Susan, I totally agree that more precise terminology would be beneficial,
but I'd suggest a slight revision for even greater precision by encouraging
the terms I've heard Dr. Jim McKenna use to distinguish between "cosleeping"
(just as you've described) and "bedsharing" (instead of the term
"cobedding"). As a mother of twins, I'm more familiar with the term
"cobedding" being used to referr to the placement of 2 or more
multiple-birth infants in the same bed/crib/cot as per Dr. Helen Ball's ref
http://www.dur.ac.uk/sleep.lab/projects/twins/.

Using "cobedding" to refer to "bedsharing" of one baby with mother or of
twin or 2/all triplets adds to the confusion rather than precision.

Like you, I find it very curious (and maddening) that HP colleagues and
parents seem to remember the part about "back to sleep" in a separate
sleeping space, yet the evidence-based recommendation that the separate
sleeping space be in close proximity to mom/parents seems to have been lost
on the majority. (I repeat this like a mantra, which is one reason this
point is included in the 2007 edition of Mothering Multiples: Breastfeeding
and Caring for Twins or More.)

 K


> Date:    Thu, 11 Mar 2010 13:49:15 -0500
> From:    Susan Burger <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Cosleeping is not synonymous with cobedding
>


> Dear all:
>
> I think it is extremely important to be precise in how we talk about
> breastfeeding and also how we talk about infant sleep.
>
> Cosleeping is actually what the American Academy of Pediatric recommends --
> the baby sleeping in CLOSE PROXIMITY to the mother.  The American Academy of
> Pediatrics includes on additional caveat that still fits within the
> definition of cosleeping.  Cobedding is a subset of cosleeping.  Cosleeping
> does not need defending.  Cosleeping is actually the lowest risk of SIDS.  A
> study in Great Britain showed that the risk of SIDS was 36% higher when
> infants slept in a separate room compared to cosleeping on a separate
> surface.  In the same study, the risk of SIDS was 16% higher when infants
> were cobedding (with no distinctions among all the factors we know that
> could contribute to the higher risk) than infants who were cosleeping on a
> separate surface.
>
> So, if you are posting about cosleeping, please make sure you do not assume
> this is higher risk.  If you are posting about cobedding, it may be higher
> risk for some subsets of the population than cosleeping on a separate
> surface, but it is NOT higher risk compared to sleeping in a separate room.
>  Please don't post about cobedding as if it is cosleeeping because it is
> only a subset of cosleeping.
>
> Why is it that public health officials ignore the elephant in the next room
> ---- i.e. the separate nursery that is the higher risk factor for infants.
>
> Best, Susan Burger.
>
>



-- 
Karen Gromada
www.karengromada.com/

             ***********************************************

Archives: http://community.lsoft.com/archives/LACTNET.html
To reach list owners: [log in to unmask]
Mail all list management commands to: [log in to unmask]
COMMANDS:
1. To temporarily stop your subscription write in the body of an email: set lactnet nomail
2. To start it again: set lactnet mail
3. To unsubscribe: unsubscribe lactnet
4. To get a comprehensive list of rules and directions: get lactnet welcome