Re: Parents Mag article

[Belphoebe]

"Leslie" > wrote in message
...
> Anybody read the latest issue of Parents? I don't know why I bother--it
always
> gets me angry--and this issue was even more full of garbage than usual.
>
> There's an article on preventing SIDS. There is NO mention of the
preventive
> effects of breasatfeeding, but there is a diatribe against co-sleeping:
>
> "2. Don't let your baby snooze in your bed.

[ . . . ]

I'm glad you posted about this, because I was thinking of doing so myself.
This also ****ed me off. Notice that the reasons given for co-sleeping
being so allegedly risky all involve not practicing *safe* co-sleeping.
It's like saying never take your baby on trips in your car, because not
using a carseat is so dangerous--instead of simply warning how important it
is to *use* a carseat!

The same issue has a ped recommending CIO in a Q & A section, and an article
on colic that suggests scheduled feedings ("wait a minimum of 2 1/2 hours
from the beginning of one feeding to the beginning of the next, and limit
each meal to 30 minutes" [186]) (!).

Like you, I don't know why I bother. It was a gift subscription, and I know
I won't renew it when it expires!

Belphoebe

[gerry]

"Leslie" > wrote in message
...
> Anybody read the latest issue of Parents? I don't know why I bother--it
always
> gets me angry--and this issue was even more full of garbage than usual.
>
> There's an article on preventing SIDS. There is NO mention of the
preventive
> effects of breasatfeeding..
>
There's no conclusive evidence that breastfeeding prevents SIDS. Some
studies have shown that it might, others that it doesn't make any
difference. The Foundation for the Study of Infant Deaths in the UK is very
careful to point out that SIDS occurs in both bottle fed and breast fed
babies. Although SIDS is extremely rare it's important not to be lulled into
a false sense of security and make sure to follow the guidelines which have
been proved to work.

[badgirl]

"Sue" > wrote in message
...
> I always view these kinds of articles that have to reach the whole
general
> public as a precautionary measure. It's like the advice to not put
bottles
> in the microwave because there are hot spots in them. Well any
person with
> half a brain knows to shake the bottle so it doesn't burn the baby.
So, for
> co-sleeping, they are stating a whole generalization statement that
people
> who sleep with babies don't know enough on how to co-sleep properly.
They
> should have, however, put in statements on how to co-sleep properly.
But,
> they do assume that their audience doesn't have half a brain to do
it safely
> and properly. I don't get worked up over these articles, I use what
pertains
> to me and throw out the rest.
> --
> Sue
> mom to three girls
>

Yea ;( Same reason "Do Not Drink" is on the label of a bottle of
bleach, and "Do Not Use This Appliance While Bathing" is on your
hairdryer. The world is FULL of idiot ****tards, the rest of us with a
brain need to just *read around* all the stupid crap they put out
yano?

Jen

[Michelle Podnar]

I forgot about the article on Colicky babies!! That once also sucked!! So
if my baby is hungry after an hour, how do I tell them that they have to
wait another hour and a half.....it is easy to say, very hard to actually
implement!! Their articles are just a joke. It is scary to know that
people read that mag and not know better, and get themselves into a battle
that never has to happen

Michelle P
"Belphoebe" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Leslie" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Anybody read the latest issue of Parents? I don't know why I bother--it
> always
> > gets me angry--and this issue was even more full of garbage than usual.
> >
> > There's an article on preventing SIDS. There is NO mention of the
> preventive
> > effects of breasatfeeding, but there is a diatribe against co-sleeping:
> >
> > "2. Don't let your baby snooze in your bed.
>
> [ . . . ]
>
> I'm glad you posted about this, because I was thinking of doing so myself.
> This also ****ed me off. Notice that the reasons given for co-sleeping
> being so allegedly risky all involve not practicing *safe* co-sleeping.
> It's like saying never take your baby on trips in your car, because not
> using a carseat is so dangerous--instead of simply warning how important
it
> is to *use* a carseat!
>
> The same issue has a ped recommending CIO in a Q & A section, and an
article
> on colic that suggests scheduled feedings ("wait a minimum of 2 1/2 hours
> from the beginning of one feeding to the beginning of the next, and limit
> each meal to 30 minutes" [186]) (!).
>
> Like you, I don't know why I bother. It was a gift subscription, and I
know
> I won't renew it when it expires!
>
> Belphoebe
>
>

[Phoebe & Allyson]

Leslie wrote:

> An infant can get pinned between the mattress and the bed frame


No bedframe here. Based on the beds I've seen, falling out
would be more likely than getting pinned between the
mattress and a frame, unless you're co-sleeping on a waterbed.

> sink into the pillow and quilt

Which is why you don't put the baby on a pillow or quilt...

> a baby who sleeps with Mom or Dad in a grown-up bed is nearly
> one-and-a-half times more likely to die of SIDS,

Are they sure they aren't confabulating SIDS with
suffocation? Dying from getting stuck in the bedframe or a
pillow over the face doesn't really sound like an
unexplained death (which is what SIDS is), but rather like
smothering.

