Court Upholds Charges Against Co-Sleeping Parents
Posted by:
banana who
()
Date: January 12, 2012 02:27AM This is the second baby of theirs to die this way! WTF?!
[main.aol.com] If parents want their babies nearby, why not have something which attaches to the bed?! Why does the baby have to actually share a bed with Mama and Daddy? Re: Court Upholds Charges Against Co-Sleeping Parents
Posted by:
Anonymous User
()
Date: January 12, 2012 03:12AM I slept with both babies, ok I still do lol. But I'm not heavy of body, I didn't go to bed intoxicated, use heavy blankets, put tiny baby between myself and another, etc.
Watch the video, she talks about the parent's breathing etc regulating a baby's system, this can prevent SIDS etc. Co-sleeping has so many benefits, and I'm talking in the bed right there beside you, not in a side sleeper or crib in the room. Re: Court Upholds Charges Against Co-Sleeping Parents
Posted by:
banana who
()
Date: January 12, 2012 03:23AM Coco, if you don't mind a semi-personal question: you were ALONE in that bed with the baby, correct? Because a big man and a woman and a tiny little baby sounds like a sandwhich from hell. I get having the baby nearby, but lying there doesn't make sense to me, especially if a man is in bed. Re: Court Upholds Charges Against Co-Sleeping Parents
Posted by:
banana who
()
Date: January 12, 2012 03:24AM And plus, if it already happened to them (for whatever reason), I would think the first baby's death would have put a damper in the whole practice. D'oh! Re: Court Upholds Charges Against Co-Sleeping Parents
Posted by:
Anonymous User
()
Date: January 12, 2012 03:54AM I agree, they were not being smart. I wouldn't put baby between two bodies of any size, the recommendation is against this. I did sleep with both kids at times but I sleep in the middle even now. Kids in a bed together is a recipe for an elbow in the eye at BEST! Re: Court Upholds Charges Against Co-Sleeping Parents
Posted by:
rawalice
()
Date: January 12, 2012 01:20PM As my dad used to always tell me, "We brought you into this world, we can take you out!" That poor woman, having that happen again, then being accused. What was she thinking? Did she fall asleep breast feeding? Oh, regulating their system? Sounds like a control freak who would have created a psychopath anyway. Sorry for your loss. Re: Court Upholds Charges Against Co-Sleeping Parents
Posted by:
Anonymous User
()
Date: January 12, 2012 01:32PM Rawalice, did you watch the video? Small babies often fall so deeply asleep that they stop breathing, this is a major cause of SIDS. Being beside mom to whom baby was so closely connected in utero can regulate breathing, the actual sound and action of breath stimulates same in baby. The steady heart beat and breathing of mom sustains the life of the baby after he or she is born. Seriously, where do you get creation of a psychopath from that? Re: Court Upholds Charges Against Co-Sleeping Parents
Posted by:
rawalice
()
Date: January 12, 2012 01:58PM Babies need touch, with that I agree, but once they pop out, they are their own person. Individuality is an important trait to develop. Otherwise, we'd all be mindless creatures with no true conscience to guide us. Who knows what causes SIDS? I used one of those triangle side sleepers, though, for both of my children, and they got plenty of touch, in a front carrier during the day. (I didn't watch the whole thing, I went by your assessment. Thank you, by the way.) Re: Court Upholds Charges Against Co-Sleeping Parents
Posted by:
Anonymous User
()
Date: January 12, 2012 02:13PM Don't you think those concepts are a bit advanced for a newborn? I agree that the development of autonomy is essential to a healthy human mind but we're talking about a tiny little thing, can't hold it's head up, can't feed itself, has no language, no bowel or urinary control, no teeth, is completely helpless, even forgets how to breathe! There's time enough to think about independence once a child is actually able to control some aspect of their physical being. Until they they might as well be still attached to mom.
