Stuff

Co-Sleeping Is A Trendy ‘New Parenting Fad’ That Could ‘Kill Your Baby!’ According To Dumb Article

By  | 

Attachment Parenting Could Kill Your BabyWhen my babies were babies, I practiced a parenting style I like to term “Super Exhausted Breastfeeding And Collapsing Into Bed With My Babies” Style. I co-slept with all of my kids. I knew the risks involved. I took many precautions. I never used a ton of pillows or heavy duvets and I never drank or did drugs or any of the other things you aren’t supposed to do when sharing a bed with an infant. I am a light sleeper, and the second any of my kids even quietly cooed in their sleep I woke up. It worked really well for me. My main reason for deciding to share a bed with my babies is because I am lazy. I knew I didn’t want to wander over to a separate crib or down the hall to a nursery to get them for nursing. I also loved being close to them.

For REALS Headline:

Screen Shot 2013-08-22 at 6.37.38 AM

SIDS is a horrible thing and my heart breaks for any parent who has lost a child this way. I know that sharing a bed with a baby can increase the chances of SIDS, even though some studies say that co-sleeping reduces the likelihood of a baby dying this way. What I don’t agree with is alarmist news articles like this one published today in the Daily Mail that pretty much states any parents who bring their babies into their bed will more than likely kill them:

The comprehensive review – compiled with data from five previous studies and after examining nearly 1,500 cases of SIDS – revealed that an estimated 88 per cent of deaths that occurred while a child slept with their parents would not have happened if the baby had not been bed-sharing.

And then the article goes on to say:

This is, perhaps, due to the popularity of trendy ‘attachment parenting’, as espoused by psychologists such as Penelope Leach and celebrity mothers from Angelina Jolie to Heidi Klum. It encourages mothers to feed their babies on demand and never let them out of their sight.

The ‘breastapo’ also has a case to answer: pressure on women to breastfeed has led to a huge rise in co-sleeping, with 80 per cent of mothers succumbing to it.

Trendy attachment parenting! Trendy trendy even though it has been around for a gazillion years! Plus, they stole “breastapo” from me, I just know it.

Moms don’t SUCCUMB to breastfeeding or attachment parenting or co-sleeping because Heidi Klum does it. We parent this way because we feel it is what’s best for our babies, or in my case, because I am really lazy. I held my kids a lot because I wanted to, and I like being held so I assumed tiny humans must like it too. The article then contradicts itself, and discusses how Japan has the lowest rate of SIDS in the world, and how Japanese moms usually co-sleep and has quotes from a few other experts on the safety of co-sleeping. BUT THEN!!! It goes on to say that co-sleeping means parents don’t have sex:

And what of the husbands in this arrangement? Co-sleeping inevitably creates an added barrier to spousal relations which are often already strained by a newborn.

Listen, I don’t wanna tell the Daily Mail how to get all freaky but they need to realize that couples can have sex places other than in the bed with a baby sleeping in it. Or couples can decide they wanna have sex and put the baby in the crib while they are having sex and then get the baby when it’s time for sleep. If co-sleeping messes up your sex life than how did I end up having three kids?

Parents need to research all their options and decide that is best when it comes to infant sleeping arrangements. There are plenty of safety measures most parents who decide to co-sleep take in order to make their bed safe for baby. Parents are actually really smart people, and I think the majority of those that do co-sleep probably read a mess of parenting books and articles about it in order to do it. There is a ton of conflicting information out there regarding co-sleeping and SIDS, and it’s up to parents to research and decide for themselves. Not a news article that makes attachment parenting out to be some hot new trend like what lipstick shades will be IN for fall.

(Image: GoodMood Photo/shutterstock)

24 Comments

  1. Emmali Lucia

    August 22, 2013 at 9:37 am

    Wow, that news article is incredibly sensationalistic. That’s just a really bad news article. Honestly you guys have better news articles and you aren’t even a news site!

    I can see why there might be a difference in Japan, though. American’s are “soft pillow and huge comforter” crazy. I don’t think the Japanese are quite as into pillow top mattresses and huge Duvets as we are.

    That and you’re not even supposed to be having sex for the first 4-6 weeks after having a baby any ways! If you co-slept for 4-6 weeks it wouldn’t change anything in the sex department.

    • ElleJai

      August 24, 2013 at 7:09 am

      Yeah, “supposed to”… *awkward look*

  2. Katie L.

    August 22, 2013 at 9:43 am

    Co-sleeping is something pre-baby me was high and mighty about. I was all “I’d NEVER do that! It can’t be safe for the baby!” Post-baby me had to eat some crow on that one. It was the only way I got some sleep, especially once I went back to work. I also don’t regret it at all. I loved snuggling with my baby.

  3. keelhaulrose

    August 22, 2013 at 9:44 am

    Daily Mail. That should speak enough about the journalistic integrity of the article. That would be like someone taking the Enquierer seriously.

  4. Amber Starr

    August 22, 2013 at 10:41 am

    When I have my baby, I won’t be co-sleeping for two reasons:
    -I’m an INCREDIBLY light sleeper already
    -Because of back surgery in 2009, I toss and turn and flop around all night long

    For me, I don’t feel like the baby will be safe in bed with me…however… that is just MY situation. If other parents want to sleep with their babies, more power to ’em. This DM article is inflammatory and unfair. I say, sleep however it works for your family.

    • Emmali Lucia

      August 22, 2013 at 10:53 am

      Have you seen the little co-sleeper cribs?

