Tell me more ×
Parenting Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for parents, grandparents, nannies and others with a parenting role. It's 100% free, no registration required.

For our first baby, we were told by various midwives in no uncertain terms, that babies must always be placed on their backs to sleep (no explanation ever given- just instructions!). This was all very well, but our little boy just wouldn't stay asleep for more than a few minutes on his back before waking himself up crying.

It was only when his Grandmother came to stay after a few weeks and placed him on his front that he actually had any kind of lengthy sleep at all. She says that the advice used to be to always do the exact opposite, and place babies on their front to sleep.

We are now expecting a second child, and would like advice as to whether we should try our best again to place him on his back as before.

share|improve this question

4 Answers

up vote 10 down vote accepted

When I was baby, my the official recommendation was to sleep babies on their stomach. I don't know the scientific/medical reason for that decade (1980's).

According to research, sleeping babies on their back greatly reduces SIDS probability, and that is the main reason for recommending sleeping on back.

According to this article,

Since "Back to Sleep" was launched in 1994, the incidence of SIDS has declined by more than 50%.

Many older children and adults also sleep better on their stomach, or on the side. Once the baby is old enough to turn around (and back again), you can't really influence it anymore anyway, so don't worry about SIDS then. Until then, placing the baby face-up is safer.

share|improve this answer
5  
Its worth adding that no one actually knows why this makes a difference, just that it does. – Mongus Pong Jan 13 '12 at 9:54
1  
I heard that babies used to be placed on their stomachs to supposedly stop them choking on vomit. – Urbycoz Jan 13 '12 at 10:30
1  
@urbycoz that was definitely one of the main rationales for having infants sleep prone. However, research has since then shown that this is actually unfounded. – Beofett Jan 13 '12 at 16:31
2  
I ABHOR STATISTICAL QUOTES LIKE THIS. What region, USA? California? Orlando? Who's study was it? How the hell do you have a control group for something like this? Even the wikipedia article is light on clarification of parameters. i had a Dr. throw this exact stat at me in 2003 and I asked her all those questions that she couldn't answer. Baseless or undefined stats can be dangerous. – monsto Jan 16 '12 at 9:28
1  
@monsto The American Academy of Pediatrics cites the CDC's compressed mortality file:Mortality for 1979 –1998 with ICD 9 codes; Mortality for 1999 –2001 with ICD 10 codes. Available at: wonder.cdc.gov/mortSQL.html. Control groups are irrelevant for identifying correlation trends in large populations. – Beofett Jan 19 '12 at 19:24
show 5 more comments

Adding to the answers already here, it is true that the incidence of SIDS fell at around the same time that health care professionals started telling parents to not let babies sleep on their front.

The problem is, around that time parents were also told not to smoke around their babies, and a number of other sensible things like having proper air circulation, proper bedding that won't smother the baby, etc.

So it is not clear that the sleeping position is a causation, though it is an association.

Babies do seem to sleep better on their fronts. They also tend to be better crawlers, with better upper body strength - babies who sleep exclusively on their back often skip crawling and go straight to walking.

Because of this, I let my babies sleep on their front, tried to monitor it when I could, and hoped for the best.

share|improve this answer
It is true that there is no known causation between prone sleeping and SIDS, but there is very strong correlation. Proper bedding that won't smother the baby wouldn't impact SIDS rates, as infant suffocation is different than SIDS (the cause of SIDS is unknown). The general advice is to encourage "tummy time" with prone sleeping, which offsets the idea that supine sleepers crawl better. – Beofett Jan 19 '12 at 19:01
Both of my kids were exclusive back sleepers until they could flip themselves over and they were both champion crawlers. I don't know a single kid who slept on their back and didn't crawl. – Meg Coates Feb 20 '12 at 15:16

So here's the deal:

Sleep infants on their back. It can reduce SIDS.

Vs.

Sleep infants on their stomach and eveyrone gets a full nights sleep.

Really, tho, what is SIDS anyway? I read an article about a woman that had a couple babies die of SIDS. Come to find out, the babies were sleeping in her bed. And since she was a large woman she was actually suffocating the babies unintentionally. Is that SIDS?

Basically what it comes down to is this: It's a choice between the risk and the quality-of-life.

Personally, we always kept all the potential breathing problems out of the crib, and put the baby on their stomach. I always felt that the risk was ridiculously lower than the potential benefit of being able to sleep 4hr+ at a crack. When baby sleeps, we all sleep. When we all sleep, we can drive to work without wrapping up around a light pole.

share|improve this answer
No, babies dying of suffocation is not SIDS. Many supposed SIDS cases are later found out to be from other sources. Any sources to support the claim that babies sleeping prone will sleep longer, and those sleeping supine less? – Beofett Jan 19 '12 at 19:04

Your Grandmother is correct - during their times, it was always recommended to place the baby to sleep on their tummys (because of risk of choking on their own vomit). Babies LOVE sleeping on their tummy - they have a longer, more sound sleep. Has the baby ever fallen asleep on you (on its belly)? They fall into a very deep sleep.

But THAT is the problem with kids sleeping on their belly. The babies are so soundly asleep that they don't wake up to get out of danger.

Researchers don't know what exactly causes SIDS. They really don't. All they know is that the risk of death is greater when the infant is sleeping on their belly versus when sleeping on their backs. At the same time, studies have shown that an infant has the same likelihood of choking and dying regardless of the sleeping position it is in.

SIDS is a very real thing. Even today, 3000 babies die from it every year in the US. Before the "Back to Sleep" (sleep on back) campaign was launched, more than twice as many infants use to die. Just because none of your Grandmother's children lost their lives to SIDS, doesn't mean that it won't happen. It can happen. It does happen. I would highly recommend reading more about SIDS (just ask your ob, midwife, pediatrician, doctor) and the risks of putting your child to sleep on their tummy. The highest risk of SIDS is between the 2-4 months of age; the risk disappears after 1 year of age.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.