Stack 'em Up Cribs!

April Fool's Day? No lie, we were so tempted to post this on April 1, but rest assured, the Double Decker Twin Crib is not a joke.

According to the advertising copy, this is an "an innovative, space-saving solution" for parents of multiples. We have some thoughts about that.

Lucky top-bunk baby gets to be nearly eye level with Mum and Dad. Unlucky bottom-bunk baby gets to be eye level with the dog, the dust bunnies, and Mummy's shapely calves. It doesn't take an MD to envision a lot of therapy sessions in one baby's future, deconstructing why one's parents designated them the 'bottom bunk' baby.

It looks like pet-store crating to us. Double Decker cribs are $649.99, and free shipping, if this is the twins-bed of your dreams.

Are we wrong? Is this actually a genius of an idea that we are too thick to comprehend? Or alternately, have you seen anything recently that tops this in bad nursery design?

Comments (14)

I just see that whole thing tipping and falling over, "both babies and all."

Also "top bunk" baby gets more light because he doesn't have a roof right above him.

I give it a thumbs down. Creepy.

posted by Lisa from VA/lsaspacey on April 5th 2007 at 10:31am
view Lisa from VA/lsaspacey's profile

I suppose you could switch them each night so it's "fair," but I think a crib is a crib is a crib, and a baby will feel separated from his mother whether he is in the top bunk or the bottom bunk.

posted by exxon23 on April 5th 2007 at 10:40am
view exxon23's profile

My friend saw something similar at a day care she visited once and she is still traumatized by it! Even though we are going to be tight for space once our twins arrive this is not appealing to me at all.

posted by angie on April 5th 2007 at 11:12am
view angie's profile

Wow, that is scary! No matter how tight my space is, I could never do that.

posted by Trisha L. on April 5th 2007 at 11:26am
view Trisha L.'s profile

The bottom "crate" definitely has a kennel flavor to it. Maybe it would not be so bad if there were slats around the sides and back, not just in the front.

posted by MEP on April 5th 2007 at 11:44am
view MEP's profile

I don't think it's as bad as it looks. Babies like to be swaddled and held close, so I don't think they'd feel claustrophobic in the bottom crib, esp. if the parents switch them back and forth. But I doubt many parents would be comfortable with the setup.

posted by Li on April 5th 2007 at 12:31pm
view Li's profile

Even the mom in the picture won't put a child in the bottom bunk. This made me snicker after a long, long day. Thanks.

posted by pelicolina on April 5th 2007 at 6:23pm
view pelicolina's profile

Actually, I'd be more scared about the top bunk, once the kids got old enough to be escape artists, which can happen pretty early. I think Li's point is a good one. Babies like many things that are counter-intuitive to adults--being swaddled, going to sleep in a swing, etc., so I don't think it can exactly equate to pet housing.

posted by fiona on April 6th 2007 at 2:06am
view fiona's profile

more prison-esque cribbing.

posted by lb on April 6th 2007 at 5:17am
view lb's profile

1. Well, if you have twins and are THAT short of space... Parents of one baby might consider a variation on the concept, putting storage undernead a bed. However, as a former crib escape artist, I'd recommend adding a ladder to anything that high.

2. Perhaps this idea could be expanded for quintuplets into a ferris wheel of bunks, which would rotate to a gentle lullaby.

3. This would be great for "getting the message across" if you decide you like one twin better than the other.

posted by nuni on April 7th 2007 at 7:48am
view nuni's profile

Nuni you made me laugh out loud!

posted by Sofia on April 9th 2007 at 4:07am
view Sofia's profile

Funny, both of my childhood churches had multiples of these in the nurseries! I'm sure the 1970s versions intended for quasi-institutional use weren't nearly seven-hundred dollars, though; the stacked crib may or may not appeal to the majority of parents but it deffo doesn't appeal to my pocketbook.

Anyway, the bottom bunk child is far better situated for adults to sit on the ground and play games/make eye-contact/read stories.

posted by Pythia on April 9th 2007 at 9:30am
view Pythia's profile

I would buy this. Bottom bunk becomes a crate for my dog, top bunk for the baby. Perfect!

posted by Max on April 9th 2007 at 10:04am
view Max's profile

@Pythia -- Yes, a church I once visited had 3 per bay, not 2 as shown. And with about 7 lined up, it did look like a kennel. In a way it's like a capsule hotel ;) I just wonder about the parents' backs bending down to the lower bunk once the baby gets heavy.

posted by katalyst on April 9th 2007 at 10:25am
view katalyst's profile