to think that back sleeping guidelines are taking the piss

[extrastrongnosugar]

on my third baby here, just got him fresh from the hospital and its day four. and night four with 1-2hr sleep totals for me. its 3am now and i had 45min so far. hes fast asleep after nursing on me but once i lay him to bed, nicely swaddled with rolled up tetras on the side for a lovely huggy feeling, he inevitably wakes up and starts crying. i am now rembembering that with number 2 i didnt even try. am just reading up on the guidelines again and tgey basically admit the reason back sleeping prevents infant death sybdrome is because it prevents deep sleep and that most babys prefer to sleep on their belly. i love it that they recommend back sleeping until year one, completely oblivious to the fact that a baby that wont sleep on its back will sleep on the mother - which is much riskier and also nice for pretending a person can go a year without sleep and not become homicidal. AIBU to think back sleeping is completely impractical advice that doesnt take into account other risk factors and follow a kind of stupid circular logic? i have another suggestion: if deep sleep is so dangerous lets just all wake up our babies every hour - at least that way well get a full hours sleep now and then!

Nearly 25 years ago my first DD died of SIDS. I already had 2 DS's who had slept quite happily front, side, back etc. My DD was on her front when she died.
As a pp said, since the guidelines for 'back to sleep' came in deaths have fallen greatly.
Obviously all babies are different and sleep deprivation is terrible and affects every part of your life. I had my DS3 four years after my DD died, had a breathing monitor from the hospital on him and one under his mattress and still didn't sleep properly for a year. It was an awful time and still can be.
When I had DD2 14 years ago I had become much less paranoid and she was a difficult sleeper with silent reflux but I still followed 'feet to foot' and back sleeping.
Obviously as babies become more mobile them turning on their front is quite common and not necessary to turn them back (though I would) but i really would recommend back sleeping.
I'm not saying this to frighten you OP, just to say that my child was one of those statistics and it is completely life changing and something that will never go away.

OP where did you find info that back sleeping for babies prevents deep sleep? That's the first I've ever heard that! I followed the sleeping guidelines with DS and we never had any problems, he slept solidly for 3 hours then woke for a feed then back to sleep (deeply) for another 3.

As a PP suggested, have you considered silent reflux? I would speak to GP/HV, but would also get your partner to help so you can try and get some sleep.

Try propping up the end of the cot a little? My DS absolutely hated lying flat and did a really loud grunting thing. Sticking books under one end of the crib did help.

We used the angel care monitor and snuza baby alarm. DS slept on his side since birth. It was the only way he'd sleep. The second he could roll we just used the angel care movement monitor.

If we tried to put him on his back he'd lose his shit in moments and would take ages to settle down again.

I get why they use them but I'd be more scared of a baby choking on vomit on their back, than them rolling face forwards on to a totally breathable mattress in an empty cot. But that's just me 🤷🏼‍♀️

Common sense with risks goes a long way to keeping your own sanity during those early few months.

@angieloumc my identical twin died in 1986 from Sids and she was sleeping on her back. They now believe it's to do with their ability to properly regulate their temperature and possibly exposure to certain substances/chemicals.

The 'back' part of the safe sleep guidelines are pointless if you have a safe and fully breathable cot mattress and nothing they can suffocate on. With todays mattresses they could bury their face in it and still reathe fine. Feet to foot also isnt relevant anymore if you use sleep bags.

The death rates have fallen more in line with improved manufacturing guidelines, safety measures for furniture and what not to put in a cot at that age, and maintaining proper and consistent room tempartures.

Angelcare monitors and the new body/hr monitors that attach to their feet eliminate the risks even further.

thats not even slightly true. It's not and has never been about mattress quality.

Whilst I agree that sometimes back sleeping doesn't work out, I detest the line "well mine were fine" - Some people still use cot bumpers because of this stupid, naive line.

If it is reflux, the lullaby trust acknowledges this could be a cause for variation from their guidelines so if it continues then definitely see your doctor

I am a midwife and have just gone to the latest safe sleep training, so I can give you exact details about all the SUDI deaths ("Sudden unexpected death in infancy") in the country I am living and working.

Of all the babies younger than 4 months dead by SUDI:
Sleeping on their back: 5%
Sleeping on their side: 31%
Sleeping on their front: 64%

I wish people would pay attention to this sort of thing rather than shrugging it off with "well my bubz was fine hun".

OP, YABVVVU. I doubt many of the parents whose babies died while sleeping on their tummies would say it was all worth it because they got slightly more sleep Your baby can't assess the information and make a decision to keep themselves safe - they need you to do that for them.

There's no evidence that AngelCare monitors do anything to prevent SIDS. If there was, you can guarantee it would state that very clearly on the packaging - it would be a goldmine! Unfortunately, some people use it as an excuse to put their baby at risk - i.e. "I smoke, but it doesn't matter because I have an AngelCare monitor to balance it out." That's not how it works!

Does anyone know the stance on what happens when they start rolling? My DD is 5 months and we always slept her on her back but she's started rolling into her side and front and it's terrified me! I know how important the back to sleep is but how can you stop it when they move themselves?

You can't stop them moving once they have learned to roll, any more than you can stop yourself moving in your sleep.

AlphaBravo
All the things you mention are fantastic inventions which do stop accidental suffocation but not SIDS.
Baby’s who die from SIDS don’t suffocate, they stop breathing because they are sleeping too deeply.

No of course Alpha I understand all that and I wasn't suggesting the use of 'feet to foot' regime nowadays, just saying what I followed for that DD in 2004, I'm well aware of current guidelines.
I also wasn't suggesting that all children who die from SIDS do so while on their fronts, just what happened to me.
As pp said babies who die from SIDS don't suffocate.

No of course Alpha I understand all that and I wasn't suggesting the use of 'feet to foot' regime nowadays, just saying what I followed for that DD in 2004, I'm well aware of current guidelines.
I also wasn't suggesting that all children who die from SIDS do so while on their fronts, just what happened to me.
As pp said babies who die from SIDS don't suffocate.

Ah he's still so tiny at day4. They must be as bewildered by birth and the outside world as we are. DD was exactly the same. She would only sleep on me. I know this is another evil thing but what about a dummy? This helper DD settle in her own basket on her back

When I had mine it was side sleeping I believe because if they brought up milk it trickled out of their mouths! Or that was what I was told. I have noticed a lot of children with flat heads nowadays

Read up on infant sleep cycles, it helped me understand when to move an infant once asleep. It's interesting as well!
I wouldn't put an infant on their front, if they can turn around then fine, their choice, until then it is back or side (when co-sleeping and breastfeeding).

YABU. The back to sleep campaign has drastically reduced SIDS in this country. It’s not even worth the risk. BS about babies ‘preferring’ to sleep on their front too, the only reason people used to do that was to prevent choking on vomit.

Third baby and you are on day four - then surely you should know it is perfectly normal they don't want to be put down yet!

My mum was told to sleep me on my front to avoid choking on vomit, we are told to sleep babies on backs for numerous reasons. The one that always stuck with me was that heat escapes babies through their stomachs so there is less risk of them overheating if on their backs, that was enough for me to go with it. It won't be right for all babies but at day 4 I think it would be unreasonable not to try.

Good luck and have a Double Decker to go with the coffee that was what got me through!

My two sleep on their left side due to reflux. This is on the advice of the paediatrician.

Yanbu to bu about this. I have so much sympathy and remember (actually still feel slightly enraged) by the blithe assumption that you just pop the baby on back, whilst they’re drowsy but awake and voila, sleeping baby. that feels as remote as levitating baby above cot.

Turns out our babe had reflux. I don’t think he lay on a flat surface until he was 5 months. He slept on me for a large part of those early months. I couldn’t do co- sleeping following the safe sleep guidelines because our bed is flat, and that was the issue. Wedges don’t comply with safe sleep either, so we just had a tilted cot or a semi upright me. I agree with other posters that it can feel very desperate and lonely when all you get is the guidelines repeated at you, with a baby that just won’t go there. In the end I decided that the risk of sleep deprived care giver was equal to him spending half the night on me and made my peace with it.

Try not to be too distressed by the conflict. There’s some suggestions on the thread that may help. I hope you get some sleep soon with peace of mind for babe.

Also can anyone explain why angelcare monitor mats don’t help to prevent sids and are not recommended. I was told this by a sids charity when thinking of buying one for DS3. Don’t monitor mats alert you quickly that there’s a problem, thus giving you a fighting chance to help baby? And why was my friend who nearly lost her first baby, issued with one by the hospital, if they are so useless?

I thought it was that they basically alerted you when it was too late, and could lead to people not following safe sleep guidelines (eg being in the same room) as they think the monitor does the same job. They also will have false alarms leading to complete parental breakdown (I had such things !)

I think there are various reasons why the monitors aren’t recommended. Evidence shows that in countries where monitors are used as standard, SIDS rates haven’t fallen.

They do not detect "obstructive apnoea", where breathing movements continue but an obstruction in the windpipe prevents any oxygen reaching the baby's lungs. And the alarm may be prevented from going off when it should, by other body movements unrelated to breathing.

They are thought to create a false sense of security, so (some) parents don’t then take other precautions such as placing baby on back, sleeping in same room, not smoking, etc which are actually shown to reduce SIDS risk as they think they can use the monitor instead.

I think possibly if you are trained in infant resuscitation you may get a chance to save a baby from another type of medical/breathing problem but not it’s not thought that you can save from SIDS by using a monitor.

I think if a baby has a medical condition that may affect their breathing, the hospital may issue for this reason.

Yes I think once a baby stops breathing and the alarm goes off it's too late, so they can provide reassurance but they can't actually prevent SIDS.

I had an Amby nest for DD 10 years ago, do they not do those anymore? That was a godsend to me and she was a wonderful sleeper. Maybe they're dangerous now...

I've always followed back to sleep, my son is 21 and the advice came out long before that - love to Ann Diamond. Son just liked his food and kip - nothing changed!