Bassinet in your room???

nicoletteb1985 · July 2012

sbevmc09:
nicoletteb1985:
chip22:
Magenta728:

nicoletteb1985:
Do what you want to do. I disagree with the attachment/ abandonment issues. I think the baby will be fine. Get a noise machine that imitates the sounds of the womb. Babies can't see when they are newborns, so having them sleep in the same room or not, they will not know. Also, many people are mentioning SIDS, well no one knows what causes SIDS, some think it has something to do with the brain. So this also shouldn't be a deciding factor. Many babies die of SIDS for unknown reasons, not because the parent did not do something. My friend, who is a nurse, said one of her other nurse friends who did all that was recommended for her newborn and she was next to her baby as her baby died of SIDS, just took a last breath and that was it. So don't make your decision on SIDS recommendations, because none are proven to prevent it.

::headdesk::

I'm going to keep this short, bc I'm on my phone.

While it's true that no one knows what causes SIDS, there has much been research dedicated to finding ways to reduce it. It's irresponsible to completely throw those out the window. For example, since the Back to Sleep campaign, the incidence of SIDS has dropped dramatically. You SHOULD make parenting decisions based on the research.

And the idea that newborns can't see so they don't know their mom isn't around is ridiculous.

All this. The Public Health agncy of Canada and the Candian Pediatric Society also recommend "room-sharing" as associated with a reduced risk of SIDS and recommend that you room-share until baby is 6 months old.

And babies can tell their moms are nearby by much more than sight. Duh!
As for the "Duh" statement. Do you think babies are dogs and they can smell their mothers? No!! Can you tell if some one is in the same room with you if they are quite? No! Many people have crimes committed in their own home without sensing someone is there the moment they are there. The "Duh" statement completely unnecessary and rude. Refrain if you don't agree and can't make a valid argument rather than inserting a rude "Duh" regarding mine, when I gave a reason why I thought that, and why I think the SIDS research is faulty.
Actually, newborns can see. They're not blind. And they do know their mothers using their other senses as well. Especially if you're BF'ing they can smell your milk.
And I agree with PP that just because they don't know what causes SIDS there's no excuse to dismiss studies which have found things that reduce/impact SIDS. That doesn't mean YOU have to choose to do the recommended thing if it doesn't feel right/work for you family, but it's nothing to just dismiss because they don't know what the exact impact is.
Again, this is one of these things that everyone is going to feel differently about, but your reasons for not agreeing with it don't really make much sense. Maybe it's not the right thing for you, and that's fine, but I wouldn't make that decision based on the fact that you think a newborn can't see you so they don't know you're there or because they might still fall victim to SIDS. That doesn't make much sense.

My original point had nothing to do with either. My original point was that you aren't going to traumatize the baby by sleeping in a different room, and the SIDS research regarding sleeping in a different room is miniscule due to the fact that some research says co sleeping reduces the risk (how does that reasoning not make sense?), which is the opposite. It has nothing to do with "back is best," and such. My original point had to relate to the original questions. The comments above go off on tangents that have nothing to do with the original question asked.

And I will argue this, if babies can smell breast milk why do they try to breast feed off other women's chests and stuffed animals that contain no breast milk? Can you smell your breast milk? I sure couldn't. Are babies born with a sensitive sense of smell?

Let's go over the five senses of newborns and sleeping:

Touch- Well whether they are sleeping in the parents room or their own room, they can't have this sense unless they are touched.

Sight- Ok, they can see, blurry and not well at all, and in a bassinet they would only be seeing the ceiling in either room.

Smell- Unless they are born with a heightened sense of smell or have smelly parents they won't be able to smell you a few feet away.

Hear- Well unless you are a loud sleeper they won't hear you because you will be sleeping.

Taste- Well unless you are feeding them they can't taste you.

