pacifiers and preemies

My opinion is that if mommy's boob is available 24hrs a day to comfort that baby I will keep the pacifier away otherwise I think it's cruel to take a god-given source of comfort (sucking on something nipple-like) from a stressed infant.

We've had very very few parents that fought us on this one; even the ones that were strong pro-breastfeeding.

According to our PT/OT... there is NO SUCH THING as nipple confusion!!!

Oh, we don't buy that "nipple confusion" nonsense either but that's what we hear from the parents. I believe they hear it in their prenatal classes? Parents can be selfish at times. You would think that whatever gives their offspring comfort...they would allow it! I have used that same line on a parent actually..."IF you 'd like to be available 24/7 to breastfeed or hold or comfort your infant in some way, we will abide by your wishes, no problem." The parent soon saw the light and allowed the pacifier. I was just wondering if there was an article out there somewhere anyone has posted in their unit for parents to see/read?

I always explain to the parents that this is one of the few methods we have to offe their infant for comfort and consolation. I also explain to them how important it can be with feeding later.

Babies are born with the " I am hungry, I suck, I feel better" instinct. Kiddos that are gavage fed for a long time may lose this association. I also explain this to the parents.

I had that problem in Ontario as well. I would just explain that premies and term babies are very different. Premies don't get nipple confusion (most of them aren't feeding by mouth!). They need it for comfort (talk about the importance of babies remaining calm, especially considering IVHs) and it can actually aid with breastfeeding since they associate sucking with a full stomach. If I have to, I will get blunt and explain it's one of the only comfort measures available.

The pacifier...such a little thing causing so much trouble. Most of my families want whatever comforts, but occassionally there is the parent wanting to hold on to some control. Plain and simple...their baby and the NICU wasn't part of the plan.

I do give the pacy to many babies, but there are some that just don't need it regularly. The oxygen and caloric consumption from constant suckling isn't benificial. But a benefit...apnea and brady's can sometimes be avoided with a pacy. And, for the NPO baby, the pacy can keep the suck instinct functional because you know it can be lost over time, thus, causing feeding by nipple to take a while to relearn.

Anyway, if the pacy issue is approached with care and lots of discussion most of my families can find other topics for concern.

:roll :yeahthat:

Biggest decision new parents have to make: orthodontics or psychiatry?

I'm going to add that to, "IQ or eye sight".

Would anyone consider it unethical to give a paci to a baby whose parents had requested it not be used? It seems like such a small thing, but I do understand the concept of the slippery slope.

I have always found that parents respond to sound reasoning. With this in mind I explain to the parents the difference between nutritive and nonnutritive sucking and the comfort their baby gets from nonnutritive sucking. Also I explain the positive effect that a normal sleep cycle has on breast feeding. I will also point to the decibel levels associated with crying infants, and the effect this has on other sicker infants as well as their own child. Sometimes the bottom line helps: Your baby sleeps, eats and grows faster with a normal sleep pattern, so you can get your baby home sooner if we keep him/her comfortable.

Why is nobody talking about the HUGE reduction in SIDs with the use of pacifiers. A whopping 90% reduction. Also nonnutritive sucking is required for optimal gut development.