SO there appears to be some controversy over baby bottle tenders (holders, bottle propers, etc.). While researching bottle feeders, the New Family Dad came across some interesting and strong opinions both in favor and against using them. Some claim they are dangerous devices that can result in death. Others claim they are necessary sanity savers.
![]() |
Dangerous baby killer or safe device when used with supervision? (Image source: Amazon.com) |
Users, typically caregivers to multiples, see a bottle tender as more than a convenience; it is a sanity saver. The most popular positive review for the bottle tender shown in the picture above makes the point that feeding multiples is a challenge that justifies their use. The user notes that she is not leaving her children unattended while in use. Another writes that the holder allows him to respond more rapidly to his twins when they decide they need to feed at the same time.
Nonuser's arguments, represented by the arguments made by a NICU nurse and mother herself, claim the danger for outweigh the convenience. She claims that her patient died after aspirating formula from a propped bottle. She continues that babies should always be fed by hand and supported in an upright position. Further, she claims to sometimes care for three babies simultaneously, so she understands the challenges parents of multiples face.
As typically happens in comment threads where there is sharp disagreement between two or more divergent interests, one nonuser commenter alleged some mothers are simply too stupid to use the bottle tender safely.She concedes that they could be used safely, but some parents won't.
Here are the New Family Dad's observations about the bottle feeders.
- Any unsupervised baby is unsafe relative to one that is closely monitored irrespective of the device used or activity performed. If you prop a bottle in your infants mouth and leave, you are increasing the risk of death or injury to an unacceptably high degree.
- The patient that died from aspirating formula was likely unmonitored for an extended period of several minutes (or more), otherwise the parent would have intervened likely saving the child's life. It is unacceptable to fault the device for the irresponsibility of the parent.
- The standard of care in a NICU or pediatric nursery is driven by motivations different from the ones that drive the rules parents create when considering and implementing their home standard of care. Hospitals consider, amongst other concerns, their liability should they incur a reportable incident and have not followed standard practices. Parents have no such liability, rather they have to consider the risks and benefits given the challenges they face. So, what should be standard operating procedure in maternity will, and should, differ from the standard at home.
- It is conceit to assert that someone else's practices are stupid. This is a disagreement created from conflicting values. Each party reached their decision based on whatever criteria is important to them. Their actions may appear stupid to another if he is unaware of what drove the one's decision. If, to borrow and expand on an example, you have two or more kids screaming to be fed, you are exhausted, you are alone, and you will be present for the entirety of the feeding, then propping a bottle is smart.
- The psychological and emotional health of caregiver and baby is an important decision factor for parents considering adopting a bottle tender. Anything that calms baby faster while requiring less effort from parent is extremely valuable and outweighs the marginal risk of baby choking while having her bottle propped. Less emotional energy expended enduring dueling screams is then available to share with baby.
- The physical energy of parent is not limitless. Parents and nurses both get tired, but nurses get to go home at the end of their shift, parents are still on duty. Again, less energy available for parent is less energy available for parenting. Anything that saves energy is beneficial.
No comments:
Post a Comment