how dangerous to put baby to sleep on side ?

[smk84]

Hi, DS, 6 weeks old, will only seem to settle to sleep on his side. Can anyone please point me in the direction of any evidence for this being dangerous? I know babies used to be put to sleep on their sides. If we put him on his back he just wakes up every 20 minutes at the moment. It really worries me though that we should be putting him on his back. Do you think it's ok to put him on his side during the day while he is being watched? Does anyone let their baby sleep on their side all the time? Many thanks

Ds, now 21, was always put on his side. Then when he was about 6 weeks old he started rolling onto his stomach, and no matter how much we propped him on his side in an effort to stop him, he still managed to roll, so we let him. Then he started sleeping through.

My point is that I don't think any one sleeping position is any more, or less 'dangerous'. If he sleeps better on his side then let him. That way you get more sleep too, which is, let's face it, an important consideration. Good luck. :)

It's DS preferred sleeping position. As soon as he could roll himself onto his side in his sleep he did although we always put him down on his back. We don't bother moving him back - no one would get any sleep if we tried that! He was a bit older than your DS though when he started. Sorry thats not very helpful at all is it

14day old DD is currently sound asleep on her side. She was previously asleep on her tummy but lay on my chest.

Google risk factors for SIDS - If you can exclude all but the sleeping position then i'm sure it'll be fine. A comfy baby is a happy baby and a happy baby makes a happy home. DD has slept through from 10days old.

Should add Dd is Dc3 - Other two were left to sleep how they liked and it hasn't done them any harm.

Same here Boysrstupid. DD is asleep on her side. I always put her to sleep on her back but if she's napping near me then I'll put her on her side as she sleeps better.

The rates of SIDs fell dramatically when parents were told to put babies on their backs, so I don't think that telling people to eliminate other factors is sensible advice.

Saying that, I did let DD sleep on her side when I was watching her (during the day) but put her on her back at night.

I see this as a weighing up of risk and advantage. Sure the advantage of getting more sleep is tempting, but the risk is too horrible to contemplate.

All of mine would only ever sleep on their sides or tummies, All (5)!! I know what the stats say but as a mum you have to weigh it up. I was also a baby put to sleep on my tummy and so was my brother born at 28 weeks, 25 years ago! He is fighting fit!

MrsMops
I realise that there are plenty of people who do this, I simply question the sense of making assumptions based on anecdotal evidence that you and your family have been fine when the consequences could be so serious.

I don't think that this is doing what is right for you and your baby (not you personally, but the OP and others reading this) as it there is clear evidence that putting a baby down to sleep on his/her back greatly reduces the risk of SIDs.

I've also co slept with all of my children, which clearly will be unpopular too and havent crushed them to death so far. I can't actually stand watch over my 10 month son all night and turn him on his back every time he's in his tummy. He's very mobile nearly walking, crawling etc. Perhaps it's just me but all if mine have had exceptional head control from birth, crawled and rolled early. So even if placed on back would roll over to tummy. I've also had 2 with redux and they were in acute pain on their backs.

So my point was as a mum you have to weigh up the stats and make in informed choice.

Sleeping on their side is statistically more risky than sleeping on their backs but still much less risky than sleeping on their tummies.

I don't have the exact stats/link to hand, but I remember looking into this when my baby wouldn't sleep on her back. She slept on her side until she was 12 weeks, at which point she suddenly was happy to be on her back (some sort of developmental leap/weight gain thing I guess).

Will try to find the link/stats.

From the FSID website:

"The safest way for your baby to sleep is on the back. It is not safe for babies to sleep on their fronts or sides. Babies sleeping on their sides have twice the risk of cot death as babies who are sleeping on their backs. Always sleep your baby on her back, but when she is awake allow her to spend time on her front."

And from patient.co.uk:

"Cot death is uncommon. About 1 in 2000 babies die due to cot death in the UK. That is, about 250 babies a year in the UK. Most cases occur in babies under the age of five months. However, the number of cases in the UK has fallen sharply since the introduction of the 'Reduce the Risk' campaign in 1991. (In 1990 more than 3 in 1000 babies died of cot death.)"

I can't find the relative risk compared to sleeping on their front, but I hope this helps.

The question put was, do any of you put their babies on their sides? To which the answer is yes some people do!

Everyone is well aware of the stats. And i wasn't saying we shouldn't all try, but what r you supposed to do in the real world when your baby wont????

There are lots of contributing factors to SIDS and a friend of mines baby actually died at 6 weeks but he was on his back and still died. It is such a tragedy when a baby dies but sleeping on their back is not the only factor.

