the "family bed."

The American Academy of Pediatrics, hoping to settle some of the most hotly debated and emotional issues related to the care of newborns, is for the first time endorsing routine pacifier use and explicitly advocating a ban on babies sleeping with their parents. In both cases, evidence suggests the precautions would cut the risk of suffocation, the group said.


----------



## dillonandmarasmom (May 30, 2005)

Did you see the Early Show seg this morning???

Oh My G*D!!


----------



## JamesMama (Jun 1, 2005)

I saw that today.







Yeah, I'm sure babies die due to UNSAFE cosleeping. But done safely there is no more danger than crib sleeping.









I guess on the plus side they did advocate rooming in.


----------



## bean0322 (Jul 15, 2005)

I wonder if any of the researchers have ever co-slept with infants/babies/children themselves? I'm guessing they have not. I sleep in such a different way if my child is in bed with me. It's automatic -- your body knows the baby is there and responds...doesn't it?

I didn't see the segment on tv but did read the article in the newspaper. Now I'm just waiting for all the phone calls from family and friends telling us how wrong we are for our choice.







:


----------



## dnr3301 (Jul 4, 2003)

I was just popping in here to see if anyone else had read this yet. I expected outrage, yet there are only 3 posts. Come on people!

I really hope Mothering and API come out with some sort of statement agaist this ridiculous assessment. Oh, and LLL, they should be upset too. Routine paci use as well as sleeping alone.

Geeeez, how did we make it this far without the AAP to guide us? Humans have been surviving for a long time without thier reccommendations.

This right here is why I hesitate to use "The AAP says it's fine" for a pro-breast feeding argument, they say lots of stuff I don't pay attention to.

And you know all those peds who have been ignoring the AAP's statements about pro-bfing and anti-RICing are going to be standing on the rooftops yelling at mamas all over the place not to sleep with their babies. Good grief, I can't take this. It's making me nuts-o.

AND!! they suggest to avoid that flat head we are all so worried about: put baby to sleep with head facing one way for one week, then switch it to facing the other way for the next week. Darn those babies who try to move their own heads and get in our way of beig the perfect "AAP" parent. grrrrrr.


----------



## jenoline (Nov 25, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *bean0322*
I wonder if any of the researchers have ever co-slept with infants/babies/children themselves? I'm guessing they have not. I sleep in such a different way if my child is in bed with me. It's automatic -- your body knows the baby is there and responds...doesn't it?

I didn't see the segment on tv but did read the article in the newspaper. Now I'm just waiting for all the phone calls from family and friends telling us how wrong we are for our choice.







:









: I'm so disugsted with this recomendation. And then there is this quote from the article

Quote:

It remains unclear why pacifiers help, but some research suggests it might affect babies' sleep patterns in ways that allow them to awaken more easily.
Hmm...kind of like BREASTFEEDING? Arrghh


----------



## elmh23 (Jul 1, 2004)

I didn't really see it all and I haven't read the new guidlines, but anyone else wonder why they call it "crib death" in the first place if that's where the baby is safest? Either way, it won't stop me from co-sleeping and I won't offer paci's until bfeeding is well established (my daughter was a sucker, but wouldn't take one, when she was little little, I wish she would.)


----------



## shayinme (Jan 2, 2005)

:







Totally disgusted with the recommendations.

Shay


----------



## Nitenites (Jan 23, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *elmh23*
I didn't really see it all and I haven't read the new guidlines, but anyone else wonder why they call it "crib death" in the first place if that's where the baby is safest?

That was my first thought, too.

What about those of us who use ecological breastfeeding? What about all the studies by James McKenna?

As for what my ped says, I don't ask her where (or with whom) she sleeps, so I figure my kids sleeping locale is none of her business.


----------



## BetsyPage (Mar 5, 2004)

Oh, I just don't get it at all! Where is the head-banging emoticon?

They say...

Quote:

Consider offering a pacifier at nap time and bedtime: The pacifier should be used when placing infant down for sleep and not be reinserted once the infant falls asleep.
Ummm, how in the world is this better than nursing them to sleep? So, instead of nursing my baby to sleep I should just stick a paci in??? OK, I have just decided that these people are IDIOTS. I usually do not get worked up about stuff like this, but really, it is just ridiculous.


----------



## ceilydhmama (Mar 31, 2003)

:
I'm speechless. How sad for yet another generation of babies...


----------



## slightlycrunchyann (Apr 15, 2004)

I hopefully await the day when co-sleeping is embraced by the AAP and everyone "mainstream." Today, I am sad. So many mothers will avoid co-sleeping while they drive themselves nuts trying to get their newborn baby to sleep in a crib or bassinet when all that baby wants is to be beside Mama.

I hope that one day this becomes like bf used to be, from shunned to being considered the best.


----------



## Jenivere (Aug 4, 2003)

I am angry and speechless. What an idiotic reccomendation!


----------



## Lula's Mom (Oct 29, 2003)

ARGH I just saw this on my local news... the teaser said "New recommendations on sleeping for babies, that may surprise you!" Silly me! I thought it might be that they'd relaxed the back-to-sleep thing, realized that tummy-sleeping is not the problem... but no. They have come down on side-sleeping, and recommend pacifiers for all?!?







: That makes no sense!

As someone noted above, pacifiers are a substitute for breastfeeding, a natural way for the babe to regulate the depth of his sleep- and best accomplished through co-sleeping.

What drives me nuts is that _they don't even know what causes "crib death"_, yet they just make these willy-nilly recommendations. From the MSNBC article:

Quote:

"Over 2,000 babies a year are still dying. We should be able to do something about that," said Dr. John Kattwinkel of the University of Virginia, chairman of the academy's SIDS task force.

Doctors think actual numbers are higher because *some true SIDS deaths* are being blamed on other causes, said Moon, a SIDS researcher at Children's National Medical Center in Washington, D.C. Data suggest, for example, that *accidental suffocation, which is hard to distinguish from SIDS, has increased in recent years*, Moon said.

*Doctors aren't sure about SIDS causes* but a prevailing theory suggests that brain stem abnormalities affecting arousal reflexes leave some babies vulnerable when faced with challenges during deep sleep, including overheating and *breathing hampered by pillows, stuffed animals or other soft objects*. Babies sleeping on their stomachs are at risk because they sleep more deeply and their airway risks being partly obstructed.
First of all, how can you separate out what is a "true SIDS death" when you do not know the actual cause of SIDS? And then, if you say that suffocation deaths are not true SIDS deaths, then why say that breathing hampered by soft objects can cause SIDS? That sounds like suffocation to me. This is all just so stupid.


----------



## thedevinemissm (Apr 9, 2004)

Ok, deep breath....

1. I saw GMA. I thought it was absolutely idiotic that this mother would say, "I'm willing to do anything to prevent SIDS" and then plops a bottle of formula in her daughter's mouth!!! Isn't the AAP the same group of yahoos that said that breastfeeding is recomended thru one year and acknowledges that is REDUCES the incidence on SIDS?? Can't this same group of people notice that the breastfeeding instead of pacifiers would acomplish the same goal????? But I guess that wouldn't make anyone any money, would it????







:

2. I find it interesting that if a baby dies in a crib or their own bed, it's SIDS; but if that a baby dies in their parents bed it's SUFFOCATION. Like somehow either baby is any less DEAD!!!







Ultimately the statistics show that FAR LESS babies die in their parents' beds than in cribs ~ who cares what the cause is??







:

3. I don't agree with the "back to sleep" campaign as a whole. Has anyone noticed that SIDS didn't exist until CRIBS did? Has anyone noticed that since this campaign started the incidence of sleep difficulties, exhausted parents, CIO, breastfeeding difficulties, and ACID REFLUX have skyrocketed? It also seems an interesting coincidence that at the same time the "back to sleep" campaign began "working" the medical community also changed the definition of what constituted SIDS and many babies that previously would have been considered SIDS are now given diagnosis of suffocation, other medical/genetic conditions, and unfortunately murder.

My largest problem with this statement is that the AAP is further promoting a DISTANCE between parents and their babies.







If the AAP put the same amount of energy into breastfeeding that they put into these other campaigns ~ our children would be much healthier for it!!!!!!

I am incredibly dissapointed in the AAP... is there anything we can do???


----------



## alissa_redclogs (Oct 8, 2004)

this is so frustrating. we saw this in the LA Times illustrated with a picture of a crib with fancy bed sheets--looked like an ad. the article was basically baby in bed--BAD! crib and pacifier--GOOD! (grrrrr!) now go be a good consumer and buy buy BUY!







:

it just makes me angry that all these people are going to think that they HAVE to have all this unnecessary equipment to take care of their child.

the family bed has been such a wonderful experience for us. i am sad for all the families who will miss out on it. i hope people don't take this pronouncement as a sort of "case closed." i get so frustrated with don't-think-be-afraid-and-do-what-we-say rhetoric.

my husband saw the article first and announced it when he came in to say good morning (baby and i were still in bed...) He concluded with "but _we_ know this is best."








hurrah! for the family bed!


----------



## sapphire_chan (May 2, 2005)

So to prevent "crib-death" they're suggesting putting babies into cribs? And what's the pacifier supposed to do, stop the baby from inhaling the crib and choking to death?







: Do you think they even *considered* doing an actual study before coming to their conclusions?









"Ooo look at me, I'm a big smart doctor, I can pull statisitics out of my @ss, ooooh, this idea is popular with the majority so I'll suggest it's the right thing to do. Lookit me, lookit me"

One comfort, mainstreamers never read the AAP's recommendations on bfeeding to at least a year, so they might miss this one too.