Am I missing one? Are newborns born with a sixth sense that I am missing, because that is what my statement is made out to be.

sbevmc09 · July 2012

nicoletteb1985:
sbevmc09:
nicoletteb1985:
chip22:
Magenta728:

nicoletteb1985:
Do what you want to do. I disagree with the attachment/ abandonment issues. I think the baby will be fine. Get a noise machine that imitates the sounds of the womb. Babies can't see when they are newborns, so having them sleep in the same room or not, they will not know. Also, many people are mentioning SIDS, well no one knows what causes SIDS, some think it has something to do with the brain. So this also shouldn't be a deciding factor. Many babies die of SIDS for unknown reasons, not because the parent did not do something. My friend, who is a nurse, said one of her other nurse friends who did all that was recommended for her newborn and she was next to her baby as her baby died of SIDS, just took a last breath and that was it. So don't make your decision on SIDS recommendations, because none are proven to prevent it.

::headdesk::

I'm going to keep this short, bc I'm on my phone.

While it's true that no one knows what causes SIDS, there has much been research dedicated to finding ways to reduce it. It's irresponsible to completely throw those out the window. For example, since the Back to Sleep campaign, the incidence of SIDS has dropped dramatically. You SHOULD make parenting decisions based on the research.

And the idea that newborns can't see so they don't know their mom isn't around is ridiculous.

All this. The Public Health agncy of Canada and the Candian Pediatric Society also recommend "room-sharing" as associated with a reduced risk of SIDS and recommend that you room-share until baby is 6 months old.

And babies can tell their moms are nearby by much more than sight. Duh!
As for the "Duh" statement. Do you think babies are dogs and they can smell their mothers? No!! Can you tell if some one is in the same room with you if they are quite? No! Many people have crimes committed in their own home without sensing someone is there the moment they are there. The "Duh" statement completely unnecessary and rude. Refrain if you don't agree and can't make a valid argument rather than inserting a rude "Duh" regarding mine, when I gave a reason why I thought that, and why I think the SIDS research is faulty.
Actually, newborns can see. They're not blind. And they do know their mothers using their other senses as well. Especially if you're BF'ing they can smell your milk.
And I agree with PP that just because they don't know what causes SIDS there's no excuse to dismiss studies which have found things that reduce/impact SIDS. That doesn't mean YOU have to choose to do the recommended thing if it doesn't feel right/work for you family, but it's nothing to just dismiss because they don't know what the exact impact is.
Again, this is one of these things that everyone is going to feel differently about, but your reasons for not agreeing with it don't really make much sense. Maybe it's not the right thing for you, and that's fine, but I wouldn't make that decision based on the fact that you think a newborn can't see you so they don't know you're there or because they might still fall victim to SIDS. That doesn't make much sense.

My original point had nothing to do with either. My original point was that you aren't going to traumatize the baby by sleeping in a different room, and the SIDS research regarding sleeping in a different room is miniscule due to the fact that some research says co sleeping reduces the risk (how does that reasoning not make sense?), which is the opposite. It has nothing to do with "back is best," and such. My original point had to relate to the original questions. The comments above go off on tangents that have nothing to do with the original question asked.
And I will argue this, if babies can smell breast milk why do they try to breast feed off other women's chests and stuffed animals that contain no breast milk? Can you smell your breast milk? I sure couldn't. Are babies born with a sensitive sense of smell?
Let's go over the five senses of newborns and sleeping:
Touch- Well whether they are sleeping in the parents room or their own room, they can't have this sense unless they are touched.
Sight- Ok, they can see, blurry and not well at all, and in a bassinet they would only be seeing the ceiling in either room.
Smell- Unless they are born with a heightened sense of smell or have smelly parents they won't be able to smell you a few feet away.
Hear- Well unless you are a loud sleeper they won't hear you because you will be sleeping.
Taste- Well unless you are feeding them they can't taste you.
Am I missing one? Are newborns born with a sixth sense that I am missing, because that is what my statement is made out to be.

I completely disagree. First, it's your opinion that putting a baby directly in the other room won't have a negative impact. Some people believe that it does. Of course there are plenty of people who have put their kids directly into their own room and have had a fine outcome, but that doesn't mean that it's right for everyone. Second, a newborn absolutely can sense its mother and even the comfort of other people. Have you ever heard of Kangaroo Care and its benefits? It's a perfect example. Not to mention, it's pretty obvious when caring for a newborn that they take comfort from being around their mother.

