Thursday
Dec182008
Mirena follows in Motrin's footsteps
Thursday, December 18, 2008 
They say a picture is worth a thousand words. Perhaps that is what Mirena is counting on here. But I'm not impressed.
When Motrin put out an inaccurate and insulting advertising about babywearing, telling moms that babywearing was painful but it was good pain and you should just take Motrin to deal with it, they used words to deliver their message. But they could just as easily have used a picture like this to communicate the same [wrong, distasteful, inaccurate, deragotory] message.
People that do not babywear would look at this advertising and think "Are you nuts??? I'm not going to wear my baby if it is that painful. That is what strollers are for". It would serve to dissuade moms that might have tried babywearing and further polarize those that do babywear and those that don't. Moms that do babywear would immediately recognize that the ring sling is being used incorrectly and that if the mom used it properly she could eliminate the pain without Motrin. They would feel that it is ridiculous to suggest that babywearing is painful, when it was pain free for them and also made their lives so much easier.
So back to Mirena's advertising. Since I don't have the benefit of the lovely voiceover that was on the Motrin ads, I need to imagine for myself what they are saying. My interpretation is this:
People let their babies sleep with them, but it isn't comfortable for mom and dad. The baby takes over the whole bed and the parents are relegated to small corners of the bed, probably don't get much quality sleep, and don't get to touch each other. The only way this awful situation can be stopped is to stop breeding. Get yourself an IUD already (a Mirena one in particular), prevent future pregnancies, and end this pain for once and for good.
Now I've talked to various people about this advertising over the course of the day and different people had different interpretations (this was all based on me describing it though, since I didn't have it scanned in until tonight). Obviously different people may take different things away from it, but regardless of exactly how you interpret it, I think it is pretty clear that it is saying that co-sleeping is uncomfortable for the parents. However, for most co-sleeping parents that I know, this couldn't be further from the truth. I sleep quite comfortably and harmoniously with my daughter and often don't know whether she slept through the night or not.
Co-sleeping is not for everyone and babywearing is not for everyone. That is fine, but I don't like it when the media and advertisers send messages that suggest that attachment parenting is difficult for parents and that they are sacrificing themselves, when my experience is that it is easier than other styles of parenting.
I plan to write to Bayer (which sells Mirena) and let them know how I feel about the advertising. It appeared in a Canadian magazine, so I'm going with their Canadian contact information:
Bayer Inc. would be pleased to provide you with information about our company and answer any questions you may have. Please direct your comments and questions to one of the areas below:
General Information
Bayer Inc.
Attention: Public Policy & Communications
77 Belfield Road
Toronto, Ontario M9W 1G6
Tel: (416) 248-0771 or 1-800-622-2937
Email: contactbayer@bayer.com
What do you all think? Does this type of co-sleeping imagery bother you? Do you interpret it the same way I did? Does anyone have better contact information than what I posted above (i.e. a specific person)? Please comment and act if you feel it is appropriate!
Reader Comments (24)
I have no words really. It's like a bad joke - one that is really not funny......
What gets me is that most people think co-sleeping means that sex doesn't happen. So why would you even need a Mirena? ;) Part of me is looking at that kid in the middle and thinks, "That kid is like a natural Mirena!"
Of course, co-sleeping parents do find time (and other places) for each other.
But yeah, bad marketing again.
I just don't understand the ad. Is it ironic? Like advertising a comb by using a photo of a bald man?
(I see there's a bottle at the top of the shot too.)
While I was really quite offended by the negative, direct message the Motrin ad gave, I didn't have the same response from this one. Interesting why that's the case. It just doesn't make any sense to me.
To me, who has co-slept with three children, it was a billion times better to the 'put kid in crib and get up in the night 5 times' option.
But then, I'm a breastfeeder too so just allowing easy all night access to the breast made it easier too.
I don't know that this ad will turn people off co-sleeping. I do, however, believe it's a long bow to draw and simply won't resonate.
The Motrin ad was horrible, but like mediamum, I'm not particularly offended by this. In truth, it's rare, but sometimes our family looks like this in the morning. This doesn't stop us from cosleeping, and most of the time we're all lined up like three peas in a pod. We love cosleeping. This ad made me chuckle a bit, because I know that feeling, but it doesn't make me want to get Mirena or any IUD. I'm not sure how it would appear to a non-cosleeping, or considering-cosleeping family. If I found it was turning people off from cosleeping, I would object to it.
Thanks for posting the ad. Without the ad, it was hard to determine what the advertisers were referring to.
After looking at the ad, I didn't get any impression that the company isn't referring to co-sleepers or just regular parents with kids that come into their bed every now and then.
The Motrin ad targeted babywearing families. I think Mirena isn't targeting co-sleepers but it is a bad ad.
I wanted to get a father's perspective so I asked my husband. I showed him the ad and asked him what he thought of it. At first he thought it was an ad for sleep medication.
After I told him it was for an IUD he interpreted the ad as saying, "If you don't want children to keep you apart from your spouse, use Mirena."
I asked him if he thought it was a statement on parents that choose to cosleep he said he didn't get that impression at all and that all parents with toddlers the same age as the boy pictured he believes will have nights when their kids sneak into their bed.
He said he focused more on the husband and wife being apart from each other.
This ad doesn't appear to attack attachment parenting, so much as it appears to attack children. If I were to write a caption to it, it would read: "Do you hate your child, and wish he'd never been born? We can fix that!"
It's slightly annoying, but I don't think it's quite on the same level as the Motrin ad--perhaps because it's not, say, advertising a crib. A lot of people have their kids sleep in their bed occasionally, so I agree with the other commenter that this doesn't seem to be attacking routine cosleeping per se. And I do know quite a few people whose toddlers/preschoolers do take up much of the bed (but the parents continue cosleeping because it's worth it to them for their child's sake or they enjoy the closeness as a family). It's definitely not an ad I like, but I don't think the potential damage is as bad as the Motrin ad. It'd be worse if the child in the bed were a baby, I think--once the child is a toddler, people are generally either pretty dedicated to cosleeping or whatever else their structure is, so I don't think it'll have much impact.
I definitely feel that the Motrin ad is a blatant attack on babywearing, regardless of whether they meant it to be. The Mirena ad, like previous commenters have suggested, seems to be attacking the presence of the child much more than the co-sleeping.
Both ads stink, IMO.
I found the Motrin ad in really poor taste, and totally off the mark. I wrote to them expressing my thoughts.
This is isn't anywhere near as bad, I even see the humour of it. In that as a co-sleeper I find it funny (sometimes!) where we end up in the bed.
But as pantrygirl noted, I think most people will see it as simply the parenting situation where the child comes into bed with you, rather than a remark on co-sleeping. I can't imagine any of my non-AP parent friends even thinking of co-sleeping when they see this.
It's still a poor idea for an ad. But it could have been any parenting situation, such as feeding time with food everywhere, etc.
I thought this was an add for sleeping medication as well. Seeing that it is birth control I have to say I get the same impression as AmberDawn, "kids make you miserable so make sure you don't have anymore!"
Can't say I like that message.
My son was a cosleeper and now he is way into his crib, so I guess I'll find out if it gets less comfortable when he comes in our bed as a toddler. As a baby, it was the most comfortable thing in the world.
Thanks all for your comments on this post. Keep them coming!
Honestly, I don't think it makes much difference whether this ad is about regular co-sleeping or just parents that sometimes let their toddler into bed with them. Either way, it is depicting it as an uncomfortable experience, something you would want to change, and suggesting birth control (stop having babies) as the way to change it.
I guess different people had different things that bothered them about the Motrin ad. I didn't see it as an attack on babywearers (although there was one comment that made us sound shallow). What bothered me most about the Motrin ad was the suggestion that babywearing has to be painful.
I don't like it when the media, advertisers, bloggers, whoever make it seem like parenting practices that involve keeping your child close to you must be in some way painful or difficult. I have chosen attachment parenting because (a) I think it is a better way to raise a child and (b) it is easier. Sure, there are days when it is trying, but most of the time I find it easier and in the long run I think it will certainly be easier (i.e. I expect our strong attachment to bode us well as we enter the pre-teen and teen years).