----------



## counterGOPI (Jan 22, 2005)

http://articles.news.aol.com/news/ar...00010000000001

this must be the same AAP study. i just saw it on AOL and i am..grrrrrrr.... i love how they try and cover their butts too by saying how they promote breastfeeding. ha!!!!
my baby is new only 3 weeks old today and im new at co-sleeping and not exactly sure of what i am doing..can you give me suggestions on what to do and not to do for co sleeping? i thought,too, that the baby is less likely to have SIDS b/c the mimic our breathing patterns being close to us. i dont know, im jus ta paranoid mother so help me regain my intelligence and remind me why my little one sleeping with us is healthy for her (besides how much i love to cuddle with her and hear her breathe next to me at anight







)
<3,
nicole


----------



## simonsmama (Oct 7, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Nitenites*

As for what my ped says, I don't ask her where (or with whom) she sleeps, so I figure my kids sleeping locale is none of her business.









I agree! Why is everyone so interested in where children sleep anyways? So yes, cosleeping is unsafe, but mysteriously thousands and thousands of cosleeping babies made it into adulthood, and somehow came out ok. Darn, how did they do it? *sarcasm*

As for the AAP







:

I go with World Health Orginazation (WHO) recommendations insted of AAP's recs because quite honestly, the AAP is a bunch of QUACKS!









Why cant we just listen to our instincts?


----------



## the2amigos (Apr 27, 2005)

This has been eating away at me all morning. Is there anywhere we can leave feedback on these ridiculous "recommendations"? Off to check out GMA website to start...


----------



## MrsT (Jun 13, 2004)

I don't ever mention where my baby sleeps to my ped and since she told me to stop feeding my 4 month old bfed baby when he woke at night b/c it was "rewarding" him for waking - I stopped telling her ANYTHING about sleep at all.

I don't get why they are qualified to talk about co-sleeping in the first place since they obviously don't do their own research on it. This whole new recommendation irritates me b/c it makes NO sense. Like pps have mentioned, pacis are boob substitutes!! Why is it okay to give your baby a silicone nipple to suck on, but not the real thing? And what if your baby rolls himself on his side to sleep? And if they are in a crib, how would you even know how they are positioned? (Because even little babies can move- mine's been rolling to his side since he was a few weeks old!!!) IMO, having him in my bed has been safer! He has a human paci, I am able to know his position, I can sense his breathing pattern and he mine, and I wake at the tiniest movements he makes b/c I'm more in tune with him. Ugh.

All this AAP guideline is going to do is make it more difficult to defend my co-sleeping to my friends who previously would just make "oh, you're setting up a bad habit and will never get him out of your bed!" comments. Now they'll add unsafe to their arsenal and use it to champion CIO!







:


----------



## natesmamma (Jul 8, 2005)

I just heard it on NPR while sitting here at work. A female Dr was being intervied about it. I logged on here immediately to see if there was a post.

I am very disappointed... but I am not going to stop cosleeping.


----------



## aentwood (Aug 12, 2005)

So, I basically wanted to throw up when I heard the tickler for the evening news about this. My first thought was "they must have interpreted something wrong...I'll have to get the real story and tell them they've misread the statement." But, alas, it appears they were right.

This is particularly frustrating for me since I am now the Executive Director of a state Chapter of the AAP. This is a new job and it is allowing me to be home with my child while still working on causes I care about, so I am very sensitive to any issues that I don't agree with. I don't want to feel that I am working for something that I don't believe in. Not that my chapter actively promotes all the National policies, but there is that affiliation and assumed agreement, you know? Wouldn't life be easier if you didn't have principles and just did whatever television and popular culture told you to do?









Anyway, you can get the entire AAP statement on their website, but there really isn't any way to put up an "academic"/research disagreement to it without reviewing the literature they cite (which is a lot and I do not have the time to read all 137 studies they cite). SO, I also hope that Mothering or someone will look at their policy recommendations further and talk about the research.

Here is something interesting in their recommendations: "the evidence is growing that bed sharing, AS PRACTICED IN THE UNITED STATES AND OTHER WESTERN COUNTRIES, is more hazardous than the infant sleeping on a separate sleep surface". So, how is bed sharing practiced in non-US and non-Western countries that doesn't increase the risk of SIDS? Anyone know?

This comes out just as I was about to post something about worrying about our co-sleeping arrangement since my son has now started to slide down the bed at weird angles and ends up with his head within rolling-over distance of my DH or on his side with his face very close to my pillow! Geesh, like I need one more thing to worry about him...doesn't it seem that it is so easy to worry about our babies dying from the second they are born (or even concieved)? I refuse to live in constant fear, but it's hard not to with all the messages being thrown at you.

Anyway, I am rambling. I think I won't answer the telephone until the fallout from this happens and someone comes up with counter-arguments for the AAPs reccommendations. I am sure my family will start calling after they see their evening news! Argh.


----------



## midwestmom (Feb 5, 2005)

:







:







:







:








: I am so pissed right now that my heart is racing. This is all we need. I don't think that I can even say anymore right now without much profanity.


----------



## vegaenglit (Aug 4, 2005)

i always love the "the baby could roll and get trapped in the footboard or headboard" argument. is the baby sleeping at the foot of the bed like thefamily dog? or being used as a pillow? the only time lucien has gotten "trapped" at the foot of the bed was went he was fully awake and squirming off the bed.

and as for the "there are other ways to bond with your baby" BS. i worked for the first year of my sons life. except for on weekends, night co-sleeping was the just about the only real time i had with him. in the morning i was rushing to get out the door, then there was time on the train home from work and maybe an hour when i got home - then he was ready for bed. and co-sleeping was just about the only way i got enough sleep to function at work. there were a few times i woke up and panicked "wheres the baby" but they were few and far inbetween and even in the winter when there were tones of blankets, he was always safe.

and i dont know about this "total ban on cosleeping." are we going to arrest parents for "endangering/neglecting" their child? how does one enforce this ban? who finds out about incidents of co-sleeping? are family and friends supposed to rat out each other?


----------



## rozzie'sma (Jul 6, 2005)

I don't care about the AAP. They don't know what they are talking about. It's just sad so many people need someone to tell them how to parent. Kids were a lot better off before they became a cash cow


----------



## BetsyPage (Mar 5, 2004)

I almost think that "purposeful" co-sleeping is being grouped together with "fell asleep with baby in unsafe place- accidental co-sleeping." These are two different issues. I assume that where co-sleeping is the norm, people intuitively practice culturally-appropriate safe co-sleeping... Don't many families in other cultures sleep on mats on the floor & have less bedding, for example? The basic principles behind this can easily be translated to US-style sleeping. Throwing out co-sleeping for all because some people don't do it safely is like throwing the baby out with the bathwater.


----------



## RedWine (Sep 26, 2003)

Further proof that the AAP is useless. There are so many flaws with the research and conclusions that I don't know where to begin. But it doesn't matter to our family anyway -- we've never followed the (woefully ignorant) AAP guidelines on anything, why would we start now?


----------



## MoMommy (Oct 8, 2004)

AHHHHHH!! This is infuriating! I'm so sad for the babies/families who will miss out on the closeness provided by co-sleeping. Apparently my grandma already called my mom this morning to get her to talk me out of sleeping with my dd. Sorry, nope!


----------



## RedWine (Sep 26, 2003)

I hereby declare my Magic Eight Ball to be more intelligent and more informed than the AAP.


----------



## bamamom (Dec 9, 2004)

arg







they must not know how to cosleep


----------



## Nature (Mar 12, 2005)

OMG... that article and the reccomendations sicken me.







Literally. My husband and I are appauled that they would change their positions to "ban" co-sleeping. Pfffftttt on them.


----------



## natashaccat (Apr 4, 2003)

This makes me so sad, I feel so helpless to fight this ignorance. What can a layman do? Why can't they get their heads around safe vs unsafe co-sleeping?


----------



## plantmama (Jun 24, 2005)

Ick...
I hope my ped. doesn't remember that we cosleep so she won't give us crap for it next visit.
I remember being convinced that we could not have a family bed before ds was born because we would roll over on him, so we got a cosleeper, but he rarely slept in it. You just KNOW where your baby is. We also had our bed set up with a body pillow against the wall and the cosleeper against the other side. Now we have our bed on the floor. If you want to have a family bed it's possible to make it safe for everyone by making these adjustments. Wouldn't it be nice if the AAP could make these kind of suggestions instead of instituting a catagorical "ban" on cosleeping???
What does the ban mean anyway? That they will report you for endangering your child if you tell them you cosleep???
I read this article this morning and knew there would be something here on it. Glad to know we're not alone.


----------



## counterGOPI (Jan 22, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *bamamom*
arg







they must not know how to cosleep

thats why i want to make sure im doing it correctly, can someone please help me out?
<3,
nicole


----------



## counterGOPI (Jan 22, 2005)

p.s. we actually have a good ped that encourages our co-sleeping


----------



## kate~mom (Jul 21, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *natesmamma*
I just heard it on NPR while sitting here at work. A female Dr was being intervied about it. I logged on here immediately to see if there was a post.

i heard the very end of this when i got into my car - and it sounded a little bit like it was in favor of cosleeping - the quote i heard was something like "may be better off than babies who sleep away from their parents." i was excited and was going to stream the whole segment. not worth it huh?







:


----------



## ajsgirl (Mar 31, 2004)

counterGOPI,

I just read this on the askdrsears.com website...

http://www.askdrsears.com/html/10/t102200.asp

It gives good recommendations, do's and don'ts for safe cosleeping. HTH!

