Thanks NickNicksmommykitkat and rtorres66. My intention is not to cast questions/doubts but it is trully scary if there is nothing can be done to even monitor the SIDS. the most scary thing to me is not being able to do anything. I was wondering if all those cases which you mentioned happened for very young babies, say less than 2 months old.

As a matter of fact, they all were younger, the oldest in the group that comes to mind was 6 weeks old.

Projectgavin, I am trying very very hard to not be upset by your post, and incredibly inaccurate information on your web site. Let me start by saying, I am very glad your son made it, all of us know the pain of loosing a child, and would never wish it on anyone. However, you were misinformed as to the SIDS connection with your child, which is not an uncommon mistake for doctors who haven't had a lot of direct experience with SIDS to make. Your child would not have been ruled a SIDS death, in order to come to that conclusion, the medical examiner must have met VERY strict guidelines to rule out all other causes of death. The medical examiner would quickly rule out a baby that died of suffocation, abuse, smothering, choking, lungs filled with fluid, sickness, injury, etc. None of these apply to SIDS babies. The best way I can describe it is this; suffocation, choking, infection, rsv, etc. all cause the baby to NOT BE ABLE TO breath, therefore the baby is struggling for air, trying to breath, making noises like what you describe on your site, etc. this is NOT the case for SIDS babies, for all purposes, a SIDS baby CAN breathe, there is no medical or physical condition at the time of death, or earlier, that would obstruct, prevent or otherwise make breathing difficult. It is almost as if, the baby's body just shuts down and no longer feels breathing is necessary. Your child was very ill, which is a whole different can of worms. I apologize for being pointed, but this is a topic which we get a lot from people who don't understand SIDS, and it is painful to deal with because it makes it seem as though we as mothers allowed, or worse, caused our babies to die, or at the very least, didn't do everything we could to protect our baby. Also, your site says that Halo sleep sacks have been proven to decrease SIDS, which is simply not true (although the people who own the company would like it to be so) there has been NO studies that show Halo sleep sacks, or any other so-called SIDS prevention product has ANY effect on the number of SIDS deaths. I am sorry that the doctor you spoke with led you to believe your baby would have died of SIDS, that is a scary statement, especially on top of the fear that comes with having a baby who is ill, but please show the grieving families of these babies the respect of throughly researching SIDS before posting.

P.S. Sorry to everyone else who had to read my rant...lol its just one of those things...

Hdavis is right on. There really is a misunderstanding on SIDS even in the medical community. My children's pediatrician who is in her 30s says that very little was even taught about SIDS when she was in med school. Most of her knowledge about SIDS has come from things I have found for her in the last 3 years. Three years ago, today as a matter of fact, my son was put down for a nap in a sleep sack (Halo I do believe). He was a completely healthy perfect baby, no issues whatsoever, not even a sniffle, My husband was not even 10 feet away. There wasn't any noises or fighting etc., there was nothing. My son found my son, breathing shallow, barely a pulse, did advanced CPR too, he died. I am glad you still have your boy, however instead of trying to plug your site which is a slap in the face to grieiving parents, why don't you go play with your kid?

here is some knowledge for you website, http://sids-network.org/experts/nearmiss.htm

Is there such a thing as "Near-miss SIDS", "Near SIDS", and "Aborted SIDS"?
This is a difficult area.

By definition, SIDS babies died, and could not be revived (if there was a chance to try).

By definition, ALTE (apparent life-threatening event) babies, also called apnea of infancy or babies with unexplained apnea, did not die, and were able to be revived.

