Anonymous wrote:I don't like them because it makes the babies heads misshapen. Just use a bassinet or crib.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I don’t think there’s anything special about the rock n play that is making it any more dangerous than any of the alternatives - it’s just the most popular, brand name item out there. AAP recommendation is the flat surface, on back, etc.
Listen, no parent starts out intending to have their kid sleep in a swing or a rock n play - mostly borne out of sheer desperation. I fought it so hard given the emphasis on back to sleep! but my DS had reflux and elevating the crib mattress did not work especially as he would slide down when that small. It was the rock n play, or falling asleep with him on our chests which seemed less safe. We got the owlet which ended up being sort of useless anyway since we would have the rocker going most of the night anyway, but it did make me feel somewhat better knowing that I would know if he stopped breathing. That might be one way to get peace of mind if you have to use a rock n play or an alternative
The fact that it's the most popular and widely used is what is increasing the number of deaths, prompting AAP and CR to warn about improper use. When a product or technology becomes normalized people tend to overlook the risks.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This is all the fault of back 2 sleep. If I had to do it all over again, I'd do tummy sleeping. Because my child would not sleep on a flat surface for the first 10 weeks. My DH and I had to take turns holding her. It was horrible and I still am traumatized by it.
You can't just tell parents "flat surface only on their backs" and then shrug when a newborn won't sleep that way. That in and of itself leads to dangerous outcomes.
+100000. I want the AAP to measure the unintended consequences of back to sleep -- all the babies who died in rock n plays, nap nannies, and from being crushed by exhausted parents or slipping between couch cushions.
Anonymous wrote:This is all the fault of back 2 sleep. If I had to do it all over again, I'd do tummy sleeping. Because my child would not sleep on a flat surface for the first 10 weeks. My DH and I had to take turns holding her. It was horrible and I still am traumatized by it.
You can't just tell parents "flat surface only on their backs" and then shrug when a newborn won't sleep that way. That in and of itself leads to dangerous outcomes.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:32 deaths in 10 years? How does it compare to SIDS rate generally over the same time? There is no way to evaluate the number 32 without a comparator.
They weren't sids deaths. All those infants were over 3 months, not restrained and rolled over and suffocated. Horrible but not sids.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I don’t think there’s anything special about the rock n play that is making it any more dangerous than any of the alternatives - it’s just the most popular, brand name item out there. AAP recommendation is the flat surface, on back, etc.
Listen, no parent starts out intending to have their kid sleep in a swing or a rock n play - mostly borne out of sheer desperation. I fought it so hard given the emphasis on back to sleep! but my DS had reflux and elevating the crib mattress did not work especially as he would slide down when that small. It was the rock n play, or falling asleep with him on our chests which seemed less safe. We got the owlet which ended up being sort of useless anyway since we would have the rocker going most of the night anyway, but it did make me feel somewhat better knowing that I would know if he stopped breathing. That might be one way to get peace of mind if you have to use a rock n play or an alternative
The fact that it's the most popular and widely used is what is increasing the number of deaths, prompting AAP and CR to warn about improper use. When a product or technology becomes normalized people tend to overlook the risks.
Anonymous wrote:I don’t think there’s anything special about the rock n play that is making it any more dangerous than any of the alternatives - it’s just the most popular, brand name item out there. AAP recommendation is the flat surface, on back, etc.
Listen, no parent starts out intending to have their kid sleep in a swing or a rock n play - mostly borne out of sheer desperation. I fought it so hard given the emphasis on back to sleep! but my DS had reflux and elevating the crib mattress did not work especially as he would slide down when that small. It was the rock n play, or falling asleep with him on our chests which seemed less safe. We got the owlet which ended up being sort of useless anyway since we would have the rocker going most of the night anyway, but it did make me feel somewhat better knowing that I would know if he stopped breathing. That might be one way to get peace of mind if you have to use a rock n play or an alternative
Anonymous wrote:I don’t think there’s anything special about the rock n play that is making it any more dangerous than any of the alternatives - it’s just the most popular, brand name item out there. AAP recommendation is the flat surface, on back, etc.
Listen, no parent starts out intending to have their kid sleep in a swing or a rock n play - mostly borne out of sheer desperation. I fought it so hard given the emphasis on back to sleep! but my DS had reflux and elevating the crib mattress did not work especially as he would slide down when that small. It was the rock n play, or falling asleep with him on our chests which seemed less safe. We got the owlet which ended up being sort of useless anyway since we would have the rocker going most of the night anyway, but it did make me feel somewhat better knowing that I would know if he stopped breathing. That might be one way to get peace of mind if you have to use a rock n play or an alternative
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Good luck finding something better. Use it properly and it's fine. Don't use it, get exhausted, pull kid into bed and crush them when you roll over. Good luck.
Or just never use it? This is a ridiculous thing to say. I never used a RnP and never brought my baby into bed. She slept in her bassinet. When she woke up, I would rock the bassinet to get her back to sleep. People are right to be cautious. Why would you bother to take the risk.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Good luck finding something better. Use it properly and it's fine. Don't use it, get exhausted, pull kid into bed and crush them when you roll over. Good luck.
Or just never use it? This is a ridiculous thing to say. I never used a RnP and never brought my baby into bed. She slept in her bassinet. When she woke up, I would rock the bassinet to get her back to sleep. People are right to be cautious. Why would you bother to take the risk.
Anonymous wrote:Good luck finding something better. Use it properly and it's fine. Don't use it, get exhausted, pull kid into bed and crush them when you roll over. Good luck.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:32 deaths in 10 years? How does it compare to SIDS rate generally over the same time? There is no way to evaluate the number 32 without a comparator.
They weren't sids deaths. All those infants were over 3 months, not restrained and rolled over and suffocated. Horrible but not sids.
THIS is not true. The deaths were for two reasons - infants over 3 months who rolled over, AND younger newborns who suffocated due to positional asphyxiation. The latter is what's being ignored on this thread and many other places, and that's perhaps the most dangerous part.
No one has provided evidence of the latter. The former is the subject of the news article last week which is the first definitive information about RnP safety I have ever seen.
Read: https://www.consumerreports.org/recalls/fisher-price-rock-n-play-sleeper-should-be-recalled-consumer-reports-says