> the risks can quickly rise if parents cover their baby
> with a comforter, or if either or both have been drinking, are taking
> sleep-inducing drugs, or are very tired

You'd think, with the number of people who co-sleep casually
(so are less likely to take precautions), they'd be better
off telling people how to co-sleep safely, rather than
saying don't do it. It's like saying "don't let a baby ride
in the car" rather than impressing on you the need to use
the carseat for every trip and not drive while impaired. :P

Phoebe :)

[Sue]

I always view these kinds of articles that have to reach the whole general
public as a precautionary measure. It's like the advice to not put bottles
in the microwave because there are hot spots in them. Well any person with
half a brain knows to shake the bottle so it doesn't burn the baby. So, for
co-sleeping, they are stating a whole generalization statement that people
who sleep with babies don't know enough on how to co-sleep properly. They
should have, however, put in statements on how to co-sleep properly. But,
they do assume that their audience doesn't have half a brain to do it safely
and properly. I don't get worked up over these articles, I use what pertains
to me and throw out the rest.
--
Sue
mom to three girls

Leslie > wrote in message
...
> Anybody read the latest issue of Parents? I don't know why I bother--it
always
> gets me angry--and this issue was even more full of garbage than usual.
>
> There's an article on preventing SIDS. There is NO mention of the
preventive
> effects of breasatfeeding, but there is a diatribe against co-sleeping:
>
> "2. Don't let your baby snooze in your bed. It's tempting to bring your
newborn
> into your bed, at least occasionally. And more moms and dads are making it
a
> permanent arrangement: Nearly 13 percent of babies under 8 months of age
> usually share an adult bed at night, up from just 5.5 percent in 1993,
> according to the NICHD.
>
> Don't jump on the bandwagon. "Adult beds are not designed for babies,"
says
> Marian Willinger, Ph.D., special assistant for SIDS at the NICHD, in
Bethesda,
> Maryland. "An infant can get pinned between the mattress and the bed
frame, or
> sink into the pillow and quilt." The crowded environment might also cause
the
> child to rebreathe air pockets, just as tummy-sleeping can. Possibly for
these
> reasons, a baby who sleeps with Mom or Dad in a grown-up bed is nearly
> one-and-a-half times more likely to die of SIDS, according to one
preliminary
> study. Most experts consider that increase to be negligible, says Fern R.
> Hauck, M.D., a SIDS researcher at the University of Virginia, in
> Charlottesville, but the risks can quickly rise if parents cover their
baby
> with a comforter, or if either or both have been drinking, are taking
> sleep-inducing drugs, or are very tired -- which may make them unaware
that
> they're crowding their child. If Mom or Dad smokes, the risks increase too
(for
> more on why, see Tip #6). "
>
> http://www.parents.com/articles/health/5373.jsp?page=2
>
>
>
>
> Leslie
>
> Emily (2/4/91), Jake (1/27/94), Teddy (2/15/95), and William (3/5/01)
> http://www.babiesonline.com/babies/o/onemoremakesfour/
>
> "Children come trailing clouds of glory from God, which is their home."
> ~ William Wordsworth
>

[Cheryl S.]

Phoebe & Allyson > wrote in message
...
> You'd think, with the number of people who co-sleep casually
> (so are less likely to take precautions), they'd be better
> off telling people how to co-sleep safely, rather than
> saying don't do it. It's like saying "don't let a baby ride
> in the car" rather than impressing on you the need to use
> the carseat for every trip and not drive while impaired. :P

Unfortunately they probably do have to be careful what they say is OK,
in any way, shape or form. If they ran an article on how to co-sleep
safely, once they've said "co-sleeping is safe", the magazine has opened
itself up to being sued by the parents whose baby dies while
co-sleeping, even if they weren't following all the things that come
after the "if" in "co-sleeping is safe IF you do X, Y and Z." The only
way for them to legally CT(heir)A is to say, "don't co-sleep".

<rant> Just another example of the myriad of ways that stupid,
sue-happy people make things worse for everyone else. <end rant>
--
Cheryl S.
Mom to Julie, 2 yr., 3 mo.
And a boy, EDD 4.Sept

Cleaning the house while your children are small is like
shoveling the sidewalk while it's still snowing.

[Patty Reali]

"badgirl" > wrote in message
et...
>
>
> "Sue" > wrote in message
> ...
(snip)

I don't get worked up over these articles, I use what
> pertains
> > to me and throw out the rest.

(snip)

the rest of us with a
> brain need to just *read around* all the stupid crap they put out
> yano?

I do the same with Parents mag, but just out of curiosity - anyone found a
parenting mag that they generally like *most* of the articles? I know this
will vary by person, but Parents struck me as most balanced out of the 4 or
5 I looked at way back when I was still expecting. (I guess that's not *so*
"way back," but feels like it, ya know?)

