"JG" <jg030103@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:AZDOa.10743$Hw.7968200@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> "Elizabeth Reid" <eliz_reid@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:c3338aa8.0307080637.746283fe@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > "JG" <jg030103@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:<1GhOa.10498$Hw.7698515@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>...
>
> > > Another article for the "Well, DUH!" file. Amazing how some people
> > > manage to walk without someone else (a physician?) telling them
> > > (headphones?) how ("Left foot...right foot...left foot...right
> > > foot...left foot...").
>
> > > How many fights do you imagine this one little piece of
> advice--"Back to
> > > Sleep"--has caused? Husband: "Aaah, honey? The back of Bubba's
> head
> > > is gettin' as flat as a pancake. Whaddaya say we let him sleep on
> his
> > > belly for a while to see if it helps?" Wife (in a high-pitched,
> panicky
> > > voice): "NO! !! No, no, no, no, NO! He'll DIE of SIDS if we do
> that!
> > > Dr. Imdeexpert said babies should sleep on their BACKS! So what if
> > > Bubba looks like some sorta weird doofus; at least he's ALIVE!!")
>
> > Right. How ridiculous. I'd much rather my son live fast, die
> > young, and leave a beautiful corpse. A round head would look so
> > much nicer in the last pictures I'd ever have of him. (As it happens,
> > he never had any flattening problems, although he did have a bald
> > spot on the back of his head for a while. The horror!)
>
> The chance of an infant dying as a result of being placed on his/her
> stomach to sleep are *extemely* remote.
What is extremely remote? The rate of SIDS about 1/1000. Considering that
the death of a child is devastating to a family (not to mention the
child),
as well as the fact that a large percent of SIDS deaths can be prevented,
I
conclude that putting kids back to sleep to save their lives (literally)
is
a very good thing.
> (Indeed, I think the "BtS"
> campaign has gotten too much of the credit for the reduction in SIDS; a
> "campaign" advising parents to clear their infant's sleeping area of
> toys, pillows, etc. has been concurrently conducted, and no doubt should
> also be credited for many "saved" lives.) If a child sleeps *much*
> better on his/her stomach (falls asleep faster, stays asleep longer), it
> makes much better sense, IMO, to let him/her do so.
Yet in the opinions of real experts, it is better to put kids back to
sleep.
> There's a trade-off to be made in the case of kids whose heads become
> pronouncably misshapen: Are the costs (financial and other) of having
> the deformity corrected worth the benefit (very, very small) of forcing
> an infant to sleep on his/her back?
Preventing the death of 1 infant in 10,000, to me, is worth the price of
putting 10,000 kids to sleep on their back.
> Likewise (alternatively), are the
> costs of *not* correcting a noticable deformity (teasing, ridiculing,
> name-calling, ...[= bullying, these days]) worth it?
Really? How is one going to tease a kid for a flat head when that part of
the body is covered by hair and not visible from the front? Do you have
any
evidence that the flat head persists into school:? And how frequently do
kids get teased becase of a flat head from putting a kid back to sleep as
an
infant?
> > From what I've read, in the majority of cases the flattening resolves
> > itself over time. Even if it didn't, though, what possible
> implications
> > would this have for 'our country's future'? Millions spent on
> > hat redesign, plunging us into an economic crisis? Increased
> > incidence of mosquito-borne illness because the little vampires have
> > a nice flat surface to fasten upon? Round-headed aliens arrive and
> > exterminate us all because they think we look silly? What's the
> > doomsday scenario here?
>
> "Doomsday," IMO, is already upon us (the US). The point of my posting
> the article (along with my comments) was not to lament the creation of a
> society with weird-shaped-head kids (hell, some of the kids whom I tutor
> have deformities/conditions that they'd undoubtedly trade for a
> flattened head in a heartbeat), but to deplore the existence of a
> society in which parents apparently can't discern and resolve problems
> for themselves.
Gee, how many parents have been able to resolve the problem of thier kids
dying suddenly? Probably not many.
> I'd like to think parents who notice a flattening of
> their child's head could figure out how to alleviate/solve the problem
> themselves (such as by employing some of the suggestions in the article,
> or by--MY GOD!--placing the child to sleep on his/her stomach), but
> apparently many are either too stupid or too blindly obedient to
> authorities/"experts." (Stupidity and blind obedience to "experts"
> aren't mutually exclusive, of course.)
If parents are that concerned about the flat heads in their babies, they
can
always ask the doctor.
(You also show that people who are not blindly obediently to "experts" can
also be stupid.)
All the best,
Jeff
> > I think there are decent reasons to ignore the recommendation, and
> > obviously the risk to any one child is probably low. Fear of
> > flat-headedness is silly though.
>
> I agree.
>
>
|
