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

I got the impression on reading about this tragedy, that it was a perfect storm... it was a second hand crib without instructions, so the parents were not aware of the advise to put the side up if the baby was left unattended. The baby was on her tummy and therefore able to lift her head into this unfortunate position. A tragic accident but an accident none the less..?

Also a higher mattress not designed for a bed nest was used

And the cot was at a slant.

Do you know, I've just read this whole thread and the other news articles, the coroner's report, etc.

I agree with the OP.

I think OP has some weird vendetta against NCT

I know you don't mean to, but a lot of the comments have the unfortunate effect of sounding like the parents were at fault for doing perfectly sensible things like buying a new mattress. (I am about to have my third, and I buy new mattresses, check the gap between the cot bars and the mattress, the gap between the cot and the wall, but never have measured or considered the depth of the new mattress, nor seen any advice to do so.) If the cot was not meant to be tilted beyond 5cm, why was that function available, and how were the poor parents supposed to know that?

Surely you can tilt a cot to any angle you want? You just put things under one side. It's not a function as far as I know

Poor baby, poor family, nutso OP who is completely obsessed about this topic and POSTS HYSTERICALLY ABOUT THIS SUBJECT IN CAPS EVEN WHEN THE TRaGEDY HAS BEEN DEALT WITH.

The op is sadly obliterating her own cause with obsession and hysteria. The multiple threads about this topic posted by the op have resulted not in people saying 'good lord that's terrible', but rather 'omg that nutter is off on one again'.

I don't think it's the reaction you were hoping for op. A tad counter-productive?

RIP poor baba. What a terrible accident.

The tragedy hasn't 'been dealt with' for the baby's family though has it, madwoman. That's exactly the point. Those poor parents have to live the rest of their lives with the unnecessary death of their baby.

CactusAnnie, I also agree with the OP. Unfortunately, her posting style gets peoples' backs up and prevents them from thoughtfully engaging with the issues that she's bringing up, as they're too busy doing roll eyes emotions.

The tragedy will never be dealt with for the family. That's not even what the OP is trying to do. She started trying to get Everyone on MN to email NCT and at this point she's just whinging

It's fair to say that there's a strong consensus that OP's posting style gets in the way of people actually engaging with some if the salient points that she's making.

.

Yes, but perhaps people should make an effort to look beyond the style, or alternatively, they could object to that specifically, without dismissing and minimising the salient points she's making.

I think the NCT has done some dodgy things over the years (promoting homeopathy, putting men's rights above women's, etc.).

In this case they clearly promoted a product being used in a way that has been shown in a coroner's court to have contributed to if not been wholly responsible for the death of a tiny baby.

And it seems that they've behaved in the manner of all large profit-making companies, which is to say they've initially denied a link, then later backtracked and tried to erase evidence of earlier denials, putting their own profits first rather than the welfare of children and parents.

I am able to look past the OP's writing style and see that, why are so many others focusing on the style and not the substance?

You need to look further past it and look again, because your assesment is still arseways.

I can look through Mandy's style (though it is distracting and a bit worrying), and I did look at the coroner's report and some other sources. I don't think that NCT are to blame. Other people do. That's all fine.

Cactus,
You must have read a different coroners report to me, because I can't see anything in the one I posted a link to that comes even close to giving the suggestion the cot was wholly responsible for the death

Lots of people, me included, went to some lengths to explain to the OP the difference between a dangerous product, and safe product that can be used dangerously, and she repeatedly ignored it.
Plus, she doesn't actually seem remotely bothered about the use of the product, so much as getting some sort of bizarre public apology for everyone who has ever used a nest without ill-effect.

It is perfectly acceptable to pull her up on that, and point out how counter-productive it is.
She isn't campaigning for safer products (or else she might have pondered what test Snoozpod, sleephead etc are doing in light of this)
She is tubthumping for the head of Bednest to grovel in public and presumably open the floodgates for compensation for emotional distress

I can't understand why anyone would get this invested in someone else's tragedy.

OP didn't even buy the cot herself. It has shades of the Liverpool "stop grieving it's only a chicken" about it.

Chicken link for a bit of light relief:

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/merseyside/4372230.stm

I agree cactusannie, the NCT's tardy response - obviously commercially and litigation driven - doesn't quite sit with their mother earth image.

I don't think they're liable for this baby's death and according to their statement, they did suspend selling this product after the baby's death, and before the coroner's court judgement.

Bed Nest have indeed dramatically reduced prices to shift their stock, but it looks like the NCT are trying to distance themselves from the branding now.

I suspect the NCT didn't want to rush into anything and their legal team would want everything ordered correctly before releasing anything.

As with anything you need to do a personal risk analysis before using anything especially with a baby- that would include checking the internet for instructions (as I did for a cot we had since DSS was born but couldn't find anymore) and decide if it's worth a risk.

Obviously Bednest want their product to be as safe as possible so are taking a belt and braces approach.

I think asking NCT to apologise publicly is like asking car manufacturers to apologise for drivers who hit people in the vehicles.

scared that's rather funny!

They've put a warning out that's all they have to do, if you know how to use them safely it's fine.

It's up to you to decide whether you want to buy one no one is forcing them on you

OP ccould you not have conducted this thread without shouting, ranting, insulting posters and accusing people randomly of being in the pay of the NCT?

It probably is all worth drawing attention to, but the histronics are going to scare people off.

They promoted a product in good faith, then when there was reason to suspect there was a problem, they suspended sales and did more testing and then released the results of that, with new advice to make it even safer (even though the prompting incident was an against advice use of the product anyway).
What more do you want from them?

I'm sure that the NCT didn't want to rush into anything that may dent their image!

I may be wrong, but don't retailers usually issue an immediate product recall in addition to stopping selling the product pending investigation, if something as serious as this has happened?

"I think the NCT has done some dodgy things over the years (promoting homeopathy, putting men's rights above women's, etc.)."

By 'promoting homoeopathy' do you mean telling women that some people find it helpful in pregnancy/birth/postnatally? Do you mean misleading people over the clinical evidence? Have they actually recommended that people should use homoeopathic treatments? Do you have any evidence for this accusation?

I'm interested to know how they have put men's rights above women's as well. Your comment implies that they do this generally. Have you got any examples of this?

I really can't see how the NCT have behaved in a 'dodgy' way over the tragic death of the baby using the Bednest cot, as is repeatedly implied by the OP on this thread. They immediately stopped selling the product as soon as the accident happened and launched an inquiry. How was this 'tardy'? The product was withdrawn as soon as the problem came to light.