Hathor the Cow Goddess and the Evolution Revolution » 2007

Archive for March, 2007

Ideology Being Justified!

homebirth, unassisted birth, attachment parenting,family bed, child-led weaning, breastmilk, continuum concept, evolution revolution, sling, breastfeeding, attachment, homebirth, constant contact, cosleep,family bed, unschool, midwife, newborn, lactivism, progressive parenting, environmentalism, peace, anti-bush,nursing in public

Order this Cartoon as a 8.5 x 11 print on glossy photo paper and signed for only $10!

March 28, 2007 at 9:26 am · Filed under COMICS, share sleep, save the world, 2007

Comments

Are Co-Sleeping Studies Objective?

Dr. Rosemond remarked that if a co-sleeping study finds co-sleeping to be beneficial then it’s not ‘objective’. hmmmm.

Well I recieved a series of e-mails from Donna B. (thanks Donna!) who located a study that finds co-sleeping to be stressful. According to Dr. Rosemond this should be objective, huh? hmmmm. why don’t you read it for yourself!

Original Article
The sleep of co-sleeping infants when they are not co-sleeping: Evidence that co-sleeping is stressful
Melissa Hunsley, Evelyn B. Thoman *
Biobehavioral Sciences Graduate Degree Program, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269-4154
email: Evelyn B. Thoman (evethoman@mac.com)

*Correspondence to Evelyn B. Thoman, Biobehavioral Sciences Graduate Degree Program, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269-4154.

Funded by:
NICHD; Grant Number: HD32903

Keywords
co-sleeping; bed-sharing; sleep; human infants; home-monitoring; stress

Abstract
Co-sleeping proponents consider the practice to be natural and a potential protection against sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS); others consider the practice of an infant sleeping in the parents’ bed for prolonged periods at night to place an infant at risk for harm or death. For this study, co-sleeping was investigated from a different perspective, that is, as a significant early experience to investigate as it may have implications for the infant’s development. The sleep of 101 normal, full-term infants was recorded nonintrusively in the home for 24 hr periods when they were 5 weeks and 6 months old. Infants were assigned to three groups: short-term co-sleepers, long-term co-sleepers, and non-co-sleepers. Their sleep states and wakefulness were compared at the two ages and over age. At 5 weeks and 6 months, the long-term co-sleeping infants differed significantly from the non-co-sleepers on a number of measures: At 5 weeks, they showed more quiet sleep and longer bouts of quiet sleep; and at 6 months, they also showed less active sleep, fewer arousals in active sleep, and less wakefulness. Each of these differences indicates a markedly lower arousal level in the long-term co-sleeping infants. This sleep pattern has been repeatedly found to be an indicator of stress. We infer that a major source of stress for these infants is the experience of sleep disturbance documented for infants when they were co-sleeping. Based on extensive evidence for long-term effects of early stress, we conclude that co-sleeping should have significant implications for infants’ neurobehavioral development.

Received: 28 March 2001; Accepted: 25 April 2001

Donna B. sent an e-mail to the contact for the study asking for clarification:

Hello,

I found your article The sleep of co-sleeping infants when they are not co-sleeping: Evidence that co-sleeping is stressful at Wiley InterScience while looking for a different study cited in an article I read this morning. I have to admit, I think I’m a little confused, and I was hoping you could offer me either further information, or direct me to another resource.

The study compared 101 infants’ sleep patterns, and grouped the infants by the amount of time they co-slept with their parents. You made the following observation:

At 5 weeks and 6 months, the long-term co-sleeping infants differed significantly from the non-co-sleepers on a number of measures: At 5 weeks, they showed more quiet sleep and longer bouts of quiet sleep; and at 6 months, they also showed less active sleep, fewer arousals in active sleep, and less wakefulness. Each of these differences indicates a markedly lower arousal level in the long-term co-sleeping infants. This sleep pattern has been repeatedly found to be an indicator of stress.

It seems counter-intuitive to me that the lack of arousals in active sleep and less wakefulness is an indicator of stress. A great deal of effort is put forth in our society to help infants sleep through the night; and as an adult, I know I feel more rested when I sleep with less wakefulness. In my own experience co-sleeping with my child, every person in the house sleeps better, and gets more rest in general, when we share a bed.

Would you please direct me to the studies that have ‘repeatedly found [these sleep patterns] to be an indicator of stress.’

Thank you,

Donna B

and received in answer a letter that pretty much said ‘Hey, I’m glad to hear that something so stupid works for your family, but it doesn’t work for anyone else, so WHATEVER!’ and didn’t make the connection between stress and sleep at all.

So, Donna B. being quite intrepid asked Dr. James McKenna of the Mother Baby Sleep Laboratory about the study and he said it was “absurd” “incomprehensible” and “illogical” which is a good reminder why he is so cool.

Anyway, I thought you would enjoy the back and forth and I’ll keep you posted as the intrepid Donna B. researches some more!

Love,
Heather

March 28, 2007 at 9:24 am · Filed under MUSINGS, evolving, family values

Comments (4)

Mom My Ride!

Hee hee hooooooo….
Just yesterday my Dh went out to get the baby’s car seat and when he pulled it out of the van it dribbled a foul-shrimp-in-the-sun-smelling liquid all over his pants and shoes.

I noted that “there’s a design flaw of those seats!”
He noted that “someone needs to clean out the $#%%^&*!!! car!”

And then he did ;o) of course, it was a chance for him to try out his new shop vac.

So I knew when I saw this video that I should share it (even though its an ad, sorry!) I couldn’t resist because that’s my van. To a T. And I bet it’s yours too.