Baby sleep and monitor - totally confused

[FourGreenElephants]

Hi, I'm expecting my first baby.

Yes, I'm concerned about SIDS. We are quite low risk - no one smokes, no one drinks regularly, we will use next-to-me crib, but we know a low risk family where SIDS took their baby.

I'd like to understand how the baby monitors fit into this.
Intuitivelly, it sounds easy - monitor tries to wake the baby up (by noise) plus notifies parents to try to wake/resuscitate the baby.

The issue is - if you try to select one, every sellers and source tells you that they don't prevent SIDS/there is no evidence that they do prevent SIDS - both wordings are used at the lullaby trust research summary for monitors.
https://www.lullabytrust.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Monitors.pdf

So... would anyone know please how it fits together? Do they actually help or are they just an empty reassurance? Is it a lack of data or lack of results?

I'm aware that with next-to-me crib the choice is limited to skin contact ones, practically only the nappy clip or owlet.

I'm a bit disapppinted that lullaby trust refused to comment on owlet, but it seems it should work to the same level, they just don't like the potential information overload. Is this true?

I was wondering whether the owlet would potentially mitigate the risks associated with baby turning to their tummy in their sleep (as once their learn to turn, it will be impossible to turn them back every time), but it is hard to find some confirmation.

(My gemini failed spectacularly, getting stuck between how of course the monitors help and how they don't prevent SIDS)

Would anonyone know more please? Or maybe have a better links for me?

I have the owlet for my baby and it does give me peace of mind and helps me sleep while she’s sleeping knowing she’s wearing it. I wouldn’t be without it. It tracks if oxygen levels start to drop and also if heart rate is low/high which can be signs of fever or other illness. my understanding is if levels were too low or high I would be alerted and able to wake baby or seek medical assistance much quicker than if I wasn’t awoken by the alarm.

I do think it depends on your level of anxiety around it to begin with as I know some people can get obsessed over the figures but for me knowing what’s normal for my baby and being able to check we’re within that range is reassuring. It’s very similar to what they use at triage in A&E.

edited to add I don’t think any websites/products would be able to say they reduce the risks due to lack of testing as it is nearly impossible to conduct a proper study with control groups etc but I have read a lot of stories from people who 100% believe it has saved their baby

Thanks for your experience. I don't know yet how anxious I'll really be and I was hoping that getting some level of understanding will help me.

I don’t think any websites/products would be able to say they reduce the risks due to lack of testing as it is nearly impossible to conduct a proper study with control groups etc but I have read a lot of stories from people who 100% believe it has saved their baby

I'd imagine that it would be observation based - how I understand it, observation is all we have for SIDS itself, there is no known reason explaining for example why sleeping on the back is safer, it just came up as a variable when studying the collected SIDS data. I'd expect the monitors in general to eventually show their usefullness this way.

No monitor can 100% guarantee that a child will not die of SIDS. That's the truth.

I understand that - SIDS is suspected to have some biochemical reason, and once it is triggered, we don't know whether the monitor will help save the baby or just notify you earlier, but still too late.

My confusion is more about the other direction - whether the monitors actually do something. There is a difference between for example: decrease the SIDS risks 2-5 times / they only sell reassurance, but do nothing / save babies in situations which wouldn't be classified as SIDS.

I just don't like the combination of recommendation and denial of any effect.

Quite easy to work out that most is false security.

I would look into the Snuza Hero, this (I believe) is approved as a medical device. I had a lot of anxiety about SIDS and the Snuza Hero helped to reduce this, although once baby starts rolling and moving it can slip off and so would only recommend it in the first few months as it can make anxiety worse if it alarms and it’s because the baby has rolled over or something!

There is quite a lot of research behind the Back to Sleep campaign

My understanding of monitors such as the owlet is that they cannot prevent SIDS and due to the fact we often do not know the reasons, there is little that can be done to prevent it. What a monitor may do is wake you/alert you in time to get help for your baby.

Yes, it is one of my top two options.

We only really used a monitor (not a fancy one that attached to them) when the baby moved into their own room and we were downstairs after they went to bed. Having the parent unit downstairs meant we could hear them crying. We didnt need it when we were upstairs as we just left the bedroom doors open and we could hear them cry

I found this article from 5 years ago, but it aligns with my current understanding.
https://undark.org/2021/05/24/sids-monitors-may-not-prevent-sids

There probably is something like "true SIDS," where no monitor could help, because it might be a non-resuscitable condition.

At the same time, there are other conditions—which we could describe as "forgot to breathe" or apnea-based—where the monitor does what it says and is certified for: it detects that the baby hasn't taken a breath for some time, and knowing this allows us to wake the baby up. However, we cannot be sure whether it actually prevents death, or whether the baby would eventually take a breath anyway. (If the number of reports where a monitor "saved the baby" were all true saves, there would have to be many more dead babies without them).

So my conclusion seems to be - I don't know whether it does anything, but as a dilligent middle class parent, I absolutely do need one.

That's the other type, like nanny cam.

I understand that it is practical for bigger homes. We live in a flat and can hear/check the baby crying easily, so I don't plan to use one (at least at the beginning, will see later). I'm more concernd about the situations when the baby becomes too quiet.

Agree with this ^^

It would interesting to know if they do make a real difference. When my children were small the monitors were not like they are today and we only used them once baby moved into their own room. I would be interested to know if the monitors now make more of a difference than the ones that were commonly used 15 years ago or 30 years ago.

Thanks for the history link.

It is interesting how strong the campaign is about something we know so little about, but is seems to have some results.

...but also other sleep-related infant deaths...
sounds like the key sentence here - there are several reasons of infant deaths, we don't understand them all, some seem to be position-influenced, some are breath-obstruction related, some are about something totally different (the article I've linked mentions a specific metabolic issue), some we just don't know.

And any advice or device will target only some of the underlying reasons. Together with relatively low incidence it makes separating the influences and impacts very hard.

There was an old theory about SIDS which was that it was related to neonatal sleep apnoea, which means pauses in breathing. This is the reason that the home monitors were first invented. This has been disproven but the companies conveniently fail to explain this part, allowing the misconception that they might help in some way to pervail, because it provides a useful marketing angle for them.

In reality neonatal sleep apnoea is normal and is not thought to be associated with SIDS. Newborns will pause in breathing, which can cause these monitors to alarm. Parents then have the perception that the machine has "saved" their child but realistically nothing has happened. Or in a way, it's similar to the way that dopplers work - the doppler can show you that your unborn baby still has a heartbeat, they can't realistically prevent miscarriage/stillbirth or reassure you that it will not happen, they can only act as reassurance that it has not happened yet.

I do think the ones which measure oxygen saturation levels have a different mechanism and potentially these could alert to a baby who has got themselves into a potentially hazardous position in time for a parent to intervene. However all the oxygen saturation ones are very expensive.

With certain kinds of anxious feelings, it can actually be counterproductive to rely on this kind of reassurance as looking for the reassurance causes you to seek it more etc and it can increase the anxiety and fear. In extreme cases, this is the mechanism behind OCD. But postpartum you are more susceptible to this kind of thought loop, so particularly if you have history of any kind of anxiety, OCD or other mental health difficulties, I would be really cautious about anything which rewards reassurance-seeking in this way.

Then the other issue with them IMO (and has been pointed out by experts, I didn't make this up) is that sometimes people can use the reassurance they get from these machines in order to put their baby into a more risky sleep situation than they would otherwise feel comfortable with. This is a problem because the risk is not actually mitigated by the machine. This is one of the criticisms of them. IMO, either take the risk knowingly (e.g. I chose to co-sleep with my babies, avoiding alcohol/smoking and keeping bedding away from them; I also chose to let them nap in inclined containers e.g. car seat, swing, bouncer, when I was in the room and awake.) or do not take the risk. Don't let a monitor change what you would have done otherwise.

If you are struggling with anxiety/intrusive thoughts around safe sleep speak to your midwife as they can refer to the perinatal MH team.

Breathing monitors have definitely been around for more than 15 years as I remember them with my eldest (Angelcare was the brand then). The Lullaby Trust or FSID as they were called then used to loan them out to provide reassurance for parents after a SIDS death. I am not sure whether this was stopped because we now know that reassurance-seeking in this way can sometimes be self-perpetuating.

I think the modern way they are marketed can be really predatory, and I find the companies and marketing shady for that reason. Personally, I would actually avoid giving money to these companies if possible. We used audio monitors and video monitors and found them useful to see if the toddler was asleep or not (we didn't really need them for babies as didn't leave them alone to sleep) but I would have avoided Angelcare, even though they also make video/audio only monitors without breathing monitoring, because I don't want to give money to companies which prey on new parents' fears like this.

So my conclusion seems to be - I don't know whether it does anything, but as a dilligent middle class parent, I absolutely do need one.

IMO this just says that you've been sucked in by the marketing. I do not think you need a breathing monitor to be diligent, regardless of how much money you have. Being diligent IMO is things like making sure your cot meets the right safety standard and is used correctly, being aware of safer sleep advice and following as much of it as is practical, making sure your baby gets the right health check ups, vaccinations etc and following advice from HCPs.

there is no known reason explaining for example why sleeping on the back is safer, it just came up as a variable when studying the collected SIDS data. I'd expect the monitors in general to eventually show their usefullness this way.

This is extremely unlikely to happen.

SIDS deaths are thankfully very very low these days. The amount of babies who are using monitors like this is also extremely low across the broad spectrum of how many babies are born.

There is also a difficulty because babies born into affluent families who can afford these devices already have a much, much lower chance of SIDS, meaning SIDS deaths are already reduced in this group. The numbers are so low you'll never get an answer for whether or not monitors reduce this number further.

This is a good thing because it means SIDS is very rare, although it also means that the companies have a lot of scope to make vague statements which allude to some kind of protective factor, when realistically unless they show some kind of dangerous effect (e.g. like the US Rock n Play) nothing concrete will ever come up about these devices at all.

I appreciate that it doesn't feel like the rarity matters when you've known someone close to you experience it, and you might want to do anything possible which might help reduce the chances, but that's what the reality is.

@BertieBotts
Thanks so much!
As you can see I've already been on the path to understand a part of that, but it's so hard to believe my own conclusions when it leads so far away from the original position, and you formulate it so clearly. Thanks!

Then the other issue with them IMO (and has been pointed out by experts, I didn't make this up) is that sometimes people can use the reassurance they get from these machines in order to put their baby into a more risky sleep situation than they would otherwise feel comfortable with.

Yes, it was one of the reasons I started to read about it - I was curious whether the sock monitor wouldn't "even out" the risks of belly sleeping in case our baby would sleep better that way. It seemed absolutely logical at the first glance, accept doubling the risk, mitigate by throwing some money on it.
Now I know it isn't that simple and I can't just apply the very basic math on this problem and be happy the equation works.

IMO this just says that you've been sucked in by the marketing. I do not think you need a breathing monitor to be diligent, regardless of how much money you have.

I'm absolutely aware that I'm sucked in by marketing. We know that there is a huge market with things we don't need around babies, we are really trying to protect ourselves against it and I believe we've managed to decide against many children pseudosafety gadgets and even more pseudoconvenience items. What I meant by that sentence is, that even when I don't believe it does anything against SIDS, I don't think we will be able to resist this one, because:

1. The "what if it could had helped" risk is still there. Maybe not with SIDS, but with some other issues? The "if my baby stopped breathing for 15 seconds I'd like to know" is tooo powerfull statement to overcome.

2. It's not worth trying to explain the "no" at this point to the wider family*. If we don't get one, we will end up with several, everyone around us will want to save our baby, or at least feel they did all what they could. So we can as well get the cheaper one, be able to say "yes of course" and see how long we will want to use it, maybe first few months. Yes, marketing won, but only once.

* I've tested this on my mum. Just not worth it. I'm ready for some battles, but I probably won't pick this one.

This is extremely unlikely to happen.SIDS deaths are thankfully very very low these days. The amount of babies who are using monitors like this is also extremely low across the broad spectrum of how many babies are born.
Yes, I can see this point now - if the monitors did something easily measurable and really saving visible number of lifes, there would have to be the same number of deaths at the comparable category to start with.

I appreciate that it doesn't feel like the rarity matters when you've known someone close to you experience it, and you might want to do anything possible which might help reduce the chances, but that's what the reality is.
It is actually quite comforting. When it happened, it felt like "SIDS is real, I have to take it seriously". Now it is becoming just one of the extremely rare risks of life, but not "the one".

It seems like you are getting pressured into buying one from family anyway.

To add a different perspective, yes, SIDS is real but the likelihood is very very low. However, As a new mother you will be up so frequently in the night, checking on your baby, listening in to them breathing, just watching them sleep! Oh and they are so loud making all sorts of grunting noises, sleeping with their eyes open etc. You will get reassurance they are okay from that perspective. My friend had an owlet and so many other gadgets, but she was kept up and had trouble sleeping because she got very anxious and always needed to check the app. If you think you are susceptible to getting over anxious about it, I would err away from getting a monitor. The best thing is to follow the safe sleep guidance.

Family pressure - I didn't think about it in this way before starting this thread. It was just something everyone expected to happen, because it makes sense at the first glance. And now I'd have to explain to everyone it doesn't make sense. Which would be possible if I was 100% sure I don't want to use one.
The problem is: while I understand what was written here, there is still the small voice "what if it could be useful in some adjacent way we haven't identified yet". And, as long as I have this weak point, it isn't worth trying to say no to people around me.

I understand about the secondary anxiety with people staring at monitors all night - my best guess is, that this isn't my kind of anxiety. I totally expect I'll be anxious about many things, but hopefully not this way. Still thanks, the warning is accepted (and shared with my DH).

--

And... Sorry if I'm not consistent. This thread is a great help for me in both understanding what I read and discovering how I feel about it. Both is important for me and both is changing.

If we end up with one, but with the understanding it isn't a magic bullet, it doesn't replace the safer sleeping routines and that the additional safety isn't that big, so we don't have to try really hard to keep using one for many months, this thread has already helped me a lot (even if evil marketing still wins)

But you don't owe it to family/other people to explain if you don't want one. You can say we decided not to get one and leave it there. Or you can decide to buy one, but you don't need to justify to others why you did.

There will be many many other times family/friends/strangers will weigh in on your parenting choices, and it is totally fine to say "we decided xyz" and not give a reason.

YY I agree I would not fight the battle if I had family trying to pressure me into buying one. It is highly unlikely to do any harm to the baby, especially if you're aware that using these monitors cannot "cancel out" other risk factors such as tummy sleeping, and as long as you buy a reputable brand, not some cheapo copy from amazon etc.

My only concern would be if, as I have, you have any tendency/markers/family history, etc, towards OCD or anxiety disorders, because I think it could be very easy to fall into a trap of feeling that you "need" the monitor for your baby to be safe and I would not want to end up ill. This is the harm that I think they can potentially cause.

That said. I did use a doppler during pregnancy, after 2x early losses. I made quite strict rules for myself - as soon as I could feel the baby moving, I packed the doppler away and stopped using it. I was only "allowed" to use it every other day leading up to 10 weeks. This was an attempt to prevent me obsessing over it and wanting to use it all the time. It was OK. It didn't exacerbate anything with these limits on it, and I got some reassurance/enjoyment from using it.

A suggestion for a limit for you: 2-4 months is thought to be the "peak" risk period for SIDS. Perhaps it might be worth having in the back of your mind the idea that you will stop using it after 4 months. Or just go with the flow - some people find that they get so many false alarms with these things that they get frustrated and stop using it.

Hi op
My little one is 3 now. We live in a small 2 bed semi, we never needed a baby monitor. They slept next to me and then went into own cot in room. If they woke I could hear them stir so I didn't need another thing. I got a very very cheap old school one from a charity shop when they were about 1 so I could do gardening while they had there afternoon nap and I new when they woke up.

The Lullaby trust states for the first 6 months baby is meant to be with you in the same room day and night so no need for a monitor.

@Sailawaygirl , @Iloveeverycat

My confusion was about breath monitors, not a nanny cam.
I agree we don't need a nanny cam for now. Will see whether we will get one for the summer and staying in GP's houses, but no need for one at the first few months, we live in a flat and will keep the baby close.

You are right, and I know it will come at other topics.

I suppose the family is a red herring here. I'm not sure enough to say it and mean it.

the most important thing to do is make sure everyone does a high quality paediatric first aid course.