You should think about newborns this way: they've lived their entire existence in a tiny, warm, dark, place, next to their mother's beating heart. It's all they know. All of the sudden they're thrust into the real world where they have to experience any number of new things and experiences and sensations and are all of the sudden a separate person. That's why a lot of people believe there needs to be a transition period (the "fourth trimester") in which they're near the only thing they know: their mother. I think that their senses are very sensitive at first so when you're talking about their sense of smell I absolutely believe they can smell their mother and their mother's breastmilk. It's known that babies most developed sense at birth is their sense of smell. I would imagine it's almost a heightened experience for them because it is their strongest sense. There have been studies done that have found newborns can even discern between their mother's breastmilk and someone else's.

I know from personal experience, when we were first trying to get DS to nap on his own he would sleep far better laying on our bed than he would in his crib. I finally made the connection that our bed probably smelled like me so I put a blanket that I had used down as a sheet for him in his crib and it helped him to sleep better there. It's a comfort thing.

Again, it's totally fine if you want to have your child in another room. It's your baby, it's your family, you have to do what feels right and natural for you, but some of what you're saying is opinion and some of what you're saying just isn't correct based on what is actually known about newborns.

chip22 · July 2012

sbevmc09:

Again, it's totally fine if you want to have your child in another room. It's your baby, it's your family, you have to do what feels right and natural for you, but some of what you're saying is opinion and some of what you're saying just isn't correct based on what is actually known about newborns.

Hence the "duh!" which was meant to be rude because I think your arguments are unsupported by fact.

Mason&Mama · July 2012

I wouldn't stress about it at all right now. When the time comes, you will find out what works best for your family. You are ahead of the game by having a bassinet in case that is what works for you. We started off using a bassinet for almost 7 weeks. He hated it! I then transitioned him to his crib, and he hated that as well. Truthfully, he spent a lot of nights sleeping in the living room in his swing. You don't know until you are in the middle if it, just like most aspects of parenting. On a side note, at one year old, after rejecting his bassinet/crib for about 6 months, my son will now only sleep in his crib. Not on me, not in the car, not in a pack and play. Only his crib.

nicoletteb1985 · July 2012

chip22:
sbevmc09:

Again, it's totally fine if you want to have your child in another room. It's your baby, it's your family, you have to do what feels right and natural for you, but some of what you're saying is opinion and some of what you're saying just isn't correct based on what is actually known about newborns.

Hence the "duh!" which was meant to be rude because I think your arguments are unsupported by fact.

The five senses are fact, Duh. I didn't go off saying that the senses did other things as others are and you are insinuating. There is no proof that newborns, who do not yet have a developed brain can use their senses beyond what is fact about the five senses, a person with a developed brain can't sense things that are being insinuated that a newborn can sense. Emotional feelings are not a sense as you are insinuating. What is actually known about senses is that most newborns are born with all five, not all. No newborn is born with a magical sixth sense. I never said comforting wasn't a necessary part of being a parent, it is. But when you are speaking of it in the sleeping sense, I stated why I do not think that, yes it is my opinion. I have not heard about kangaroo parenting or anything of that sort, which are also opinions. But stating the five senses and what it means to a newborn sleeping isn't opinion, please enlighten me by stating what the five senses are in a newborn relating to sleeping that argues the simple fact of the definition of senses, that have nothing to do with emotional feelings, which are learned by having a more developed brain. I think it is more a parents feeling than anything, if the parent feels bad about leaving a newborn alone in a room at night. Not to say newborns don't have feelings, they do, but not at all as how complex some parents may think (that is why it is important to teach children how to id their feelings). It is all instinct, if you believe something will be traumatizing you don't do it, but that being said, it doesn't mean it is traumatizing especially if the parent does it from the beginning. It is traumatizing entering the world, you guide your children to what you think is best, and I don't think starting a newborn off in their own room will ruin them for life.

And "duh," is a lackluster argument. You are saying my argument lacks validity when your argument is "duh."

