Page 10 | To think we try and encourage babies to be independent too soon?

Botw1 · 23/04/2023 00:50

Ugh.

technically you're right.

So annoying

No. I'm just right

@Peppadog

whats your agenda? The risk of bedsharing isn't just sids. It's also suffocation

The Japan thing is also misinformation

They record sids and suffocation infant deaths differently.

They actually don't have lower suds deaths than anywhere else

Of course infant mortality is a biological and evolutionary norm.
It happens to every living thing. Disease and infection are also biological norms

Chocolatesandroses · 23/04/2023 00:54

Every does things differently and all babies are different . We do what is best for us and our kids at the time . When I had my children I was told not to co sleep because of cot death etc was safer for baby to sleep on their own . I was also advised to sleep train my dd as she was a terrible sleeper etc this is what worked for us but may not work for others . I always use to have comments about my kids going to bed at 9 as this classed as too late but it’s what worked for my children . I used to feel like inferior when my dd was born but now I just think my children are safe and Happy I don’t worry about others and what they do

Ottersmith · 23/04/2023 01:14

SouthLondonMum22 · 23/04/2023 00:20

Some babies sleep through by that age, especially if they are formula fed.

Mine started sleeping through at 8 weeks.

Show quote history

How do you know they were sleeping through? High chance they were waking up but staying quiet.

Peppadog · 23/04/2023 08:11

@botw incorrect, they have changed how that is recorded now, they do have lower SIDS deaths.
And when you actually think sensibly about it, it would make sense right? We know that room sharing is a protective factor against SIDS, absolutely no-one is arguing that. So it's logical that the baby would need to be pretty close in the room to achieve that benefit because it's based on breath and heartbeat, so what they are really recommending is that your baby sleeps CLOSE to you.

So maybe a side crib or cot next to the bed supports that, fine, but actually that isn't often enough security for the baby, which is why many cry and scream every time they are put back, so this leads to women keep putting them back and picking them up and occasionally falling asleep with them unsafely in the bed. I believe 60% admit to co sleeping, even if unintentionally.
If a mattress is firm, with no loose bedding and you don't drink/smoke then you eliminate the other risks and you achieve the gain of being close.

My agenda is that many many women are being told that bed sharing increases SIDS and they are suffering as a result. In fact many babies are dying because mothers are so exhausted and they are trying to feed in chairs and sofas to wake themselves up and given misinformation by health workers. 40% of women admit to falling asleep accidentally at least once in a chair or sofa! They are also being encouraged to use techniques like CIO in order to get sleep because their baby doesn't want to be left in their cot, madness.

The fact is, cot sleeping is safe. If the baby is happy and settled and it's what the mother wants, fine! I totally support that, but so is bed sharing when done correctly and all the actual evidence points to that.

Your point about infant mortality is completely irrelevant. A baby has evolved to want to be close to its mother for survival, it has developed a system where feeling her breath INCREASES survival, how amazing when we actually think about it. What on earth has infant mortality being 'normal' got to do with it.

CatCake · 23/04/2023 09:59

Botw1 · 22/04/2023 21:21

@Porridgeislife

I'd say that something that carries risk is unsafe, yes.

@Peppadog

Planned co sleeping is less risky than unplanned for sure.

It's not safer than cot sleeping though

Absolutely people should make their own risk assessment based on the actual evidence

You cant do that if you won't acknowledge the risk or evidence at all

Oh for goodness' sake, PLANNED co-sleeping IS acknowledging the risks, because in planning for co-sleeping, rather than just bringing them in ad hoc, you are mitigating the risks.

This hysteria around co-sleeping is silly. Nobody's judging you for putting your baby in a cot and persisting with that even if it gets hard - that's your informed choice. Stop judging other people or telling them they're ill-informed / ignoring the research if they make a different, informed choice from your own.

Your choice isn't better than anyone else's. Research is there to help people make informed choices, not to force everyone down a path that doesn't work for them. Many, many cultures co-sleep - it's a perfectly valid choice. You don't agree, and that's your prerogative, but it isn't your prerogative to tell everyone who doesn't agree with you that they're wrong. You're not wrong - neither are co-sleepers.

CatCake · 23/04/2023 10:01

And @Botw1 - something that carries risk is unsafe? There's a risk your baby will choke when they eat - should they stop? There's a risk your child will get bitten by a dog at the park - should you not go? There are risks involved in almost everything we do. All any of us can do is make well-informed choices that work the best on balance for our families.

CatCake · 23/04/2023 10:02

Peppadog · 23/04/2023 08:11

@botw incorrect, they have changed how that is recorded now, they do have lower SIDS deaths.
And when you actually think sensibly about it, it would make sense right? We know that room sharing is a protective factor against SIDS, absolutely no-one is arguing that. So it's logical that the baby would need to be pretty close in the room to achieve that benefit because it's based on breath and heartbeat, so what they are really recommending is that your baby sleeps CLOSE to you.