The terms "Near-miss SIDS", "Near SIDS", and "Aborted SIDS" have been used in the past, and refer to ALTE. These terms are not preferred now because they imply that if someone had not come along (by chance) to resuscitate an ALTE baby, the baby would have gone on to die. For those of you who may have witnessed an ALTE, they are frightening to the observer, who often 'believes' that the baby is in the process of dying. However, many ALTE babies have a number of episodes, which they manage to survive, sometimes even before they receive treatment, such as a home monitor. SIDS babies, on the other hand, rarely had apneas observed prior to death, and death is usually the first sign of any "problem". Therefore, I believe that the two populations are generally different, but possibly similar. The relationship might best be described as two overlapping circles, with the area of overlap being small. Some SIDS babies had apneas observed prior to death, though the percent is very small. Some ALTE babies will go on to die from "SIDS" (sudden death, no cause at autopsy), though the percent is small, even if they are not treated.

Doctor Guntheroth's other point, however, may be valid. If one wishes to study physiology, that is the way babies' organ systems behave, you need to study living babies. You can not do physiology on SIDS victims. So, which babies do you study? Many researchers, including our group, take babies who are statistically at high risk for SIDS, and compare various responses to low risk babies (controls). We have also used ALTE babies in many of these studies. This is not to say that ALTE = SIDS. But, rather, it says that these babies may have some similarities to the way SIDS babies would have behaved, and study of them might give us insights into SIDS. Everyone who does this type of research is acutely aware that we are not really studying SIDS, but only babies who we think might act like SIDS babies would have acted if they were alive.

Thank you.

Tom Keens
Children's Hospital Los Angeles



The term "near miss for SIDS" had its beginning in the early 1970s, following Dr. Steinschneider's report (Pediatrics 50:646, 1972) that several infants had died of SIDS after exhibiting breathing pauses (apnea) in sleep laboratory studies. As a result of these observations, the "apnea hypothesis" for SIDS was proposed and became the basis for many clinical investigations focused on finding the cause of SIDS and the possibility of finding a screening test that could identify infants at risk in order to prevent SIDS. The introduction and increase of home apnea/cardiac monitoring for prolonged apnea and/or heart slowing (bradycardia) detection as a possible prevention for SIDS occurred. Stanford University and many other centers around the U.S. began recruiting "near miss" SIDS infants for sleep and apnea studies. The "near miss" for SIDS term assumed that the event causing concern would have ended in a SIDS if the parent or caregiver were not there to intervene.

At the outset, many sincerely believed that the assumptions were correct, i.e., that the infant almost died and that the event might reoccur. It became common place to prescribe home monitoring. The emotional burden primarily for the families, and to a lessor extent for the medical and allied medical professional was considerable. Imagine the stress of having to react as if a SIDS was about to happen each time a monitor alarm sounded. Over time (ten to fifteen years), we learned that nearly all of the infants with "near miss" for SIDS survived and that the link between apnea and SIDS was not predictive for SIDS.

In 1987, the NIH consensus process on Infantile Apnea and Home Monitoring published a report stating that there were no scientific studies to support the conclusion that home monitoring prevented SIDS. Home monitoring was not recommended for siblings of SIDS, or newborn or preterm infants who did not have symptoms of apnea. The report also recommended that the term "near miss" for SIDS be retired since it was misleading and that there were no data to support that these infants usually died of SIDS. Instead the term "apparent life-threatening event (ALTE)" was introduced, which recognized that it may not be possible to determine whether or not the event could have lead to a death. The report estimated that approximately 7% of babies that died of SIDS had a history that suggested an observed ALTE. At this point, with additional experience and information, we have changed our position regarding "near miss" and its significance to SIDS. Hopefully this will end the public misconception, which in the final analysis, had more hazards than advantages.

What can parents do to lower the risk of SIDS? The answer has been stated in previous issues but it is worth saying again: do not smoke or use illicit drugs; do not allow anyone to smoke around your baby (passive smoke exposure); if it is possible, breastfeed your baby; unless instructed otherwise (by your doctor), place your infant on the back to sleep; finally, choose a firm mattress and do not use pillows or sheep skin in the baby's crib.

