In thinking that Jo Frost should shut the fuck up about breastfeeding

[spudulika]

... as she clearly knows nothing about it.

If you want proof have a look at the new Jo Frost magazine (no need to buy it of course, just do what I do - rifle through it at the supermarket ). Article on breastfeeding 'how long, and when to stop'.

She seems to think that 'weaning' means stopping breastfeeding.

And she feels the need to say 'I'm the biggest fan of breastfeeding, but I don't think mothers should be made to feel like the scum of the earth for not doing it. Whatever choice you make is fine!' To which I want to respond: if I wanted to read vapid platitudes about breastfeeding I'd go to Netmums. It's free. Whereas your magazine costs... bloody loads.

It's just not asseptable.

She needs to pull her socks up.

"The judgy brigade strike again - I don't know why some women get their knickers in such a twist over the other's choices and feel the need to be so smug about it."

Would you like to make it clear who you are judging here?

muggle, out of interest, why open a thread on breastfeeding in order to post 'yawn'?

I don't understand!

Spudulika, what was the point of this thread? Jo Frost has a right to express an opinion. IMO YABU, and that Jo didn't say anything wrong. You may think bf is the way to go, and thats fine. You can do it for all your children. But there are plenty of women who don't or can't bf. And people should mind their own business about that. They should not interfere in how a woman brings her child up. Yes, women are often made to feel ashamed for not bf. Some midwives are bf nazis!
As for covering up, whats wrong with it? I don't want my breasts being looked at by strangers. I may think of bf as a beautiful moment between mother and child, but plenty of perverts just get kicks out of a bared breast. Harsh, but very true. And I will certainly not be the one to provide them with their cheap thrills. If I bf in public, I will be covering up. But I don't judge women who don't. If they are comfortable with the public display, so be it.
You seem too judgemental about the choices women have a right to make.
Let it go. People will always express opinions, some of which we won't agree with. So what? You can't possibly argue with them all about it.

What I was trying to express was the gist of Dancing's first paragraph of their post. Yawn was probably not the best term to use, but Jo Frost simply expressed her opinion and taking that into consideration feel the title of this thread is a bit strong! And my opinion is esp when reading some of the posts further up that bf/ff discussions frequently get a bit judgy rather than sticking to facts ( I was unable to bf although I very much wanted to and if you yourself are frustrated regarding this you don't need your nose rubbing in it by some who just want to preach) but hey that's just my opinion!!

Only shut up about breastfeeding? I think JF should shut the fuck up about parenting - full stop.

So ... loosely ... 50% do find pethedine effective, two thirds do not have an excessive reaction to it, and 9% of women who opt for epidrual have it 'take'....? Not sure I'd describe that as a 'very significant risk' that pharmacological pain relief won't be helpful. On balance, the probability weighting seems to be towards it being more likely to be helpful.

And on the denial of epidurals or withholding any pain relief, it would be useful to tell women their rights about pain relief and choices under NICE guidelines in these classes. I can't remember the detail, but I do know DH is going to be armed with the literature when we go to the hospital - just in case he needs to cite it on my behalf. Like the 80% of women who don't opt for epidurals, I'll be going into labour hoping I don't need dramatic pain relief, but have to say that my own fears have been heavily alleviated by being very informed about ALL my options and also knowing I have a right to options.

The 'glass half full' position on interventions vis epidurals would be to point out that 20-30% (if I remember correctly from the class) of women opt for epidurals, so the vast majority do not feel the need to do this - I think this is reassuring. And that there is some doubt as to whether the interventions are conclusively the result of having an epidural, or whether the minority of women who opt for one do so because they are already in a worse state than the other 70-80% who don't, and so possibly heading for intervention anyway. There was an interesting chat with an anaethetist on MN a while ago who made this point in his hospital (he was also the one who advised women to dig out the NICE guidelines). I'd be surprised if women opted for a needle being stuck into their spine if they didn't really need it - regardless of how risky it is it doesn't sound pleasant.

Key to feeling in control is being fully informed about ALL choices, and ALL risks and having the freedom to make those choices without judgement - and not 'being controlled' by the personal the views of others. We are adults and totally capable of assessing and managing our own choices and own levels of risk. Regardless of how upset the NCT woman may feel about what happens to some women in hospital, I question whether it is right, or ethical, or respectful to women to withhold important information with a view to oushing a certain agenda. And if they do do this, maybe they are inadvertantly a part of the problem.

..90% of women...

"Jo Frost has a right to express an opinion."

Yes. I agree. Everybody has a right to express an opinion.

I don't think that's being quibbled about here is it?

As long as you don't put it in between two magazine covers saying 'Expert advice for new parents!'

"You may think bf is the way to go, and thats fine. You can do it for all your children. But there are plenty of women who don't or can't bf. And people should mind their own business about that."

And the point of that in relation to the OP is.....?

"They should not interfere in how a woman brings her child up."

What - you mean midwives and health visitors shouldn't give advice or information on safe sleeping, recognising when a baby is ill, weaning etc?

Cause that's intefering as well isn't it?

"Yes, women are often made to feel ashamed for not bf. Some midwives are bf nazis!"

Some midwives! Health nazis the lot of them. Some are anti-smoking nazis too. Now they REALLY guilt trip women. Nobody has a right to stop a mum smoking during pregnancy. Her body. Her baby. Her choice.

"50% do find pethedine effective"

Well - they carry on being in pain but they may find the sedative effect (because of course it's a synthetic form of heroin) helpful.

"On balance, the probability weighting seems to be towards it being more likely to be helpful."

So yes - cup half full!

Actually most (the vast majority) of women give the big thumbs up to their epidural. But not all go on to repeat the experience second time round, which is interesting.

"would be to point out that 20-30% (if I remember correctly from the class) of women opt for epidurals, so the vast majority do not feel the need to do this"

Yup - but weed out the figures for first time mums and you'll find a very different picture.

In some large teaching hospitals 75% of first time mums will have an epidural.

"to withhold important information'

What particular information do you think she was withholding?

As far as I am aware smoking during pregnancy is not illegal so who does have the right to stop a women smoking in pregnancy? And how is this 'right to do so' imposed on smoking women ...? I'm curious. So it seems it is her body, her baby and her choice... even I can see that despite my own fascist anti-smoking views.

I think some of the quoted material does sound misleading, if it leads people to believe that 'weaning' means stopping BF. I would have to read the whole article to really comment though. Because she is a well-respected childcare expert (whatever people's personal opinion of her grammar and her methods!), she should be very careful not to make misleading or ambiguous statements.

Advice is good. Judgemental opinions are not. In any case, you seem to ebjoy arguing for the sake of it. I don't understand your way of thinking at all.
So I'll leave the tread now.

"So it seems it is her body, her baby and her choice... even I can see that despite my own fascist anti-smoking views"

I think the point I was trying to make - is that public opinion is only vociferous about the fundamental issue of women's right to choose, when she's making choices that are largely socially sanctioned.

So you almost never hear this point being repeatedly referred to in discussions about the ins and outs of smoking in pregnancy as you do in relation to feeding issues.

FFS breastfeeding nazis

Do you HAVE any idea how inappropriate and offensive that lazy and silly expression is?

spudulika "I've seen nasty, stupid comments made by both 'sides'."

So at least you are aware that it does happen then, even if not in an organised way by either 'side'. Neither 'side' should be critical of the other 'side's' choice though.

I don't know what else she wrote in the article but the part you quoted didn't mention organised fanatics and to be honest I can't see that she is implying it either, not just from the quote you gave. All she said was that she supports breastfeeding but doesn't want to make those who don't breastfeed (or those who stop breastfeeding) feel bad by saying so because she believes they have also made a valid choice which she is supportive of.

Unless she said more than you quoted I think you might be reading too much into it.

The people who have made negative comments to me and to my friends are not an 'organised gang' by any means. But in some cases they were in responsible positions and ought to have known better, at least known that letting their personal ideals overcome their professional responsibility was wrong. Much as you say (and I have agreed with you in my first reply) that Jo Frost should have done when talking about weaning and stopping breastfeeding.

And the people who were not in such positions but just felt like sticking their oar in should know better too.

People will make the choice they feel best with, sometimes that choice is made for them. But it is a private and personal choice, no matter which 'side' you are on and ultimately both should be supported by people in positions like Jo Frosts'.

Bit ambivalent about Jo Frost's statement - I found all the messages contradictory in many resepcts throughout pregnancy and first 6 months.

• At 8 week midwife appt, when we'd just found out DS wasn't an ectopic pregnancy but been back in x 2 for bleeding - 'Are you planning on breastfeeding?' - figured that we'd try to get to 16 weeks first... Too early to start discussing it?