Patty

[Michelle Podnar]

I like Today Parent (Cdn Magazine) or Mothering.

Michelle P
"Patty Reali" > wrote in message
...
>
> "badgirl" > wrote in message
> et...
> >
> >
> > "Sue" > wrote in message
> > ...
> (snip)
>
> I don't get worked up over these articles, I use what
> > pertains
> > > to me and throw out the rest.
>
> (snip)
>
> the rest of us with a
> > brain need to just *read around* all the stupid crap they put out
> > yano?
>
> I do the same with Parents mag, but just out of curiosity - anyone found a
> parenting mag that they generally like *most* of the articles? I know
this
> will vary by person, but Parents struck me as most balanced out of the 4
or
> 5 I looked at way back when I was still expecting. (I guess that's not
*so*
> "way back," but feels like it, ya know?)
>
> Patty
>
>

[Patty Reali]

"larissa" > wrote in message
u...
> I just found one I like called 'Natural Parenting' (Australia)> It has
> articles on natural weaning, cloth nappies/diapers, bad behaviour and
> nutrition, homeschool and natural remedies.
>
> Larissa
>

Do you know if it's available in the US? I might pop over to Barnes and
Noble in the near future to look at their selection.

Patty

[Leslie]

Belphoebe said:

>This also ****ed me off. Notice that the reasons given for co-sleeping
>being so allegedly risky all involve not practicing *safe* co-sleeping.
>It's like saying never take your baby on trips in your car, because not
>using a carseat is so dangerous--instead of simply warning how important it
>is to *use* a carseat!

Love this analogy! You are so right. Why not just say, "If you decide to
sleep with your baby, you can decrease the risk of SIDS by . . . "

>
>The same issue has a ped recommending CIO in a Q & A section, and an article
>on colic that suggests scheduled feedings ("wait a minimum of 2 1/2 hours
>from the beginning of one feeding to the beginning of the next, and limit
>each meal to 30 minutes" [186]) (!).
>
>Like you, I don't know why I bother. It was a gift subscription, and I know
>I won't renew it when it expires!

When I cancelled my Parents subscription years ago, they called and tried to
convince me to renew, and I told them that after four years all the articles
were starting to repeat themselves. That shut them right up.


Leslie

Emily (2/4/91), Jake (1/27/94), Teddy (2/15/95), and William (3/5/01)
http://www.babiesonline.com/babies/o/onemoremakesfour/

"Children come trailing clouds of glory from God, which is their home."
~ William Wordsworth

[Leslie]

Gerry said:

>There's no conclusive evidence that breastfeeding prevents SIDS. Some
>studies have shown that it might, others that it doesn't make any
>difference.

I had the impression that there was a correlation, at the very least.

The Foundation for the Study of Infant Deaths in the UK is very
>careful to point out that SIDS occurs in both bottle fed and breast fed
>babies. Although SIDS is extremely rare it's important not to be lulled into
>a false sense of security and make sure to follow the guidelines which have
>been proved to work.

Oh, absolutely--but I still think they might have mentioned that some studies
have shown a preventive effect for bf.


Leslie

Emily (2/4/91), Jake (1/27/94), Teddy (2/15/95), and William (3/5/01)
http://www.babiesonline.com/babies/o/onemoremakesfour/

"Children come trailing clouds of glory from God, which is their home."
~ William Wordsworth

[Leslie]

Patty asked:

>I do the same with Parents mag, but just out of curiosity - anyone found a
>parenting mag that they generally like *most* of the articles?

Yes. Mothering. I also like The Compleat Mother, in which I "read around"
the more radical stuff!




Leslie

Emily (2/4/91), Jake (1/27/94), Teddy (2/15/95), and William (3/5/01)
http://www.babiesonline.com/babies/o/onemoremakesfour/

"Children come trailing clouds of glory from God, which is their home."
~ William Wordsworth

[Chookie]

In article >,
(Leslie) wrote:

> Gerry said:
>
> >There's no conclusive evidence that breastfeeding prevents SIDS. Some
> >studies have shown that it might, others that it doesn't make any
> >difference.
>
> I had the impression that there was a correlation, at the very least.

I think they have had trouble replicating it. SIDS Australia also says the
evidence is inconclusive.

--
Chookie -- Sydney, Australia
(Replace "foulspambegone" with "optushome" to reply)

"...children should continue to be breastfed... for up to two years of age
or beyond." -- Innocenti Declaration, Florence, 1 August 1990

[Sue]

> Yeah, but what about all those mothers who are unfortunately less endowed
with brains than you who are going to read that article and think it's
gospel truth because Parents said so? Doesn't the magazine have some
responsibility to be truthful in informing people who really take it
seriously as a source of
> parenting wisdom?
>
> Leslie

But co-sleeping isn't that important of a parenting issue. If it was about
breastfeeding, sure they need to be as accurate as they can be. But,
co-sleeping isn't for everyone and it isn't even required. And again, they
are reaching the general public so they have to be very careful in what they
write about because there are all walks of life reading the magazine. They
have to cover their butts.
--
Sue
mom to three girls

[Joy]

>When I cancelled my Parents subscription
> years ago, they called and tried to convince
> me to renew, and I told them that after four
> years all the articles were starting to repeat
> themselves. That shut them right up.

I cancelled my subscription years ago, also. Recently, I received a
call from them trying to convince me that I NEEDED the magazine. I said
I wasn't interested. Three kids, btdt. The guy told me, basically,
that I was stupid to not renew at such a low rate for such a great
resource on parenting. I finally said that I totally disagreed with
their parenting magazine. They had no clue about homebirth,
co-sleeping, or breastfeeding, and I just wasn't interested reading all
the crap that I already knew I didn't agree with. He finally got the
hint.


Joy


http://community.webtv.net/joybelle15/ROSESCLUBFOOTPAGE

[Stephanie and Tim]

"Leslie" > wrote in message
...
> Anybody read the latest issue of Parents? I don't know why I bother--it
always
> gets me angry--and this issue was even more full of garbage than usual.
>
> There's an article on preventing SIDS. There is NO mention of the
preventive
> effects of breasatfeeding, but there is a diatribe against co-sleeping:
>
> "2. Don't let your baby snooze in your bed. It's tempting to bring your
newborn
> into your bed, at least occasionally. And more moms and dads are making it
a
> permanent arrangement: Nearly 13 percent of babies under 8 months of age
> usually share an adult bed at night, up from just 5.5 percent in 1993,
> according to the NICHD.
>
> Don't jump on the bandwagon. "Adult beds are not designed for babies,"
says
> Marian Willinger, Ph.D., special assistant for SIDS at the NICHD, in
Bethesda,
> Maryland. "An infant can get pinned between the mattress and the bed
frame, or
> sink into the pillow and quilt." The crowded environment might also cause
the
> child to rebreathe air pockets, just as tummy-sleeping can. Possibly for
these
> reasons, a baby who sleeps with Mom or Dad in a grown-up bed is nearly
> one-and-a-half times more likely to die of SIDS, according to one
preliminary
> study. Most experts consider that increase to be negligible, says Fern R.
> Hauck, M.D., a SIDS researcher at the University of Virginia, in
> Charlottesville, but the risks can quickly rise if parents cover their
baby
> with a comforter, or if either or both have been drinking, are taking
> sleep-inducing drugs, or are very tired -- which may make them unaware
that
> they're crowding their child. If Mom or Dad smokes, the risks increase too
(for
> more on why, see Tip #6). "
>
> http://www.parents.com/articles/health/5373.jsp?page=2
>
>
>
>
> Leslie
>
> Emily (2/4/91), Jake (1/27/94), Teddy (2/15/95), and William (3/5/01)
> http://www.babiesonline.com/babies/o/onemoremakesfour/
>
> "Children come trailing clouds of glory from God, which is their home."
> ~ William Wordsworth
>


Do other people's very pro-breastfeeding peds not also agree with the
recommendation to not cosleep?

[Naomi]

"gerry" > wrote in message >...
> "Leslie" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Anybody read the latest issue of Parents? I don't know why I bother--it
> always
> > gets me angry--and this issue was even more full of garbage than usual.
> >
> > There's an article on preventing SIDS. There is NO mention of the
> preventive
> > effects of breasatfeeding..
> >
> There's no conclusive evidence that breastfeeding prevents SIDS. Some
> studies have shown that it might, others that it doesn't make any
> difference.

Uhhh... I don't think anyone ever claimed that breastfeeding PREVENTS
SIDS. (Obviously bf babies DO die of SIDS too.) But there is some
evidence that it may reduce the risk of SIDS.

Naomi
The Foundation for the Study of Infant Deaths in the UK is very
> careful to point out that SIDS occurs in both bottle fed and breast fed
> babies. Although SIDS is extremely rare it's important not to be lulled into
> a false sense of security and make sure to follow the guidelines which have
> been proved to work.

[Naomi]

"gerry" > wrote in message >...
> "Leslie" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Anybody read the latest issue of Parents? I don't know why I bother--it
> always
> > gets me angry--and this issue was even more full of garbage than usual.
> >
> > There's an article on preventing SIDS. There is NO mention of the
> preventive
> > effects of breasatfeeding..
> >
> There's no conclusive evidence that breastfeeding prevents SIDS. Some
> studies have shown that it might, others that it doesn't make any
> difference.

Uhhh... I don't think anyone ever claimed that breastfeeding PREVENTS
SIDS. (Obviously bf babies DO die of SIDS too.) But there is some
evidence that it may reduce the risk of SIDS.

Naomi
The Foundation for the Study of Infant Deaths in the UK is very
> careful to point out that SIDS occurs in both bottle fed and breast fed
> babies. Although SIDS is extremely rare it's important not to be lulled into
> a false sense of security and make sure to follow the guidelines which have
> been proved to work.

[Naomi]

"Sue" > wrote in message >...
> > Yeah, but what about all those mothers who are unfortunately less endowed
> with brains than you who are going to read that article and think it's
> gospel truth because Parents said so? Doesn't the magazine have some
> responsibility to be truthful in informing people who really take it
> seriously as a source of
> > parenting wisdom?
> >
> > Leslie
>
> But co-sleeping isn't that important of a parenting issue. If it was about
> breastfeeding, sure they need to be as accurate as they can be. But,
> co-sleeping isn't for everyone and it isn't even required. And again, they
> are reaching the general public so they have to be very careful in what they
> write about because there are all walks of life reading the magazine. They
> have to cover their butts.

I'm not quite clear what you are getting at here. Right, it isn't for
everyone, and it isn't required. So, if they were to write, "Everyone
is required to co-sleep or be considered a terrible mother!" they
would be way off base. But it is JUST as wrong, therefore, for them
to write "Nobody should co-sleep, because is horribly dangerous!"
which is, essentially, what they are doing here.
Co-sleeping is an option. It has pros and cons. It does not increase
the risk of SIDS and, if done carefully, does not increase of risk of
suffoccation. So claiming in the article that co-sleeping increases
the risk of SIDS is just plain wrong, and doesn't, in any way, cover
their butts.

Naomi

[Jenrose]

"Leslie" > wrote in message
...
> Anybody read the latest issue of Parents? I don't know why I bother--it
always
> gets me angry--and this issue was even more full of garbage than usual.
>
> There's an article on preventing SIDS. There is NO mention of the
preventive
> effects of breasatfeeding, but there is a diatribe against co-sleeping:
>
> "2. Don't let your baby snooze in your bed. It's tempting to bring your
newborn
> into your bed, at least occasionally. And more moms and dads are making it
a
> permanent arrangement: Nearly 13 percent of babies under 8 months of age
> usually share an adult bed at night, up from just 5.5 percent in 1993,
> according to the NICHD.
>


Y'know, I don't think I know how NOT to co-sleep. Can't do it. I just flat
out don't wake up that thoroughly at night, and once I lie back down to
nurse or give a baby a bottle, I'm just out. Can't stay awake for it, which
means baby spends the night in the crook of my arm. The flip side of this is
that when they're THAT close, I'm totally aware of every move they make.
With my daughter, many, many times I would startle awake a little, not hear
her, put a hand on her and either feel her chest moving or feel her suddenly
take a deep breath. Then I'd fall back asleep. I'd be much more dangerous if
I was getting out of bed to feed someone--because I'd be falling asleep in
the chair.

The few times we tried not cosleeping, I could NOT stay asleep because I
could not hear/feel my baby breathing.

Jenrose

[larissa]

Patty Reali wrote:
> "larissa" > wrote in message
> u...
>
>>I just found one I like called 'Natural Parenting' (Australia)> It has
>>articles on natural weaning, cloth nappies/diapers, bad behaviour and
>>nutrition, homeschool and natural remedies.
>>
>>Larissa
>>
>
>
> Do you know if it's available in the US? I might pop over to Barnes and
> Noble in the near future to look at their selection.
>
> Patty
>
>
Don't know availability but you can check out their website and read
some articles.

www.naturalparenting.com.au

cheers

Larissa

[Phoebe & Allyson]

Leslie wrote:

> Mothering. I also like The Compleat Mother, in which I "read around"
> the more radical stuff!

I just got a box of "hand me downs" of both of those.
Haven't had a chance to get into them, though.

Phoebe :)

[Phoebe & Allyson]

Stephanie and Tim wrote:

> Do other people's very pro-breastfeeding peds not also agree with the
> recommendation to not cosleep?

Our pediatrician (who has come across as pro-bf in person,
and bf'ed her kids, although her handouts aren't too
bf-friendly) never asked anything about sleeping
arrangements, and assumed Caterpillar sleeps in a crib. I
let her assume that, because I honestly don't care what she
thinks of co-sleeping.

Phoebe :)

[Belphoebe]

"Stephanie and Tim" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> Do other people's very pro-breastfeeding peds not also agree with the
> recommendation to not cosleep?

We've gone to a large pediatric practice where we've seen three different
pediatric residents and I sort of think of them as being lukewarm on bf.
They give lip service to encouraging bf, and the attending pediatrician made
a point of congratulating me for bf successfully when he came in during our
last (10-wk) visit. But the growth/development booklet they gave us was
produced by a formula company, and it's got formula ads front and back. My
impression is they'd probably go out of their way to give a woman
"permission" to discontinue bf and not feel "guilty."

Anyway, two of the three residents we saw did make a point of telling us not
to co-sleep. We smiled, nodded, and continued to do what works for us.

But I don't really consider them "very pro-breastfeeding."

Belphoebe

[Leslie]

Sue said:

>But co-sleeping isn't that important of a parenting issue.

It can be. You say below that they need to be accurate re bf; for some people,
co-sleeping is absolutely essential to a good bf experience.


If it was about
>breastfeeding, sure they need to be as accurate as they can be. But,
>co-sleeping isn't for everyone and it isn't even required.

Even so, they don't have to out and out lie about it, you know? Babies who die
while co-sleeping are victims of suffocation for the most part, not SIDS. It's
not the same thing any more than someone putting a pillow over their baby on
purpose is SIDS.

And again, they
>are reaching the general public so they have to be very careful in what they
>write about because there are all walks of life reading the magazine. They
>have to cover their butts.

IMO, there is no excuse for inaccuracy. They don't have to endorse it; they
can even talk about the safety issues.



Leslie

Emily (2/4/91), Jake (1/27/94), Teddy (2/15/95), and William (3/5/01)
http://www.babiesonline.com/babies/o/onemoremakesfour/

"Children come trailing clouds of glory from God, which is their home."
~ William Wordsworth

[Leslie]

>I just got a box of "hand me downs" of both of those.
>Haven't had a chance to get into them, though.
>

When you do have time, let us know what you think!


Leslie

Emily (2/4/91), Jake (1/27/94), Teddy (2/15/95), and William (3/5/01)
http://www.babiesonline.com/babies/o/onemoremakesfour/

"Children come trailing clouds of glory from God, which is their home."
~ William Wordsworth

[Tracey]

Patty Reali wrote:


> I do the same with Parents mag, but just out of curiosity - anyone found a
> parenting mag that they generally like *most* of the articles? I know
> this will vary by person, but Parents struck me as most balanced out of
> the 4 or
> 5 I looked at way back when I was still expecting. (I guess that's not
> *so* "way back," but feels like it, ya know?)

Yup. THe only parenting type magazine that I don't get totally aggravated
while reading is Mothering. I don't agree with every article they print,
but probably 85-90% of them.

Of course Mothering magazine is difficult to find. The only magazine rack
I've ever seen it on is at the big Barnes & Noble. Its not a magazine that
you'll see while you are standing in the checkout line of your local
grocery store or on the rack at Wal-Mart, so most people have probably
never heard of it or seen it.


Tracey in CT

[Sue]

Well they are covering their butts because there are still many babies dying
and they are attributing it in part to co-sleeping. When I say co-sleeping
isn't required, I mean its not like they are giving poor advice on
breastfeeding because that is required (feeding). Co-sleeping for a lot of
people is out of neccessity and isn't really needed by all babies. Yes, I
agree they should have put something in the article on what to do if you are
co-sleeping, but like I said before, I think they have a wide range of
audience and they really don't want to have any lawsuits.
--
Sue
mom to three girls

Naomi > wrote in message
om...
> "Sue" > wrote in message
>...
> > > Yeah, but what about all those mothers who are unfortunately less
endowed
> > with brains than you who are going to read that article and think it's
> > gospel truth because Parents said so? Doesn't the magazine have some
> > responsibility to be truthful in informing people who really take it
> > seriously as a source of
> > > parenting wisdom?
> > >
> > > Leslie
> >
> > But co-sleeping isn't that important of a parenting issue. If it was
about
> > breastfeeding, sure they need to be as accurate as they can be. But,
> > co-sleeping isn't for everyone and it isn't even required. And again,
they
> > are reaching the general public so they have to be very careful in what
they
> > write about because there are all walks of life reading the magazine.
They
> > have to cover their butts.
>
> I'm not quite clear what you are getting at here. Right, it isn't for
> everyone, and it isn't required. So, if they were to write, "Everyone
> is required to co-sleep or be considered a terrible mother!" they
> would be way off base. But it is JUST as wrong, therefore, for them
> to write "Nobody should co-sleep, because is horribly dangerous!"
> which is, essentially, what they are doing here.
> Co-sleeping is an option. It has pros and cons. It does not increase
> the risk of SIDS and, if done carefully, does not increase of risk of
> suffoccation. So claiming in the article that co-sleeping increases
> the risk of SIDS is just plain wrong, and doesn't, in any way, cover
> their butts.
>
> Naomi

[Sue]

The magazine is who "they" are. The magazine editors and writers who wrote
the article for the magazine. The magazine has to cover their butts and not
give advice that could kill a baby.
--
Sue
mom to three girls

Meredith Edwards-Cornwall > wrote in message
...
> In > Sue wrote:
> > Well they are covering their butts because there are still many babies
> > dying and they are attributing it in part to co-sleeping.
>
> Who are "they?" I haven't seen any research that suggests that co-
> sleeping is to blame for SIDS. I'd be interested in seeing it, though!
>
> Meredith

[Meredith Edwards-Cornwall]

In > Sue wrote:
> The magazine is who "they" are. The magazine editors and writers who
> wrote the article for the magazine. The magazine has to cover their
> butts and not give advice that could kill a baby. -- Sue mom to three
> girls
>
> Meredith Edwards-Cornwall > wrote in
> message ...
>> In > Sue wrote:
>> > Well they are covering their butts because there are still many
>> > babies dying and they are attributing it in part to co-sleeping.
>>
>> Who are "they?" I haven't seen any research that suggests that co-
>> sleeping is to blame for SIDS. I'd be interested in seeing it, though!
>>
>> Meredith


I'm trying to understand. Are you saying that talking about co-sleeping
is "giving advice that could kill a baby?"

Meredith

[AnnaS]

There were so many things in this issue that really annoyed me. I have had a
subscription for the past few months and have found a few annoying things before,
but this issue was just really bad. When I was reading about the baby that fell
through a hotel crib because one of the screws holding the bottom in was loose, I
thought why would you use a crib at a hotel anyway? Later in the issue, it talked
about all the checks you should do on a crib at a hotel before you use it. It
would be so much easier to put the baby in bed with you!

Anna



Leslie wrote:

> Anybody read the latest issue of Parents? I don't know why I bother--it always
> gets me angry--and this issue was even more full of garbage than usual.
>
> There's an article on preventing SIDS. There is NO mention of the preventive
> effects of breasatfeeding, but there is a diatribe against co-sleeping:
>
> "2. Don't let your baby snooze in your bed. It's tempting to bring your newborn
> into your bed, at least occasionally. And more moms and dads are making it a
> permanent arrangement: Nearly 13 percent of babies under 8 months of age
> usually share an adult bed at night, up from just 5.5 percent in 1993,
> according to the NICHD.
>
> Don't jump on the bandwagon. "Adult beds are not designed for babies," says
> Marian Willinger, Ph.D., special assistant for SIDS at the NICHD, in Bethesda,
> Maryland. "An infant can get pinned between the mattress and the bed frame, or
> sink into the pillow and quilt." The crowded environment might also cause the
> child to rebreathe air pockets, just as tummy-sleeping can. Possibly for these
> reasons, a baby who sleeps with Mom or Dad in a grown-up bed is nearly
> one-and-a-half times more likely to die of SIDS, according to one preliminary
> study. Most experts consider that increase to be negligible, says Fern R.
> Hauck, M.D., a SIDS researcher at the University of Virginia, in
> Charlottesville, but the risks can quickly rise if parents cover their baby
> with a comforter, or if either or both have been drinking, are taking
> sleep-inducing drugs, or are very tired -- which may make them unaware that
> they're crowding their child. If Mom or Dad smokes, the risks increase too (for
> more on why, see Tip #6). "
>
> http://www.parents.com/articles/health/5373.jsp?page=2
>
> Leslie
>
> Emily (2/4/91), Jake (1/27/94), Teddy (2/15/95), and William (3/5/01)
> http://www.babiesonline.com/babies/o/onemoremakesfour/
>
> "Children come trailing clouds of glory from God, which is their home."
> ~ William Wordsworth

[Stephanie and Tim]

"Naomi Pardue" > wrote in message
...
> >Unfortunately they probably do have to be careful what they say is OK,
> >in any way, shape or form. If they ran an article on how to co-sleep
> >safely, once they've said "co-sleeping is safe", the magazine has opened
> >itself up to being sued by the parents whose baby dies while
>
> >co-sleeping,
>
> Uhhh... it would be hard to see that the parents would have much of a case
> there. I mean, if the magazine ran an article on giving solids to babies,
and
> a baby choked on solids, could the parents sue the magazine? If they ran
an
> article on using swings, and a baby died in a swing, would the parents sue
the
> magazine?
>

The difference is that the example you site of a swing is that there is a
swing manufacturer involved. Whether or not someone can successfully bring
suit against someone else is based largely on whether or not it has been
done before. There is plenty that a mag can do to be held liable, but that
has more to do with irresponsible journalism. Like they can quite a
reputable source who is really not reputable or misrepresent facts.



> > The only
> >way for them to legally CT(heir)A is to say, "don't co-sleep".
> >
>
> No, the ONLY way to CTA's would be to not have a magazine at all.
>
>
> Naomi
> CAPPA Certified Lactation Educator
>
> (either remove spamblock or change address to to
e-mail
> reply.)

