Babies in boxes and the missing links on safe sleep: Human evolution and cultural revolution
- PMID: 29047226
- PMCID: PMC6866223
- DOI: 10.1111/mcn.12544
Babies in boxes and the missing links on safe sleep: Human evolution and cultural revolution
Abstract
Concerns about bedsharing as a risk for sudden infant death syndrome and other forms of sleep-associated infant death have gained prominence as a public health issue. Cardboard "baby boxes" are increasingly promoted to prevent infant death through separate sleep, despite no proof of efficacy. However, baby boxes disrupt "breastsleeping" (breastfeeding with co-sleeping) and may undermine breastfeeding. Recommendations enforcing separate sleep are based on 20th century Euro-American social norms for solitary infant sleep and scheduled feedings via bottles of cow's milk-based formula, in contrast to breastsleeping, an evolutionary adaptation facilitating the survival of mammalian infants for millennia. Interventions that aim to prevent bedsharing, such as the cardboard baby box, fail to consider the implications of evolutionary biology or of ethnocentrism in sleep guidance. Moreover, the focus on bedsharing neglects more potent risks such as smoking, drugs, alcohol, formula feeding, and poverty. Distribution of baby boxes may divert resources and attention away from addressing these other risk factors and lead to a false sense of security wherein we overlook that sudden unexplained infant deaths also occur in solitary sleep environments. Recognizing breastsleeping as the evolutionary and cross-cultural norm entails re-evaluating our research and policy priorities, such as providing greater structural support for families, supporting breastfeeding and safe co-sleeping, investigating ways to safely minimize separation for formula-fed infants, and mitigating the potential harms of mother-infant separation when breastsleeping is disrupted. Resources would be better spent addressing such questions rather than on a feel-good solution such as the baby box.
Keywords: breastfeeding; infant behaviour; infant formula; mothers; sleep; sudden infant death.
© 2017 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Conflict of interest statement
Dr. Bartick has no competing conflicts of interest regarding breastfeeding and infant sleep. Her current funding is for breastfeeding and economics research and comes from the WK Kellogg Foundation. Dr. Tomori has no current sleep‐related funding. Her past funding came from The Alfred P. Sloan Center for the Ethnography of Everyday Life; the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Development; the Rackham Graduate School, the Department of Anthropology, and the Center for the Education of Women at the University of Michigan. Dr. Ball's recent research was funded by the Lullaby Trust, the Scottish Government, the UK Economic and Social Research Council (ERSC), and the University of Durham. Previously research has been funded by the ESRC, the UK National Institute for Health Research, and UK health and medical charities.
References
-
- Alvarez‐Rodriguez, J. , Palacio, J. , Casasus, I. , Revilla, R. , & Sanz, A. (2009). Performance and nursing behaviour of beef cows with different types of calf management. Animal, 3, 871–878. - PubMed
-
- American Academy of Pediatrics & Section on Breastfeeding . (2012). Breastfeeding and the use of human milk. Pediatrics, 129, e827–e841. - PubMed
-
- Baddock, S. A. , Tipene‐Leach, D. , Williams, S. M. , Tangiora, A. , Jones, R. , Iosua, E. , … Taylor, B. J . (2017). Wahakura versus bassinet for safe infant sleep: A randomized trial. Pediatrics, 139. - PubMed
-
- Ball, H. (2006). Parent‐infant bed‐sharing behavior : Effects of feeding type and presence of father. Human Nature, 17, 301–318. - PubMed
-
- Ball, H. L. (2003). Breastfeeding, bed‐sharing, and infant sleep. Birth, 30, 181–188. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical