Co-sleeping and bbc news. Irresponsible reporting?

[thedcbrokemybank]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39381265

This article on the BBC news apparently highlights the dangers of co-sleeping. However it reports on a poor woman whose baby apparently died from a brain injury at birth although the coroners report, apparently unfairly, states sudden death associated with co-sleeping. There is no clarification of the definition of co-sleeping. This lady accidently fell asleep on the sofa.
It highlights "dangers" but doesn't actually give any facts about what these dangers may be. They had an opportunity on giving out info on safe co-sleeping but chose instead to focus on someone else's suffering.
Lazy reporting from the BBC?

Here is some research for those who want to read it, from reliable sources ISIS and Unicef.

ISIS: www.isisonline.org.uk/hcp/where_babies_sleep/parents_bed/
www.isisonline.org.uk/where_babies_sleep/parents_bed/

Unicef: www.unicef.org.uk/babyfriendly/news-and-research/baby-friendly-research/infant-health-research/infant-health-research-bed-sharing-infant-sleep-and-sids/

I also stumbled across this article and it peed me off. Agree with figgy and other posters... the risk associated with falling asleep on the sofa with baby is suffocation, not SIDS. The baby died of SIDS - probably due to to sleep apnoea - so the fact that the mother slept with baby on the sofa (whilst not ideal) had no bearing in this case. The article also seems to suggest that cosleeping is dangerous without providing a definition of cosleeping - or pointing readers to good guidance. Sloppy. Hate to say it but I think the mirror article is better: www.google.co.uk/amp/www.mirror.co.uk/news/real-life-stories/heartbroken-mum-recounts-losing-baby-6287952.amp. It doesn't imply blame on the mothers part when there was nothing she could have realistically done in this situation to prevent the tragic outcome

I agree that the article gave mixed and misleading information.
The brain injury and falling asleep on the sofa are very different issues to appropriate and planned co sleeping.
Poor woman though.

I recall a sort of mirror-image article in the Fail about a tragic case in the US, where a mother had fallen asleep on a chair while breastfeeding her baby after drinking. It was reported as "baby dies because mother drank and breastfed", rather than "baby sadly suffocated because mother fell asleep after drinking", i.e. the outcome would have been the same had the mother been giving a bottle. Unfortunately "baby dies because woman does WRONG THING" makes better copy than "baby dies tragically because of general crappy circumstances that probably couldn't have been avoided". (Yes, I know the woman I just mentioned wasn't following guidelines, but presumably she didn't intend to fall asleep, and breastfeeding had absolutely nothing to do with it. The article strongly implied that she POISONED her baby with her BOOZY BREASTMILK, which was just ridiculous.)

As others have said, many co-sleeping deaths are not as a result of co-sleeping itself but as a result of suffocation or overheating which can be avoided if the mother follows the guidelines correctly. The stats regarding SIDS deaths associated with co-sleeping are more problematic. Maybe the mothers were bedsharing because their baby was unsettled that night or seemed unwell or just wasn't right? Couldn't this point to the tiny increase in risk from bedsharing?

I had a tongue tied baby who wanted to feed for hours and would scream when put in a cot. I started bedsharing (safely) when she was three weeks old after accidentally falling asleep breastfeeding her in a chair. I hadn't slept more than 45 minutes continually since she was born. I think the risks of bedsharing for me were lower than the alternative and the benefits to my mental health and therefore her well-being were immeasurable.

GUnpowder, you could be right. But years ago I found a research paper on the dangers of co-sleeping and SIDS and it quite clearly included 1 baby falling out of bed, at least 2 being rolled on and a couple more who suffocated - these were included in the SIDS stats, even though they're not actual SIDS. I don't know now where I found it (it was 2007/8 I was looking) and doubt I could find it again for trying, but that was definitely what it said, which I found highly dubious.

Don't know if they've cleaned up their act stats-wise now, but I somehow doubt it - there's an agenda against co-sleeping because, as someone else said, they have to work to the lowest common denominator and assume everyone is completely stupid and will do the wrong thing (drink, smoke, bedshare with partner as well, use quilts, get baby too hot, allow covers to go over baby etc.)

Interesting Thumbwitch. Yes the stats are so muddy, I suppose in part because cot death is now (thankfully) relatively rare.

This bmj study is interesting and attempts to unpick the cosleeping stats. Interestingly it suggests swaddling could be a risk factor. But by far the greatest risk is from parental (particularly maternal) alcohol consumption and then bedsharing.

This bit from the conclusion makes me think OP YANBU. It is irresponsible journalism. (Not even going to think about the horrendous (unsurprising) example from the Mail.)

'Based on evidence from research into SIDS it is questionable whether advice to avoid bed sharing is generalisable and whether such a simplistic approach would do no harm. Parents of young infants need to feed them during the night, sometimes several times, and if we demonise the parents’ bed we may be in danger of the sofa being chosen. A better approach may be to warn parents of the specific circumstances that put infants at risk.'

To clarify I meant bedsharing following paternal consumption of alcohol. Sorry.