As for my feelings, I just want to vomit, for all the reasons prevous posters have already listed. 'Nuf said. uke


----------



## KnitterMama (Mar 31, 2005)

Yeah ... well what do you expect from an organization most of whose members are simultaneously responsible for a baby's health but know nothing about breastfeeding?










They suck.


----------



## KnitterMama (Mar 31, 2005)

Wasn't trying to be snarky at the OP.


----------



## thedevinemissm (Apr 9, 2004)

Seriously... what does the word "ban" mean? Does it mean that if CPS (or DCF or whoever) investigates a co-sleeping family that the children are actually "endangered"? When we leave the hospital will we not only have to prove we own a car seat, but a crib and a pacifier as well??? (another good reason to homebirth or birth center birth!)










If some other parent wants to "have" a child by scheduled c-section, cut off a necessary and useful part of their body, feed them formula, stick a pacifier in their mouth anytime they make a sound ~ and, of course, now to fall asleep, let someone else raise the baby in full time day care, stick them in front of a TV any other time, ignore their needs and let them CIO, parent from another room via a baby monitor....

*AND I'M BEING IRRESPONSIBLE????*







:

How's this for a plan of action? We *ALL* call our pediatricians today and withdraw our children from their practices. In writing we request a full copy of our medical records and explain that the AAP's recent statements regarding a ban on co-sleeping, encouraging the use of pacifiers, and their support of mercury in vaccines make it a hostile environment that we are not willing to endure nor subject our children to.









Maybe if THOUSANDS of Peds across the country lose money due to diminished case loads the AAP will pay attention. Since they seem to listen to money ~ maybe we should take it away from them!!!!









p.s. To the mama looking for info on cosleeping, try: http://www.askdrsears.com/html/7/T070100.asp


----------



## G-Mama (Sep 2, 2004)

I agree with everything everyone here has said but also wanted to add that I think it's criminal to make parents feel in any way responsible for the death of their baby due to SIDS. The whole point is that the cause of SIDS is UNKNOWN! Now there's a possibility that some mother and father are saying to themselves, "if only we hadn't co-slept." As if their intense grief isn't enough.







:


----------



## RosieTook (Sep 4, 2004)

Dh and I both agree it's a load of bull...not to mention a healthy dose of propaganda.







:

The family bed is alive and well over here!


----------



## natashaccat (Apr 4, 2003)

Can we start a chain of email to DrSears begging him to respond to this new rec on his site? I'd be nice to see something public from the guru of co-sleep advocacy.


----------



## gethane (Dec 30, 2003)

I am also furious that because of a few cases of SIDS type deaths in co-sleeping situations, they now "ban" co-sleeping. Why not ban cribs? More babies die in cribs than anywhere else.

The thing is, if you are co-sleeping, and your baby dies, they WILL say its a roll-over, or suffocation. If the same baby died in a crib with no bedding/bumper pads, its SIDS. Its cultural discrimination.

I have NO idea what this stuff with the pacifier is about. I breastfed all 4 of my kids, my last until just a couple months ago (he's 22 months now) and they did all take a pacifier. I know that pacifiers can cause breastfeeding problems, but they didn't for me. However, if the pacifier thing IS true, and is backed up by reapeatable studies, then we shouldn't throw that out just because it also conflicts with the breastfeeding info. Like I said though, they need to back it up with some more studies.

The thing is, you never hear about co-sleeping death studies done only on parents who 1) are intentionally co-sleeping 2) in a bed not couch 3) neither parent smokes or drinks 4) no pillows or bedding near the baby.. etc. etc.

I personally just don't understand how someone wouldn't know where their baby was. And if they DID have that issue, slept too deeply or whatever, then I would hope people would use their own best judgement and choose an alternate sleeping arrangement.


----------



## Kate522 (Jul 1, 2004)

This upset both my husband and I. So frustrating. I can just read the frustration and anger in everyone's voice. Why can't they just say to co-sleep safely? Why can't they get those recommendations out there? Co-sleeping is a secret amongst a lot of parents. Everyone does it at one time or another, but few mainstreamers want to admit it. And what's with the pacifier? I suppose because they suggest putting babies to bed when they are drowsy, but still awake. Hello! Just say it's okay to nurse them to sleep. I think it's for the FF crowd: they are afraid of bottle mouth cavities. Plus, if you FF you're supposed to use a pacifier because babies need comfort sucking. It's just more of the same for the formula choosing fools.

Whoops! I forgot this little tidbit: a lot of doctor's families ff because they get free formula from the formula makers. My girlfriend who used to work on a maternity ward (mother's a lc) says that NICU nurses are the worst for promoting FF to preemies because it makes their jobs easier. ARRGH!! Why can't we do what's RIGHT instead of what's EASY???


----------



## Meli65 (Apr 29, 2002)

I read this in the paper this morning and it fairly ruined my day









I'm a letter-writer and have been stewing about how to address this -- I know I have read of studies that prove that co-sleeping is actually safer than sleeping separately, and that the main factors for SIDS are things like smoking, formula-feeding, and the like. The point I'd like to make is that why aren't pediatricians insisting that their patients breastfeed and quit smoking, rather than further isolate these poor babies (esp. the babies of WOH mothers) at night? If anyone can share any references, thanks!


----------



## RedWine (Sep 26, 2003)

Hey Bette Midler (I love your screenname!) -- I am doing as you suggest. Tomorrow we have a 6 month old visit check-up for dd2. I will request medical records there and later draft a letter to explain why I'm withdrawing from their office.

I will begin the search for a homeopath tomorrow, and keep the emergency insurance on the kids in case of a broken arm/case of pneumonia/etc -- something I would actually need a pedi for (or access to a hospital).

I'm just so sick of American pedis being ignorant on breastfeeding and cosleeping. Just can't take it anymore. So I won't.


----------



## Belle (Feb 6, 2005)

Didn't the AAP just release new breastfeeding guidelines a couple months back promoting Co-sleeping?







I remember seeing Dr. Ruth Lawrence (Head of the AAP's section on BFing) on the Today show promoting co-sleeping. I'll bet she did not vote for this recommendation.

ETA: I found the link to the video of that segment.
http://video.msn.com/v/us/v.htm?f=00...39a-4dcf-b1bc- The new segment on with their pacifier recommendations will play after the first one.

It's official. I have totally lost respect for the AAP in light of these new recommendations.


----------



## Eman'smom (Mar 19, 2002)

I think we need to talk more about co-sleeping "on purpose" as opposed to (like some have mentioned) falling asleep on the couch. I also think we need to look at other countries, do they have the same SIDS rate we do?


----------



## cravenab00 (May 25, 2005)

oh my!!! is there a smiley for RAGE!!!!?????

it disgusts me to no end.

you have to look at this though:

http://www.aap.org/donate/fcfhonorroll.htm

their list of financial supporters, makes you wonder where thier motives lie!! Get it? "LIE"


----------



## CountryMom2e (Apr 1, 2005)

MIL clipped it out for me - ugh. I was so disgusted with the new recs - they rank right up there with ACOG's ridiculous notions about VBACs.

I told MIL that the side sleeping thing, well they change their minds all of the time but DS always slept with a sleep positioner, so little risk of rolling over. As for the co-sleeping recs, that's just ridiculous. Every study has shown if you co-sleep carefully it is SAFER in terms of SIDS. At least the recs acknowledged that small babies belong in the same rooms as M&D.

And pacifiers? You have GOT to be kidding me! That is just nutso. It saddens me how many moms who don't think about these things for themselves are going to plug their children in at night just because the AAP says it's a good thing.

YUCK!


----------



## mzfern (Nov 16, 2004)

For everyone who is disgusted with their pediatricians, but still would like input from a doctor who knows how to care for children and is well versed in co-sleeping and pro-BF, I suggest you look for a chiropractor who specializes in pediatrics. This website can help you find one in your area.


----------



## Periwinkle (Feb 27, 2003)

: I just read the Post article and am floored. But beyond being sick to my stomach, I'm wondering where their data are coming from. How are these cosleeping babies dying? And what proportion of these babies died in a fire because a parent went to bed with a cigarette and fell asleep, or were suffocated from a snoring mother with a blood alcohol of .10. Further, I am beyond annoyed that they could have a rich dataset that could inform how to make cosleeping SAFE. Not just the usual "don't cosleep with a newborn on a waterbed" stuff, but maybe something about fabrics, temperatures, use of a fan, I don't know... something, anything, that could help people cosleep safely. But because of their inherent biases against cosleeping, they are throwing the baby out with the bathwater, as safe cosleeping reduces SIDS much more than using a damn paci.









ETA that there was one thing that I really really liked about the AAP's statement / the Post article, and that is it made abundantly clear that babies should NOT SLEEP ALONE in their own rooms. They were unequivocal about that, actually.







That's huge people. Huge. Basically, they ARE advocating cosleeping, as defined by Sears/McKenna et al (who say cosleeping is when parents and children sleep in the same room), but not bed sharing. Not that this fine tuning isn't the most insipid and downright dangerous statement, but for most mainstream people I know who cart the baby off to the nursery at 2 weeks of age, this is going to be a big shock.


----------



## MyLittleWonders (Feb 16, 2004)

I saw the story on our local news. What really irked me beyond all the rest was that they kept showing these parents putting their babes in cribs complete with sheets and blankets!!! WTHeck?!?!







: Yea, put your infant to sleep with a paci in another room with thick blankets all around them. That's a good way to prevent SIDS.