Article by: Ronald Ariagno, M.D., Stanford Medical School, Department of Pediatrics; Chairperson, Northern California Regional SIDS Council; Member, California State SIDS Advisory Council.

this is what many of us live:
http://sidsnetfaqparents.blogspot.com/

a factual representation of SIDS
http://www.sids-network.org/sidsfact.htm

What Is SIDS?
Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) is the "sudden death of an infant under one year of age which remains unexplained after a thorough case investigation, including performance of a complete autopsy, examination of the death scene, and review of the clinical history"(Willinger, et al., 1991).

What Are the Most Common Characteristics of SIDS?
Most researchers now believe that babies who die of SIDS are born with one or more conditions that make them especially vulnerable to stresses that occur in the normal life of an infant, including both internal and external influences. SIDS occurs in all types of families and is largely indifferent to race or socioeconomic level. SIDS is unexpected, usually occurring in otherwise apparently healthy infants from 1 month to 1 year of age. Most deaths from SIDS occur by the end of the sixth month, with the greatest number taking place between 2 and 4 months of age. A SIDS death occurs quickly and is often associated with sleep, with no signs of suffering, . More deaths are reported in the fall and winter (in both the Northern and Southern Hemispheres) and there is a 60- to 40-percent male-to-female ratio. A death is diagnosed as SIDSonly after all other alternatives have been eliminated: SIDS is a diagnosis of exclusion.

What Are Risk Factors for SIDS?
Risk factors are those environmental and behavioral influences that can provoke ill health. Any risk factor may be a clue to finding the cause of a disease, but risk factors in and of themselves are not causes.

Researchers now know that the mother's health and behavior during her pregnancy and the baby's health before birth seem to influence the occurrence of SIDS, but these variables are not reliable in predicting how, when, why, or if SIDS will occur. Maternal risk factors include cigarette smoking during pregnancy; maternal age less than 20 years; poor prenatal care; low weight gain; anemia; use of illegal drugs; and history of sexually transmitted disease or urinary tract infection. These factors, which often may be subtle and undetected, suggest that SIDS is somehow associated with a harmful prenatal environment.

How Many Babies Die From SIDS?
From year to year, the number of SIDS deaths tends to remain constant despite fluctuations in the overall number of infant deaths. The National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) reported that, in 1988 in the United States, 5,476 infants under 1 year of age died from SIDS; in 1989, the number of SIDS deaths was 5,634 (NCHS, 1990, 1992). However, other sources estimate that the number of SIDS deaths in this country each year may actually be closer to 7,000 (Goyco and Beckerman, 1990). The larger estimate represents additional cases that are unreported or underreported (i.e., cases that should have been reported as SIDS but were not).

When considering the overall number of live births each year, SIDS remains the leading cause of death in the United States among infants between 1 month and 1 year of age and second only to congenital anomalies as the leading overall cause of death for all infants less than 1 year of age.

How Do Professionals Diagnose SIDS?
Often the cause of an infant death can be determined only through a process of collecting information, conducting sometimes complex forensic tests and procedures, and talking with parents and physicians. When a death is sudden and unexplained, investigators, including medical examiners and coroners, use the special expertise of forensic medicine (application of medical knowledge to legal issues). SIDS is no exception.

Health professionals make use of three avenues of investigation in determining a SIDS death:

(1) the autopsy,

(2) death scene investigation, and,

(3) review of victim and family case history.

The Autopsy
The autopsy provides anatomical evidence through microscopic examination of tissue samples and vital organs. An autopsy is important because SIDS is a diagnosis of exclusion. A definitive diagnosis cannot be made without a thorough postmortem examination that fails to point to any other possible cause of death. Also, if a cause of SIDS is ever to be uncovered, scientists will most likely detect that cause through evidence gathered from a thorough pathological examination.

A Thorough Death Scene Investigation
A thorough death scene investigation involves interviewing the parents, other caregivers, and family members; collecting items from the death scene; and evaluating that information. Although painful for the family, a detailed scene investigation may shed light on the cause, sometimes revealing a recognizable and possibly preventable cause of death.