Oh and I did want to note, that yes this is my opinion, but I didn't pick on anyone else's opinion, just stated mine. You ladies wanted to argue my opinion, not the other way around. You ladies say my opinion is wrong, but how is your opinion better than mine, how is yours more factual? It isn't it is still an opinion. That is how I see it as coming off to be since my post was picked on.

zonagirlie · July 2012

nicoletteb1985:
chip22:
sbevmc09:

Again, it's totally fine if you want to have your child in another room. It's your baby, it's your family, you have to do what feels right and natural for you, but some of what you're saying is opinion and some of what you're saying just isn't correct based on what is actually known about newborns.

Hence the "duh!" which was meant to be rude because I think your arguments are unsupported by fact.
The five senses are fact, Duh. I didn't go off saying that the senses did other things as others are and you are insinuating. There is no proof that newborns, who do not yet have a developed brain can use their senses beyond what is fact about the five senses, a person with a developed brain can't sense things that are being insinuated that a newborn can sense. Emotional feelings are not a sense as you are insinuating. What is actually known about senses is that most newborns are born with all five, not all. No newborn is born with a magical sixth sense. I never said comforting wasn't a necessary part of being a parent, it is. But when you are speaking of it in the sleeping sense, I stated why I do not think that, yes it is my opinion. I have not heard about kangaroo parenting or anything of that sort, which are also opinions. But stating the five senses and what it means to a newborn sleeping isn't opinion, please enlighten me by stating what the five senses are in a newborn relating to sleeping that argues the simple fact of the definition of senses, that have nothing to do with emotional feelings, which are learned by having a more developed brain. I think it is more a parents feeling than anything, if the parent feels bad about leaving a newborn alone in a room at night. Not to say newborns don't have feelings, they do, but not at all as how complex some parents may think (that is why it is important to teach children how to id their feelings). It is all instinct, if you believe something will be traumatizing you don't do it, but that being said, it doesn't mean it is traumatizing especially if the parent does it from the beginning. It is traumatizing entering the world, you guide your children to what you think is best, and I don't think starting a newborn off in their own room will ruin them for life.
And "duh," is a lackluster argument. You are saying my argument lacks validity when your argument is "duh."
Oh and I did want to note, that yes this is my opinion, but I didn't pick on anyone else's opinion, just stated mine. You ladies wanted to argue my opinion, not the other way around. You ladies say my opinion is wrong, but how is your opinion better than mine, how is yours more factual? It isn't it is still an opinion. That is how I see it as coming off to be since my post was picked on.

You need to be educated. It is sad how much you don't know about infant development. Please find some education. Everything you stated was loaded with unfactual information. To the point of being downright scary. Our statements are based on fact not opinion. Science proves what is best. There is physical evidencethat proves room-sharing is best. The AAP and the other medical associations and millions of physicians world wide wouldn't recommend it based on anything but fact. Again, educate yourself for your child's sake.

nicoletteb1985 · July 2012

zonagirlie:
nicoletteb1985:
chip22:
sbevmc09:

Again, it's totally fine if you want to have your child in another room. It's your baby, it's your family, you have to do what feels right and natural for you, but some of what you're saying is opinion and some of what you're saying just isn't correct based on what is actually known about newborns.

Hence the "duh!" which was meant to be rude because I think your arguments are unsupported by fact.
The five senses are fact, Duh. I didn't go off saying that the senses did other things as others are and you are insinuating. There is no proof that newborns, who do not yet have a developed brain can use their senses beyond what is fact about the five senses, a person with a developed brain can't sense things that are being insinuated that a newborn can sense. Emotional feelings are not a sense as you are insinuating. What is actually known about senses is that most newborns are born with all five, not all. No newborn is born with a magical sixth sense. I never said comforting wasn't a necessary part of being a parent, it is. But when you are speaking of it in the sleeping sense, I stated why I do not think that, yes it is my opinion. I have not heard about kangaroo parenting or anything of that sort, which are also opinions. But stating the five senses and what it means to a newborn sleeping isn't opinion, please enlighten me by stating what the five senses are in a newborn relating to sleeping that argues the simple fact of the definition of senses, that have nothing to do with emotional feelings, which are learned by having a more developed brain. I think it is more a parents feeling than anything, if the parent feels bad about leaving a newborn alone in a room at night. Not to say newborns don't have feelings, they do, but not at all as how complex some parents may think (that is why it is important to teach children how to id their feelings). It is all instinct, if you believe something will be traumatizing you don't do it, but that being said, it doesn't mean it is traumatizing especially if the parent does it from the beginning. It is traumatizing entering the world, you guide your children to what you think is best, and I don't think starting a newborn off in their own room will ruin them for life.
And "duh," is a lackluster argument. You are saying my argument lacks validity when your argument is "duh."
Oh and I did want to note, that yes this is my opinion, but I didn't pick on anyone else's opinion, just stated mine. You ladies wanted to argue my opinion, not the other way around. You ladies say my opinion is wrong, but how is your opinion better than mine, how is yours more factual? It isn't it is still an opinion. That is how I see it as coming off to be since my post was picked on.
You need to be educated. It is sad how much you don't know about infant development. Please find some education. Everything you stated was loaded with unfactual information. To the point of being downright scary. Our statements are based on fact not opinion. Science proves what is best. There is physical evidencethat proves room-sharing is best. The AAP and the other medical associations and millions of physicians world wide wouldn't recommend it based on anything but fact. Again, educate yourself for your child's sake.