Being a parent we all have to make informed choices about our children.

I let my babies sleep on their sides most of the time. They were fine. OP is asking for anecdotal experiences.

I met a tiny baby the other day who has to sleep on front for medical reasons. You do indeed have to weigh up individual circumstances.

Neighbour lost a baby to cot death. Baby was sleeping on her front, but then sleeping on front was recommended back then to prevent other risks.

Perhaps this is also controversial but I know of loads of mums who put their babies on their sides and tummies to sleep and lie to the busy body hv they are on their back because they know the backlash. We have given the nursery signed consent for him to go on his side/tummy. He is certainly not the only baby in the nursery to do this. So my question is what are the true stats???

I think side sleeping is not a hugely high risk but is considered higher risk because even little babies can roll from their side to their front. You are not meant to use anything to wedge them to prevent overheating, and if you did you shouldn't wedge from behind as you increase the chance of them going onto their tummy. But as i understand it side sleeping is otherwise ok, much less risky than tummy but higher than on their back. Once baby is rolling they are fine to tummy sleep.

My 14 week old DT2 (with reflux) is currently asleep on his side. Dh and i feel we have made an informed decision. He is not wedged. He has never rolled onto his tummy and sometimes ends up on his back. DT1 is already able to sleep on his back but not DT2 yet.

My dd1 would become completely hysterical when put on her back so I ended up putting her on her side. At the time I did quite a lot of online research. From memory, I think the risk of SIDS when sleeping on your side is double that of sleeping on your back. However, the risk is still something like 7 (or 15?) times less than sleeping on your front. I think there was a hypothesis that the risk of sleeping on your side only doubled because some babies fell forward when sleeping on their side and therefore ended up on their front. We used to wedge our dd on her side with a bag of rice and a towel. If you are worried, you could maybe put your baby on their side but have a movement monitor.

There is no way my 2 reflux babies would have slept on their backs either. Nor my 5th with breathing difficulties! He just couldn't breathe when laid flat.

Why is it frowned upon as parents to make informed choices? Not all babies are the same?

Oh gawd, I didn't know you shouldn't sleep them on their side. I've done this since Dd was born, and she just over two weeks old now. She had a lot of mucus after she was born and the midwives told me to do it to help her. So I've just carried on laying her down like it, wedging rolled up blankets behind/infront to stop her rolling

McPhee I had that with baby 5! I'm not sure what you're supposed to do then according to statistics! If you are still having same breathing mucous issues I would think it safer to be on side in my experience, No doubt someone will be along in a mo to tell you not though.

She is a lot better, but in the night I can still hear her snuffling, and that mucus rattle at the back of her throat. If I lay her on her back I'm genuinely scared it might make it difficult for her to breath

Yes well then IMO I think you're doing the right thing. But that's just my opinion which apparently isn't very popular, if really concerned, I expect mw has discharged you but they should have left a number to call? I wouldn't broach subject with hv until youve spoken to same mw again to clarify.

My son would actually stop breathing when on his back coz of blocked tubes!

You have to be happy with your decision. Go with your gut instinct.

My babies have all slept better on their tummies. You cannot deny the overwhelming evidence that it is safer for them to sleep on their backs though. We purchased a movement monitor which meant I was happier leaving them to sleep like that.

mine slept better on their sides as well, i co-slept with them and i did roll a small blanket and put it infront of their tummy/legs so they couldnt roll onto their front, that was when they were in bed on their own, when i went to bed i removed that.

once a baby can roll itself ie front to back and back again then the sids risk is lowered anyway and if they do roll themselves then you can leave them on their front, esp once they are crawling age? or that is what i thought anyway?

When my son was in NICU they put him to sleep on his tummy!

There is some evidence that fire retardant chemicals plus pvc in baby mattresses could be a factor. This evidence was ignored by UK government but taken more seriously by New Zealand. They started wrapping baby mattresses in polythene and dramatically reduced incidence of cot death. Nowadays most baby mattresses don't contain these chemicals even though gov says they are "safe", lots of manufacturers have stopped using them.

MrsMops
I am not blaming you or judging you, but for every thread on MN there are dozens of lurkers who read but do not post. If the impression is given that sleeping on the side or tummy is fine, then some parents might think that the recommendations have changed.

Of course there are some few babies with medical issues that make sleeping on their backs is necessary, but most babies are fine (if grumpy) with this.

Now how does this work again??
www.stopsidsnow.com/SuccessOfMattressWrapping.html