Are your children’s vaccines up to date?

Set a reminder

Please or to access all these features

Sleep

Join our Sleep forum for tips on creating a sleep routine for your baby or toddler. Need more advice on your childs development? Sign up to our Ages and Stages newsletter here.

Co-sleeping. Give it a go!

167 replies

MarmaladeSun · 28/08/2004 10:42

Hi all. I've posted a reply on one of the other threads about my 6 week old sleeping with me, and knowing the reactions Mums get from other people if they co sleep, I thought I'd paste this information onto this thread. Hope it helps anyone who's struggling with the night time!

Harvard psychiatrist Michael Commons and his colleagues recently presented the American Association for the Advancement of Science with research that suggests that babies who sleep alone are more susceptible to stress disorders.

Notre Dame anthropology professor and leading sleep researcher, James McKenna, has long held that babies who sleep with their mothers enjoy greater immunilogical benefits from breastfeeding because they nurse twice as frequently as their counterparts who sleep alone.

In his book on Sudden Infant Death Syndrome, pediatrician William Sears cites co-sleeping as a proactive measure parents can take to reduce the risk of this tragedy. McKenna?s research shows that babies who sleep with parents spend less time in Level III sleep, a state of deep sleep when the risk of apneas are increased. Further, co-sleeping babies learn to imitate healthy breathing patterns from their bunkmates.

Every scientific study of infant sleep confirms that babies benefits from co-sleeping. Not one shred of evidence exists to support the widely held notion that co-sleep is detrimental to the psychological or physical health of infants.

If science consistently provides evidence that the American social norm of isolating babies for sleep can have deleterious effects, why do we continue the 150-year crib culture in the United States? Why do parents flock to Toys R? Us to purchase dolls that have heart beats, sing lullabies and snore when they can do the same for free?

McKenna suggests that there are several factors that maintain this cultural norm. Foremost is the American value of self-sufficiency. Independence is an important characteristic for a successful person in our society. We take great pride in watching our babies pick themselves up by their own bootie straps. But the assumption that co-sleeping inhibits independence is pure cultural mythology. In fact, the opposite it true.

Children who share sleep with their parents are actually more independent than their peers. They perform better in school, have higher self esteem, and fewer health problems. After all, who is more likely to be well-adjusted, the child who learns that his needs will be met, or the one who is left alone for long periods of time? McKenna suggests that it is confusing for a baby to receive cuddles during the day while also being taught that the same behavior is inappropriate at night.

The Commons report states that when babies are left alone to cry themselves to sleep, levels of cortisol, a stress hormone, are elevated. Commons suggests that the constant stimulation by cortisol in infancy causes physical changes in the brain. "It makes you more prone to the effects of stress, more prone to illness, including mental illness, and makes it harder to recover from illness," he concludes.

The best-selling book on infant sleep is frighteningly misdirected and offers absolutely no scientific grounds for its thesis. Richard Ferber suggest that the best way to solve your child?s "sleep problems" is to isolate them in another room, shut the door, and let them cry for ten minutes without interruption. Then parents may enter the room and verbally soothe the baby, but are warned against making physical contact with their baby. Shortly after, they are advised to leave the infant to cry for another timed interval a la "Mad About You."

Most sleep disorders are not biologically based, but rather, created by well-intended parents. Making oneself available by intercom is simply not meeting the nighttime needs of an infant.

Many parents argue that they tried "Ferberizing" their baby and enjoyed great success with the technique. Indeed, the infant may stop crying and learn to go to sleep on his own, but this is a short-term pay off for parents. The baby has not suddenly discovered quiet content. He simply is exhausted from his futile efforts to be nurtured. Fifteen years later, the same parents shrug their shoulders and wonder why their kids are shutting them out.

Though co-sleeping is common in most parts of the world, many American parents would not consider it because they fear it will cause them sleep deprivation. Every scientific study concludes that parents who bring their babies to bed sleep longer and better.

A few parents do experience difficulty sleeping with a baby in their bed. For them, a "sidecar" or bedside sleeper is an ideal way to meet their needs for rest and their baby?s need for co-sleep. Keeping a crib or bassinet in the parents? room is another option. A "family bed" is not for everyone, but creative solutions for co-sleep are abundant in our consumer-friendly culture.

The most common question co-sleepers are asked is about maintaining a sexual relationship with one?s partner. The answer is simple. Go someplace where the baby is not. Enough said.

For those who consider unlimited access to their sexual partner more important than meeting the needs of their baby, cat ownership is a wonderful alternative to parenthood. You can just toss a bowl of Nine Lives on the floor and frolic around the house whenever the mood hits you.

Co-sleeping is not right for everyone. Heavy drinkers and drug addicts should avoid sleeping with their babies. Of course, these folks should probably avoid parenthood altogether.

If scientific research consistently demonstrates that co-sleeping offers tremendous benefits for babies and has no deleterious effects, it?s time Americans join the rest of the world and parent our babies 24 hours a day.

Jennifer Coburn
San Diego, California
USA

Send this article
to a friend!

----------------

Related Articles

The Family Bed: An Evolutionary Approach to Family Sleep
To Sleep or Not to Sleep: That is the Question
Someone's Been Sleeping in My Bed!

