In a message dated 10/1/1999 7:43:54 AM Central Daylight Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:
<< From today's Op-Ed section of the New York Times on the Web:
October 1, 1999
Beware the Parenting Police
By PENELOPE LEACH
LONDON -- In the Western world, anxious parents love to follow scientific
studies that tell them what to do with their babies.
The Federal Consumer Product Safety Commission played into this obsession
on Wednesday when it issued a stern warning: parents who sleep with their
babies and toddlers are at risk of accidentally smothering or strangling
them.
Before making such a stark declaration of cause and effect, a government
agency should make its case very carefully. In this particular instance,
one would expect the commission to establish beyond a doubt that some
babies died solely because they were sleeping in their parents' beds.
But it did nothing of the kind, and its dire warning could end up hurting,
rather than helping, parents and their babies.
First, as its authors admit, the study did not adequately account for other
risk factors. It found that from 1990 to 1997, 515 children under the age
of 2 died as a result of sleeping in their parents' beds. How did the study
determine this? It looked at the death certificates of infants, coroners'
reports and news accounts.
But death certificates often don't mention other risk factors. Did the
parents drink? Did they smoke or take drugs? Above all, were the babies
lying on their stomachs? All these elements have been shown to play roles
in sudden infant death syndrome.
Three other studies, in the United States, New Zealand and Britain,
reported no direct risk to babies from sleeping in parents' beds. The
studies, published in medical journals in 1996, 1997 and 1999, blamed other
factors for deaths. The New Zealand research found that sudden infant death
syndrome could be reduced by 35 percent if babies slept on their backs
instead of their stomachs. This is now accepted advice everywhere.
Even without definitive scientific proof, is there any harm in warning
parents that it may be dangerous to sleep with their babies? Well, yes. We
are talking about something that is very important in the lives of many
parents. Being close at night helps parents bond with their babies, and for
mothers who aren't at home during the day, bed-sharing is a vital aid to
breast-feeding.
What happens if mothers are convinced that their duty is to keep the baby
in the crib? How many will get up night after night when a baby cries,
nurse the baby, rock the baby to sleep, put the baby back in the crib, then
go to bed? When a mother nurses an infant in her bed, both get more sleep.
The new study seems to play to the vulnerability of Western parents, who,
lacking traditional supports like extended families, village elders and
traditions, rely on experts.
For instance, an obstetrician says, "For the sake of the baby, you must
have a C-section." Any woman has to say yes. No wonder more than a fifth of
all births in the United States are by Caesarean.
I'm not knocking experts, but I do think we should avoid offering advice
until we're absolutely sure that it accounts for every variable. How many
times has one study come out, only to be contradicted by another?
And sometimes experts should trust the parents. As long as the parents
don't drink, smoke, sleep with thick comforters or put babies on their
stomachs, there is no real evidence against sleeping with a baby, as most
people in the world do.
Penelope Leach, a psychologist at the University of London, is the author
of "Your Baby and Child: From Birth to Age Five."
>>
***********************************************
The LACTNET mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software together with L-Soft's LSMTP(TM)
mailer for lightning fast mail delivery. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html
|