So maybe a side crib or cot next to the bed supports that, fine, but actually that isn't often enough security for the baby, which is why many cry and scream every time they are put back, so this leads to women keep putting them back and picking them up and occasionally falling asleep with them unsafely in the bed. I believe 60% admit to co sleeping, even if unintentionally.
If a mattress is firm, with no loose bedding and you don't drink/smoke then you eliminate the other risks and you achieve the gain of being close.

My agenda is that many many women are being told that bed sharing increases SIDS and they are suffering as a result. In fact many babies are dying because mothers are so exhausted and they are trying to feed in chairs and sofas to wake themselves up and given misinformation by health workers. 40% of women admit to falling asleep accidentally at least once in a chair or sofa! They are also being encouraged to use techniques like CIO in order to get sleep because their baby doesn't want to be left in their cot, madness.

The fact is, cot sleeping is safe. If the baby is happy and settled and it's what the mother wants, fine! I totally support that, but so is bed sharing when done correctly and all the actual evidence points to that.

Your point about infant mortality is completely irrelevant. A baby has evolved to want to be close to its mother for survival, it has developed a system where feeling her breath INCREASES survival, how amazing when we actually think about it. What on earth has infant mortality being 'normal' got to do with it.

All 100% accurate from someone who has taken the time to read ALL the research and make their own, informed choice, not just the one bit of research that validates her decision.

Blossomtoes · 23/04/2023 10:06

Ottersmith · 23/04/2023 01:14

How do you know they were sleeping through? High chance they were waking up but staying quiet.

Show quote history

In which case they were fine. Distressed babies cry.

Botw1 · 23/04/2023 10:08

@CatCake

I havent judged anyone. I haven't said co sleeping is wrong.

I've said it's not safe. I've said that the safest place for a baby to sleep is its own bare cot. On it's back, feet to foot.

The only 'hysteria' I can see is from defensive co sleepers who absolutely do deny the increased risk.

As you rightly say, everis entitled to their own risk assessments and choice. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

At least mine is based on the actual evidence

Wanderingowl · 23/04/2023 10:08

00100001 · 22/04/2023 15:16

There's not a chance a 18mo th old was independently using the toilet all day on their own without being prompted/taken by adults and having no accidents.

Show quote history

Yes there is. It is the absolute norm in my family. My DS literally poo'd twice in a nappy after 6.5 months. They were both just before 9mo when we were visiting MIL who had just been given 4 months to live and clearly his response to the emotional state of the people around him. He came out of nappies completely by 15 months. As did I and my DBs. Babies will choose not to soil themselves if they know they don't have to.

CatCake · 23/04/2023 10:11

@botw1 it's based on one finding, which is that the safest place for babies to sleep is in their bare cot. Nobody disagrees with you.

That doesn't make planned co-sleeping unsafe. There's research for that, too.

Stop saying it's unsafe. It isn't. Stop calling those who are defending their position to co-sleep deniers of risk. They're not. The risks of co-sleeping are out there for everyone to see and for everyone to mitigate.

You're ignoring the "actual evidence" posters are providing, which tell you the statistical likelihood of SIDs during SAFE co-sleeping.

Our choices are also based on "actual evidence."

Botw1 · 23/04/2023 10:18

@CatCake

For the millionth time, it's not about SIDs and it's not based on 1 piece of evidence. I've read loads in years of these debates, including the stats on so called safe bed sharing.

If you as a parent feel you have mitigated the risk of SIDs and suffocation and feel you can bed share safely, after proper research, then great. That is your risk assessment to make.

I dont agree you can because the research shows equavically that the safest place is in a cot.

But you can ignore me. I have no relevance to your decision.

I won't however change my opinion or shut up because you don't like it.

You sound like a child having a temper tantrum because you're not getting your own way

Fandabedodgy · 23/04/2023 10:20

You are being just as judgmental of others as you perceive them to be of you.

Hugasauras · 23/04/2023 10:22

Weird how it's only cosleeping that generates this level of ire on here. We also know it's safest for babies to be breastfed and for children to travel rear-facing in the car for far longer than the minimum legislation, yet people fall over themselves to declare 'fed is best!' at the first hint of breastfeeding not being plain sailing and happily turn their tiny babies to face forward at 9mo and think people who ERF are some sort of crunchy weirdos. But cosleeping REALLY gets under people's skins for some reason. It's interesting.

Botw1 · 23/04/2023 10:26

@Hugasauras

Bm is better than fm. Erf is safer (5×?)than ff.

Facts are facts

CatCake · 23/04/2023 12:30

Botw1 · 23/04/2023 10:18

@CatCake

For the millionth time, it's not about SIDs and it's not based on 1 piece of evidence. I've read loads in years of these debates, including the stats on so called safe bed sharing.

If you as a parent feel you have mitigated the risk of SIDs and suffocation and feel you can bed share safely, after proper research, then great. That is your risk assessment to make.

I dont agree you can because the research shows equavically that the safest place is in a cot.

But you can ignore me. I have no relevance to your decision.

I won't however change my opinion or shut up because you don't like it.

You sound like a child having a temper tantrum because you're not getting your own way

Pot kettle black, much. 😂

You're extremely rude. I've made clear your choice is your choice, without accusing you of acting like a child.

Also, the word meant to use is "unequivocally." HTH.

Botw1 · 23/04/2023 12:33

@CatCake

🤣

aSofaNearYou · 23/04/2023 13:11

As a mum who happily spoon feeds, co-sleeps and rocks my baby to sleep, it is so annoying hearing these comments because it's like these mums think they're superior.

NRTFT, but on the flip side mothers such as yourself often view themselves as superior, too. It's about perspective. There are holier than thou people on both sides.

SouthLondonMum22 · 23/04/2023 13:30

Ottersmith · 23/04/2023 01:14

How do you know they were sleeping through? High chance they were waking up but staying quiet.

Show quote history

He can self settle so it’s possible that he wakes briefly before drifting off again.

If something is wrong, he cries.

Peppadog · 23/04/2023 15:26

Debating with @Botw1
Bowt1 - I've seen this evidence
Other poster - yes I realise that but if you interrogate the evidence then it actually says this
Bowt1 - yeah but my evidence says this
Other poster - yes yes I realise that but actually on closer inspection the evidence looks like this...
Bowt1 - I don't agree with you, stop having a tantrum

At least we can all agree to disagree!!

Hardbackwriter · 23/04/2023 15:36

Hugasauras · 23/04/2023 10:22

Weird how it's only cosleeping that generates this level of ire on here. We also know it's safest for babies to be breastfed and for children to travel rear-facing in the car for far longer than the minimum legislation, yet people fall over themselves to declare 'fed is best!' at the first hint of breastfeeding not being plain sailing and happily turn their tiny babies to face forward at 9mo and think people who ERF are some sort of crunchy weirdos. But cosleeping REALLY gets under people's skins for some reason. It's interesting.

I really disagree! The pendulum has swung a bit towards 'fed is best' but the ERF posts is always an absolute festival of people smugly declaring that they must just love their child more and that's why they don't want them decapitated (it also normally reveals how poor most people's grasp of risk is). I have a theory that the car seat thing invites some of the most extreme stuff because it's the only case where you can literally buy superiority.

Botw1 · 23/04/2023 16:10

@Peppadog

Actually it's more like

Botw1 the evidence states x

Defensivecosleepers how dare you!!! You take that back right now and don't ever say it again!!! Stop saying it right now!! I dont want to hear it and will just make up my own evidence that ignores the actual evidence because I dont want to have to listen. So you stop it right now! I made my choice and I dont want anyone to be allowed to disagree!!

Botw1 alrighty then

🤣🤣

KnittedCardi · 23/04/2023 16:14

Wanderingowl · 23/04/2023 10:08

Yes there is. It is the absolute norm in my family. My DS literally poo'd twice in a nappy after 6.5 months. They were both just before 9mo when we were visiting MIL who had just been given 4 months to live and clearly his response to the emotional state of the people around him. He came out of nappies completely by 15 months. As did I and my DBs. Babies will choose not to soil themselves if they know they don't have to.

Show quote history

Agreed. DD was potty trained in the summer of her first birthday. July baby. She was clean and dry during the day within a couple of weeks. Yes, I prompted her after breakfast, before going out, after eating and drinking. But it worked and saved a fortune in nappies. It's why we (as adults) always go for a pee before leaving the house, or before bed, even if we don't need to, it's learned behaviour. She wasn't dry at night, until much later though. I had to pick her up asleep, put her on the loo, she peed, and I took her back to bed, still asleep!

CatCake · 23/04/2023 16:24

@Botw1 Your sense of superiority is really misplaced. Here's how it actually goes:

Botw1: here's a statement drawn from research: the safest place for a baby to sleep is in its bare cot. Oh, also, co-sleeping is categorically unsafe. Anything with risks associated is categorically unsafe.

Other posters: You're spot on that the safest place is the bare cot. But, actually, there's research about co-sleeping, too. It doesn't have to be unsafe. Oh, and, it's prevalent in many cultures and has been for years. And did you - did you really just say that anything with risks associated is ... unsafe? What about crossing the road / travelling by car / giving a weaning baby solid foods / all the myriad other things that carry risk and people do every day?

Botw1 (ignores all reference to other precedent / research / statistics relating to co-sleeping and risk): Er, no. You're ignoring the research. My decision is the only one based on research. Your insistence on using all available research to make a balanced choice is simply hysterical and childish.

There aren't any "defensive co-sleepers." There are simply other posters, who looked at what's out there and at their own family situations and made a different choice from you, and who have simply tried to point out that research and to tell you that co-sleeping isn't unsafe by definition. It really isn't those posters you term "defensive co-sleepers" who aren't capable of rational debate and conversation. Nobody told you to take anything back. Your comment that co-sleeping parents "make up their own evidence" is just another example of your dogged inability to see things from any perspective but your own and your clear sense of (completely misguided) superiority.

CatCake · 23/04/2023 16:26

@Peppadog

Very accurate depiction of what trying to reason with the unreasonable is like...