Hermenuetics

Comments

This campaign is totally offensive. Comparing cosleeping to giving your infant a butcher knife is an inflammatory overreaction.

Further, safe cosleeping practices result in nor more smothering deaths than crib sleeping. In addition, the implication that cosleeping is linked to SIDS is completely false, as studies show. SIDS is NOT caused by cosleeping.

Both my children STILL cosleep at ages 2 and 5 occasionally. They will wake up during the night and climb in bed with us. I assure you, they are perfectly safe. When they were infants and coslept with us occasionally, we used safe practices such as no blankets, etc.

Vilifying a legitimate parenting practice is reprehensible. Educating parents on safe cosleeping AND cribsleeping (no blankets or crib bumpers, etc) would be a legitimate ad campaign.

Posted By: Robyn | December 9, 2011 10:28 AM

Great paragraph, Caryn:

I’m no fan of “bad mom” insinuations, whether about coats or co-sleeping. I’m no fan of implying that parents who choose to co-sleep are as reckless or malicious as those who’d put their babies to bed with a knife. And I’m no fan of the government “educating” a public via shame and shock and hyperbolic misinformation.

And as Robyn said:

Vilifying a legitimate parenting practice is reprehensible. Educating parents on safe cosleeping AND cribsleeping (no blankets or crib bumpers, etc) would be a legitimate ad campaign.

There are so many variables in each family when it comes to child safety that this campaign's attempt to "educate" everyone into a single practice may do much more harm than good. As you said, Caryn, parents generally get that they need to protect their children, and do so fiercely when necessary. And frankly, choosing to allow your son to go coatless is not a sign of lack of protection; rather, it's a sign that you are nurturing his decision-making skills as he grows up.

Tim

P.S. We read Dr. Sears's book when our first child was born. We did not adopt his co-sleeping approach whole-heartedly, but there was a whole lot of information and sugggestions that we did adapt for our family.

Posted By: Tim | December 9, 2011 12:14 PM

I know a lot of people who happily co-sleep and it's very nice. When it comes to me, my oldest son was in my bed for probably the first 15 months. He had a REALLY hard time separating when I put him in his own room and it was really hard. He's a mush and is very loving now at nearly 5 years of age. My younger son I put in his own crib at 5 months outside of the bedroom and he's attached to me at the hip and slept better in the night and I did too. . .so I have two sides from trying out both things (he co-slept though for the first 5 months).

As for all the babies dying, I know when my boys slept, they were always on their side or on their back and I didn't use blankets further than covering halfway on their body, but in the middle of the night when I couldn't constantly watch them, I didn't use blankets, just warm clothing. Also I used those things to prevent them from rolling around with the cushions on each side of them. I think that was really helpful. I am sure there are really squirmy babies though. I was always watching my little ones as they slept. When they were in bed with me. . .well I don't move when I sleep and neither does my husband. I never put their heads on my pillow. It is so sad to hear that babies get SIDS. I knew someone who lost their child that way. I think sometimes it is a mystery how it happens and other times it's an accident but always it is devastating and heartbreaking.

I'm with you that co-sleeping can be safe and wonderful, if parents read and research how it can be done properly. It is sad that people automatically think it is horrible when they don't understand it. Lovely article!

Posted By: Victoria / Justice Pirate | December 9, 2011 12:48 PM

I think it is important to realize just how many parents there are out there, (definitely in places like the City of Milwaukee--a family member of mine worked in foster care there) who lack very basic parenting skills and common sense decision-making ability. The author acknowledges the campaign is intended to reach moms who ignore danger signs, so we can imagine they probably don't research safe co-sleeping methods or consult with their pediatricians regarding this, and follow through on safe practices. You can be offended by messages from government offices (or any other entity) running campaigns for which you are not the target, but if we remove them, are we taking away a message someone else needs to hear? And I don't see support for this poster not helping some parents NOT as a cure-all solution, but maybe at least as a needed wake up call that something they are doing may put their child at risk. In addition, it looks like the baby in the poster is not in the position recommended by the pediatrician for safe co-sleeping, with its head on a pillow or at least a thick blanket.

Posted By: Julia | December 9, 2011 12:52 PM

I am a HUGE fan of co-sleeping. My daughter is not. She prefers the crib (at five months old. argh.).

My pediatrician freaked out when she heard we were co-sleeping, until I explained babygirl was in a co-sleeper attached to the bed. But I was really discouraged by her reaction. Pediatricians need to be well-informed and educated on this issue so they can educate their patients. You were responsible and unafraid to ask about the safe ways to do it, and your pediatrician gave you good advice. But a lot of parents are either afraid to ask, or will be given the answer, "Just don't do it." They will continue to do it and more babies will be endangered.

The thing I do not like about this campaign and some pediatricians' recommendations is that they don't inform parents about the CORRECT way to co-sleep. The reality is that a lot of parents are going to choose this option, and we are endangering children by keeping quiet about the safe way to do it.

Posted By: rachel @ even one sparrow | December 9, 2011 1:08 PM

Key to the SIDS/co-sleeping debate is to note that although almost 50% of the cases of SIDS were in a co-sleeping environment, that assumes that 50% were NOT- and were in their cribs, we assume with babies sleeping according to commonly accepted crib guidelines.
Tragically, it is clear that SIDS has no known cause and no failsafe way to prevent.
Most parents try their best to prevent in each sleeping situation, but sadly neither can guarantee.

Posted By: Sarah D | December 9, 2011 1:13 PM

"My pediatrician freaked out when she heard we were co-sleeping ... . I was really discouraged by her reaction."

Rachel, I am so sorry to hear about your suffering under the pediatrician's ignorance. Sometimes we need to fire our doctors.

Tim

Posted By: Tim | December 9, 2011 1:30 PM

We raised our three children on the opposite side of the coin, and they are now in their early 20s. From the day they came home from the hospital, they slept in their own crib in their own room. They actually never slept with us, and if they woke up at night, of course we would cuddle them and calm them down until they fell back asleep. We also set a bedtime that was adhered to every night, so that putting them to bed was never difficult, because it's all they knew, that their bedtime was set and regular, that they would be read a story, say their prayers, and go to sleep. I'm not going to criticize others though for doing otherwise, but I've seen some extreme examples, where the children can't go to sleep unless the parent lies there with them, trying to get them to sleep can literally take a couple of hours, and the kids miss out on being able to sleep over at friend's homes because they haven't learned to be able to calm down by themselves and fall asleep. I'm sure most don't fit into this extreme example though. I guess it's the "German" orderliness I was raised with, but we took the bottle away at age 1, they moved out of the crib when they turned 2, and they started swimming lessons at age 3. Everything went very smoothly, and we have three great kids we are very proud of. I believe it was for their benefit of course though, because they were always very welcome to stay over at other people's houses because they were polite and respectful, and there were no problems with falling asleep. My children are extremely loving and affectionate as well, so I don't think the loving, affectionate children are that way simply because they slept with their parents.

Posted By: Patricia | December 9, 2011 1:42 PM

Patricia wrote: "... we took the bottle away at age 1, they moved out of the crib when they turned 2, and they started swimming lessons at age 3." I suppose it's a matter of different strokes for different folks. (Sorry, couldn't resist the swim pun.)

It sounds like you have some wonderful children, Patricia, and that they have wonderful parents as well.

Tim

Posted By: Tim | December 9, 2011 1:55 PM

Thanks Tim, I was expecting a big slam (but not from you) about the way we raised them. But they are all happy, well-adjusted young adults, and all studying hard in college. We love them with all our hearts, and they're all doing well (but asking for a lot of prayers during finals next week).

Posted By: Patricia | December 9, 2011 2:53 PM

So is this really a case of "the problem doesn't really apply to me so I am going to take offense that others would dare have a problem I don't have and that might make me feel bad"?

As I understand the issues 1) There is a greater likelihood of SIDS among African Americans for unknown reasons. 2) There is a greater likelihood of SIDS among co-sleeping for unknown reasons. 3) A huge number of co-sleeping deaths (as many as 50% by some articles I have seen) are related to alcohol and drug consumption by the parent. 4) In many cases of co-sleeping among African American, poor families of Milwaukee, a significan reason for co-sleeping is poverty and lack of room or funding for a crib.

So this campaign is just not targeted toward the author and frankly, most readers of this blog. You can feel bad about it all you want, but it is a local campaign.

On the other hand, advertising is not going to do anything to amiliorate poverty, alcohol or drug abuse, or being African American. So I am also not sure that it will do much to solve the problem.

According to the city of Milwaukee's website, the African American infant mortality rate is 14.7 per 1000. This is only slightly above the average African American infant mortality rate in the us at 13.3. But it is way above the non-hispanic White rate in Milwaukee (5.9) and the US (2.4). The real disparity in Milwaukee is the White rate.

The majority of infant deaths are correlated with pre-mature births and/or low birth weight. Milwaukee says that half of their infant deaths are.

The issues that are really the problem are not co-sleeping, but medical care. This is a problem on both sides. Mother's with no pre-natal care have huge increase in infant mortality (both because the actual medical care and the social reality that is associated with not receiving pre-natal medical care.) But on the other side, medical care keeps many kids alive till birth or through the birth process in ways that were unimaginable 20 or 50 years ago.

This is already way too long. But I think the author just missed the boat. It is not really about her.

Posted By: Adam Shields | December 9, 2011 3:07 PM

"Now two prostitutes came to the king and stood before him. One of them said, 'My lord, this woman and I live in the same house. I had a baby while she was there with me. The third day after my child was born, this woman also had a baby. We were alone; there was no one in the house but the two of us. During the night this woman’s son died because she lay on him...'" (1 Kings 3:16-19)

The Bible warns against co-sleeping. Ignore at your own risk.

Posted By: Barry | December 9, 2011 10:51 PM

I think Adam Shields really hit on something-co-sleeping is an easy scapegoat for a problem with way too many variables and deeply-rooted causes that can't be easily resolved

I've read the news stories on these alleged co-sleeping deaths whenever I've been able to find them online (I don't live near Milwaukee) and all of them I've seen involve families not following the common sense "rules" of co-sleeping like the one Dr.Sears proposes. Tragic stories like drunk parents rolling on a baby in the couch are being counted towards these deceptive statistics.

Anyone who is interested in this should check out the post about it on PhDinParenting and check out the research of Notre Dame's mother-baby sleep lab.

One more interesting point (that Annie from PhDinParenting noticed first): pack n' plays like they are giving out are NOT considered safe places for babies to sleep according to the warning labels on them. Milwaukee's health dept is putting babies in danger with this campaign in my opinion!

Posted By: Crunchy Con Mommy | December 9, 2011 11:11 PM

Living within 50 miles of Milwaukee, hearing the stories of all the children dying from co-sleeping, is frequent. I especially heard a lot about it because I chose to co-sleep with my daughter until she was about 21 months old. I have read, very carefully, practices for safe co-sleeping. I got sick and tired of hearing how I shouldn't be doing this, look at all those children dying, etc. Well, did you look into the facts, people? Most, if not all, of those cases of infant death in Milwaukee were due to at least one of the people sleeping in the bed being intoxicated, or having had alcohol. That is NOT safe.

In fact, the whole SIDS thing related to co-sleeping is just not true. If a child stops breathing, which is what SIDS is, NOT suffocation, the mother is there to catch it. I know a person who was able to save her child's life because she knew instantly her child stopped breathing. If she were in another room, the child would have died. I knew my daughter's every move in her sleep. SIDS is NOT suffocation. It is Sudden Infant Death Syndrome. It would be called suffocation if they suffocated. A parent rolling on top of their child because they're consumed by alcohol is not SIDS either. Dying an unusual, not sure the reason death, is SIDS. It really bothers me that people mess up the terminology so much, that being a responsible person who practices co-sleeping, or rather, bed-sharing, safely, gets deemed a bad parent.

Posted By: Laurie | December 10, 2011 7:26 AM

I agree with the previous comment, by crunchy con mommy. There is a lot of confusion of causes going on here. Even the quoted statistics don't prove what they are cited to prove. A 51/49 % split between co-sleeping deaths and deaths in a crib, is pretty close to even. That is not a number which would lead you to conclude that being in the parents' bed was the cause of the deaths!

Back in the 1990's when I was in nursing school for my BSN, I researched this with the help of the librarian of the hospital I worked in. I reviewed all the studies of this issue which had been done at that time, which was six. Five of the studies showed that infants were SAFER from SIDS in bed with their mothers, because the infant's breathing synchronized with the mother's breathing. Have you read those stories of premature babies that were thought to be dead, or close to dead, so the mother put them in skin to skin contact just to be close to them one last time? I have read two, one about the boy of a set of twins, and one about a tiny preemie girl. That shows how powerful a mother's presence and touch is for a small infant.

The sixth study, in which more babies sleeping with their parents died was done in Australia, where people of European descent, mostly middle class, put their babies in cribs, but the indigenous population, mostly poor and often afflicted by alcoholism, slept with their babies. These confounding factors changed the results of the study.

The real conclusion is that your baby is more likely to die if you were unhealthy and not well nourished during your pregnancy, if you smoke, if you drink and take drugs, and if you don't breast feed. These factors all affect the general health and strength of the baby. On top of that you can put those few deaths which are not SIDS but which are actual suffocation by drugged and intoxicated parents.

Even now, no one knows what really causes SIDS. In the Bible, it is called, "overlying" because all women slept with their babies, as is the biological norm for human beings. When babies started sleeping alone in cribs, it was called "crib death" or in England, "cot death." I don't think co-sleeping was responsible for something called "crib death"!

I believe that there is another reason as well why the co-sleeping issue is taken up whenever there are infant deaths, and that is because it plays into some of our cultural issues. We have cultural issues about personal space. We have cultural issues about physical intimacy which is not sexual. We have cultural issues about the bed being for sex. Don't "go to bed with" and "sleep with" both mean "have sex with" in common parlance? We have cultural issues about breasts and breast feeding, when it is extended, because of the association with breasts and sexuality. When someone hears that half of infant deaths were associated with co-sleeping, (and half are not) these issues are what drives the conclusion that co-sleeping is responsible .

If Milwaukee wants to prevent infant deaths, the single most important thing they could do is to promote breast feeding! Stop smoking efforts for pregnant women and their partners would come second. Next after that would be to promote prenatal care, including ongoing diet counseling from a nutritionist. But these efforts would be expensive. How much cheaper it is to put up some dramatic posters which blame parents!

Full disclosure: I am the mother of nine children, all of whom slept with me as infants, sometimes with other children in the bed as well as my husband.

Susan Peterson

PS I don't want the woman above whose babies slept in a crib at stated times to feel I am criticizing her. She obviously felt strongly that that was the "right" way to raise them, and trying to do otherwise would not have worked for her. The most important factor for children emotionally is the love of their parents, for them, and for each other, and that matters more than any specific child raising practice.

Posted By: Susan Peterson | December 10, 2011 10:37 AM

While mostly I agree with Susan Peterson, statistics do matter. First, half of all deaths in Milwaukee were SIDS and not related to co-sleeping. Only 20% of deaths were related to co-sleeping and the rates of death were not much different from the rest of the country.

But we can understand something from statistics. (Not the following is an example and not real, so don't think I am quoting any study)

if statistics said that 50% of children die from peanut allergies and 50% do not, then you might believe that peanut allergies are not a big deal because half die from something else. Or you might believe that it is a huge deal because that is the largest cause of childhood death. The issues in that stat is that you don't know how many children have peanut allergies. So if 90 percent of kids have a peanut allergy, but it is only reponsible for 50 percent of the childhood deaths, then it is not a significant cause of deaths in comparison to the allergy. But if only 0.5% of kids have a peanut allergy, but that 0.5% of kids are responsible for 50% of deaths, then that very small segment has a huge chance of being a part of the childhood deaths.