Review of the Victim and Family Case History
A comprehensive history of the infant and family is especially critical to determine a SIDS death. Often, a careful review of documented and anecdotal information about the victim's or family's history of previous illnesses, accidents, or behaviors may further corroborate what is detected in the autopsy or death scene investigation.

Investigators should be sensitive and understand that the family may view this process as an intrusion, even a violation of their grief. It should be noted that, although stressful, a careful investigation that reveals no preventable cause of death may actually be a means of giving solace to a grieving family.



What SIDS Is and What SIDS Is Not
SIDS Is:
the major cause of death in infants from 1 month to 1 year of age, with most deaths occurring between 2 and 4 months
sudden and silent--the infant was seemingly healthy

currently, unpredictable and unpreventable

a death that occurs quickly, often associated with sleep and with no signs of suffering

determined only after an autopsy, an examination of the death scene, and a review of the clinical history

designated as a diagnosis of exclusion

a recognized medical disorder listed in the International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision (ICD-9)

an infant death that leaves unanswered questions, causing intense grief for parents and families

SIDS Is Not:
caused by vomiting and choking, or minor illnesses such as colds or infections

caused by the diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus (DPT) vaccines, or other immunizations

contagious

child abuse

the cause of every unexpected infant death

Any sudden, unexpected death threatens one's sense of safety and security. We are forced to confront our own mortality (Corr, 1991). This is particularly true in a sudden infant death. Quite simply, babies are not supposed to die. Because the death of an infant is a disruption of the natural order, it is traumatic for parents, family, and friends. The lack of a discernible cause, the suddenness of the tragedy, and the involvement of the legal system make a SIDS death especially difficult, leaving a great sense of loss and a need for understanding.

References:

Corr, C.A., Fuller, H., Barnickol, C.A., and Corr, D.M. (Eds).Sudden Infant Death Syndrome: Who Can Help and How. New York: Springer Publishing Co., 1991.

Goyco, P.G., and Beckerman, R.C. "Sudden Infant Death Syndrome."Current Problems in Pediatrics 20(6):299-346, June 1990.

National Center for Health Statistics. "Advanced Mortality Statistics for 1989."Monthly Vital Statistics Report, Vol. 40, No. 8, Supp. 2, January 7, 1992, p. 44.

National Center for Health Statistics. "Advance Report of Final Mortality Statistics, 1988."Monthly Vital Statistics Report, Vol. 39, No. 7, Supp. 1990, p. 33.

Willinger, M., James, L.S., and Catz, C. "Defining the Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS): Deliberations of an Expert Panel Convened by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development."Pediatric Pathology 11:677-684, 1991.

Information Sheet #1 was originally published in 1993.

Phew, that was very upsetting to me as well. Thank you hdavies and Nicksm for saying waht I still don't have the words to say. I want to think that gavinsproject is only trying to help but in fact the opposite is the case. All our mums are only on this forum because our babies DID die so really not very thought through.

what i find very upsetting is first of all, a. i am trying to help. b. you do not know gavin nor what happened. he was dead his heart was stopped he had stopped breathing. and i my self have done alot of research on SIDS and found a recent study in Great Britain siting reflux as a possible major cause of SIDS. you are right NO one knows what causes it, and everyone is looking for a cure and ways to reduce it, and yet when someone comes along with a miracle i get condomned? i do not understand? i did not come into this trying to "sell" anything or hurt anyone just the opposit, and most angel moms applaud what i am trying to do. Halo SleepsSacks do not prevent SIDS do to suffocation as most assume it is the overheating factor and yes it has been proven, there was a study right here in Saginaw MI. on thier affectivness. Also, apnea monitor usage, you again are condemning saying you cant bring a SIDS baby back, then why are you all on other posts talking about the monitors you will buy to help protect your subsoquent children? the truth is you are scared and the idea that onee may have lived scares you more. sorry it was mine. if i could have saved each and EVERY baby i would have but please dont treat me like im a panhandling theif out to h urt you.

