The ten most controversial parenting practices: the colecho

In the blog we talk about very varied topics, and in matters of parenting it is not uncommon to find some debate and controversy among those who think differently. Let's list the ten most controversial parenting practices, stopping at each of them and offering the different points of view and conclusions, if any.

It is clear that by "parenting practice" concepts of a very different nature are included, from what has been called "method" and lean towards artificiality to natural practices rooted in our biology.

So what do these practices have in common? Precisely the controversy they raise when discussing them, the extremes that seem irreconcilable when everyone believes that he is doing the best for his son (or the "not so bad") and thinks himself questioned in his behavior.

El colecho: sleep with the baby, yes or no?

We begin our review by talking about colecho, a term that we do not find in the Spanish Language Dictionary but which makes etymologically meaning by using the prefix "co-" (shared, joint) and the lexeme "bed" (bed): sleep in the same bed.

The colecho is defended by many fathers and mothers who point out the benefits of sleeping with their babies and indicate that it is the most natural, practiced throughout the centuries in many communities and even today in societies such as the Japanese. On the contrary, there are those who only see negative effects in sleeping with the baby and prefer that he sleep in his crib.

Between one extreme and the other, there are a multitude of options, such as the widespread one of the occasional colecho or the one that avoids the colecho during the first months of the baby's life. But, What does the scientific evidence say about it?

What the experts say

Scientifically, it is difficult to point out the suitability or not of sleeping with the baby. However, Pediatric Associations do not advise the practice of colecho, at least during the first year of life, since would have been related to sudden infant death syndrome. Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) is defined as the death of a child that is unexpected because of its history and in which no cause is demonstrated.

This fact, which support pediatric associations such as Spanish, American or Latin American, would be relevant during the baby's first months, but not later, when the risk of sudden death disappears.

For the first months, these associations recommend cohabitation, that the baby sleeps in a crib attached to the parents' bed, which would allow advantages such as breastfeeding on demand and immediate assistance to the baby but avoid the risks associated with sleeping in the same bed with the baby.

However, for anyone who decides to sleep with the baby, there are certain guidelines that make colecho a safer practice:

  • The mattress must be firm and wide enough for both or three (soft mattresses, water mattresses or bedtime with a baby on a sofa).
  • The quilt, blanket or comforter should not be too heavy.
  • The room temperature should be adequate, preventing it from being too hot or that the baby is too warm.
  • The baby is on his back.
  • Parents do not smoke (or at least they never do it in the room) or drink alcohol, drink any type of sedatives, or have significant obesity.

As we verify when making a detailed analysis of the publications in this regard, the positions are far from clear, and only more accurate and extensive research could clarify the issue in the future. Virtually every week we can talk about new studies on sudden infant death syndrome.

Therefore, other health professionals, including those belonging to the associations mentioned above, choose to state that Colecho (or not Colecho) is a personal choice of each family that will depend on many factors and in which no one should interfere, as happens in these controversial cases. That is, there is no need for "experts" to point out what works best for each family.

Soon we will continue with this review by the most controversial issues of parenting, those in which we all have something (much) to say but, fundamentally, in which we will not agree.