• I have preexisting diabetes and had weekly + appts throughout pregnancy. At every appt breastfeeding was bought up, despite having very clearly documented that I wanted to try BF. Got kind of irritating and felt like it was rammed down my throat.

• Wanted to express antenatally, mixed enounters regarding this from MW's and medics - some v supportive, some make me feel like a silly little girl for not wanting DS to have formula given that he had to be fed within 30 mins of birth. Did express, DS had a couple of syringes of my milk as I ended up having a 38 hour failed induction, emcs and lost over 1.5 litres of blood during surgery so was a tad poorly. But pressure (which was how I percieved the BF messages at appts - formula bad, if he had tiniest drop I'd never be able to BF etc etc (I exaggerate slightly here) ... aware I was hormonal but I had this EVERY WEEK so it got to be a BIG THING)

• ONLY way midwives would show me how to BF was sitting bolt upright in bed, which was AGONY. Asked if I could be shown how to feed laying down (DS had to feed min every 2 hours becasue of my diabetes) - apparently 'jospital policy' was that I HAD to sit up. Was told if it was 'too sore' then they would (not 'could') take him and give a bottle of formula.

• Got home, DS feeding really well, gaining weight, blood sugars stable, all fab. Lovely week.

• Little Angels BF 'support' turn up, unannounced, on Day 8. Woman comes in wouthout asking, sits on sofa and says 'I'm from Little Angels, can I check your latch please?' then ticked some boxes before leaving. Not massively helpful.

• Little Angels advertised as '24 hour service' - except that meant 9-4 Mon- Fri, which didn't help when I got thrush and was in agony....on a Saturday. Or when I had oversupply problems....

FWIW I loved BF DS, and fed him for 6 months. Topped up from 5 months when I went back to work and freezer supply ran out.

Not sure what the answer is but guess the current set up doesn't work....Themes seem to be 'not enough support / correct advice' or 'rammed down throat' among others. Consistent themes.

Sorry for long post. Better now that's out!

I dont think smoking in pg and bf pr not bf can be compared really,smoking harms babies whereas formula although not as good as breast milk does not actually harm them,in many cases it does the opposite.Fwiw i bf my first 3 and ff my 4th and 5th.

"YANBU. I can 't stand her or her car crash tv shows. She always strikes me as a bit thick. I wouldn't employ a nanny with her BMI ( go on shoot me)"

Why?

Sorry that was to NaughtyMummy btw

"I've not heard of there being any clinical risks to not using pethidine or epidurals, except in some cases where a mum may be at very high risk of emcs and so may benefit from having an epidural sited early on in labour"

Sorry if someone has already pointed this out but have you not heard of women with pre-eclampsia (and therefore very high blood pressure) having an epidural to bring their blood pressure down, thus making things safer? Spinal anaesthesia is known to lower blood pressure.

I had pre-eclampsia with both pregnancies and in fact the spinal I had with my second c-section brought my blood pressure down so low I had to go on an ephidrine drip!

(Shot up again afterwards though as it often does for a few days after the birth unfortunately)

Why can't I stand her ? Because she exploits situations where the parents aren't coping, comes into their homes and takes over. There are much more effective parenting strategies which she never uses. Her shows are formulaic and sensational.
I think she is a bit thick, because she employs this one size fits all attitude, she doesn't seem able to think outside the box or look at the wider picture. If you use a simple reward system with time out (or chill out time or whatever you call it) then it will all be ok reguardless of age of child or developmental stage or family situation-a bit simplistic.

I would not employ an obese person to look after my preschoolers as they were both very active and needed a lot of chasing about out of doors, in my experience( there are exceptions of corse) extra large people and Jo Frost looks huge, are less able to chase around after 2 and 3 year old boys than slimer folk.

I don't particularly like JF but she is a qualified child care professional

Pretty sure she's not qualified at all ( from what I have read about her)

I doubt she even wrote the article - probably just put her name to it.

I like her no nonsense attitude, she's great imo and speaks more sense than other 'experts,' her methods aren't rocket science - she just encourages parents to be consistent.

( I have only read page one - so sorry if it's moved on )

naughty, I think FRost is invited in. She's not like the Spanish inquisition.

naughty she doesn't just turn up at your doorstep uninvited!

I'm fat and have no trouble keeping up with my 7, 5 and 2 year olds. Not all fat people are sedentary slobs. For the record I don't think Jo Frost is that fat. She's slimmer than me thats for sure.