Projectgavin,

First of all, you either did not read our posts, or just didn't care, but all of us said that we are so glad your child lived, and that we know your intent was not a bad one. However, you are missing some very important points. First of which is that you are approaching a group of people who have lost their children to a cruel twist of fate, and who have an extensive amount of knowledge on the subject. Second of all, if you did the research you claim to have done, please do more research. Yes, there are a few random studies that found a connection between this thing or that thing and SIDS but they are in the minority, and usually proven to be incorrect. For example, the only studies about the Halo were done by the company who makes the sleep sacks, and cannot be considered a unbiased study. Saying a risk factor is the same as a cause is the equivalent of taking 100 people with cancer, noticing that 60 of them are wearing red, and claiming wearing red causes cancer. Nick cited a number of well proven studies and information, and it seems you completely ignored all of it. The mere fact that you would say things as disrespectful and insulting as your last post, when all we were trying to do is better inform you about SIDS, is appalling. Also, on the monitor point, if you bothered to actually read our posts before making nasty comments, you would see that we all agree that the monitors don't prevent, or predict, or even lessen the risk of SIDS, they do however, help some of us sleep at night, since after you suffer loosing your healthy baby for NO reason, you tend to worry about your next child. I am literally at a loss for words, and I am devastated by the knowledge that the other moms will have to read your cruel comments. But if you are going to post something that insensitive in a place where we all come to gain the support of others who have been through what we have, the least you could do is actually go to the trouble of reading our responses, and the research we have to back up our statements. To be completely honest, if you believe that making the statements you did in your last post, and posting them here, was an appropriate, acceptable thing to do, than I doubt anything we say will have an effect whatsoever, as you have obviously made up your mind about things. I am sure there is more I could say, but I am honestly so deeply hurt and saddened that anyone would post something that cruel, that I am not sure anything I could say would quite describe it.

From http://www.sidsresources.org/ParentInfo.HTM:

Can babies be revived if they are found not breathing?

Many researchers and clinicians have a strong sense that the SIDS process, whatever it turns out to be, cannot be easily interrupted or stopped. However, it is important to always perform resuscitation efforts, because a SIDS diagnosis cannot be made at the time the baby is found not breathing. If a baby is revived, it is generally found that the baby temporarily stopped breathing due to recognized medical problems(i.e. apnea) or an Apparent Life Threatening Event (ALTE), an extended period of apnea.

Is there a relationship between SIDS and apnea?

Most researchers do not believe there is a strong relationship between SIDS and apnea or ALTEs (apparent life threatening events). As SIDS rates have fallen, ALTE rates have not. Studies linking the two are outdated.

From: http://www.sugarmountainhome.com/parenting/apneasids.html

Infant apnea is a different situation. Infant apnea is diagnosed in an infant who was found limp, blue, and not breathing, but who was able to be revived. This is the major difference between SIDS and apnea. Apnea babies are successfully resuscitated. It is true that they have a statistically increased risk of subsequently dying from SIDS, however, apnea is not the same as SIDS. It is tempting to believe that if you find a limp, blue baby who is not breathing, and you revive that baby, that you have prevented him from dying of SIDS. However, it does not appear to be that simple. Apnea babies usually have survived several such episodes before they get to medical attention. This is very different from the typical SIDS victim who was found dead as the first sign of any potential problem.

I still hope and think that GP means well, I have however chosen to use the IGNORE button, just wanted to remind others they can do the same if they want to not read the comments.

projectgavin: if you have any respect what so ever for the grieving parents on here - PLEASE stop posting your thoughts on here, which are, indeed, very inaccurate, false, misleading, and insensitive! NOBODY, as you can see, appreciates them. therefore, get an idea!

let me ask you: are you feeling pleasure hurting others on here?! especially, AFTER you have seen the reaction to your first post?!

be happy - your son made it. i'm glad for you. but please leave others alone. all of it what you've said is pure nonsense. and i feel sorry you are so confused!

SIDS mommies: please pay no mind to projectgavin posts. she is not worth your time, most importantly, your feelings! love you all!

cruel is not what i am intendint to be, and actually the study that was done on halo sleep sacks was an independant by covenant hospital RNICU in saginaw michigan befor they decided whether to implement the use of Halo SleepSacks fulltime. but that is neither here nor there. you keep going back to apnea with Gavin. please DO NOT. he doesnt have apnia, he had a singular episode where he stopped breathing and his heart stopped and the only reason he had that monitor is because of me and my inability to sleep. Yes my son is alive, and i am greatful.but i am traumatized by those events. and i too need support, but the dont really make support groups for congratulations your child lived. so, i made project gavin. i just wanted to do my part, to help and i know that certain things help lower certain risks... and if i can do something good for my community, and possibly help someone, and myself i dont understand why i had to get yelled at and called cruel and more. im not trying to undermind your experience or your loss, but no one is seeming to understand my own. and on my website and on here i put an abridged version of events.... i too have been thru something. sorry to have botherd you,

projectgavin,

please go to read what the scientists collectively say SIDS is and is NOT as the first step.
it seems that you think you know more than all the science today.
how does a halo sleep sack or any other garment help prevent SIDS?! PLEASE!! use your common sense!!!
ur just not getting at all and you don't even realize it... you should really consider everyone else's feelings on here and stop putting out your groundless opinions on here.
finally, your son is ALIVE and LIVING, where our babies are DEAD. it's an uncomparable situation what you have been through and what we are going through. be glad you are not one of us. if you want to be helpful, you need to research so much more and get clear about things.

Projectgavin,

I believe some of what is going on, is there seems to be some confusion about what exactly we are upset about (thats what I gathered from your last post) so I would like to clarify those things. But I need to re-emphasize to you, that the ONLY reason I (and I would assume the other posters as well) have spent the time and energy answering your posts, and directing you to studies/facts/articles, is because we DO see that you want to help, and we DO appreciate your desire to do something good. However, if you are further perpetuating false and misleading information, that is NOT helpful, to our cause or any cause, in fact it is extremely detrimental to our cause. We understand that is not your intent, that your intentions and motivations are good, which is why we have been trying so hard to give you the correct information, so that you CAN do good, but if you refuse to listen, and/or dont care if your information is correct, you are doing much more harm than good. As SIDS parents, we constantly are confronted by people who know nothing about SIDS or have the wrong information about SIDS, and because of that, they assume we smothered our children, or we must have had our baby on their stomach, or we werent watching them, or we didnt call 911 fast enough, or we didnt do CPR, etc. etc. and you cannot imagine the pain that inflicts. So when we are confronted with someone who is in the position to either perpetuate or dispel those ideas, it is VERY important to us that the correct information is being distributed.

Now to get back to my first comment about clarifying what exactly about your post upset me so much. In your second post, you wrote the truth is you are scared and the idea that onee may have lived scares you more. sorry it was mine this statement was nothing but cruel and unnecessary. The fact that you would think it was slightly appropriate to suggest that we, as parents who have lost children, are scared because your child lived, is not only insulting, but a slap in the face, and horribly inaccurate. It is as if you are saying that we sit around and wish other babies would die, and that is quite a bold statement to make about people you have never met and know nothing about. I think I can speak for all of us when I say that I want nothing more than to have a reason for why my daughter died, even if that reason was somehow my fault, because at least then I could prevent it in the future. We arent scared because your child lived, we are nothing but joyful that you have a living healthy child. The reason for our upset, aside from your rude comments, is that the information you are distributing about your experience, and our experience, is incorrect. What is more upsetting is that you seem to have no concern about the fact that it is incorrect, and seem unmotivated and unwilling to correct it. Why does this anger us so much? Well, if you look at your last post, you said, you keep going back to apnea with Gavin. please DO NOT. he doesnt have apnia, he had a singular episode where he stopped breathing and his heart which clearly shows how upset you got that we had incorrectly labeled your child as having sleep apnea, if that mistake upset you that much, how can you not understand why we would be so upset when you are spreading false and misleading information about the manner in which our children DIED? You then go on to write; i KNOW that a SIDS baby can in fact be revived. Which is a VERY false statement and one that most clearly proved to me that you had not done the research necessary for someone who has a web site about SIDS. A few posts ago a number or different resources and explanations were given to why that statement was incorrect, so please re-read those posts. You also mentioned that Gavin didnt have apnea, he had a singular episode, which contradicts your earlier post in which you describe an incident where he coded, was on a ventilator and almost died, which lead you to get the monitor, which later alerted you to the near-death event. So, at the least, there were 2 incidences where Gavin stopped breathing, which again, very clearly goes against what we know to be true about SIDS.

Putting all of the above mentioned aside, your facts are simply wrong. The ONE study you mentioned, that was done in the UK, has been widely discredited, as their findings were neither accurate, nor scientifically based. (see http://www.sids-network.org/experts/pylorima00.htm for more info). As far as your situation specifically, you are right, we dont know every detail, all we know is from the information you provided us with, which is what I will reference to. You wrote; it was reflux that had caused him to stop breathng and heart rate to drop, and HAD i not been able to revive my son it WOULD have been ruled a SIDS death because gavin was too young to show damage from acid reflux You even stated yourself in this post, that it was REFLUX, which IS a clear cause of death in infants, in fact the leading cause of death in infants after SIDS, it is NOT the same as SIDS, nor would any medical examiner make the mistake of confusing the two. I DO believe that the doctor made that statement to you, but that is because doctors, unfortunately are very under trained when it comes to SIDS, and in this case, the statement she made to you was not correct. RSV/Reflux, can cause death in infants, and your son is very lucky that you saved his life, but had you not been able to save him, the cause of death would be RSV/reflux, NOT SIDS. RSV/Reflux babies, have CLEAR signs of illness, fluid in lungs, mucus, as well as clear signs that they were attempting to breath but were unable to. Some of which you yourself described (he was purple, I felt a pop, etc.) SIDS babies, are quite the opposite, almost all SIDS cases had NO sign of illness, NO sign of distress or trouble breathing, they do not turn purple or blue, they do not make any noise, or attempt to breath, they dont move, in fact there is NO way to tell that anything is wrong until it is already too late.

You are right, what you went through is traumatic, and you do deserve support. I did a bit of research online for you and the International Association for Near-Death Studies (IANDS) has a great support group page which lists a lot of support groups that may be a good fit for you, at; http://www.near-death.com/support.html. Also, DS has a Parenting Newborns and Infants group that has discussed situations similar to your in the past, and may be a good outlet for you. There are a lot of options out there for you. As for us, we are willing to answer your questions and help give you correct information about SIDS, we will not however, keep quiet when damaging and inaccurate information is being distributed, nor will we stand for rude or cruel statements directed at us. DS is a place where we come to heal, and there is no reason why we should have to be faced with unkindness and judgment in a place of healing.

i am sorry that i came across as cruel. it was not my intention. and i was very misunderstood, yes gavin did code, but because he had RSV. and was on a ventalator. while on the ventalator the nurses extubated him causing him to code. when he was sent home from the picu 15 days later he was fine the only reason he was put on an apnea monitor is because i begged my pediatrician because i could not sleep. i know they say there cant be a near miss sids, but i also know that no one know what is causing sids, that more than likely it is a multitude of things. and when i asked first candle representative why they were giving halo and endorsement (because i was also understandin that suffocation is NOT sids) they said it was because of the overheating issue, not the suffocation factor.. agian i am sorry for any pain i have caused or anything i truely am.

hdavis,
that is a one awesome post. thank you! i hope it clarifies projectgavin's confused mind and mouth.

thanks again.