[Stephanie and Tim]

"Meredith Edwards-Cornwall" > wrote in message
...
> In > Sue wrote:
> > The magazine is who "they" are. The magazine editors and writers who
> > wrote the article for the magazine. The magazine has to cover their
> > butts and not give advice that could kill a baby. -- Sue mom to three
> > girls
> >
> > Meredith Edwards-Cornwall > wrote in
> > message ...
> >> In > Sue wrote:
> >> > Well they are covering their butts because there are still many
> >> > babies dying and they are attributing it in part to co-sleeping.
> >>
> >> Who are "they?" I haven't seen any research that suggests that co-
> >> sleeping is to blame for SIDS. I'd be interested in seeing it, though!
> >>
> >> Meredith
>
>
> I'm trying to understand. Are you saying that talking about co-sleeping
> is "giving advice that could kill a baby?"
>
> Meredith

Well they are hanging out there a little if they support a practice that the
peds specifically do not support. If there is no defacto authority espousing
co-sleeping whom they can quote with impunity, they can get in trouble for
bad journalism. But if they put it in a format of a pros and cons and put
Sears on one side, they could talk about it if they wanted to. Of course,
cosleeping can kill a baby. If you are a moron and do it unsafely. People
get sued by morons all the time.

S

[Phoebe & Allyson]

Leslie wrote:

> Babies who die while co-sleeping are victims of
> suffocation for the most part, not SIDS.


Exactly! If the co-sleeping baby had fallen out of bed into
a bucket of water, they wouldn't call that SIDS, so why is
suffocation confabulated with SIDS?

Phoebe :)

[Sue]

Because the magazine wants people to think that so they will stop putting
babies to sleep in the family bed.
--
Sue
mom to three girls

Phoebe & Allyson > wrote in message
...
> Leslie wrote:
>
> > Babies who die while co-sleeping are victims of
> > suffocation for the most part, not SIDS.
>
>
> Exactly! If the co-sleeping baby had fallen out of bed into
> a bucket of water, they wouldn't call that SIDS, so why is
> suffocation confabulated with SIDS?
>
> Phoebe :)
>

[Meredith Edwards-Cornwall]

In > Stephanie and Tim wrote:
>
> "Meredith Edwards-Cornwall" > wrote in
> message ...
>> In > Sue wrote:
>> > The magazine is who "they" are. The magazine editors and writers
>> > who wrote the article for the magazine. The magazine has to cover
>> > their butts and not give advice that could kill a baby. -- Sue mom
>> > to three girls
>> >
>> > Meredith Edwards-Cornwall > wrote in
>> > message ...
>> >> In > Sue wrote:
>> >> > Well they are covering their butts because there are still many
>> >> > babies dying and they are attributing it in part to co-sleeping.
>> >>
>> >> Who are "they?" I haven't seen any research that suggests that co-
>> >> sleeping is to blame for SIDS. I'd be interested in seeing it,
>> >> though!
>> >>
>> >> Meredith
>>
>>
>> I'm trying to understand. Are you saying that talking about co-
>> sleeping is "giving advice that could kill a baby?"
>>
>> Meredith
>
> Well they are hanging out there a little if they support a practice
> that the peds specifically do not support. If there is no defacto
> authority espousing co-sleeping whom they can quote with impunity,
> they can get in trouble for bad journalism. But if they put it in a
> format of a pros and cons and put Sears on one side, they could talk
> about it if they wanted to. Of course, cosleeping can kill a baby. If
> you are a moron and do it unsafely. People get sued by morons all the
> time.
>
> S

There are authorities that support co-sleeping, and there is a growing
body of research on it. I guess I don't get this, because it's not co-
sleeping that causes SIDS. After all, a much higher percentage of babies
die in their cribs, not in the bed with their parents who are co-
sleeping safely.

[Vicki S]

I was reading Essence yesterday - the June 2003 issue, I believe, and
they had a fairly positive little blurb about co-sleeping. They even
quoted James McKenna. So not all national magazines feel they can't
say anything positive about it or they will get sued.
---
--- Vicki in Indiana

Married my dear husband Joshua on May 21, 1995.
Ima shel ds, born 11/16/99 and breastfed for 22 months;
and Ima shel dd, still nursing. Born at home, 05/19/02.
http://www.geocities.com/vyxter/
An ounce of mother is worth a pound of clergy. -Spanish proverb
Baby names I like: Theodore, Corinne, Lionel, Adele, Timothy, Amelia,
Chloe, Orlando.

[Catheleijne Berck]

Meredith Edwards-Cornwall > wrote:

> In > Sue wrote:
> > Well they are covering their butts because there are still many babies
> > dying and they are attributing it in part to co-sleeping.
>
> Who are "they?" I haven't seen any research that suggests that co-
> sleeping is to blame for SIDS. I'd be interested in seeing it, though!
>
> Meredith

The askdrsears website has research claiming the opposite, that
co-sleeping, as long as certain rules are followed, reduces the risk of
SIDS!

Cath

[Dawn Lawson]

Stephanie and Tim wrote:

> Do other people's very pro-breastfeeding peds not also agree with the
> recommendation to not cosleep?

No idea wrt ped, but the breastfeeding specialist physician who has been very
helpful to me recommends that we DO co-sleep. (she has four kids, and says
there's nothing like having co-slept to keep older kids willing to talk to their
parents about difficult things...I've heard this before from other sources too.)

Dawn



--
«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤ »¥«¤»§«¤»