"CBI" <00doc@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:befo84$8v7$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> "JG" <jg030103@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:AZDOa.10743$Hw.7968200@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 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.
> At least (s)he will be a well rested corpse.
Why are you so averse to letting parents make a rational decision based
on *their* situation? A sleep-deprived child can adversely affect an
entire family; his/her problem usually has a domino effect.
> > 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? Likewise (alternatively), are
the
> > costs of *not* correcting a noticable deformity (teasing,
ridiculing,
> > name-calling, ...[= bullying, these days]) worth it?
> You tell us. What is the cost of correcting these deformities caused
by BTS?
Sorry, I don't have a plastic surgeon on call. I'm sure you could get a
ballpark figure by doing a Gooogle search, however.
> Compare that to the number of lives saved. How many of these kids are
> noticibly deformed by the time they get to school age? How much
teasing
> /life is worthwhile?
That's for the individual (or, in this case, his/her parents) to decide
now, isn't it?
> > "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.
> Why do you assume this?
I'd say "up to 48%" of kids having misshapen heads, even if the
deformities aren't permanent, speaks for itself. The simple measures
suggested in the article (prone while awake/observed, rotating 180
degrees in the crib) are, IMO, common sense--yet apparently almost half
of "Back to Sleep" parents haven't employed them (or asked their kid's
caregiver to employ them). OTOH, maybe they ARE aware of them, and
simply think Jr.'s misshapen head is endearing, right? Uh-huh. Yeah...
Maybe they can and they just don't come tot he same
> conclusions as you.
Yup. Gee, and to think there are some parents who just can't cope with
having kids, so they come to the conclusion that they'll simply off
them.
|