      It keeps your baby safe in their own crib area but you don’t have to actually get out of bed in the middle of the night to feed them. It’s like the ultimate crib because I think you can detach it and put the forth side back up.

    • Amber Starr

      August 22, 2013 at 11:34 am

      I haven’t heard of those! I’m still learning so much about all the awesome baby stuff out there and I would love to check it out! Thank you so much for the info… since this is my first pregnancy, I absolutely appreciate any advice or info 🙂

    • allisonjayne

      August 22, 2013 at 12:12 pm

      We had the arm’s reach co-sleeper and quite liked it.

    • Emmali Lucia

      August 22, 2013 at 3:57 pm

      Here’s a good website that shows how you can get a cheapo crib from IKEA and turn it into a co-sleeper:

      http://www.ikeahackers.net/2012/02/sniglar-crib-co-sleeper.html

    • Amber Starr

      August 22, 2013 at 4:52 pm

      Thank you so much! What an awesome idea! 😀

    • Rachel

      August 22, 2013 at 11:44 am

      Those look amazing! I wish I had seen those when I just had my son–the reason I did not co-sleep was that I am like some kind of gymnast when I am asleep & would totally have ended up on top of my son at some point.

    • Rachel Sea

      August 22, 2013 at 3:26 pm

      There is a difference between co-sleeping, and bed sharing. Co-sleeping means sharing the same room and is almost always a good idea according to science. Bed sharing is questionable because typical American beds are major suffocation hazards. I will never intentionally bed share with an infant because my bed has a pillow top mattress, a dense blanket, large pillows, and a comforter or two, depending on the weather. It’s basically a newborn death-trap but it’s what my wife and I need to sleep well.

  5. Tea

    August 22, 2013 at 10:52 am

    Gotta love Daily Fail…

  6. TngldBlue

    August 22, 2013 at 11:04 am

    I’m confused, maybe I just should’ve read the study or more information but I thought SIDS was generally unexplained death? How did they determine 88% of SIDS deaths would not have happened if the parents didn’t co-sleep? Is suffocation now considered SIDS?

    • Rachel

      August 22, 2013 at 11:42 am

      I don’t think you are confused at all, since that caught my eye, too…I think the “journalist” flat-out doesn’t know what he is writing about.

    • bellarose

      August 22, 2013 at 12:36 pm

      SIDS does not have to be unexplained. It’s a sudden death in an infant. The myth is that it’s unexplained, when, in reality, there are very common causes, the most prevalent is suffocation, which can happen whenever a baby’s face is pressed into something, be it a blanket, a mattress, or even their mother’s body.

    • Rachel Sea

      August 22, 2013 at 3:20 pm

      SIDS is a misnomer. Almost all SIDS deaths are actually suffocation deaths, a small percentage are other things like undiagnosed heart defects or brain bleeds.

  7. Rachel

    August 22, 2013 at 11:29 am

    Like keelhaulrose said–at least this ‘article’ was published in the Daily Mail, and not an actual news source. Still, the condescending attitude that permeates the article is infuriating. It comes just shy of stating that new parents co-sleep because Angelina Jolie champions it, or that they regard her advise as in the same category as a child psychologist, but it implies it. Since parents who co-sleep are new age robots following the latest fad, or something.
    By the same token, it stops just shy of actually saying that co-sleepers are responsible for their infant’s death in the case of SIDS…but it wanders dangerously close to it. And, the lack of integrity in the article is astonishing. They identified a correlation, which is hardly the same thing as causation. The fact that the contradictory data comes from Japan–a country noted for having a medical system that is beyond superb–should have at least made the ‘journalist’ raise an eyebrow…and yet, he didn’t even seem to think that the data contradicted the rest of his article.

  8. Bellarose

    August 22, 2013 at 12:35 pm

    Until you’ve had a child die of SIDS, you really can’t know how frustrating articles like this are to parents who’ve lost a child. I was all about AP and I took the same precautions you did… no drugs, no drinking, no heavy blankets or pillows… and yet, one day, I awoke to find that I’d lost my daughter. It happens all too often. I think that a lot of parents who co-sleep have the idea that, because they’re from middle-upper class background, and are educated that this won’t happen to them. Well, it can.

    • SusannahJoy

      August 22, 2013 at 5:13 pm

      I am so sorry for your loss! I can’t imagine how painful that is.

    • Eve Vawter

      August 23, 2013 at 4:36 am

      I am so sorry too Bella.

  9. DMH

    August 22, 2013 at 3:33 pm

    I didn’t co sleep because of reading shit like this. I wish I had just trusted myself.

    I also got up to check on my son every freaking hour for five solid months whenever he was sleeping because he refused to sleep on his back, with the whole OMG TUMMY SLEEPING = SUFFOCATIONDEATHSIDS thing going on.

    I feel robbed. Robbed of co sleeping and robbed of sleep when my son was an infant.

  10. Melissa

    August 23, 2013 at 11:42 am

    So, let me get this straight. When the Daily Mail takes an alarmist angle on the interpretation of the results of a study, we should all be outraged, but it’s okay when the mommyish bloggers do the exact same thing? Believe me, I have the same problem with the angle on co-sleeping that the Daily Mail “journalist” chose to take as you do, but it seems a little hypocritical when I have read similarly written articles that spread false or misguided interpretations on this very website. Anyways, we all know that the point of these sensational headlines is to get people to click on the article, and it seems to have worked in this case.

  11. Pingback: Quotes About Mothers And Sons Are Usually Cheesy

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *