How young was your baby when it started sleeping in nursery

[benne81]

This is a long story (see the cats and babies thread) but I'm thinking of moving the baby into the nursery at quite an early age to make sure that there is no risk of my cat jumping in the moses basket with the baby. I know that the official guidance is that the baby should stay in the same room as you for 6 months - but how many people actually do this? when did yours go in the nursery? My mum was shocked the baby is expected to sleep in the same room as the adults and apparently I was straight into the nursery from day one (although if you listen to my mum we also didn't have central heating/ food/ running water etc in my day!!). I would be really interested to hear peoples experiences of how old theri babies made the transition

Broodzilla - my Ds was in a moses basket until 5 mth, but outgrew and no space for a cot, the FSIDS website does state that co-sleeping is a risk too, albeit small. So you can't really ignore this bit of the advice in itself, so therefore i decided that the risk of co-sleeping outweighed the risk of moving into own room a bit early.

You're absolutely right dribbleface, co-sleeping IS risky if you are formula feeding, overweight, on drugs/alcohol/medication/ill... However, if you don't belong to any of these categories, co-sleeping is safer for the baby. unfortunately, this is rarely stated and in some of the statistics often quoted, "co-sleeping" includes parents in the above categories. I apologise for not making the distinction in my post above.

Whoa - I seem to have kicked off a massive debate and as my maternity leave started today and I am a medic I thought I would have a look at some of the research into the FSIDs guidelines. It appears that 4 main papers are quoted, all of which seem to mainly look at co sleeping rather than room sharing.

1. One of the papers I'm having difficulty accessing.
2. Blair et al 1999 report, 'Cosleeping in terms of room sharing increases the sensory exchanges possible between parent and infants,22 but further research is required to investigate whether room sharing is protective in itself or merely a marker for hidden confounders not measured in this study'
3. Tappin et al 2005 'Separate room not sharing (Table I) was not associated

with a risk of SIDS on univariate analysis (OR 1.32 95% CI 0.67, 2.60) but became a risk on multivariate analysis (OR 3.26 95% CI 1.03, 10.35). Variables were removed singly to ascertain which were important in converting a nonsignificant univariate model to a significantmultivariate model. The main factor was parental smoking. Further stratified analysis showed that separate room was associated with a significant risk of SIDS only if a parent smoked (OR 12.2 95% CI 2.25, 66.4) and not if parents were nonsmokers (OR 1.25 95% CI 0.16, 10.06).

1. Carpenter 2004 This is the paper that I think the guidelines are probably most based on but it does combine the risk of bed sharing and room sharing. It uses Population attributable fractions (PAF; often called

population attributable risk) reported as percentages.These fractions estimate the expected percentage reduction of cases if a particular exposure were eliminated.The largest PAF was for sleeping place. This PAF was 35·9% because, on average, 53% of cases were last left in another room (range 18?88% across the 15 centres for which this information was available) and 68% of the risk was attributable. Additionally, the PAF for bed-sharing was 15·9%, so the data suggested that 52% of cases might have been prevented had the baby slept in the parents? room but not in their bed. They report in the discussion, 'An unexpected finding was that the factor with the largest PAF was that associated with either the baby sleeping in another room or bedsharing. On average, cases slept in another room 26 (11·3?41·5) days earlier than controls, but the OR did not change with age. Why the baby sleeping in the parent?s room reduced the risk is unclear.'

So there you go the hard statistical facts which may be a bit dry to digest but it essentially shows that there may be a small risk attributable to separate room but that this data is by no way conclusive or understood and is based much more on data regarding co sleeping. There are much clearer risks related to other issues - sleeping prone, temp, smoking.

Guidelines are just that and it is up to the individual to weigh up risks, there is no easy answer to the topic but I don't think that people should be too pious regarding this issue as the researchers themselves are not clear on causes/ confounders. Also the risk of SIDS is reduced greatly after 3 months so maybe it is worth taking that into account.

And finally everyone of course my bloody cat doesn't take precedent over the baby but living in a small london flat it is not possible to 1. lock the cat out of the bedroom as we don't have a downstairs etc, she will just sit outside the bedroom door or the door to outside crying until we let her in - believe me if there was a way we could keep her out the room we would do it!

Anyway the cat net has arrived and we are just going to see how it goes, hopefully my cat won't be interested and if she is it may mean I need to decamp to the nursery for the first couple of months with baby.

Well done with your points about alcohol. Jolly good show. It has nothing to do with SIDS though. On the one hand you say you want peer reviewed research AND you want it to all be on the SIDS website, yet on the other, make spurious comparisons with government advice about alcohol.

Not spurious at all, I posted the quote from the DoH.

The reference to alcohol was merely to show that agencies do not always give advice based on new research, sometimes it is a change of tack by the agency. Only by knowing the underlying research can you make an informed decision about that champagne toast at your sisters wedding (or whatever).

You sound like you're looking for some sort of hidden conspiracy theory to justify your own choices which increase the likelihood of SIDS.

What is your issue with informed choice?

If the only decision to be made on the issue is a whim of should I/shouldn't I, then obviously then you could glibly go along with professional advice. However, if you have to make substantial changes, possibly involving a lot of money you have to weigh up the risks.

You may bimble along accepting everything that is fed you, but when an issue matters it helps to know the facts behind the soundbite. That's all.

Whoever said they couldn't get out of bed without stepping on the baby's head - unless you literally have to make your way to and from your bed along a path that is the width of your palm, and your bed is surrounded by walls on all four sides - that must be a slight exaggeration, surely?

The bed is surrounded by cupboards one side with a gap obviously to open the cupboard doors but no wider; a window the other and there is a gap of approx 10" at the bottom of the bed to move past.

No, I wouldn't literally step on his/her head but neither would I be able to get out of bed. There is not enough room for me to stand up next to the bed with a moses basket on a stand beside it.

Also, if there is room for a double bed, there IS room for a baby.

Are you suggesting I sleep with the baby in my bed or remove the double bed?

FAP Well, I figured that since an average bed is about 2 meters long and 1,40 wide or whatever, unless you literally only have a path as wide as your palm leading to the bed, you should be able to squeeze in a moses basket along one edge of the bed (it may mean you yourself would have to get in on the "wrong" side of the bed, or from the foot of the bed, or...) or that the moses basket could go at the foot of your bed, or that, if there was no room anywhere else, you would be able to put the moses basket on the actual bed if you were against bed-sharing. Or... I don't know?

My point was mainly that it worries me that people make decisions without having all the facts. This same question has been posted on another thread, and there were replies there to the tune of "never knew the guidelines, never cared for the reasons" or "my DH and I like to have a chat in bed and have noisy sex so the baby has to sleep in a separate room"... I'd like to think that if those people really knew what it's about, they would prioritise differently.

To use a completely unrelated example: Someone I know told me she'll be eating brie and soft cheeses throughout her pregnancy "because they only tell you not to, incase you get diarrhea, and I've never had it so why would I get it when pregnant" which would be fine, but it's listeria you need to be worried about. If you know that, and decide that the risk is small, and that you really can't live without brie, or that it's an unreasonable sacrifice to not eat brie for 40 weeks of your life, then fine... but please do the research before making your mind up about things that actually matter.

DD is almost 6 months and will be moving into her own room next week. We have two cats and a dog and we all sleep in the same room. I tried to keep the animals out at night but they made far too much noise.

Not one of them have ever bothered DD while sleeping though. They basically ignore her, though I have caught one of the cats sleeping in her bed when she is not there, which makes for lots of sheet laundry.

The room she is moving into is currently the guest room and we never let the animals in there so there will be even less of an issue. You'll find the cat/baby hysteria is just that: hysteria.

Broodzilla - my point was exactly the same, give me the stats not just the headline and then an informed decision can be made.

Not following advice on the basis, "it never happened to me before, so it will never happen in future", may not be genius.

However, considering what the actual risks of getting listeria from soft cheese, how often does this happen in the UK, what happens if you do catch listeria and what are the effects on baby and mother's health? Those all seem like sensible questions to ask if you were considering eating 'banned' cheeses in pregnancy.

At least then you make an informed choice based on fact/analysis/stats and you may come to the the conclusion that the risk of catching listeria from soft cheese is less that your risk of catching it from salad so you would rather live without salad and chow down on cheese... who knows!

To bring it back to SIDS and to use your analogy, if you weigh up your individual risks (smoking, age etc) and decide that increasing your risk of SIDS by 0.5 in 1000 is an acceptable risk in comparison to not having sex with your husband, feeling isolated and disconnected as you both miss the emotional connection and increasing your risks of PND; then maybe it is a valid choice to put your child in their nursery on their own so you and DH can have noisy sex.

Discussing my bedroom lay out and the possibility of putting the whole moses basket in bed with me and DH at night is fruitless and bordering on absurd. For me, the increased risk is so minimal that I would be willing to take it (barring lottery wins and moving to a mansion in the next 8 months).

I was using the example Broodzilla offered... whether someone has made that choice or not in RL I have no idea.

But it wouldn't matter where you had sex; you shouldn't leave your baby alone (according the research) while it sleeps, which won't be for long once you're having noisy sex.

So you could shag on the dining table if you were so inclined but LO would also be there if you were following the guidelines.

I would be uncomfortable having loud sex in front of a 6 month old...

The point is weighing up potential risk by actually knowing the research not just the headlines and making an informed choice.

How you choose to interpret that in the hypothetical context of loud sex is of no concern to me.

I will definitely be investing in the cotton wool industry though. It seems some people can not bear the thought that they might make choices (educated or otherwise) which involve a percentage of risk to their child.

If we took the guidelines as gospel, does that mean I am unable to do the dishes in the kitchen/clean the bathroom/put the laundry away while my baby sleeps in the lounge? I most certainly will not be carting it around with me room to room, nor will I sit and twiddle my thumbs next to it's moses basket in the lounge while it snoozes for two hours?

FannyAnn talks a lot of sense. Weigh up the risks.

Similarly, there are risks involved in walking across the road with my baby; I doubt I should be expected to stay indoors till their puberty to ensure 100% guarantee that they shall never come to any harm in life?

I give up... Re: the cheese, my point was that if you choose not to find out why you're not supposed to do something (just a vague "something to do with diarhea" as opposed to risking listeria OR "you're supposed to have the baby in your room because you just might be awake of it stops breathing") you're making a choice, but not an informed one.

That's all. As I said, if someone HAS done the research and still chosen to do x y and z then it's a different matter. (I personally still find it hard to understand why someone would prioritise having noisy sex over the baby's safety but then again, I don't find that I need to have noisy sex in bed to connect with my DH, physically or emotionally,so what do I know.)

But whatever. I'll go back to wrapping my son in cotton wool and stay firmly on my side of the road.

i wouldn't be putting the baby in another bedroom to have loud noisy sex, lets face it, that can be done in even the most unexpected places. Id do it to ensure the few hours sleep between feeds are cosy, comfy and quiet. That can only be gleaned from my cosy perfect bed.

OMG ladyintheradiator and Brodzilla you both seem to be having some sort of hysterical meltdown. As shown in my last entry the research evidence to support the guidelines is very sketchy. So if people want to look at the guidelines and think they are not for them so be it! I think you should both get off your bloody highhorses and recognise that people can take on information and make up their own minds without you saying that its similar to crossing the road with your eyes closed. - Get a grip!

Cheria - good to hear your experience, hopefully my Cat will be able to share the bedroom aswell - fingers crossed. I think the little one will be moving across in the nursery when it suits us. I think it is best to go with the flow and see where the road of childrearing takes us.

why on earth would I cross the street with my eyes closed? that really would be dicing with death.

two eyes open, stop look and listen etc etc, still has a risk involved. "I'd probably be okay"....you are correct, I would, probably.

The odds show it is probable that a baby sleeping in it's own room would be okay. Much more probable it being okay than it being in danger.

Having the baby in the room with you does not erradicate the danger.

"So if people want to look at the guidelines and think they are not for them so be it! I think you should both get off your bloody highhorses and recognise that people can take on information and make up their own minds without you saying that its similar to crossing the road with your eyes closed. - Get a grip!"

Maybe you missed the part where I wrote "As I said, if someone HAS done the research and still chosen to do x y and z then it's a different matter"?

But sure, high horses and hysterical meltdowns must be it.

The highhorse and hysterical meltdoown refers to, Well, I figured that since an average bed is about 2 meters long and 1,40 wide or whatever, unless you literally only have a path as wide as your palm leading to the bed, you should be able to squeeze in a moses basket along one edge of the bed (it may mean you yourself would have to get in on the "wrong" side of the bed, or from the foot of the bed, or...) or that the moses basket could go at the foot of your bed, or that, if there was no room anywhere else, you would be able to put the moses basket on the actual bed if you were against bed-sharing. Or... I don't know?

FGS its not your life, your bedroom - it she can't fit a moses basket in her room who are you to say she can and even if she can and she doesn't want to that is her choice.

...which was a direct reply to a direct question...

"The bed is surrounded by cupboards one side with a gap obviously to open the cupboard doors but no wider; a window the other and there is a gap of approx 10" at the bottom of the bed to move past.

No, I wouldn't literally step on his/her head but neither would I be able to get out of bed. There is not enough room for me to stand up next to the bed with a moses basket on a stand beside it.

Are you suggesting I sleep with the baby in my bed or remove the double bed?"

but really, the OP wanted to know whether people actually follow the official guidelines and at what age others have put their babies in a separate room. I replied to the question, also giving my reasons for doing what I have done. I was under the impression that it was therefore ok to reply even if you chose to not go against the official advice.

I shall keep my opinions and experiences to myself in the future, as I had intended to help, not offend.

...And back to the original post! :)

I say cats are generally clever enough that you can train them in what's allowed and what isn't. My cat isn't allowed in our bedroom as my dh is mildly allergic and wants to be able to breathe at night (some people- so picky! :o) so Colin (cat) had to learn that he got told off if he went in there. Now he never does. His attitude seems to be that it's not worth the bother.

My advice would be that if you intend to have the cat in your room and won't be shaken from that arrangement, teach your cat that the moses basket is off limits. Set up your basket now, with a sheet or so inside it so you can remove all traces of cat should your cat think you have kindly set up a new cat-bed :), and be vigilant- when your cat goes to explore the basket hiss, clap, shout and generally do things that make you unpopular with cats! It may seem harsh if you're generally soft with him/her (didn't read the other thread); but it works.

Good luck!