: Absolutely unbelievable!!!! That's all I can say ... my blood pressure is getting too high thinking about it.


----------



## bamamom (Dec 9, 2004)

My dd's former pediatrician, who is now a friend, is not too happy with it . She thinks the paci recommendation is gonna hurt bfeeding, and that it isn't a great policy. she is just waiting for the counter attack..

in her prac, she tells parents how to cosleep safely.. no ff, no smoking, no pillows near baby, etc.


----------



## Christeeny (Jun 8, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Quirky*
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...100901598.html

You know. It is articles like this that terrify new mothers and keep them from sleeping with their babies. @@







:
I am new to AP, but even before, I coslept with my premature baby. And he is strong and healthy now. Oh, and he sleeps great in his OWN bed now. (For those manstreamers that think you can never get your child to sleep in their own bed after cosleeping.)


----------



## janellesmommy (Jun 6, 2004)

OK, so now there is a new requirement for paranoid NFL moms like me--a pacifier in the home. To ease my (probably) overblown paranoia about CPS (I say overblown because the statistical chance of them bothering me is pretty low), I'm going to not only need an unused crib in the house again for my next baby, but an unused pacifier. At least a pacifier is cheap and doesn't take up much space.







Oh, I just remembered--I don't have to buy one for the next baby because I bought one last year to make a momsicle.









The AAP can be pretty idiotic at (most) times. Luckily our doctor is a family practice doc so he never had to take the AAP's "Obey-us-completely-and-blindly-under-penalty-of-death-Oath" that pediatricians have to take. :LOL


----------



## RedWine (Sep 26, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Periwinkle*
ETA that there was one thing that I really really liked about the AAP's statement / the Post article, and that is it made abundantly clear that babies should NOT SLEEP ALONE in their own rooms. They were unequivocal about that, actually.







That's huge people. Huge. Basically, they ARE advocating cosleeping, as defined by Sears/McKenna et al (who say cosleeping is when parents and children sleep in the same room), but not bed sharing. Not that this fine tuning isn't the most insipid and downright dangerous statement, but for most mainstream people I know who cart the baby off to the nursery at 2 weeks of age, this is going to be a big shock.

Yes, that is a silver lining, isn't it? So they're not TOTALLY full of sh*t. Almost, but not totally.


----------



## ikeessyou (Jan 5, 2005)

Hey,

Here's what Dr. Sears has to say about the latest recommendations:

http://www.askdrsears.com/html/10/t102200.asp

Here's an interesting tidbit: "Who is behind this new national campaign to warn parents not to sleep with their babies? In addition to the USCPSC, the Juvenile Products Manufacturers Association (JPMA) is co-sponsoring this campaign. The JPMA? An association of crib manufacturers. This is a huge conflict of interest. Actually, this campaign is exactly in the interest of the JPMA."

(Yeah, I know, I've heard some folks complain that Dr. Sears is a sell-out because he many times stands on the fence and gently makes his point - however, people don't listen to fanatics - a lesson from my early days as a parent (I have a 17 and 15 year old plus a 3 month old) and Dr. Sears is always a voice of reason of actual practicing "Hollywood" pediatricians.

Dr. McKenna has also weighed in on this as well:

``I'm very disappointed,'' said James McKenna, director of the mother-baby behavioral sleep laboratory at the University of Notre Dame in Indiana. ``I really fear this is just another step of inappropriately medicalizing decisions that are best made within the home.''

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercu...s/12864279.htm


----------



## knittingmomma (Jun 5, 2004)

Wow, this is ridiculous... are they going to be telling us how to pee next!!!

Please keep us informed if there is going to be a formal campaign against the AAP.

You know the said part is that a part of me is actually a bit nervous and scared that I will be accused of being a poor parent or something and makes me watch my every move and make sure that we don't stand out - which is hard to do when you have five children.

Warm wishes,
Tonya


----------



## njeb (Sep 10, 2002)

I dare not say what I think of the AAP's new recommendations because I would end up using language that violates the user agreement!

Please let me know if there is any organized opposition to these idiotic recommendations. If enough of us protest, maybe they will rethink their stance.


----------



## miasmommy (Feb 4, 2005)

Ugh!

Of course my mother had to call me to tell me.







:

miasmommy
DD is 19 mos.!


----------



## MamaBear+3 cubs (May 30, 2004)

I too was floored by the news. I have three children and the only child we co-slept with (and still co-sleep with even though she is almost 4) is our third and youngest child. I wish I had co-slept with my first two. The entire family got more sleep, better sleep and it made night nursing a piece of cake. Whenever my pediatrician would ask about how the baby was sleeping, I would always reply "Just fine, thank you." Fortunately, my pediatrician is also a mother and quite wonderful. She has the philosophy of whatever works best for the family, so she never made me feel badly about sleeping or eating arrangements.

I'm curious about why the rest of the world (who co-sleeps and practices extended breastfeeding) doesn't seem to have the sleep/feeding issues that we in the United States have. It would seem to me that God created us the way He did for a purpose. Why would he have a mother carry a child in her womb for 40 weeks only to have her put that helpless babe in a crib the moment it is born, where it has no human contact/support/love? Why does research show that preemies thrive on human contact? Don't you think all babies (premature or full term) thrive on that same human contact? After my youngest was born via C-section, I was lucky enough to have a private hospital room. I can promise you that she spent very little time in her bassinet. Everytime the nurse came in, I was holding her. She spent the night sleeping on my chest. Even though the nurse told me I was not allowed to sleep with her in the hospital, I would just smile and keep my hospital door closed throughout the day and night.
I could continue to ramble on and on, but I won't. DH and I are ttc#4 and I promise you that if we are blessed with a fourth baby we will co-sleep and nurse. Heck with what the AAP says. As a mother, I know what is best for my babies.

Kerri


----------



## dnr3301 (Jul 4, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *miasmommy*
Ugh!

Of course my mother had to call me to tell me.







:

miasmommy
DD is 19 mos.!










I've had one friend (for whom I am one of the few AP friendly people in her life) call and her sister had called her and said, all sing-songy, "I told you you weren't supposed to be sleeping with them!" You know what I told her to say? "Yeah, well you didn't listen to the AAP when they told you circing was stupid and unnecessary, why do you care what they say now?" Seriously, I knew that would happen.

I'm glad to see that Sears and McKenna stepped up and said something. I looked yesterday for a statement from McKenna, but didn't find one. I saw him speak once, he's great.


----------



## Quirky (Jun 18, 2002)

As far as I can tell, the Sears statement is old - not responsive to the new AAP statement but to the JPMA study that the national consumer safety board was flogging.


----------



## Christeeny (Jun 8, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ikeessyou*

Dr. McKenna has also weighed in on this as well:

``I'm very disappointed,'' said James McKenna, director of the mother-baby behavioral sleep laboratory at the University of Notre Dame in Indiana. ``I really fear this is just another step of inappropriately medicalizing decisions that are best made within the home.''

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercu...s/12864279.htm

Amen! That is worth repeating.


----------



## AmyY (Jul 22, 2004)

I have to confess that at first I ignored this news item, quite frankly, simply because it came from the AAP. Then my LLL newsgroup sent out a letter including several articles detailing the recommendations and their reasons and who made the recommendations and who funded them. I was, if possible, even more horrified than I expected to be.

According to the info I received, LLL is reviewing the information from the AAP carefully before making a formal statement in response. Two major concerns for LLL are that Ross (one of the major formula manufacturers) was a major funder of the study; and that (therefore) the information about breastfeeding is suspect.

It's really mind-numbing to try to get your brain around the notion that you should not breastfeed your child to sleep but you SHOULD put the child down alone with a pacifier. It's really beyond warped.

Looking forward to the LLL statement in response. Has anyone heard anything from Dr. Newman? His responses are always, um, crisp :LOL in these circumstances.


----------



## Tapioca (Feb 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *AmyY*
It's really mind-numbing to try to get your brain around the notion that you should not breastfeed your child to sleep but you SHOULD put the child down alone with a pacifier. It's really beyond warped.


Word.


----------



## AmyY (Jul 22, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Tapioca*
Word.









Sweetie! I don't believe I've ever rated a "Word" before!









Still shakin' my head about the idea of the pacifier being better than the breast.







:


----------



## ladybugchild77 (Jun 18, 2004)

: These "recommendations" are insane! Kiera is 7mo and we happily and HEALTHILY IMO, co-sleep!


----------



## the2amigos (Apr 27, 2005)

This has been bugging me to no end. And as I lay in bed last night nursing my DS to sleep







I got to thinking that I know in my small town community hospital it takes so much work and time to make a policy effective (I'm a nurse), nothing is done lightly. So where DID they get the info to make this recommendation? And if they do have studies to back their statement - I need to check their references - why is there so much conflicting info out there? Did a group of supposedly intelligent people sit around a table and say, "you know, it may be beneficial to sleep with your babes and help the nursing relationship, but we are going to totally ignore that and cause more babies to die in a crib vs in bed with parents." I find that difficult to believe. I guess I've seen a lot of the propaganda out there about not sleeping with your baby, but none of it had any substance. On the flip side the info out regarding sleeping with your baby makes a lot of sense and almost makes you think - why wouldn't I?

I'm just playing devils advocate here. I am in love with sleeping with our babe and plan to with all future bambinos!!


----------



## aran (Feb 9, 2005)

I looked at the policy statement, and although there are 100+ studies cited (not all on co-sleeping, most are on other SIDS risk factors), the ones that appear to be the cause of this new blanket recommendation against co-sleeping (vs. just recommending against co-sleeping after alcohol use, smoking, etc.) are the following:

Carpenter RG, Irgens LM, Blair PS, et al. Sudden unexplained infant death in 20 regions in Europe: case control study. Lancet. 2004;363: 185-191
http://www.prematuros.cl/muertesubit...tesubita11.pdf

Tappin DM, Ecob R, Brooke H. Bedsharing, roomsharing and sudden infant death syndrome in Scotland. A case-control study. J Pediatr. 2005;147:32-37
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...&dopt=Citation

McGarvey C, McDonnell M, Chong A, O'Regan M, Matthews T. Factors relating to the infant's last sleep environment in sudden infant death syndrome in the Republic of Ireland. Arch Dis Child. 2003;88: 1058-1064
http://adc.bmjjournals.com/cgi/conte...d%3B88/12/1058

Other studies are cited in the policy where controlling for smoking, heavy comforter use, sleeping on sofas, and alcohol consumption (i.e., excluding "bad" cosleeping habits) showed that there was no correlation between co-sleeping in bed and SIDS.

I haven't looked at the design of these three studies to see if there were glaring weaknesses, but it appears the AAP is weighting their results heavily, because as I say, there are other studies with outcomes that conflict with these.









ETA: I looked a little at these studies, and even in these, there is only a small significant correlation between increased risk of SIDS and co-sleeping in the same bed *for very young babies* (<8 weeks in the largest study, <14 weeks old and <20 weeks old in the other two studies). In all cases, sleeping in the same room but a different bed (and probably sidecar arrangement, too) seem OK.

*Bottom line: if you co-sleep responsibly with a baby more than a few months old, and your ped or friends/family tell you about the AAP recommendation, you can tell them that it really is only valid for tiny babies so they need not worry... your baby somehow managed to survive that stage!*

(I am not endorsing the policy, just trying to understand its basis and the limitations of the data upon which it is based.)


----------



## linny (Apr 19, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *slightlycrunchyann*
I hope that one day this becomes like bf used to be, from shunned to being considered the best.

I agree with slightly crunchyann.


----------



## aran (Feb 9, 2005)

Another thing I just thought of: these studies on SIDS and co-sleeping all require the parents of a SIDS baby to explain their sleeping arrangements after the baby died. I wonder how truthful they are about the use of alcohol/drugs/heavy comforters in that situation? If a guilt-ridden mama had a SIDS baby and had a few drinks that night, do you think she'd tell the researchers? That can make a big difference in the outcome of these studies. In other words, some of the co-sleepers in the study that were supposedly co-sleeping "correctly" and had SIDS happen, probably were not really co-sleeping "correctly," and that makes co-sleeping look riskier than it ought to look. (Hard to explain, hope this makes sense)


----------



## momoftworedheads (Mar 6, 2003)

Why is it that when the AAP decides something, we are all supposted to jump on the bandwagon? Eighty percent of the world co-sleeps. Why is it that in the US we have to even discuss this? Why is it ok to leave a child alone to sleep but it is against the law to leave them alone awake? I just do not get it? The AAP is such a joke!

How long did it take the AAP to support BFing? They learned the hard way with that and they will do it again with co-sleeping! They'll learn that it is the best thing once they do some REAL studies. Family bed children do better in school, they do better in social situations, they are much better rested and happier than their peers that are forced to sleep alone.

I am tired of the AAP, I just have to say that if my Ped gives me a hard time, I am going to ask him who he sleeps with!

I do not watch conventional TV and this is why!

Jen F, mom to my happy 5 y/o







, my three y/o :







: and my 9 m/o :2bfbabe:







:














: all in the


----------



## Mama2ABCD (Jun 14, 2003)

Quote:

Kids were a lot better off before they became a cash cow








sad, but true.
Where would the AAP be if everyone trusted their instincts as a parent like all the mama's here?


----------



## RedWine (Sep 26, 2003)

Chucklin's mommy -- thank you so much for your post and the references!


----------



## mighty-mama (Sep 27, 2005)

SO NOW SIDS IS "CRIB DEATH"

SO LETS PUT OUR BABIES IN CRIBS .. TO PREVENT "CRIB DEATH"

IS THAT IRONIC? IF CO-SLEEPING IS THE CULPRIT WHY ISN'T IT CALLED "CO-SLEEPING DEATH"

*****gee what are crib manufactures financially backing the AAP, It bet you..


----------



## counterGOPI (Jan 22, 2005)

thank you mommas for the info and i love all of you! i need you all,seriously, my very annoying know it all MIL sent me an email about that study and im taking quotes from this board and sending them to her. hope you guys dont mind. just facts etc im not using your names or anything. ughh. she annoys me and shes coming to see her granddaugter for the 1st time this weekend and ill be alone with her for the 1st 5 hours b/c my DH will be at work!! ahhhhhhhh!!!
<3,
nicole


----------



## Christeeny (Jun 8, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Kate522*
Whoops! I forgot this little tidbit: a lot of doctor's families ff because they get free formula from the formula makers. My girlfriend who used to work on a maternity ward (mother's a lc) says that NICU nurses are the worst for promoting FF to preemies because it makes their jobs easier. ARRGH!! Why can't we do what's RIGHT instead of what's EASY???

I can't say the same for the NICU my son stayed in. They were great about giving me storage containers for expressed milk, there was a mother's(pumping) room with curtains, cushy chairs, footrests, magazines, and radios, for comfortable pumping. Or, I had the option to pump at his bedside if I wanted. They were very supportive of my choice to pump for him, since he was too little to nurse or even drink a bottle.
There are still some good ones out there.


----------



## Kate522 (Jul 1, 2004)

I'm glad to hear it because all the preemie babies I know ended up drinking formula. Some mothers did pump for awhile, but then the mothers felt it was just too hard to keep pumping. It's sad because breastmilk really is the best, and even more necessary for preemies.

I really think these crib death recommendations are geared towards the formula feeders. I think the AAP still considers them the norm. Using a pacifier with a formula baby is necessary. I really don't have much issue with the pacifier stuff _if_ they'd just say it was for formula fed babies who have a higher risk towards crib death anyway. The anti co-sleeping stuff really gets me cross. Just tell people how to co-sleep safely!! It's going to happen regardless of what the AAP says, so why not say how? Sigh. I know why not. Uggh! Our American culture is so frustrating sometimes!!


----------



## mamazig (Nov 14, 2004)

Thanks so much, Chucklinsmommy, for the articles -- after a quick perusal of the three (and please note "quick" --as well as inhibited by an attention-needy toddler's pleas for play) I'm even more confused about the AAP's recommendations. The third one in particular raises questions about their support of paci use-- it looks to me that in that study it was found that a SIGNIFICANT risk factor was the ABSENCE of an otherwise routine bink . . . not the lack of using one on a usual basis. That seems to me to say that one is better off not getting a baby in the habit of using one because one night of NOT having it, and WHAMMO -- you've got a major risk factor for SIDS. But AAP must have overlooked that finding . . . along with the major major correlation between maternal smoking during pregnancy and co-sleeping with SIDS. The third article and the first both seemed to indicate that co-sleeping is only a risk (or a major one) IF the mom smoked during pregnancy. I think many of you will find the third's last paragraph with a theory about this correlation very interesting -- it has to do with body temperature and how smoking during pregnancy might affect the baby's brain in such a way that makes body temp increase --> SIDS risk...
The second link (from what I can see) is only an abstract and I can't really get anything from that.
I'll be really interested to see what the rest of you read from those links. I was an English major, not statistics, so my interpretation might be way off. They're certainly not easy reads...

Oh yeah, all that said, I wouldn't exchange our co-sleeping nights for ANYthing!


----------



## Christeeny (Jun 8, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Kate522*
I'm glad to hear it because all the preemie babies I know ended up drinking formula. Some mothers did pump for awhile, but then the mothers felt it was just too hard to keep pumping. It's sad because breastmilk really is the best, and even more necessary for preemies.

I really think these crib death recommendations are geared towards the formula feeders. I think the AAP still considers them the norm. Using a pacifier with a formula baby is necessary. I really don't have much issue with the pacifier stuff _if_ they'd just say it was for formula fed babies who have a higher risk towards crib death anyway. The anti co-sleeping stuff really gets me cross. Just tell people how to co-sleep safely!! It's going to happen regardless of what the AAP says, so why not say how? Sigh. I know why not. Uggh! Our American culture is so frustrating sometimes!!

Well ultimately my son did end up being FF.







:







: I tried several times to BF, I even worked with the hospitals LC. Which helped, but he still wouldn't nurse. And when we were finally able to take him home, he still didn't nurse. To this day, I feel sad because we missed out on a wonderful thing.







: I didn't have the resources then to get through it. And I (foolishly) thought Formula would be good b/c they wanted me to supplement w/ higher cal formula anyways.







:
Of course, when we made the switch, he immediately became constipated. And his reflux got worse.








I don't know what I was thinking.








So I applaud all you women who continued to pump or BF their preemies even when things got tough.








Since then I lived, learned, and found the world of AP.








And I will definitely be more prepared for the next time around.







:


----------



## bamamom (Dec 9, 2004)

yk, now that i think of it, i nanny'd a preemie boy years ago... he came home from the hosp on enfamil 22/// preemie formula. and if i had to choose, i'd choose enfamil over similac anyday.. similac is so harsh. anyway... he was put on enfamil, and one month later i had a nephew born premie in the same hosp, same nicu etc. adn he was put on similace neosure... when i got to the bottom of it. i found out taht they rotate which brand they push month by month... so, it doesnt matter which brand is best for your baby per say... jsut which company do we recommend this month??? how awful...

it is about the politics and what is easiest...


