NCT ADMIT BEDNEST COT IS DANGEROUS WHEN SIDE HALF DOWN

[MandyP111]

I have just seen the NCT statement admitting that using the NCT Bednest cot with the side half-way down whilst you sleep next to the cot presents a risk of death to your baby!

However, this was exactly how NCT told parents to use it!

<a class="break-all" href="https://web.archive.org/web/20140722182813/www.nctshop.co.uk/Bednest-Bedside-Crib/productinfo/4364/)" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">web.archive.org/web/20140722182813/www.nctshop.co.uk/Bednest-Bedside-Crib/productinfo/4364/) - I takes time to load up.

NCT's warning can be found at: www.nct.org.uk/announcement-statement-use-bednest-crib

Bednest are now sending parents two screws and a screwdriver! www.bednest.com/Blog-Details?NewsID=NEWS-29112015225458

The sad truth is that if someone posts a warning from NCT that their cot (a joint cot with Bednest) is dangerous, and also points out that many parents were using the cot in this way because NCT told them to do so, they are accused of acting 'irrationally' and of 'ranting'.

Er, no. That isn't what has happened.

NCT's instruction video and marketing information confirmed the cot was safe to be used with the side half-way down. So yes, NCT should apologise to all parents who have used the cot in this way.

Again, your comment implies that the death was caused by the parents not using the product correctly.

But isn't it 'irrational' to say the parents did not use the cot correctly, if NCT was telling parents to use the cot this way?

You could take any issue and ask any two experts and you'd probably get two different opinions. You are assuming that an expert would have considered the highly unlikely tragic event that happened. For all you know, experts were appointed during the design process and just didn't consider it.

It was an accident. It takes a lot of time to get answers from a tragedy. Speculating during that process would not have been helpful.

People used to be advised to put babies to sleep on their stomachs and to drink guinness during pregnancy. Are you also haranguing the nhs to apologise for this advice?

It was an accident. A horrible sickening unfortunate combination of circumstances. Your response to it is obsessive and weird and aggressive. and THAT is why you got the responses you did. Not because NCT and bednest have somehow secretly flooded these boards with people looking to cover their arses just in case something happened that they had been trying to cover up!

Even with pictures people cannot accept NCT were telling parents to use the cot in this way. Are puppets and crayons necessary?

MandyP111 people are actually trying to be very sympathetic in light of the fact that you seem particulary affected by this. Yet you are being very rude.

You have made your point. Its ok if people don't agree with it you know.

Perhaps valium is necessary? for you. Calm down.

OP it wasn't just the position of the side of the cot that caused the tragic accident and you know that well. Weren't you given a link to the coroner's report back on your thread in October?

bendybrickpumpkinpatch fair enough. I accept I have lowered myself to respond to the attacks I have been receiving for posting the warning.

I am just amazed of how many NCT members respond to posts on Mumsnet!

1. The NCT did not suggest that using the cot with the side half way down was safe with a prone baby.

1. It is universally easier to push than pull. A baby of this age hasn't developed the ability to push up on the elbows to lever themselves up, which is what is necessary from the supine position. In the prone position they just need arm strength.

1. If a baby is supine and managed to lever their head up, they would roll back off the edge because the side and back of the head is fairly flat. In the prone position, the chin acts as a hook. The baby's head is about 2/3 of the entire body weight so it is little wonder that they then can't correct.

1. The question that would have had to be asked is 'if someone uses this cot incorrectly, could a baby have their carotid artery compressed sufficiently to cause death?'

Do you blame car manufacturers when someone who is speeding crashes the car and dies on impact?

I am definitely not an NCT member. Honestly it's all a bit woo and yummy mummy for me (oh now I'll take the flaming OP).

You don't seem to understand how product liability works. Any safe product can be used in a way that makes it dangerous. That's not a dangerous product.

Guidance is given based on what is known at the time. This was not known at the time.

If you honestly think this accident was foreseeable (ie a baby could push their head that far) then you are suggesting the parents didn't think about it.

I don't think it was foreseeable. It happened and everyone has learnt. The world is now a tiny bit safer but babies will still die in ways we can't predict yet.

You want the nct to apologise to all parents who have used the nest safely and happily because one tragic and awful accident has occurred? To apologise not because they've suffered any harm but basically just because they couldn't foresee the future?

Ok then

If it is not a dangerous product why is Bednest sending 2 screws and a screwdriver to mums for them to change the design of the cot?

If NorthernLurker's summary is right then yes I will need puppets to explain that please!

To improve its safety. Because it could be safer. That does not mean it's dangerous.

NCT should be apologising to people for marketing/instructing them to use the cot in a way that they now say presents a risk of death.

Yes, there has only been one tragic incident but can you seriously say that all mums who have been using the cot in this way to now be told that this is potentially dangerous should not expect a public apology?

Ok then >

I feel strongly about this because of the crap I received for first posting that NCT was refusing to answer the question of whether the NCT Bednest was safe.

You were obsessed and unreasonable then, still are now. Let it go OP for your own health and wellbeing.

The instructions said never to leave the cot in the side fully down or half down position when baby is unsupervised. It should always be fully up when baby is unsupervised. (And eg when you the adult Is asleep). Did they follow this instruction? Or was the baby alone when it happened?

Also it was indeed very possible to buy or rent a Bednest with no mention of NCT on it - we got it direct from Bednest and know many others who did as it was cheaper that way. - so I think that your sole focus on NCT is a bit misplaced.

I'm not an NCT member but I do know a little bit about risk analysis

One tragic incident after years and years of safe use does not automatically make a product dangerous.
Can you confirm that you understand this?

Equallly, safety assessments and risk assessments are done using usual and likely use and behaviours. They don't take into account every single possible eventuality than anyone can dream up.
Can you confirm that you understand this also?

So when a manufacturer issues instructions on how to use a product, they are a) not giving any guarantees that it will be 100% safe and 100% not cause death if used this way and b) basing the advice on available evidence at that time.

Occasionally, tragic things happen. Babies are left asleep for too long in car seats and suffocate, for example. Or the incident with the Bed Nest.

In light of this, manufacturers can look at whether this is because of a fundemental flaw in the product, a failing of user behaviour or a combination of both.
If it is a fundemental design flaw that renders a product dangerous, there is a safety recall. You will note that this hasn't happened here, so that tells you all your need to know about the actual risk this product poses - minuscule.

I still can't get my head around your bizarre insistence that the company needs to apologise to people who haven't had any ill effects.

If i go to a restaurant and have a lovely meal, should the restaurant call me up to apologise 2 years later when someone else has been there and got food poisoning?

Your attitude is the reason ambulance chasing law firms exist and the reason schools get sued when a kid falls over and grazes a knee or gets stung by a wasp.

Life is not guaranteed safe. Sometimes bad things happen.
Blaming instruction leaflets and mounting your crazy one-woman vendetta against a charity is doing nothing. I'm sure the family would be a bit mortified for highlighting their mistakes to people who would otherwise have put this down as an unavoidable tragedy

Yes, there has only been one tragic incident but can you seriously say that all mums who have been using the cot in this way to now be told that this is potentially dangerous should not expect a public apology?

Apology for what?! The onerous task of now having to slightly modify the way in which they use the product? On a moral level, you apologise when you've done something wrong. You don't apologise when you update current thinking. On a legal level, I imagine it would open the floodgates for loons suing for emotional distress or whatever else they can claim to make a quick buck. The term 'professionally offended' was invented for you I actually can't comprehend your logic at all