So we need to note a couple things 1) The rates of death in Milwaukee are not much out of line than the rest of the country. I assume from the way that the info is reported that the SIDS deaths are not related to co-sleeping. Susan suggests that some of those SIDS deaths could have been reduced if there was an increase in co-sleeping (which may be true, but I don't know the extent of the potential increase. But maybe 2 or 3 kids a year might be saved by co-sleeping).

2) Without some additional information (like the rate of co-sleeping in Milwaukee, the rate of drug and alcohol related smothering deaths, rate of low birth weight deaths, etc.) There is just not enough information to really know whether or not co-sleeping has anything to do with the infant mortality rate in Milwaukee. Their Dept of Heath has suggested that it does. But that may because of news reporting, or because of actual statistical studies. (my guess is because of news, not real studies).

Posted By: Adam Shields | December 10, 2011 2:56 PM

Interesting discussion. The problem with Adam Shields' argument that this poster campaign is "not for you" (white women), is that the poster contains a picture of a white baby. So to tell people to see a white baby but think black, well, that just doesn't work. As a white expectant mother, I see that poster addressed to myself. I can't help identifying with it. And public health nurses and OBs all over NA, not just Milwaukee, instruct mothers not to co-sleep, regardless of race. A social stigma really has developed about co-sleeping. So I think the author and other commenters make a good point that this poster campaign at heart contributes to fear-mongering and social stigma surrounding co-sleeping. If certain groups of people really are more at risk to the dangers, then this campaign is ineffectual.

Posted By: Nadine | December 11, 2011 12:47 PM

@Adam Shields, Studies DO NOT SHOW that SIDS deaths are higher among cosleeping infants. That is patently false. SIDS does not have a known cause. As for SIDS deaths, the fact that approximately half were among cosleeping infants actually proves that cosleeping is NOT more dangerous than cribsleeping with regard to SIDS. If it were a cause of SIDS, then a vast majority would be among cosleeping infants. Your "issues" are falsities. I don't "feel bad." In fact, I feel GREAT about our cosleeping. I am angry that the campaign perpetuates a myth that is not supported by science. It isn't about me or the author; it is about being upset that parents are actually being MISeducated by the campaign when a far better use of the government's time and money would be accurate education.

@Barry, As for the bible warning against cosleeping, thank you for the laugh. The truth is that ALL babies coslept in that time. In fact, because the vast majority of families lived in one room, the family bed was the norm, and still is in the majority of the world where people are poor.

@Patricia, that's great! I don't think anyone is saying the cosleeping is better or that everyone should do it. What I'm saying is that it is a VALID parenting choice among many and that this campaign in not only factually wrong but harmful because it does nothing to educate parents about safe sleeping practices for both cosleeping and cribsleeping families.

Posted By: Robyn | December 12, 2011 10:47 AM

An interesting question is that if the co-sleeping deaths seem to be strongly linked to inebriation, then why isn't the government doing an anti-parenting while drunk campaign? This co-sleeping campaign looks like a straw man drawing attention away from the real problems.

Posted By: KSP | December 12, 2011 10:54 AM

The campaign is disturbing but eye opening. How many new mothers don't know about the dangers of co-sleeping with infants/newborns. I'm a very light sleeper so I don't think I would have had an issue. Those who are heavy sleepers need to think twice before letting a newborn sleep with them. There are other options. Bassinets can be set up next to your bed.

Posted By: Tina | December 12, 2011 2:49 PM

Had the ad been less shocking the conversation would not be taking place. Maybe it will help people think. Unfortunately the issue that may or may not be addressed in the city's campaign is how often the cosleeping trade goes occur in lower income families. I work in child welfare in New jersey and we see this issue alot. We end up providing furniture needed if necessary but sometimes it's not enough. So many other issues are related to this tragedy.

Posted By: Matteo | December 12, 2011 2:52 PM

@Robyn, I read some more and you are right SIDS does not seem to be related to SIDS according to the studies that I have seen. I agree with you about that. But I am nto sure about the second half of your statement. Because I have not seen any issues with the rate of co-sleeping. If only 10% of infants co-sleep, but 20% of the deaths are co-sleepers then it is concerning. If 50% of infants co-sleep but only 20% of the deaths are co-sleepers, then we should be advocating for co-sleeping.

The problem is that all the articles only focus on part of the question. There is not enough data in any of the articles I have seen to actually come to a reasonable conclusion. This is pseudo-science so far. There are too many correlations without any data to show causation (on either side). Which proves part of your point, that it should be considered a valid parenting choice unless it is actually shown to be problem with real data. My issue, is that by making it personal and 'about me' that it detracts from the actual policy discussion.

My guess is that this is really about some newspaper reporters that dug up some stats without any context and started writing. The way to counter that is not to dig up other stats without context and counter write, it is to provide real context and show where the problem is wrong.

Posted By: Adam Shields | December 12, 2011 2:52 PM

Human infants around the world throughout the ages have slept with their mothers. Unfortunately, if a parent is drunk or medicated, their awareness level is so decreased that they ought not to sleep with their little one anymore than they should be driving a car.

My daughter slept with us til she was 3. I was warned that she would develop sleeping issues and separation problems. She's 17 and very healthy and sleeps well. A poster like this to me as a young mom would have fueled those who already challenged my maternal instincts.

I agree with the poster who said that a better campaign would be to educate families about safe co-sleeping realizing that each family discovers what works for them with each child. My son slept with us for less than 6 months. He wanted his space! And he too has become a healthy sleeper. This ad does not appeal to the unique needs of each child, but characterizes families who co-sleep as irresponsible and reckless. That is the shame.

Posted By: Pam Hogeweide | December 12, 2011 3:49 PM

infants should be baptized so they can have saving faith in Jesus .And parents nor any one else can either add to or shorten the days God has determined for each of his creatures. And God is able to work out every thing for the good of those who love him,, even those he takes by some ones murder.

But like the first statement very few believe that God is such a big God and Is able to do such things any more..

Posted By: Robert | December 12, 2011 5:16 PM

@Adam Shields, good point re: statistics. However, the studies I have read have shown that cosleeping is not correlated with increased SIDS deaths. That knowledge is not from a newspaper article. It is from peer-reviewed journals.

Posted By: Robyn | December 12, 2011 5:33 PM

Yes, the ad was in poor taste.
When I was pregnant, at my first appointment, the ob handed me a booklet with tips for healthy pregnancy, from the state, that included "don't do illegal drugs, eat fruits and vegetables, don't smoke." Now, these would seem like standard elementary school health tips...but obviously not everyone cues into their "fierce and primal protective natures. The questions I heard from others around me at our baby care class enforced the lack of what I thought was common knowledge. I agree with that there should be a way to promote the same safety awareness without the shame factor.
Frankly, reading the responses here (and on mommy sites) has shown me "I'm going to ______ (or not)regardless of whatever statistic/article you throw at me". Fill in the blank with breastfeeding, formula feeding, homeschooling,public school,epidural, homebirth.....Can we stop being so defensive, and just be comfortable with our personally well researched decision?

Well, I'm a little burnt out regarding "how to raise your baby" discussion.

Posted By: Chris | December 13, 2011 3:22 PM

I would really urge everyone to look at the facts (i.e. peer-reviewed research articles) about the dangers of co-sleeping and SIDS. Putting the ad aside, it is very dangerous to co-sleep with your baby. For me, this isn't about "opinion"; it's about facts. I'm a little shocked that someone mentioned it isn't correlated and said he/she looked at peer-reviewed articles...because I did, too, and it was highly correlated. I'm not sure if these people are honestly stating that they found these articles (if so, would you mind sharing?) or if it's just a goal to spread this misinformation?

Posted By: Lynn | March 10, 2012 12:39 PM