To think that if midwives are going to be on national TV...

[NiceCupOfTeaAndASitDown]

They should get their facts straight?!

Watching "The Midwives: Bringing Home Baby" and a midwife just told a couple that most babies who die of SIDS don't die in cots, "most babies die of SIDS because of bed-sharing, they get wedged" - she's talking about unsafe bed-sharing for a start (isn't she?!) ... And getting wedged would cause death by suffocation wouldn't it?!

So am I wrong in thinking that the 'info' she's giving is incorrect? And AIBU to think that facts should be checked before 'factual' programmes are allowed to air?

coolaschmoola, the MW on the programme was the one who said "most babies who die are cosleeping"

It was cools who said 'she's not wrong' about what the midwife said. I think she is wrong to state that most babies who die from SIDS do so because they bed share . Sorry for the confusion.

Completely agree. The thing is, bed sharing does seem to give a very slightly higher risk (and a MUCH higher risk in certain circumstances) of an unlikely event happening. Therefore the generic advice is don't do it, and you can understand why it isn't recommended. It irritates me too when HCPs then say things like bedsharing causes all cases of SIDS which is just rubbish.

I have had a cot death in the family and have co-slept by the way.

Bed sharing is something that is done on occasion by at least 60% of new parents.

And it's more likely to happen when a baby is already unwell and won't settle in its cot.

It doesn't surprise me one bit that babies appear to be more likely to die while co-sleeping given this, and the fact that the vast majority of parents haven't been shown how to make it safer.

I wonder about the editing and also the language barrier problem. Was the midwife not going into detail as there did seem to be communication problems so maybe shE was keeping it basic?

It would be nice if cot death prevention info leaflets were provided in all languages. I know in theory such leaflets should be available, I also know in practice they often aren't.

Happy- that's why I explained in my post it was subjective and I wasn't preaching - pls don't jump on me I tried my best to be diplomatic

Not jumping on you at all crack. Just saying that bf and cosleeping is not safer as such than ff/cosleeping, or at least the evidence doesn't seem to suggest that, but bf is slightly protective.

The programme editors etc. should check any facts presented in their programme - especially on such an important issue (and any health/safety related advice)

Quoting this sort of thinking, especially if it's not accurate, could scare many safely co-sleeping mothers un-necessarily. Ours co-slept with us and it was a lovely and helpful thing to do. The advice I read at the time said it was no more dangerous and possibly safer due to breathing regulation in the baby IIRC
(I think being careful about over-heating is probably important)
Good night all. Sleep well - don't let the bed bugs bite x

Ive read plenty - I was quite hysterical about SIDS when dd was little. I do recall that sids on bf babies is very unusual (even then it's hard to gauge whether they were ebf or partially bf). Perhaps the connection between ff and co sleeping is ropey. Bf mothers/babies very likely to co sleep though and the frequent waking of bf babies has also been mentioned as a protective factor in the past.

Going back to the programme - with all the editing etc I still think they should have mentioned smoking being the biggest risk of sids

There didn't seem to be language issues with that particular family, it was an earlier family where the mother didn't seem to speak any English.

I was nervous too (though not excessively so) as my granny had, many years ago, lost her first baby to SIDS. So sad But we still co-slept as advice I had said this was OK.

Well as I said earlier, bf is slightly protective against SIDS so not quite the same thing. SIDS in itself is very unusual.

I'm not sure what you mean by the connection between cosleeping and ff is ropey? Do you mean people who ff don't cosleep? I don't quite understand what you are saying.

The review of the evidence I posted earlier (and remember you need a review here as individual studies generally have several problems with them) seems to indicate that bf is slightly protective, co-sleeping if a smoker is very risky, cosleeping done unsafely is risky, cosleeping done in first three months slightly higher risk, cosleeping after that very slightly higher risk...of an unlikely event.

More research may find otherwise but that is what the evidence seems to say just now.

Ah ok, really mustn't MN and watch tv at the same time. Can't keep track!

