The Courier & Advertiser (Fife Edition)
Government’s baby box is not a panacea
Sir, – We are told satisfaction rates for the new baby boxes and their contents are running at 100% or 99%.
These are response figures that we used to associate with a certain type of regime.
It turns out that the inclusion of a thermometer is very popular, while there is less acclaim for the inclusion of condoms.
What the Scottish Government’s gloss on the responses omits is the box itself is the leastused item. Only 35% of respondents said they had used it as a sleeping space for their baby.
The baby box scheme was introduced in Finland in the 1930s to combat relatively high rates of infant mortality.
However, Finnish health professional Professor Tuovi Hakulinen has been quoted in various media outlets as saying there is no direct link between the baby box and infant mortality rates.
At the same time the box was introduced, a panoply of ante-natal facilities was instituted, utilisation of which were a condition of receiving the baby box.
Then there was a massive change from home births to hospital births and, finally, the introduction of a national health insurance scheme, in the late 1960s.
Prof Hakulinen’s view is that Finland’s decline in infant mortality rates has been due to medical advances, vaccinations, nutrition, hygiene and increased prosperity.
The Lullaby Trust in the UK says on its website: “We do not believe it is factually correct to directly link the use of a baby box with a reduction in infant mortality or Sids.” (Sudden infant death syndrome).
There have been questions about the safety of both the box and its included mattress.
The best way to promote infant health is to discourage mothers from smoking and from having a baby in bed with them. This is where the box has some utility, for those who do not have a cot or crib.
But most parents will have provided their own crib or had one gifted to them by family or friends. Jill Stephenson. Glenlockhart Valley, Edinburgh.