Is a Bjorn really so bad? - Page 3

[Sk8ermaiden]

Originally Posted by npl

I'm interested in this thread, and wondering whether any other mainstream carriers are better than the Bjorn for supporting baby.
I have the Kelty Kangaroo that works differently to hold baby in than the Bjorn. You wrap the bottom part up around baby and velcro to create a snug pouch that cradles the pelvic area, with legs sticking out, and then the whole thing is buckled to the parent portion at the shoulders and the bottom.
I never felt that baby was "hanging", more like coccooned.
I tried googling a decent image to show what I mean, but I can't find one that shows the way the baby is cradled!

There is a picture down on this page. TBH, it doesn't look much better. To be ergonomically correct, the baby's knees need to be as high or higher than its bottom. Most mainstream carriers honestly suck. I really don't think they're going to do harm with average use, but if you wore your baby as much as some parents here (me included) I think the risks would go up. Some of the slings you can find at stores are OK, and thankfully, Moby, Beco and Ergo along with others are showing up more and more places!

[npl]

Thanks!
That image is the box front - which I have but didn't spot on google!
Since my newbie carrying days, I've since branched out, and much prefer my maya wrap sling for most uses, though I'm intrigued by the moby for a newborn - I think it would combine the good parts of the kangaroo and the maya wrap.
Definitely a huge change in what's widely available since I started parenting 10 years ago!

[flapjack]

Throwing out one suggestion, a UK carrier: www.wilkinet.co.uk It carries the baby froggied up and has the benefit of letting you put baby on your back at a relatively young age, which the bjorn doesn't. Plus you can face them outwards, should you choose to let them crotch-dangle.

[StoriesInTheSoil]

Originally Posted by pixiepunk

it never ceases to amaze me that people can't differentiate between something being potentially harmful and it causing harm to everyone. "my child escaped unscathed" is an argument i hear all the time for all kinds of things that are less-than-ideal or potentially harmful (formula feeding, starting solids too early, turning your baby's carseat forward facing at a year, whatever). Just because it didn't affect *your* child's spinal or hip development doesn't mean it isn't true that it can have a detrimental effect. Just as it's true that plenty of kids thrive on formula, while some fail to.

For me, I want to do what's ideal for the development of my child. Why use something that has the potential to do harm when there are hundreds of other, similarly-priced options that don't have that potential?!?! i seriously don't get it.

My sentiments exactly, Pixie!

Originally Posted by NicaG

I was in the same situation--had an Ergo for my older son, but couldn't use it for my newborn, couldn't deal with the Moby wrap, etc. I used a Bjorn for the first few months until dd was big enough for the Ergo. I don't know. It worked for us, and I didn't feel like dd was "hanging from her crotch" as is the complaint (she was only facing inward). Why would they allow this product to remain on the market if it were really causing profound harm?

Wouldn't it be nice if we could trust manufactures to do the right thing and not follow the money, continuing to make unsafe products? Cigarettes have been mentioned but what about things like, oh, Infant Formula? When used in the way that it is marketed, breastmilk substitute can cause profound harm. What about situations like Dorel's (car seat company) refusal to recall certain car seats even after they had caused multiple seriously bad injuries? Or the continued sale of overhead-sheild car seats when they'd been proven to be dangerous? Infant "walkers" and "jumpers" have been proven to cause harm and are still available at most major retailers.

[marimara]

I just saw this post on the homepage and don't normally post in babywearing since my dd is 3 but I did carry her for 2 years. Anyways, I did use the Bjorn (and a Snugli and a Hotsling, and a ring sling and a mei tai) when she was small. The hotsling when she was newborn and the Bjorn when she was about 2-3.5 months. She did like it facing out sometimes, but we didn't often wear her like that because she soon fell asleep in it. The thing is about the Bjorn is that you can only use it for such a short time. I was very conscious to make sure her hips were even and she was comfortable and all that. But around 3.5 months her legs became too chunky in the thigh and she became too heavy. One day in Target I was carrying her in it and looked down and her legs were blue. I immediately took her out and never put her back in. In my opinion, they are too expensive to use for such a short time. Looking back I would have wanted a ring sling for the newborn, bfing, and hip sling carries. And then I would get a Beco or something similar that can be used for longer than the Bjorn. Bottom line, I didn't think it was that *bad* just not useable for very long. And not worth the $ and not nearly as cute as the Becos

[Altair]

But with the Moby facing out you can frog the legs and kind of make the baby sit, leaning back, with a curved lower spine. At least that's how I used it a few times. Though that's not how they show it in the directions.

[NickisDiapers]

Originally Posted by Altair

But with the Moby facing out you can frog the legs and kind of make the baby sit, leaning back, with a curved lower spine. At least that's how I used it a few times. Though that's not how they show it in the directions.

There is a wrap carry called the Buddha by some -- you can actually do it in a ringsling or pouch as well -- where the baby is sitting froggied facing out.

[Altair]

Right, but with the Moby I have the legs out forward facing, but still with a curved lower back and the knees up. So like after you do the criss cross and pull up the horizontal strap, then you readjust the baby to pull his butt down lower and his knees up higher so he's leaning back further into you.