I don't think the intent of the Mirena ad was to depict co-sleeping as being uncomfortable, but to stress the point that kids often end up in their parent's bed. As a busy working mother of two, i think the point was that kids do often co-sleep or come into their parents bed in the middle of the night it can interrupt intimacy between the parents. Intimacy is very important to a relationship: Happy parents make for happy children. With an IUD it can lead to being more spontaneous and not worrying about birth control WHEN you have the time for intimacy.
@wendy: Thanks for your insight. Did you work on the campaign?
This is a bit off-topic, but there was nothing I liked better than taking a nap with my infant son lying on my chest. They're both too big to do that now, though!
Co-sleeping kept us nursing well past a year, and as a result, I did not get my period for 17 months. That was the BEST birth control ever, and now, we use natural methods. There is no reason to chemically or physically alter my body in order to prevent pregnancy, and gasp! There is no problem worrying about birth control interrupting our time.
Personally, what i don't like is the implication that kids are so exhausting and disruptive that only a method of birth control would be needed to prevent another's presence in my life. When The boy is in bed with us, we are more rested and better able to function-- not less able.
I never had a problem sleeping when mine were babies and in the bed with me and my H. The problem developed when they got older and larger and started kicking me in the ribs. We have coslept, but we're currently not, for lots of reasons. We do it when it works for us, and our kids sleep in their own beds (in the same room together) when it doesn't work for us.
However, I think the Mirena ad misses the mark. How will getting an IUD get your child out of your bed (if that's what you want)? Sure, it will keep you from having more babies, but it won't do anything about the one you already have.
Sorry Mirena, this one's a big FAIL.
Yeaah I don't get it. What are they trying to sell? Duvet covers or blankets maybe?
I think too much is being read into this ad. I see it more as saying that you have your hands full already, take a break for a while and then when you are ready have another kid. I don't see this as an attack on the family bed at all. And as for the Motrin ad, if you are carrying your child (especially one that size who should be using the legs God gave her) everywhere maybe you will have some pain. There comes a time when you need to get real and put the child down.
@Nicole: Um, did you see the real Motrin ad or are you referring to my "mock" Motrin ad above? If you are referring to mine:
(1) I don't carry my child all the time and she prefers to walk most of the time.
(2) if I use the right carrier and use it properly it doesn't hurt.
(3) I didn't have a smaller baby to use for the picture...gotta work with what you have sometimes.
How do I always miss these ads?! After reading some of the comments that say that they don't see the ad as being an attack on the family bed (I particularly liked the one who said You've already got your hands full - Take a break and have more kids when you're ready) I can see those points. But my first reaction to the ad was just like the person who said. “Do you hate your child, and wish he’d never been born? We can fix that!”
Honestly, I think that this ad is a bad idea in general. Upon first reaction, it looks more like an attack on kids in general. "They're gonna wreck your sleep and likely the rest of your life. Here, take some birth control that will last for 5 years or cost you hundreds of dollars to have removed early so you don't have to worry about it!"
No thanks, Mirena.
yknow i saw this ad today in todays parent magazine and i thought what the heck is an ad like this doing in a magazine about babies and children.. its terrible!!!!! I found it totally disturbing on so many levels. Instead of recognizing the child as a precious gift the ad talks about not making anymore of them...SOOO SICK!!! we co sleep and we love it....its not for everyone but still i think that this company can use their brains and come up with a better way to sell their product.
Whoever gets insulted by these ads needs to take a moment to realize you are the kind of people that make this world such a crappy place, wouldnt it be better to see the ads as what they are ment to be? A time to chuckle and look back on to moments similar to the ones they are displaying? Instead of nagging about them and starting campaigns to take them off? I took both those ads like haha I can relate and maybe I can use Motrin when I get pains from my hectic life, or Mirena sure why not I can wait another 5 years until I don't sleep comfortably again. Or better yet I wish my husband was like that
A.B.
Personally, I think it is the people who take the time to leave an insulting comment on a two year old post who make the world a crappy place. So I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.