The physical evidence can be argued, doctor's have admitted to not knowing what exactly causes SIDS, and some arguments from doctors say co sleeping is best. It isn't truth or fact if it can be argued. Ever heard of Socrates? Look him up. If it can be argued, it isn't truth. That is the problem, I am educated, educated enough to ask questions. It doesn't matter that my opinion is different, many people co sleep, room share, or have separate rooms for their baby. It doesn't make one more right. It is all based on opinions. You are telling me I am wrong, when your opinion can be argued just as much as mine can. My child will be lucky, as he will not be a sheep in the flock, I will encourage questions, and explain that if it can be argued it isn't truth. Why don't you educate yourself on what is opinion and what is actual fact. One opinion isn't better than another. I never said anything that I was saying was fact other than the five senses and that other opinions can be argued, both fact. Yet, my opinions were taken as fact; next time read before you tell someone to educate themselves. Idiots. At least I stick to the subject regarding my arguments rather than going off on tangents to argue a newborn's sleeping arrangement. (other than defending my original opinions with the tangents you ladies go off on).

Down right scary to co sleep or have your newborn sleep in a different room? Now that is laughable. Just because we all don't do the same things as you, does not mean that the rest of us are abusing our children, as you make it seem.

Here is a research website that counters your so called factual opinion: https://www.askdrsears.com/topics/sleep-problems/co-sleeping-yes-no-sometimes

Like I said you so called facts can be argued... NOT A FACT IF IT CAN BE ARGUED!

pghctwife · July 2012

y'all are way more patient than I. I can't even understand Nicolette's WORDS! Sweetie - you have no clue. Babies have brains, and yes, they are actually born with instincts and senses that we no longer have as adults. For example, when a newborn infant is born, one of the VERY first things s/he will do is literally scooch themselves over to find the breast to nurse. This is known as 'rooting.' Of course, you are no longer drawn by the nose to your mother's bosom... you don't need to do that anymore. They do this not only by (fuzzy) eyesight, but mainly by smell. THe instinct to know and locate the smell of their mother, specifically her breast milk, is a survival instinct humans are born with.

As for SIDS etc... the others covered it pretty completely.

And for the other PP. Bedsharing is a choice that certainly is not right for every family but it is not unsafe. Falling asleep sitting up in a chair or couch with your baby on you IS incredibly unsafe (but I dare you to find a mom or dad who hasn't done it). Bedsharing when done properly is very safe and is practiced by many many families over the history of mankind. FWIW, I did not plan to bedshare either. Until it became clear that it was a solution that was going to be right for our family. At that point, I researched how to do it safely before doing it. It worked for us for a long time.

pghctwife · July 2012

nicoletteb1985:

Like I said you so called facts can be argued... NOT A FACT IF IT CAN BE ARGUED!

This is not the standard by which it is determined what is a fact. HTH, YWIA.

nicoletteb1985 · July 2012

Pgh-CTBride:
y'all are way more patient than I. I can't even understand Nicolette's WORDS! Sweetie - you have no clue. Babies have brains, and yes, they are actually born with instincts and senses that we no longer have as adults. For example, when a newborn infant is born, one of the VERY first things s/he will do is literally scooch themselves over to find the breast to nurse. They do this not only by (fuzzy) eyesight, but mainly by smell. THe instinct to know and locate the smell of their mother, specifically her breast milk, is a survival instinct humans are born with.
As for SIDS etc... the others covered it pretty completely.
And for the other PP. Bedsharing is a choice that certainly is not right for every family but it is not unsafe. Falling asleep sitting up in a chair or couch with your baby on you IS incredibly unsafe (but I dare you to find a mom or dad who hasn't done it). Bedsharing when done properly is very safe and is practiced by many many families over the history of mankind. FWIW, I did not plan to bedshare either. Until it became clear that it was a solution that was going to be right for our family. At that point, I researched how to do it safely before doing it. It worked for us for a long time.

I NEVER said babies do not have brains or instincts!! Where do I say that? Of course babies have instincts! They have a natural instinct to suck and look for mom's breast, but again that has nothing to do with a newborn's sleeping arrangement. My point was that I highly doubt a newborn can smell milk from a few feet away (which was my point). They have the instinct to try to find milk every where, don't tell me you child was trying to suck on other women's breasts or other objects that contain no breast milk, because most babies do, mine did! I agree that a baby can tell the difference between other women's breast milk, but again that has nothing to do with my original comment. READ, and stop reading into things that are not, because I never said babies did not have brains or instincts.

nicoletteb1985 · July 2012

Pgh-CTBride:
nicoletteb1985:

Like I said you so called facts can be argued... NOT A FACT IF IT CAN BE ARGUED!
This is not the standard by which it is determined what is a fact. HTH, YWIA.

A fact (derived from the Latin factum, see below) is something that has really occurred or is actually the case. The usual test for a statement of fact is verifiability, that is whether it can be proven to correspond to experience. Standard reference works are often used to check facts. Scientific facts are verified by repeatable experiments.

In regards to SIDS research this cannot be done because they don't know what the cause actually is. Doctor's only have correlations between causes, this does not make a fact.

"Sudden infant death syndrome, or SIDS, is one of the most tragic and puzzling causes of infant death. SIDS has occurred for thousands of years. In the past, it was called "overlaying" because it was believed that the mother had rolled onto the baby during sleep. Now it is known that this is not the case, but the true cause of SIDS is still unknown. In fact, SIDS is only diagnosed when no other cause of death can be identified." (Sudden infant death syndrome, or SIDS, is one of the most tragic and puzzling causes of infant death. SIDS has occurred for thousands of years. In the past, it was called "overlaying" because it was believed that the mother had rolled onto the baby during sleep. Now it is known that this is not the case, but the true cause of SIDS is still unknown. In fact, SIDS is only diagnosed when no other cause of death can be identified." (https://health.howstuffworks.com/pregnancy-and-parenting/baby-health/infant-health/understanding-sudden-infant-death-syndrome1.htm)

Okay there, now I have verifiably backed up my opinions by research not done by me.

Oh, and I do not need proof stating that later because I know that these opinions can be argued. I am just proving that the so called facts you are depending on can also be argued. It just amazes me that there are idiots that believe opinions are facts, when they are not.

pghctwife · July 2012

you said that they do not have developed brains nor a developed sense of smell. That is incorrect. The instinct to root is GUIDED by their heightened sense of smell. And when you co-sleep, the basinette is generally located right next to mom, so, yes, the baby will smell you.

I am unsure what the heck you are trying to say. No, my child did not try to get BM from inanimate objects. That is the point. They can smell your BM. That is why when introducing a bottle, mom should not be holding the baby.

You are really simply wrong on basically everything. Im sure this is all a waste of time. If you already have a child, I am even more amazed by the lack of knowledge.

pghctwife · July 2012

nicoletteb1985:
Pgh-CTBride:
nicoletteb1985:

Like I said you so called facts can be argued... NOT A FACT IF IT CAN BE ARGUED!
This is not the standard by which it is determined what is a fact. HTH, YWIA.
A fact (derived from the Latin factum, see below) is something that has really occurred or is actually the case. The usual test for a statement of fact is verifiability, that is whether it can be proven to correspond to experience. Standard reference works are often used to check facts. Scientific facts are verified by repeatable experiments.
In regards to SIDS research this cannot be done because they don't know what the cause actually is. Doctor's only have correlations between causes, this does not make a fact.