Amazingly enough, due to the development of our large brains our young are born about 6 months premature as compared to other primates. Evolution favoured women who survived childbirth by going through it earlier and earlier, those who went full term could never have passed a baby of that size through the birth canal and died. So our young are not even fully formed and developed when they are born, they are completely helpless as no other creature on the face of the earth is. I think they should be in contact with mama constantly until they are able to at least hold up their own heads and sit up unassisted. That's not always possible but it can be done quite a bit, sleep time included. Re: Court Upholds Charges Against Co-Sleeping Parents
Posted by:
vermontnl
()
Date: January 12, 2012 02:49PM I had my son sleep on his own mini futon right next to mine and his father's futon. This made it easy to breast feed and for me to sleep indepenedently after feeding. Re: Court Upholds Charges Against Co-Sleeping Parents
Posted by:
rawalice
()
Date: January 12, 2012 06:29PM Well, coco, I understand where you're coming from, but at the same time, the term "smothering with love" comes to mind for this particular subject. Plus, daddy needs some attention too! (If he's around.) You know how guys are! I don't know, maybe even babies need some alone time too. Re: Court Upholds Charges Against Co-Sleeping Parents
Posted by:
banana who
()
Date: January 12, 2012 10:17PM LOL! "Daddy needs some attention!" Ha ha...That was the other thing I was thinking about. Am I a prude? I just think it's a little icky to do IT with the kid right there. Even in the same room! I know, I know, in the Amazon basin or the Navaho people or whoever does it like that but...
I think Raw Alice brings up a good point about closeness. I sometimes wonder about whether it's a bit excessive to ALWAYS have the child against the mother. I do think baby slings are very good because parents can do things while wearing them and it's better than a buggy facing away from the parent. Weird timing: the Chicago Trib had a front-page article on co-sleeping TODAY! [www.chicagotribune.com] Re: Court Upholds Charges Against Co-Sleeping Parents
Posted by:
Anonymous User
()
Date: January 12, 2012 10:28PM I think it's a bit weird to put arbitrary limitations on the needs of infants for no good reason though. There is only a relatively small window of time when a tiny one wants to be held all the time, very quickly they desire to explore their environment and want DOWN. That's when all the fun really happens, oh man.
As for s.e.x. that's up to the couple. I personally didn't have the urge for the first year at least, I can't imagine. The chicagotribune article was so biased, too silly. There are way more infants who die of SIDS than co-sleeping. I'm not saying sleeping in a crib will kill a child and I'm not saying co-sleeping is safe for everyone to do. You shouldn't sleep with a baby with your arms around them as the dad in that article did, nor should you sleep with an infant if you aren't used to it, are such a deep sleeper that you don't wake easily, and/or are unusually exhausted (that was the state of that father). It's very sad but a little common sense goes a long way. If you're restless or the baby is, if you're not a light sleeper or if you're too much of a light sleeper, etc etc etc, a side bed may be a better option. Honestly, it's not that difficult to figure something out and it's not like sleeping arrangements don't change either, babies get older and more independent, learn to self-soothe, can get comfortable with a night-time routine. People are making too much of this, over analyzing and making decisions that aren't based in their own experiences. There isn't any one right way, it's worth it not to cross ideas right off the list without really thinking about them with an open mind and weighing the options. Re: Court Upholds Charges Against Co-Sleeping Parents
Posted by:
rawalice
()
Date: January 13, 2012 07:48PM I didn't actually mean sex, just some together time without baby in the way. Men can get so jealous. Re: Court Upholds Charges Against Co-Sleeping Parents
Posted by:
brome
()
Date: January 14, 2012 09:21PM Coco is right. It wasn't until modern times that mother father and children slept separately.
Re: Court Upholds Charges Against Co-Sleeping Parents
Posted by:
rawalice
()
Date: January 14, 2012 09:47PM Re: Court Upholds Charges Against Co-Sleeping Parents
Posted by:
brome
()
Date: January 14, 2012 10:42PM Eight in a bed:
In Bud Cheff's book Indian Trails and Grizzly Tales he tells of living under the poverty of the great depression in the 1930's. They only had one room, one bed, and no spare blankets. So when friends came to stay overnite they all piled into their one small double bed, 2 men, 2 women, 2 small babies, and 2 older babies; the adults on the bottom layer and the babies layered on top. Re: Court Upholds Charges Against Co-Sleeping Parents
Posted by:
brome
()
Date: January 14, 2012 11:57PM Here's more from the link I posted above:
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
|
|