now and again, i encounter scientific literature that goes against the grain, against instinct, if i may call parenting that. see, we’ve adapted the “attachment parenting” approach in bringing up jan: lots of physical contact and no cry-til-you-can’t-breathe-anymore and the you-have-to-learn-how-to-soothe-yourself disciplinary approach. together with attachment parenting naturally comes breast-feeding and co-sleeping; jan has been breastfed for more than a year, and is still with us on the matrimonial bed to date.

so being a breastfeeding advocate, i am confounded by a recent report saying that breastmilk cause more cavities than cow’s milk. i say, huh? and then there’s the new guideline from the American Academy of Pediatrics saying that infants should sleep in their cribs, not in their parents’ beds.

“The recommendations are very straightforward and clear: Babies should not be asleep in the same bed that their parents are sleeping in,” said James Kemp, M.D., associate professor of pediatrics at Saint Louis University and a world-recognized researcher on SIDS.

so will I follow the AAP recommendation? No way!

SIDS is a syndrome that shold not be confused with suffocation. the root cause for SIDS is not even pinpointed yet, as far as i know. there was a theory some time back that it was probably a microbial infection, but as soon as jan was past the susceptible age, i lost interest in the SIDs issue. but now that it infringes on the concept of co-sleeping, i am aghast how this research dares to contradict something that is natural: for parents and their offsprings to stay together. the st. louis press release further says:

He also has found that SIDS is more common among African-American infants than in babies of other races because they are more likely to be put to sleep in adult beds or on surfaces other than cribs, such as sofas.

“There are varied reasons for sleeping with your kids. In St. Louis, we found that the practice was more common among families who could not afford safe cribs,” Kemp said.

The policy statement makes other recommendations about where babies should sleep: They shouldn’t share beds with other children, nor sleep with an adult on a couch or armchair.

not only do i find this racially insensitive, but difficult to believe. we’re not african-americans, but at any rate, our decision to co-sleep with jan had nothing to do with cost-cutting. in fact, we had a crib, a safe, sturdy crib, declared safe according to EU standards. all that emotional attachment parenting issues aside, we also had a fairly scientific ground to put him to bed with us: we figured that if SIDS was, indeed, an infectious disease, we would have had better chances of spotting the symptoms if he was right beside me, rather than if he was in his bed in another room. the ease of breastfeeding and the mammalian instinct to nurture their offspring by keeping close physical contact were difficult to ignore, of course.

i am not doubting the results of the study. afterall, i am neither a doctor, nor a medical researcher. but i wonder whether the study included population samples from asia and africa, where a crib is a rare luxury, if ever heard-of at all. in africa, babies are even borne on their mother’s backs the whole day long, on a sling (which i used, too, til jan got too heavy to bear). i wonder what the AAP has to say about this, in relation to the risk of contracting SIDS? and taking that further, i wouldn’t be surprised if they consider the mother’s arms as an unsafe place for an infant to sleep in!

If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!


This entry was posted on Monday, October 10th, 2005 at and is filed under parenting. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.