"Sudden infant death syndrome, or SIDS, is one of the most tragic and puzzling causes of infant death. SIDS has occurred for thousands of years. In the past, it was called "overlaying" because it was believed that the mother had rolled onto the baby during sleep. Now it is known that this is not the case, but the true cause of SIDS is still unknown. In fact, SIDS is only diagnosed when no other cause of death can be identified." (Sudden infant death syndrome, or SIDS, is one of the most tragic and puzzling causes of infant death. SIDS has occurred for thousands of years. In the past, it was called "overlaying" because it was believed that the mother had rolled onto the baby during sleep. Now it is known that this is not the case, but the true cause of SIDS is still unknown. In fact, SIDS is only diagnosed when no other cause of death can be identified." (https://health.howstuffworks.com/pregnancy-and-parenting/baby-health/infant-health/understanding-sudden-infant-death-syndrome1.htm)
Okay there, now I have verifiably backed up my opinions by research not done by me.

I missed the part of the definition that states "NOT A FACT IF IT CAN BE ARGUED." ???

Oh. Wait.

nicoletteb1985 · July 2012

Pgh-CTBride:
nicoletteb1985:
Pgh-CTBride:
nicoletteb1985:

Like I said you so called facts can be argued... NOT A FACT IF IT CAN BE ARGUED!
This is not the standard by which it is determined what is a fact. HTH, YWIA.
A fact (derived from the Latin factum, see below) is something that has really occurred or is actually the case. The usual test for a statement of fact is verifiability, that is whether it can be proven to correspond to experience. Standard reference works are often used to check facts. Scientific facts are verified by repeatable experiments.
In regards to SIDS research this cannot be done because they don't know what the cause actually is. Doctor's only have correlations between causes, this does not make a fact.

"Sudden infant death syndrome, or SIDS, is one of the most tragic and puzzling causes of infant death. SIDS has occurred for thousands of years. In the past, it was called "overlaying" because it was believed that the mother had rolled onto the baby during sleep. Now it is known that this is not the case, but the true cause of SIDS is still unknown. In fact, SIDS is only diagnosed when no other cause of death can be identified." (Sudden infant death syndrome, or SIDS, is one of the most tragic and puzzling causes of infant death. SIDS has occurred for thousands of years. In the past, it was called "overlaying" because it was believed that the mother had rolled onto the baby during sleep. Now it is known that this is not the case, but the true cause of SIDS is still unknown. In fact, SIDS is only diagnosed when no other cause of death can be identified." (https://health.howstuffworks.com/pregnancy-and-parenting/baby-health/infant-health/understanding-sudden-infant-death-syndrome1.htm)
Okay there, now I have verifiably backed up my opinions by research not done by me.
I missed the part of the definition that states "NOT A FACT IF IT CAN BE ARGUED." ???
Oh. Wait.

"Fact is basically something that exists, or is present in reality. Hence, these are things that can be seen visually, and these are the things that can actually be verified. Facts are objective matters rather than subjective ones. It is not just something that you believe, but rather these are more or less the things that can be observed empirically, or by the senses. So, facts can be seen and heard, as well as proven by the other senses...In terms of permanence, a fact happens to be more permanent, and almost always seems to have no changes."

https://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/difference-between-fact-and-truth/#ixzz222kDgDyL

"In scientific reasoning, something can only be called a fact when it can be observed as it occurs or as a state of being, or when it can be proven through experimentation. Experiments must be repeatable, and return the same result no matter who the observer is. Things that were once thought of as facts, however, have been shown to be incorrect. For example, the world was once thought to be flat by many people. This is now known to be incorrect, as objective evidence was introduced showing that it is actually a flattened sphere.