As I understood it from several sources, bf lowers the risk of SIDS by 60-70% depending whether it's ebf or partial bf - that's more than a slightly protective factor.
I think Dr Sprott's SIDS theories are interesting too about how ff messes up gut flora and inhibits immunity which may he a cause of SIDS.

Can you please name your several sources?

The review I posted earlier (and it's by FSID who's sole aim is to reduce cot death) states "Several published studies, but not all, have found that breastfeeding protects against the risk of SIDS. One meta-analysis of 23
reports98 concluded that formula fed infants were more than twice as likely to die from SIDS than breastfed infants with an adjusted odds ratio of 2.11 (95% CI 1.66-2.68)." Twice as likely sounds a lot, but when you look at the figures with such low numbers of deaths it actually isn't that high a number. To state as you did that means that bf babies hardly ever die from SIDS isn't true by the evidence that I have seen. (Also it seems that bf for any length of time is protective so not sure how that fits with your gut theory).

Smoking (particularly large amounts) is one of the biggest risk factors. Others are sleeping position, maternal age, low birth weight and socioeconomic status as I've already said. Since the back to sleep campaign cot deaths have reduced by 80%.

Maybe mumsnet should ask FSID to do a webchat to answer some of these questions? I've seen a lot of "facts" stated over the years about cot death on here, that just aren't true. I saw one person quite confidently state that smoking wasn't a risk factor because she bf, and on this thread that bf babies don't die from SIDS.

it was awful

to just steam in and tell them about SIDS

they looked fucked off, and rightly so

that whole programme depressed me, not cos of the Midwives just due to the general shiteness of poverty and suchlike

if this is true, why have sids rates continually gone down as co-sleeping has become more and more popular? Doesn't make sense.

I do NOT buy that SIDS is about co-sleeping

there is a,ink between BF and co-sleeping being safer down to the positioning and how the mother has the baby next to her

sadly, SIDS is closely linked to socioeconomic factors, in the main

Oh for Fucks sake how

Happy - is anyone else allowed to know anything about SIDS or is it just you?

Co sleeping is safe if it is done properly. Part of that means not smoking, drug taking, drinking alcohol etc. Baby not in the middle between 2 parents as they are more likely to get squashed. My mid wife said that you should be exclusively breast feeding as well although I appreciate that might upset some. She said that she watched a film of mothers and babies sleeping, where the rhythm of movement between the two together was very natural and safe. She also said that if done properly then it can actually reduce the risk of sids, as the breathing of the mother close to the baby can kickstart the baby into breathing again if they stop. I used to sleep wrapped in a sheet, whilst dc had a thick sleep suit. I had my legs tucked underneath them and my arm circling the top. You don't tend to fall into a very deep sleep when co sleeping properly. Dc were plenty warm enough, safe, and were able to feed when they needed to. I hate misinformation about something that can actually be beneficial to both mother and baby. The guidelines are put out there saying not to do it is a one size fits all, if people did it properly then there would be no increased risk at all.

startail

what that at me?

its well know fact that unfortunately there is a significant link between SID / families that are socioeconomically disadvantaged

and yes, of course it also tragically occurs for familes that are better off too

but the link is there

my dd died of SIDS at 10 weeks. She was exbf, we don't smoke, don't co sleep and don't take drugs.
The whole point of SIDS is that it's unexplained. Really annoys me when people refer to suffocation as cot death. Believe me, the post mortem is horrifically thorough and suffocation and "wedging" shows up and is cited as cause of death.
A "very helpful" policeman explained the signs that would be looked for regarding suffocation.
Whilst on the subject, I can't understand why anyone who can afford an apnoea monitor would not get one. Having been through this I would prefer to be alerted immediately there was a problem, rather than fining out 5 hours late.
I know a lot of people say you get false alarms, but with our ds we only got about 4 false alarms and TBH you're up and down with a small baby so many times in the night it made no difference in terms of sleeping.

moogster

I am just so sorry for your loss

I was literally about to say I hate arguing on such a sensitive topic

and you came into thread

again, sorry if anything in here (and harsh AIBU opinons) have affected you in any way

may she rest in peace