----------



## TripMom (Aug 26, 2005)

There is pretty wide-spread criticism for the recent AAP rec on this thread. I have a question -- is the main criticism that people don't feel the research was well done and thus the conclusion is not warranted? Or -- do people just not like the conclusion whether the research is sound or not?

I have not examined either in any depth - and have no personal opinion one way or the other. I am just trying to understand the consensus of opinion I see here.


----------



## TripMom (Aug 26, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Christeeny*
I can't say the same for the NICU my son stayed in. They were great about giving me storage containers for expressed milk, there was a mother's(pumping) room with curtains, cushy chairs, footrests, magazines, and radios, for comfortable pumping. Or, I had the option to pump at his bedside if I wanted. They were very supportive of my choice to pump for him, since he was too little to nurse or even drink a bottle.
There are still some good ones out there.

















:

My experience too. I had some pretty severe PP complicatations - and I attribute my BFing the triplets (which I never thought I'd do) to the continual insistence of the neonatologist and the nurses.


----------



## mamazig (Nov 14, 2004)

Tripmom,
For me, my gut-reaction criticism comes not from the research (because I haven't read it all yet) but from all the OTHER research I've read that contradicts their conclusion. I have read a lot a lot a lot that contradicts their co-sleeping ban and so right off the bat, I'm reacting with criticism. However, I want desperately to know how they came to their conclusion, and so I've started to read the research on which they have based it. It seems to be that they (AAP) didn't do any research studies themselves, but have used many studies that others have done to reach their conclusion -- a meta-study I guess. But now as I get into the studies that they used, I'm not coming to the same conclusions as they . . . surprise surprise. (See my post above) I can't judge the validity of all the research studies they used -- I'm not a research buff -- but I just can't see so far how they've come to the conclusions they have. HOpe this rambling is making some sense!


----------



## TripMom (Aug 26, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamazig*
Tripmom,
It seems to be that they (AAP) didn't do any research studies themselves, but have used many studies that others have done to reach their conclusion -- a meta-study I guess.

That's interesting. I have some (very limited) experience with clinical research as I am a lawyer for a pharma company. I know that meta-studies are not generally considered sound research. The FDA does not allow you to make claims on your drugs based on meta-analysis -- not by a longshot. Wondering if any well-controlled, prospective research on this topic has been done at all?


----------



## AmyB (Nov 21, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *TripMom*
I have a question -- is the main criticism that people don't feel the research was well done and thus the conclusion is not warranted? Or -- do people just not like the conclusion whether the research is sound or not?

The research is not sound because the AAP report is lumping together unrelated causes of infant death:

Here are the facts given by the AAP. Let's separate them:
1- SIDS is a mysterious cause of death that can apparently be reduced by sleeping in proximity to parents and sucking during the night
2-Infants can be suffocated if they sleep with other people who are vastly overweight or impaired by substance use.
3- Infants can be sufforcted if they sleep with other people on upholstered furnture.

In 2002, 2,295 babies died from SIDS per 100,000 live births
In 2002 949 babies died from accidents per 10,000 live births
Guess what those accidents were? The answer is, they were car crashes, not accidental suffocation in a bed.

How many infants suffocate accidentally in a bed or sofa? The answer is, about 100 every year. How many of those accidents can be eliminated by advising against substance use and sofas? The research says, pretty much all of them.

What that means is that "banning" co-sleeping won't reduce SIDS, and more importantly, it won't reduce suffocation either because the deaths are caused by substance abuse and falling asleep on furniture (more likely considered "naps" than sleeping)

--AmyB


----------



## Christeeny (Jun 8, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *bamamom*
yk, now that i think of it, i nanny'd a preemie boy years ago... he came home from the hosp on enfamil 22/// preemie formula. and if i had to choose, i'd choose enfamil over similac anyday.. similac is so harsh. anyway... he was put on enfamil, and one month later i had a nephew born premie in the same hosp, same nicu etc. adn he was put on similace neosure... when i got to the bottom of it. i found out taht they rotate which brand they push month by month... so, it doesnt matter which brand is best for your baby per say... jsut which company do we recommend this month??? how awful...

it is about the politics and what is easiest...









It is definitely very political.

Yes, that is what my son was on. Enfamil Enfacare 22 cal.


----------



## BetsyPage (Mar 5, 2004)

AmyB, that is a great post, right to the point. I think the evidence is clear that "accidental" co-sleeping, where basic common-sense precautions are not taken, is what is dangerous.

I mean, which is better- a mom takes her baby into the family bed, which is a comfy, safe environment and they peacefully sleep together, or an exhausted parent crashing on the couch with a newborn and falling into a hard sleep after spending hours trying to comfort them because they cry every time you put them in a crib. After I did the latter a couple of nights I decided the SAFEST place for my baby was in the bed with me!


----------



## jeanine123 (Jan 7, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *simonsmama*









I go with World Health Orginazation (WHO) recommendations insted of AAP's recs because quite honestly, the AAP is a bunch of QUACKS!


















Does the WHO have any kind of recommendation on cosleeping? And if so do you know where I could find it? Thanks so much!!!


----------



## miasmommy (Feb 4, 2005)

I am glad Dr. Sears responded. He put a blurb on his Web site responding to the AAP (dated Oct. 10, 2005).

Our kitty cat LOVES sleeping in the crib. We are grateful someone around here wants to sleep in it. I wonder if I should check with our vet?.... :LOL

miasmommy
DD is 19 mos.!


----------



## aran (Feb 9, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *AmyB*
The research is not sound because the AAP report is lumping together unrelated causes of infant death:

I don't think so. The studies I linked in a pp are the ones the AAP relies on to make its recommendation. In those studies, the variables you talk about are separated out. In those three studies "proper" co-sleeping was significantly correlated with a slightly higher incidence of SIDS than sleeping separately for very young infants. There are other studies designed similarly that found no significant correlation, though.

The main criticism I have of the studies is that they rely on parents of SIDS babies to be truthful about their sleeping arrangements at the time their child died, and I think they are likely to lie about dangerous sleeping arrangements rather than admit they may have played a part in their child's death by not heeding safe co-sleeping rules.

However, the AAP's practice of reviewing the literature to come to a conclusion is by no means scientifically suspect. All kinds of public health decisions are made this way. I am in the field of environmental risk assesment, and agencies like EPA do this kind of thing all the time in order to make regulations on things like the arsenic limit in drinking water.

I did and do co-sleep, and not even "safely" because my DS is so high needs he needed to sleep on my lap. I would do it again if I needed to, but it wouldn't stop me from worrying about SIDS with a new baby.

Like I said before, the recommendation against co-sleeping (where does it say "ban" anywhere?) really is based on data that say it is a problem for babies up to 20 weeks old, at the very oldest. Even so, I'll probably take the risk (real or artifact) and co-sleep when I decide to have another DC.


----------



## Nature (Mar 12, 2005)

Here is where the word "ban" is coming into play..

Quote:

The American Academy of Pediatrics, hoping to settle some of the most hotly debated and emotional issues related to the care of newborns, is for the first time endorsing routine pacifier use and explicitly advocating a ban on babies sleeping with their parents.


----------



## TripMom (Aug 26, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *WitchyMama2*
Here is where the word "ban" is coming into play..

What is this quoting? The AAP release? Or a summary of the release?


----------



## bamamom (Dec 9, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *TripMom*
What is this quoting? The AAP release? Or a summary of the release?

i too am curious


----------



## mamazig (Nov 14, 2004)

Quote:
The American Academy of Pediatrics, hoping to settle some of the most hotly debated and emotional issues related to the care of newborns, is for the first time endorsing routine pacifier use and explicitly advocating a ban on babies sleeping with their parents.

appears to be a quote from the Washington Post article that headed this thread -- so is the reference to "crib death," which is in the title of the said article ("To Cut Crib Deaths, Separate Beds Are Urged for Babies")


----------



## mamazig (Nov 14, 2004)

Here's the actual policy statement that outlines their meta-study research and conclusions. http://www.aap.org/ncepr/revisedsids.pdf

for those of you dealing with know it all MIL and such, this quote from the actual policy MIGHT help you:
Therefore, when considering the recommendations
in this report, it is fundamentally misguided to
focus on a single risk factor or to attempt to quantify
risk for an individual infant.

I interpret that to mean -- ok, so you co-sleep -- are you eliminating all other risk factors?
Just a thought as I plan my defense at the next family gathering . . .


----------



## newcastlemama (Jun 7, 2005)

I hate it when experts get into my personal business and call it dangerous! I think a baby sleeping in another room is dangerous (fires ect) Are they going to tell me I am an unfit mother...my baby is super content, healthy and happy! Most people seems to







the AAP, but I







. My husband and I are the exprt on Jack.

Next topic: why are child-rearing practices so backwards/opposite of history and common sense in the US? Talk amounst yourselves....


----------



## SusannahM (Sep 15, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *counterGOPI*
thank you mommas for the info and i love all of you! i need you all,seriously, my very annoying know it all MIL sent me an email about that study and im taking quotes from this board and sending them to her. hope you guys dont mind. just facts etc im not using your names or anything. ughh. she annoys me and shes coming to see her granddaugter for the 1st time this weekend and ill be alone with her for the 1st 5 hours b/c my DH will be at work!! ahhhhhhhh!!!
<3,
nicole

What is it with MILs and clipping out articles and/or mailing them? Seems to be an epidemic. Mine does that to me constantly. I'm sure I'll probably see this study sent to me at one point. In defense of her, though, she has gotten somewhat better lately, by looking at a few alternative sources. I think since our little girl is SO healthy and SO happy, it's convinced her that everything we're doing isn't bad. (Also, our incredibly healthy teeth since we gave up fluoride and drink spring water exclusively now to avoid it and other bad things in our water has helped convince her we're not crazy, too).