Many things that people think of as science facts are, technically, theories. Gravity, for example, is a fact; the explanation of how gravity works, on the other hand, is a theory ? and there are several different theories on how it actually does work. This does not mean that a theory is only speculation. Scientific theories are thoroughly tested and applied to known facts, observations, and hypotheses, and to survive, a theory must explain a wide range of observations that would be otherwise unconnected." (https://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-the-difference-between-fact-and-opinion.htm)

Since, you needed a more in depth definition of what a fact is.

nicoletteb1985 · July 2012

Pgh-CTBride:
you said that they do not have developed brains nor a developed sense of smell. That is incorrect. The instinct to root is GUIDED by their heightened sense of smell. And when you co-sleep, the basinette is generally located right next to mom, so, yes, the baby will smell you.
I am unsure what the heck you are trying to say. No, my child did not try to get BM from inanimate objects. That is the point. They can smell your BM. That is why when introducing a bottle, mom should not be holding the baby.
You are really simply wrong on basically everything. Im sure this is all a waste of time. If you already have a child, I am even more amazed by the lack of knowledge.

I did not say they do not have a developed brain, I said that their brain is not as developed as an adult (or that is what I meant). When I slept with baby in the room, the bassinet was next to my husband, so are you now saying that you have to place the bassinet in a certain area of the room? I introduced the bottle, and my baby took it just fine. I am wrong? How can an opinion v. another opinion be wrong? That is what I am trying to say. You are saying that your opinion is right and mine is wrong, how can that be if they are both opinions? Think about it. Lack of knowledge? Look up the definition of opinion, because you are basing your argument off opinions, as am I, but I am not saying your opinions are wrong, as you are to mine. I am stating that all parents do things differently, not one doing it right one doing it wrong.

This is just a circular argument going nowhere, because you don't understand what opinion v. fact is. When you come to the realization that opinions are subjective and fact is objective then you will understand why I can validly argue different research that you take as fact.

pghctwife · July 2012

I didn't need a definition. I know what it is. It is not what you asserted a million times (a fact can't be argued). But Im glad you looked up the definition so now you know!

pghctwife · July 2012

Work on your reading comprehension.

Im done wasting my sunday with circular arguments from an idiot. Thanks for the distraction though!

nicoletteb1985 · July 2012

Pgh-CTBride:
I didn't need a definition. I know what it is. It is not what you asserted a million times (a fact can't be argued). But Im glad you looked up the definition so now you know!

So then you are saying that a fact can be argued? Then would it be a fact? Putting me down does not solidify any type of argument you are trying to make.

nicoletteb1985 · July 2012

Pgh-CTBride:
Work on your reading comprehension.
Im done wasting my sunday with circular arguments from an idiot. Thanks for the distraction though!

It wouldn't be circular if you realized that what you are saying is based on opinion and is no better/ no worse than my opinion.

Magenta728 · July 2012

Pgh-CTBride:

y'all are way more patient than I. I can't even understand Nicolette's WORDS!

I had to give up. The stream of consciousness/anger spew completely devalued anything she was trying to say.

sbevmc09 · July 2012

Magenta728:
Pgh-CTBride:

y'all are way more patient than I. I can't even understand Nicolette's WORDS!

I had to give up. The stream of consciousness/anger spew completely devalued anything she was trying to say.

This. It's just hurting my brain.

Nicolette: I would really recommend that you do some reading about newborns and early childhood development. It's obvious that you're uneducated about this topic and I don't think we'll change your mind. Perhaps if you discovered the information on your own it would be more beneficial to you.

mrsodonnell12 · July 2012

zonagirlie:
PrivacyWanted:

It is just so nice to have the baby right next to you for those late night feedings. I had a c/s and it was really nice to not have to move much to get DD in the begining. I also think I remember reading sleeping in the same room helps with SIDS prevention

This. I plan on breastfeeding so baby won't be in their own room until weened. Why would you want to wander through your house at midnight with two hours of sleep (if you're lucky) and bang into stuff? I would fall on the dog or something. Arms reach is safest and easiest. And I've also read that being in the same room helps with SIDS/choking prevention and attachment.

yep- all of this!

Want a personalized experience?

Bassinet in your room???

Re: Bassinet in your room???

Choose Another Board

Search Boards