Rise in infant suffocation tied to bed sharing

[TravelingGal]

Thought I''d pass the article along...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28857953/

 

[neatfreak]

Interesting! **heads off to find the study**

 

[Dreamer_D]

Seems to me from the article you posted that the truly empirical finding is that suffocation deaths have increased a lot in recent years... but despite the title of the article, like many such stats, the actual cause of this rise seems more uncertain. In particular, the link with bed sharing seems more like a "best guess" cause. I will be curious to see what NF says based on reading the actual report.

 

[VegasAngel]

Date: 1/26/2009 4:41:05 PM
Author: dreamer_dachsie
Seems to me from the article you posted that the truly empirical finding is that suffocation deaths have increased a lot in recent years... but despite the title of the article, like many such stats, the actual cause of this rise seems more uncertain. In particular, the link with bed sharing seems more like a ''best guess'' cause. I will be curious to see what NF says based on reading the actual report.

That is how I read it.

 

[musey]

Date: 1/26/2009 4:53:51 PM
Author: VegasAngel

Date: 1/26/2009 4:41:05 PM

Author: dreamer_dachsie

Seems to me from the article you posted that the truly empirical finding is that suffocation deaths have increased a lot in recent years... but despite the title of the article, like many such stats, the actual cause of this rise seems more uncertain. In particular, the link with bed sharing seems more like a ''best guess'' cause. I will be curious to see what NF says based on reading the actual report.

That is how I read it.

+1

Though I admit that I think I''d always be too afraid of bed sharing! It took me awhile to calm down about letting the pup share the bed, I was terrified of squeeshing him!!!

 

[chrono]

It would be helpful if the cause can be narrowed down.

 

[Dreamer_D]

I think that we will stick to our plan to have our baby sleep in the co-sleeper *beside* our bed to be on the safe side... I would have no issued having an older baby in bed with me--one who can move around and squack and make a fuss if he/she gets squished--but I can totally see how blankets in particular could cause issues for a very little baby and I wouldn''t want to worry about it.

 

[TravelingGal]

Date: 1/27/2009 4:42:22 PM
Author: dreamer_dachsie
I think that we will stick to our plan to have our baby sleep in the co-sleeper *beside* our bed to be on the safe side... I would have no issued having an older baby in bed with me--one who can move around and squack and make a fuss if he/she gets squished--but I can totally see how blankets in particular could cause issues for a very little baby and I wouldn''t want to worry about it.

I think that''s a good plan DD. I had never held a real newborn before and it freaked me out how limp (although that may not be the right word I am looking for) they were. They can turn their head from side to side while laying down, but even that seemed to have hardly any control. I was so exhausted, whenever I slept, I was OUT (plus I am deaf in one ear and sleep on the "good" one so I am the living dead) that I am sure I woul have smothered the poor thing if I had it in bed with me.

 

[neatfreak]

I did skim the article, it is in this Feb's issue if anyone is interested. Basically the study was completely descriptive and the authors don't make a claim that cosleeping is the cause of the rise in deaths. They also mention a change in the way the cause of death may have been reported in the 90's which might account for some of the increase.

However I do find it interesting that out of the death certificates (children all died of accidental strangulation or suffocation in "bed") this study analyzed 52% coslept while only 6% did not (sleeping habits were not identified in some cases, but even if all of these unidentified are not cosleeping the numbers are still nowhere close). So this rather large discrepancy certainly implies to me that a lot of these deaths are at least occuring in cosleeping environments, which might imply that cosleeping is a problem...but that's extrapolating of course.

Anyway, it seems to me that there is a risk with it...so we, like DD, have a cosleeper beside our bed (which we aren't really using right now but that's another story) rather than having babies in our bed.

 

[Jas12]

I think a co-sleeper is really a great solution. The baby is so close they can smell and hear you but without any of the ''squashing'' risk.
I woke up at the tiniest gurgle, i would never sleep thru fussing and still don''t, but that is not the case for everyone.