----------



## aira (Jun 16, 2004)

Quote:

What is it with MILs and clipping out articles and/or mailing them? Seems to be an epidemic.
Well... I've thought of this a lot, having a neurotic mainstream MIL and all. And I came to the conclusion that I'd feel very nervous if I ever have a DIL who mothers opposite of what I know is best. (You know they truely believe what they're saying.) I actually often wonder how I'd handle having a grandchild who was CIO, FF, vaxed, etc...

Not that I'll ever cave to MIL, but at least that thought has kept me from wanting to kill her when she tried to bribe us to vax.

About the issue at hand... well, I just can't slap my forhead hard enough.


----------



## mom2alicia (Nov 30, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *aentwood*

Here is something interesting in their recommendations: "the evidence is growing that bed sharing, AS PRACTICED IN THE UNITED STATES AND OTHER WESTERN COUNTRIES, is more hazardous than the infant sleeping on a separate sleep surface". So, how is bed sharing practiced in non-US and non-Western countries that doesn't increase the risk of SIDS? Anyone know?

.

I think this is key. I think that people need to be educated that if you want to cosleep you need to make the bed safe for the infant. I read an article in a mainstream mag recently that said that in eastern countries parents sleep on a mat or futon on the ground and what american parent would do that? (paraphrase). but it just dismissed the idea. i wrote in that i would and did. we put our firm mattress on the floor, stored the box spring and frame, removed blankets and pillows. my hubby and i each had a small pillow under our head and a thin blanket behind each of us pulled over our back. care was taken to make sure their were no gaps that our baby could get wedge in and nothing nearby to suffocate her. if you read the list of crib safety checks it is long: no bumper pads, no padding, no blankets, no pillows, tight fitting sheet, no gap between mattress and crib, check width of slats, etc. Why not similar recommendatons for accomodating a family bed?


----------



## spughy (Jun 28, 2005)

Thanks everyone for the comments - I'm so glad I'm not alone being disgusted by the AAP recommendations. However, after a few days of pondering (and, like everyone else, being thoroughly annoyed at MIL for telling me I was making a "big mistake" planning to cosleep) I have had some thoughts on this and I think I am starting to maybe slightly understand where the AAP is coming from.

First, I think that their point that cosleeping *as practiced in North America and the West* is potentially a problem, is valid. We typically do NOT cosleep naturally. As a pp pointed out, our beds and bedding are very different than Asian/African bedding and all our blankets and pillows and soft mattresses are risky. Also, and this is something I feel is vastly overlooked, a lot of parents still put baby to bed long before they retire. My baby hasn't been born yet so maybe I'm missing something, but I don't get this. Babies sleep just fine in slings or carriers or in bassinettes in the living room or carseats or wherever during the day, why don't they sleep in the same room that the parents are in during the evening hours? It's not like "bedtime" is a valid concept for an infant. I don't think people do this in non-Western countries but pretty much everyone I know - even "attachment" parents - does this here. So there are typically 3-4 hours every night when baby is sleeping alone, even if technically the baby is sleeping in the same room as the parents. And if the baby doesn't have a crib, he/she is basically sleeping alone, in an adult bed, which everyone, McKenna included, agrees is a bad idea. But I don't think this staggered bedtime has been looked at as a factor - in my perusal of the AAP research it didn't seem to be the case; nor did the AAP mention it. (But if I'm wrong about this, please someone correct me. I would very much like to be told that a lot of people don't put their babies to bed before themselves!)

Second, giving the AAP the benefit of the doubt and putting on my "cynical cranky" hat for a minute: given that it seems none of us are arguing that things like accidental cosleeping, alcohol use, puffy comforters etc. ARE risks, would the AAP really want to come out and say "cosleeping is great"? Because as much as we want to believe otherwise, people are generally pretty lazy when it comes to the whole reading/listening thing, and if they don't pay attention to the caveats on cosleeping they WILL put their children at risk. Moreover, this information is disseminated through the mass media, so a lot of people will pay attention only to the headlines, and take only the headlines away as retained information.

It's a totally different scenario than with breastfeeding. There are no risks with breastfeeding. If you do it "wrong" it's not fatal.

I guess what I'm saying is that if I were generating policies for the AAP, I'd be concerned about the capability of my audience to take in the information. And it IS sad and maybe I am being excessively cynical, but in the hypothetical situation of the AAP releasing a "cosleeping is good if..." recommendation, how many people are actually going to read through (or even listen to) ALL the points? How many media outlets are going to report anything other than "The AAP recommends cosleeping"? And how many people are going to take any of the caveats seriously? How many people are going to just think, "this is great, we don't have to spend any money on a crib" and stuff Junior in their waterbed between their two obese, over-medicated, over-tired bodies and then say "but the AAP said it was ok"?

I sincerely wish that the AAP hadn't released a statement at all. And I wish they had included much more information about the methodological discrepancies between Western cosleeping and other cosleeping practices, and I REALLY wish that they had made more of a big deal about the risks of babies being put to sleep in a room by themselves. But if they felt they had to release a statement just on cosleeping, and didn't have any research on those discrepancies, then I guess I am reluctantly concluding that they maybe didn't do so badly.

It's not quite right to just blame the AAP. Our culture and its aversion to critical thinking (and in some cases, basic literacy) has a lot to do with this as well. What the AAP did in its statement was cater to the lowest common denominator, because they would be blamed for any misunderstandings.

Sorry for the long babble, I just felt the need to play devil's advocate there a bit. And no I do not work for the AAP (heck, I'm not even American) nor am I a fan, I just think there is some blame to share here.


----------



## counterGOPI (Jan 22, 2005)

OT:
does dr mckenna have a website on co-sleeping?i have sometimes put my 3 week old to sleep in our bedwhen im doign laundry in the same room and im curious what is bad about it, its a king size bed so shes not going anywhere.. but im new at co-sleeping so educate me








<3,
nicole


----------



## TripMom (Aug 26, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *counterGOPI*
OT:
does dr mckenna have a website on co-sleeping?i have sometimes put my 3 week old to sleep in our bedwhen im doign laundry in the same room and im curious what is bad about it, its a king size bed so shes not going anywhere.. but im new at co-sleeping so educate me








<3,
nicole

I don't know if anything is bad if you are "standing right there". But newborns have been known to do amazing things that you'd never think they could do. So leaving them alone in the middle of a big bed for even the shortest amount of time (e.g. run out of room to put clothes in closet) - could be really dangerous. This story is really extreme and really sad . . . but we have friends that did the same thing, stepped out for awhile (not sure how long - but several minutes, I think) - newborn wriggled enough to edge of bed that she was strangled by her bedclothes. I don't mean to be so morbid -- but this did happen -- so I think its good for us all to remember to take all precautions.


----------



## natashaccat (Apr 4, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *spughy*

First, I think that their point that cosleeping *as practiced in North America and the West* is potentially a problem, is valid. We typically do NOT cosleep naturally. As a pp pointed out, our beds and bedding are very different than Asian/African bedding and all our blankets and pillows and soft mattresses are risky. Also, and this is something I feel is vastly overlooked, a lot of parents still put baby to bed long before they retire. My baby hasn't been born yet so maybe I'm missing something, but I don't get this. Babies sleep just fine in slings or carriers or in bassinettes in the living room or carseats or wherever during the day, why don't they sleep in the same room that the parents are in during the evening hours? It's not like "bedtime" is a valid concept for an infant. I don't think people do this in non-Western countries but pretty much everyone I know - even "attachment" parents - does this here. So there are typically 3-4 hours every night when baby is sleeping alone, even if technically the baby is sleeping in the same room as the parents. And if the baby doesn't have a crib, he/she is basically sleeping alone, in an adult bed, which everyone, McKenna included, agrees is a bad idea. But I don't think this staggered bedtime has been looked at as a factor - in my perusal of the AAP research it didn't seem to be the case; nor did the AAP mention it. (But if I'm wrong about this, please someone correct me. I would very much like to be told that a lot of people don't put their babies to bed before themselves!).

My babies (dd1 a 3 yo now who sleeps fine in her own bed) have never been able to sleep by themselves for any period of time longer than a 1/2 hour, not sure if this is a parent or child initiated thing. As a result I do go to bed at the same time as my kiddos. I've never felt comfortable leaving a sleeping baby unsupervised.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *spughy*

It's not quite right to just blame the AAP. Our culture and its aversion to critical thinking (and in some cases, basic literacy) has a lot to do with this as well. What the AAP did in its statement was cater to the lowest common denominator, because they would be blamed for any misunderstandings.


Yeah but I could easily see situations where crib sleeping could lead to abusive practices like CIO or worse. Many, many babies simply can't sleep alone for long periods of time so the recs are setting parents up for being unable to meet their childern's physical-emotional needs and subsequent abusive practices.

What about a baby of a mom who smokes and for her co-sleeping is the only way that mom can get enough sleep to meet the needs of her family and still keep her milk supply up? Is that baby better off with ABM (formula) and sleeping in a crib? For many babies and mom's willingness to co-sleep is the deal breaker between being able to BF or not.

Anyway if you believe the Dr. Sears stats something like 65 kids a year die from suffocation in co-sleeping envts and 2400 (I can't remember exactly) die in cribs from SIDS.


----------



## TigerTail (Dec 22, 2002)

do they have any idea how alert a normal attached mother is with a new baby? i heard my 4 yr old have a nightmare that made him peep in his sleep last night from across the hall, & ran in so fast i thought my heart would explode (he didn't even wake up! but i was up since 2, the adrenaline!) he's four & we haven't coslept for a year (other than morning snuggles, nighttime nurse, etc) & i'm still 'on'.

the odds of me falling asleep on my baby (or for that matter not noticing a change in breathing patterns) are about the same as me falling asleep lying on a speaker at ozzfest.

sad, sad. well, back to everyone doing it & feeling guilty & lying about it to their inlaws & pediatricians, instead of education.

pacifiers!!! what dolts. it would turn the formula industry on their heads if the AAP actually made a significant statement against the routine use of artificial milk- everyone knows that a baby close to its mother's breast is probably going to nurse, & nurse well. one mouth- *cough* confident bfing mama is going to spread the word- 'this must be nipped in the bud, or our bonuses will shrink & our stock options will be worth zip!' bah.

it is so hard not to see a conspiracy here- if the AAP is so dang concerned about babies, how 'bout a nice loud policy statement about that god-cursed 'good start' contest, or anything else showing the feeding of aim as anything other than a tragic recourse when you have run out of other options?

susan


----------



## MoonJelly (Sep 10, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *thedevinemissm*
Ok, deep breath....

1. I saw GMA. I thought it was absolutely idiotic that this mother would say, "I'm willing to do anything to prevent SIDS" and then plops a bottle of formula in her daughter's mouth!!! Isn't the AAP the same group of yahoos that said that breastfeeding is recomended thru one year and acknowledges that is REDUCES the incidence on SIDS?? Can't this same group of people notice that the breastfeeding instead of pacifiers would acomplish the same goal????? But I guess that wouldn't make anyone any money, would it????







:

2. I find it interesting that if a baby dies in a crib or their own bed, it's SIDS; but if that a baby dies in their parents bed it's SUFFOCATION. Like somehow either baby is any less DEAD!!!







Ultimately the statistics show that FAR LESS babies die in their parents' beds than in cribs ~ who cares what the cause is??







:

3. I don't agree with the "back to sleep" campaign as a whole. Has anyone noticed that SIDS didn't exist until CRIBS did? Has anyone noticed that since this campaign started the incidence of sleep difficulties, exhausted parents, CIO, breastfeeding difficulties, and ACID REFLUX have skyrocketed? It also seems an interesting coincidence that at the same time the "back to sleep" campaign began "working" the medical community also changed the definition of what constituted SIDS and many babies that previously would have been considered SIDS are now given diagnosis of suffocation, other medical/genetic conditions, and unfortunately murder.

My largest problem with this statement is that the AAP is further promoting a DISTANCE between parents and their babies.







If the AAP put the same amount of energy into breastfeeding that they put into these other campaigns ~ our children would be much healthier for it!!!!!!

I am incredibly dissapointed in the AAP... is there anything we can do???

Ditto ditto ditto! Those are my _exact_ thoughts on this whole thing!


----------



## MoonJelly (Sep 10, 2004)

"Ban" was The Washington Post's word, btw. Nowhere in the AAP statements did it say anything about "a ban on co-sleeping". The AAP is not a law making or enforcement authority, despite what the media would like to have you think apparently.








:


----------



## Devaskyla (Oct 5, 2003)

NAK

interesting article i just found about this :http://www.genengnews.com/news/bnite...NEWSML_WEB.xml

And why are the AAP following some exremely bad examples and ignoring this : http://www.mercola.com/2001/jan/14/crib_death.htm


----------



## aran (Feb 9, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Devaskyla*
And why are the AAP following some exremely bad examples and ignoring this : http://www.mercola.com/2001/jan/14/crib_death.htm

Because that's not science. It's poorly supported conjecture.

Anyone who makes claims like theirs (such as that phosphorus is a problem just because it is present in compounds like sarin - a chemical warfare agent) is not credible. Its sensationalist. By the same token, I could claim that table salt is a problem because it contains chlorine, because chlorine is also present in toxic compounds like PCBs and dioxins... but that is clearly a gross mischaracterization and has no basis in fact.


----------



## caycat (Feb 25, 2004)

I'm really hoping that the AAP recommendations will mean that all those doctors and researchers who support co-sleeping look at the AAP data and publish some good responses. Here is one I found
http://www.genengnews.com/news/bnite...NEWSML_WEB.xml

Edit: Oops, just noticed link was already given

Oddly it was published in the Genetic Engineering News







: --not what I usually think of as a hot bed of co-sleeping/breastfeeding. I found it when Googling responses to the AAP. The article itself is not connected with the genetic engineering news (as far as I can tell, but those guys can be tricky.)


----------



## Hazelnut (Sep 14, 2005)

As far as I've read and heard, the AAP has always discouraged co-sleeping, so I'm more curious as to why they suddenly had to reissue some statement, which everyone could guess would be trumpeted by the media in the most sensationalist form possible.

I understand that they have to take into account the people who will not practice co-sleeping safely. That's a good point that our culture with our puffy duvets, soft mattresses and ignorance of co-sleeping is not one prepared to suddenly co-sleep. Yet at the same time I'm slightly tired of them assuming parents are all stupid who can't be trusted at all with their children. This distrust of parents and in particular, mothers, seems to extend well beyond co-sleeping and into every advice book, article, or ped visit I've ever encountered.

Why not also educate on the danger of older cribs? Over 10 thousand kids every year are sent to the emergency room due to crib injuries. Why not address the potential hazard of those stupid baby quilts and crib bumpers that sell for a million dollars and are trumpeted as some kind of necessity? Why the tacit approval of some very draconian CIO routines? Why not even try to discuss safe co-sleeping? They could still approach this so much more fairly. I'm also curious to know more about Western European co-sleeping practices. I was under the impression that it is more accepted there, and yet in my experience in living there they don't sleep on futons on the floor any more than we do.

I agree that babies shouldn't be left alone on the bed, but I think it's tough because one reason a lot of people end up co-sleeping (namely me) is because the babe won't go down happily in a bassinet nor stay there asleep for more than four minutes. It would be fabulous if the AAP could maybe trumpet the use of slings or other carriers so that sleeping babies don't end up alone on the bed or crying in the crib. They aren't a perfect solution, but for shorter sleeps they certainly help.


----------



## Hazelnut (Sep 14, 2005)

I'm not a statistician, but bear with me.
My first reaction to dr. Sears was that, if 2500 SIDS deaths occur in cribs every year, you can't really compare that to 65 accidental suffocation deaths if soo many more people are using cribs than co-sleeping. But then if it's true that a good half of American families co-sleep, I suppose those would hold up (I believe co-sleeping is safer, I'm just trying to think about the numbers before I throw them out at people in defense of our co-sleeping). Although, I think most people only co-sleep in the beginning, or for a few hours when the child first wakes up or whatever.

Also, I've always just wondered, should a child die of SIDS in the family bed, won't it just be labeled a suffocation death, no matter what? Even if the mother had co-slept for months and always responded to the baby, or had with other children?

Where does that factoid come from about SIDS being lower in other countries? One ped told me that, and said that our rate of sids went down when we changed to back-sleeping guidelines. Now that we do that, I'd like to know if it's still lower. I asked her that, but she didn't answer. I'm willing to bet it's lower in countries where they co-sleep more.


----------



## Jennifer Z (Sep 15, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Hazelnut*
It would be fabulous if the AAP could maybe trumpet the use of slings or other carriers so that sleeping babies don't end up alone on the bed or crying in the crib. They aren't a perfect solution, but for shorter sleeps they certainly help.

They sort of say this. On page 19 of the 41 page abstract, there is a line that recommends: "Avoid having the infant spend excessive time in car seat carriers and "bouncers", in which pressure is applied to the occiput. Upright "cuddle time" should be encouraged."

occuput means the back of the head.

Funny how this didn't make it into the major media papers.

Some other things I found that I haven't heard from the mainstream media:

on page 18:

about pacifier usage:

pacifier shouldn't be reinserted once baby has fallen asleep, shouldn't be coated in any sweet solution, for breastfed infants should delay introduction.

about "SIDs prevention" devices:
Avoid commercial devices marketed to reduce the risk of SIDs. Although various devices have been developed to maintain sleep position or reduce the risk of rebreathing, none have been tested sufficiently to show efficacy or safety.


----------



## counterGOPI (Jan 22, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *TripMom*
I don't know if anything is bad if you are "standing right there". But newborns have been known to do amazing things that you'd never think they could do. So leaving them alone in the middle of a big bed for even the shortest amount of time (e.g. run out of room to put clothes in closet) - could be really dangerous. This story is really extreme and really sad . . . but we have friends that did the same thing, stepped out for awhile (not sure how long - but several minutes, I think) - newborn wriggled enough to edge of bed that she was strangled by her bedclothes. I don't mean to be so morbid -- but this did happen -- so I think its good for us all to remember to take all precautions.

yikes!! poor thing. so if i cant put her in my sling i guess her bassinet would be better for naps during the day?
<3,
nicole


----------



## caycat (Feb 25, 2004)

I think that the AAP's recommendations are very connected to fear of litigation. If a ped. recommends co-sleeping or doesn't explictly say not to do it and something happens, there is a risk of being sued. In a society as letitious (spelling?) as the United States (Canada is also going this way), so many decisions are made this way. There needs to be a cultural shift.


----------

