Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
BMJ 2007;335:129-131 (21 July), doi:10.1136/bmj.39203.430984.AD
C J Bacon, retired paediatrician, West Yorkshire Braithwaite, E N Hey, retired paediatrician
Northallerton, North Yorkshire
Correspondence to: C J Bacon Chrisjbacon@googlemail.com
It is misleading to classify every unexplained infant death as natural if no unnatural cause has been established, argue C J Bacon and E N Hey
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
Sudden unexpected infant death (cot death) has become much less common in recent years, and it is rare for a family to experience two such deaths. Carpenter and colleagues recently published valuable data on the repeat deaths that occurred among 5229 families in the Care of the Next Infant programme.1 This voluntary scheme funded by the Foundation for the Study of Infant Deaths provides extra support to families in England and Wales who have had a cot death and now have a new baby. There were 48 sudden unexpected deaths among babies on the programme between 1988 and 1999, including two third deaths. After examining all the circumstances and postmortem findings of the 46 second deaths, the authors concluded that all but six of the babies died from natural causes. This contrasts with earlier studies by Emery2 and Wolkind and colleagues,3 which concluded that a much higher proportion of repeat
![]()
CiteULike
Complore
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Reddit
StumbleUpon
Technorati What's this?
Read all Rapid Responses