The Weekly Review

The safety of sleep
10.48AM  19-7-2012
/site/_content/image/00006020-image.jpg

They are words I don’t even want to write: the waking nightmare of finding your baby cold and unresponsive in the bed with you.

The State Coroner’s recent finding on co-sleeping – sharing a sleeping surface with a newborn or infant – was a bombshell, and has created an awful conundrum for those who believe, or have been told, co-sleeping is actually one of the best things you can do for your young child. After investigating four cases of babies who died after sleeping with their parents, John Olle said the practice was “inherently dangerous” and that babies less than 12 months old should sleep on their backs in their own cots.

The messages on this issue are now so completely mixed that nightfall must create an environment of anxiety, if not panic, for many families across the country: just where should baby sleep?

Parents are now offered, by so many different health professionals, completely contradictory interpretations of the dangers/benefits of co-sleeping. One GP I know, who happily co-slept with all her children, cites recent research that demonstrates the practice actually prevents sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), because the child is aware of the presence of the mother, thereby reducing the possibility of sleep apnoea incidents. The other side of the story you know all too well: you can roll on them, the blankets or pillows can suffocate them, and they can slip between wall and bed, between mother and father.

I have no idea any more which way of sleeping is better, but I have a sneaking suspicion that even in early infancy the child instinctively knows what will keep her safe. Some babies just won’t or don’t sleep with their parents – they settle only in their own space, no matter how much the parents might yearn for co-sleeping. Some high-needs babies – usually struggling with issues such as reflux, colic or other conditions – need the proximity and cling to their parents, at least in the earlier days. Who is to say that they are not acting out of a basic need to be kept close and safe? And we all know that once the kids hit their toddler years and beyond, they are in and out of your bed for all sorts of reasons, real and imagined.

But I think we need to be honest with ourselves about one factor, and that is the need of the mother – and it is mostly the mother – to sleep with her child. The less-analysed side of what is now called “attachment parenting” (kind of like demand-feeding but for every aspect of the baby’s life) is the desire of the mother to be attached, not necessarily the child. Is the argument about how good co-sleeping is for “bonding” an argument about the child’s need, or the parent’s? If love and support is provided at all other times, is it really also needed at sleeping time?

One fact that can’t be overlooked, and that potentially takes some of the heat out of this issue, is that SIDS deaths in Victoria are now at their lowest levels. The education campaigns have worked, and while even one baby’s death is of course too many, as a community we are far more aware of the dangers of smoking, alcohol, drug taking and overheated beds when it comes to babies. And while it might seem counter-intuitive to argue that the loving presence of parents can be harmful to the sleeping child, if we know that they can be safe in their own space – albeit just an arm’s length away from us – perhaps we can accept that the baby can bear to be without us for just a few, crucial hours.

 

Comments

Posted by Anthony Whitmarsh at 10.41PM  27-7-2012
As usual Virginia Trioli has written a very well argued piece about a very important topic. Unfortunatley many doctors, although they may read research papers, do not appear to have a sound understanding of either research methods or statistics, and this coroner seems to be a case in point. Four cot deaths that he has seen is no statistical basis for any argument that sleeping with your child is a predisposing factor. What other factors might be involved? Did the parents smoke? The only way to resolve this issue is a critical review of all the research that has been published on the subject. There is likely to be contradictory research on most subjects you can think of, and for a coroner to come out with such a recommendation on the basis of so little information not only flies in the face of common sense but smacks of professional irresponsibility.
Posted by james king at 11.25AM  27-7-2012
Virginia- this wasn't 'mouthing-off' this was a thoughtful sensitive piece of writing about a very complex topic, refreshingly devoid of spin, politics or bias. You are right, the 'back to sleep' campaign has saved many infants, but SIDS will never be completely eliminated. A complete ban on co-sleeping seems not only counter intuitive, but overly prescriptive, and could never be complied with. C0-sleeping is much more dangerous when there's drugs, alcohol or smoking or exhaustion. That needs to be stressed, for the benefit of infants and their parents.
Posted by Adrienne Morton at 11.54AM  25-7-2012
An excellent piece. A brave piece.
Submit a comment
Name
Email
Comment
Stonnington
Heidelberg
Bayside
South East
Eastern
Geelong
The Pioneer
11.32AM 17-5-2013
For 45 years Jack Thompson has embodied the Australian spirit on screen and he’s not about to sto...
Tonka
11.30AM 17-5-2013
Kendall Hill reviews Tonka.
The Rusty Fox
11.27AM 17-5-2013
Leanne Tolra reviews The Rusty Fox.
Looking beyond the standards
11.31AM 17-5-2013
Looking beyond standard grape varieties.
The Hamper
11.28AM 17-5-2013
Leanne Tolra samples the contents of this month's hamper.

Perform Australia