One precaution with the co-sleeper: make sure your don''t have piles of blankets on your bed that could drape over the side and onto the baby when you move about in your sleep. That was the only thing that i found ''bad'' about that set-up.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 1/27/2009 8:31:13 PM
Author: Jas12
I think a co-sleeper is really a great solution. The baby is so close they can smell and hear you but without any of the ''squashing'' risk.
I woke up at the tiniest gurgle, i would never sleep thru fussing and still don''t, but that is not the case for everyone.

One precaution with the co-sleeper: make sure your don''t have piles of blankets on your bed that could drape over the side and onto the baby when you move about in your sleep. That was the only thing that i found ''bad'' about that set-up.

Yeah I was thinking about that... our bed is actually a little lower than the height recommended for this co-sleeper, so it will be a little higher that our bed, so I am hoping that will limit the draping risk!

 

[kennedy]

Articles like this one irk me. They have big, scary titles and very little content.

For anyone who's interested, here's a link to an article by an OB arguing (convincingly, I think) that this new study does not show what it claims to:

Link

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 1/29/2009 12:39:44 AM
Author: kennedy
Articles like this one irk me. They have big, scary titles and very little content.


For anyone who''s interested, here''s a link to an article by an OB arguing (convincingly, I think) that this new study does not show what it claims to:


Link

I bet the fact that it was published with an agenda and had a bad conclusion will never be published as much as the lies were.

 

[janinegirly]

I do think many "studies" are inflammotory and not entirely accurate (and people tend to overact to the information--but didn''t want to say anything out of fear of being flamed).
While TTC''ing, I was convinced I''d never get pregnanat--all those chemicals in the air! I was over 35! DH ate too much soy and took hot showers! Yet it happened instantly. While I was preggers, quite a few studies and information from popular sources ("What to Expect" etc) scared the living daylights out of me! I didn''t want to touch ANYTHING that could harm my baby and that list was long and growing and not always rational. Still it was worth it for peace of mind. I then read about all the ways our babies could be suffocated from just existing by the sounds of it. Some of it was accurate and necessary--becuase even if it means one baby is saved, it''s worth it. But I also learned to be less fearful once the baby was here...not so much in the first month because I was still paranoid and reciting all the info/stats I had read in my 9 mo''s of preparation----but over time I relaxed and realized no one knew my baby''s movements as well as me or my OWN movements. And I learned what I felt most comfortable with. Which, for me, turned out to be having her in the room with me up til 4 months, and often in my bed with, gasp, covers. Her crib--while never touched by her--has bumpers and when she moves in there--she will have covers because it''s freeezing here!! I will of course take all necessary precautions (keep covers low, tucked in, check on her repeatedly, keep a monitor in the room).

In terms of co-sleeping, I only do it when DH is not in the bed meaning she has half a queen bed to herself. I only realized this was an option after reading Dr. Sears'' book--before that, I thought I was unequivocally risking her life by doing this. Still ultimately I am only comfortable with cosleeping becuase I know my sleeping patterns---I am a light sleeper and never move! I originally started co-sleeping due to flat head concerns and was positioning her head throughout the night (yes that means I wake up repeatedly and turn her head), but now I actually prefer it. Anyway, I definitely do not recommend it since there are risks and any risk is too much in some cases--but I can also respect the fact that some parents make choices out of instinct and self awareness and that is ok too. If we followed every fad/study of the day, we''d never be able to get up and live--we''d be paralyzed by fear. I guess educating oneself and subsequently making decisions for yourself based on your own conclusions is how I can best describe it.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 1/29/2009 10:00:56 AM
Author: janinegirly
I do think many ''studies'' are inflammotory and not entirely accurate (and people tend to overact to the information--but didn''t want to say anything out of fear of being flamed).
While TTC''ing, I was convinced I''d never get pregnanat--all those chemicals in the air! I was over 35! DH ate too much soy and took hot showers! Yet it happened instantly. While I was preggers, quite a few studies and information from popular sources (''What to Expect'' etc) scared the living daylights out of me! I didn''t want to touch ANYTHING that could harm my baby and that list was long and growing and not always rational. Still it was worth it for peace of mind. I then read about all the ways our babies could be suffocated from just existing by the sounds of it. Some of it was accurate and necessary--becuase even if it means one baby is saved, it''s worth it. But I also learned to be less fearful once the baby was here...not so much in the first month because I was still paranoid and reciting all the info/stats I had read in my 9 mo''s of preparation----but over time I relaxed and realized no one knew my baby''s movements as well as me or my OWN movements. And I learned what I felt most comfortable with. Which, for me, turned out to be having her in the room with me up til 4 months, and often in my bed with, gasp, covers. Her crib--while never touched by her--has bumpers and when she moves in there--she will have covers because it''s freeezing here!! I will of course take all necessary precautions (keep covers low, tucked in, check on her repeatedly, keep a monitor in the room).

In terms of co-sleeping, I only do it when DH is not in the bed meaning she has half a queen bed to herself. I only realized this was an option after reading Dr. Sears'' book--before that, I thought I was unequivocally risking her life by doing this. Still ultimately I am only comfortable with cosleeping becuase I know my sleeping patterns---I am a light sleeper and never move! I originally started co-sleeping due to flat head concerns and was positioning her head throughout the night (yes that means I wake up repeatedly and turn her head), but now I actually prefer it. Anyway, I definitely do not recommend it since there are risks and any risk is too much in some cases--but I can also respect the fact that some parents make choices out of instinct and self awareness and that is ok too. If we followed every fad/study of the day, we''d never be able to get up and live--we''d be paralyzed by fear. I guess educating oneself and subsequently making decisions for yourself based on your own conclusions is how I can best describe it.

Great post, Janine. As a researcher, I feel compelled to amend just the first sentence to read: many ''reports of studies'' are inflammotory and not entirely accurate. Too often the authors actually reported accurately what they were studying and what they found (the article Kennedy linked has quotes from the original source that shows the original authors were not making the claims attributed to them) but then when a press release happens it gets distorted ,and when it is picked up my the media, all bets are off! In this case, it looks like the CDC was responsible for the distortion.

Anyways, I suspect that our baby will also end up in our bed on many occassions... along with not wanting to worry about squishing the baby (which DH worries about more than me... maybe it is valid, he often rolls over on top of me in the night!

) the main reason he/she will have her own little co-sleeper is that our bed isn''t big enough for DH and I right now, I don''t want to add a baby to that mix! LOL! But when DH is gone, we will probably do what you have descibed and just see what works.

 

[kennedy]

You're totally right, DD. The authors of the study weren't the ones making the unfounded claims; it was the CDC and then the media. I'm sure there are plenty of people who only read the title and/or skim the text briefly -- the unfortunate result is more misinformation about co-sleeping.

Janine -- Great post! I can relate to everything you said. I remember the night my daughter was born. I didn't sleep a wink because I felt like I had to stare at her all night just to make sure she was still breathing.

For those who are interested, I'll include a link to Dr. James McKenna's website. He's an anthropologist out of the University of Notre Dame who does really interesting research on co-sleeping at his Mother-Baby Behavioral Sleep Laboratory. Here's the link to his website and a quote I thought was apropos give the discussion here:

Link

"No infant sleep environment is risk free. As regards cosleeping (in the form of bed-sharing) what we know to be true scientifically is that for nocturnal infant breast feeding and nurturing throughout the night both mothers and babies were designed biologically and psychologically to sleep next to one another...Infant-parent cosleeping with nocturnal breast feeding takes many diverse forms, and it continues to be the preferred "normal" species-wide sleeping arrangement for human mother-baby pairs. In the worldwide ethnographic record, mothers accidentally suffocating their babies during the night is virtually unheard of, except among western industrialized nations, but here there are, in the overwhelming number of cases, explanations of the deaths that require reference to dangerous circumstances and not to the act itself."

 

[neatfreak]

The worst part about all of this misinformation circulated by the media is that unless you have subscription access to journals (through a University usually) there is pretty much no way for the average person to access the original article and read for themselves.

These journal subscriptions cost thousands of dollars per year per journal, so unless affiliated with a research university or think tank there is pretty much no way for the average person to read it for themselves and decide what THEY think of it. They only get the information provided by the media which of course usually focuses on sensationalism and often isn''t accurate.