----------------

Home | All About | Lighter Side | Advocacy | Reading Room | Help Me! | Shopping | Community | Working Mom

URL: www.breastfeeding.com/
Copyright © 1998-2000 Breastfeeding.com, Inc.. Comments and Feedback

Disclaimer: All material provided at Breastfeeding.com is provided for educational purposes only. Consult with your lactation consultant or health care provider regarding the advisability of any opinions or recommendations with respect to your individual situation.

OP posts:
Are your children’s vaccines up to date?
MarmaladeSun · 02/09/2004 09:43

And I agree about the phrase, 'co-sleeping'...I've come to hate typing the bl**dy thing!

OP posts:
MarmaladeSun · 02/09/2004 09:50

Joanneg...thankyou for your comments . Yes, the older ones help out enormously with the baby. Teenagers tend to look after themselves if you see what I mean! And now school is back on things will return to a relative calm. What are you studying with OU? It's hard work but will be so worth it in the end, and a hell of an achievement I think.

OP posts:
lisalisa · 02/09/2004 10:41

Message withdrawn

edam · 02/09/2004 10:48

Lisa, same thing happened to my sister when she was a nanny ... baby OK but awful to think of what could have been...

MarmaladeSun · 02/09/2004 13:01

It's similar to the warnings they give you about cot mattresses fitiing snugly into the frame and not having a gap around it. I've read about the same thing happening in cots. So it's another of those things that can happen in any situation, not just confined to co-sleeping. Incidentally I don't have a gap that my baby could slip into.

OP posts:
lisalisa · 02/09/2004 13:44

Message withdrawn

MarmaladeSun · 02/09/2004 16:30

Nevertheless, that is a valid warning on all cots lisalisa. Just wanted to point out that that wasn't just a danger in co sleeping alone, but in all sleeping places.

OP posts:
MarmaladeSun · 02/09/2004 16:30

And it wouldn't need too big a gap for a baby's face to get trapped I wouldn't have thought.

OP posts:
Hulababy · 02/09/2004 16:37

I always had something right next to the bed so that if she was on the side, DD couldn't fall out. To start with it was the crib we had borrowed from a friend - the one DD absolutely ahted and refused to go near!!! Later it was the bedside cot. But. at friends houses if we stayed over - which we found was so simple for us because of the co-sleeping BTW, no strange cot, etc. - we threw pillows on the floor in a big pile, and put pillows along either side of DD to minimise any problems or likelihood. Never had any problems at all though TBH.

I think most of the so called dangers of co-sleeping can be attributed to other situations, and vice versa.

Why not just say - co-sleeping works for some, own cot from start works best for others. Seems maybe the best solution here!

Canadianmom · 03/09/2004 00:14

Almost afraid to post in case someone misinterprets but we have a 'bed rail' on our bed on the side closest to the wall just to ensure that baby/toddler does not get trapped down the side. Oddly none of our children have ever fallen out of bed but perhaps we are spoiled to have sound sleepers that don't seem to move overly much? I suppose that you could have a guard rail on both sides if it was a worry. Toys R Us sell one that fits on a big bed: here

Canadianmom · 03/09/2004 00:17

O.K. That is cute! I posted from a Canadian web page that clearly says that the product is out of stock... Sorry. I got my guard rail at Wollies and it is foldable (has its own carry sack) to make travel easy.

susanmt · 03/09/2004 01:19

I wanted to add another aspect to this. I REALLY wanted to co-sleep. But following dd1's birth I was put on antidepressants that made me sleepy, so sleepy that when I was feeding her in the night dh had to sit with me in case I dropped her. So there was no way I could have her in with us. I was eventually moved on to different medication after a hospital stay, but by then we were into a cot thing and just left it that way.

I was determined that things would be different with ds, 2 years later. But before and after he was born I was on strong painkillers for kidney stones which made me sleepy, and this has been the case with dd2 as well.

I did co-sleep a little (in the 'help there must be a baby in here somewhere!' way) and loved it, but for us, it was too dangerous. I felt really bad about it for a long time and used to cry when I read anything about co-sleeping, though I did all the other things I had wanted like carrying them, breastfeeding for a long time. But I wish I knew what it was like to have a teeny baby in bed with me. It just was something that wasn't meant to be, I suppose.

bloss · 03/09/2004 05:11

Message withdrawn

MarmaladeSun · 03/09/2004 08:13

Once again, the wrong end of the stick has been grabbed with both hands. I have never condemned non co-sleepers, and it's very unfair to say otherwise. I have explained about the article, I have apologised. I have admitted that I never looked at it from others' point of view and STILL I am being slated for it. I give up.

OP posts:
MarmaladeSun · 03/09/2004 08:15

Canadianmom, I know what you mean. I find myself reading everything I have typed half a dozen times in case there is something there that could be offensive if read in the wrong way. It's a shame, as it makes the whole discussion rather 'stinted' and unnatural. Still, if that's how it is...

OP posts:
Heathcliffscathy · 03/09/2004 09:32

fwiw marmaladesun, apology totally accepted...and actually you didn't need to apologise, just understand wthat some people were getting pissed off with the article (not you)!

bloss · 04/09/2004 07:23

Message withdrawn

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread