Invoking sudden infant death syndrome in cosleeping may be misleading
- N Carter, senior lecturer in forensic pathology,
- G N Rutty, senior lecturer in forensic pathology
- Medicolegal Centre, Sheffield S3 7ES
- PO Box 3004, Westfield, NJ 07091, USA
- Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, Newcastle upon Tyne
- Institute of Child Health, Royal Hospital for Children, Bristol BS2 8BJ
- Newcastle Neonatal Service, Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 4LP
EDITOR—Blair et al investigated the factors influencing the risk of the sudden infant death syndrome.1 In an increasing number of infant deaths that we have investigated over recent years we have found several recurring themes: infant under 3 months; shared sleeping arrangements, particularly sharing a sofa; young carer; consumption of alcohol the night before the infant was found dead. Typically, the infant is found between the adult and the back of the sofa, often covered by a duvet. Sharing a sofa seems to be particularly common in single parent households with poor socioeconomic support, in which the mother sleeps on the sofa, often with more than one child, simply because it is the warmest place in the house. Some of the risk factors highlighted by Blair et al have long been recognised in law in the Children and Young Persons Act 1933.
We are concerned with the use of the term sudden infant death syndrome in this paper because it is potentially misleading in deaths associated with cosleeping. In such cases the infant may have been accidentally overlaid, smothered by the bedclothes, or squashed between the adult and back of the sofa. We accept that this cannot, at present, be proved beyond reasonable doubt, but we found in a recent study that intra-alveolar haemorrhage was increased in infants who died in the context of bed sharing and that this may be a marker of accidental asphyxia.2 This often manifests as bloodstained fluid issuing from the nose and mouth with consequent bloodstaining of the bedding and infant's clothing. Examination of the clothing and bedding is therefore essential.
It is inappropriate to accuse a carer unjustly in a cosleeping death. Nevertheless, it strikes us as being more honest to raise the suspicion that accidental upper airway obstruction may be a …
Sign in
Personal subscribers, sign in here:
Article access
Article access for 1 day
Purchase this article for £20 $30 €32*
The PDF version can be downloaded as your personal record
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Reddit
Technorati
Twitter
Stumbleupon
Rapid responses
Latest Responses
Ethical considerations
Published 14 February 2012
Re: Diagnosis and management of Raynaud’s phenomenon
Published 14 February 2012
Re: Raised inflammatory markers
Published 14 February 2012
Re: Physical activity for cancer survivors: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
Published 14 February 2012
Smokefree cars in Wales: Laws are better
Published 14 February 2012
Most responses
Does anyone understand the government’s plan for the NHS? (17 responses)
Published 17 Jan 2012
Bad medicine: medical nutrition (15 responses)
Published 18 Jan 2012
Shared decision making: really putting patients at the centre of healthcare (8 responses)
Published 27 Jan 2012
Why legislation is necessary for my health reforms (8 responses)
Published 1 Feb 2012
How much of a social media profile can doctors have? (7 responses)
Published 23 Jan 2012