To hope that I can ask about FF without being shot down in flames?

[Darksideofthemoon88]

I'm interested in WHY people choose to FF if not for medical reasons (ie they can't because of medication they have to take, or because their baby was very premature and is unable to suckle) - I've seen a lot of threads where people assert that FF was best for them/their family/their baby or that they chose to FF without trying BF, and I'm curious as to why. Genuinely curious I'm not interested in fighting with anyone about what's best or right; I'd just like to read about why people FF because I honestly don't know. In the interests of full disclosure though (I know how MNs feel about this! ), I am a breastfeeding mother.

I would have loved to have been able to carry on breastfeeding beyond the 8 weeks I managed, but for many reasons I've already stated it just wasn't possible. I'd spoken to several GPs, health visitors, breast feeding counsellors and a lactation consultant, none of them could help - and all of them failed to mention a breast abscess could be one of the reasons why I was having so many problems and suffering agonising engorgement.

What I resent is being told I didn't try hard enough, I carried around a hell of a lot of guilt for switching to formula and reading comments like some of those on this thread just bring those feelings flooding back.

cathgirl - why do you suppose that being a breastfeeding advocate means you don't care about women who struggle to breastfeed or don't want to do it.

I know you want to believe that breastfeeding advocates care nothing for women and have no understanding of the reasons why people make the choices they do, but you are wrong.

I believe that all women have a right to make a choice. I think women must do what they can cope with in relation to themselves and their family life.

I also think that babies are disadvantaged by not being breastfed and that our low breastfeeding rates are problematic.

You can have all of these beliefs and attitudes existing side by side.

I know that might seem a bit ambivalent and conflicting - but that's the way it is. We are adults, we don't have to talk or think in absolutes.

hollie84 I am obviously very odd! I wasn't planning to breastfeed exclusively to 6 months, as I had intended to introduce solids earlier, but in the event I didn't because my son had diarrhoea for 3 weeks and the GP advised against it. I am always particularly amused by BF studies that mention the lower risk of diarrhoea etc in BF babies - definitely not my experience!

Fairylea the initiation and 6 - 8 week stats in the first survey come from healthcare providers themselves (I assume hospitals and health visitors, from the 6 week check) so you never know, maybe you're in there! The other survey was based on a "representative sample" (am meant to be working, so not going to look into it) of 10,768 mothers, who returned questionnaires.

And why do you not apply the same logic to the claims made by baby milk manufacturers whose research is very difficult for the public to access, often abandoned halfway through a trial and not published if it looks like it's going to show an unfavourable result?

Mini read the sentence you highlighted about my thoughts on stats again!

How exactly are all babies disadvantaged by not being breastfed?

Tiktok one thing about those statistics is that I don't think they tell the whole story.

At the six wel check my HV ticked the box that said I was breastfeeding. This was after I told her that I was expressing what I could and giving DD formula the rest of the time. I even told her how much ebm DD was having - about 1-2 ounces a day. An amount which paled into insignificant versus the 24oz of formula she was having. Nevertheless the statistics would have treated her as a bf baby....

I don't believe many of the stats around bf because there is political will to make bf rates look higher than they are. Hence the rather loose interpretation of bf that the HV took with us.

LittleBearPad the 6 - 8 week stats from HVs do say exclusively and partially breastfed. I assumed that meant "any breast milk at all" (which is in line with your experience).

mini i dont believe breast feeding advocates have little empathy for others.

i believe you do based on some of your more unpleasant posts on here.

i breast fed my baby until he was ten months old. i have no agenda. but some of your comments have led me to think you must lack empathy. given how unempathetic they have been.

LittleBear - if the stats are any breastfeeding then surely that is accurate?

Seagulls - I think everyone is aware that exclusive breastfeeding generally has the best health outcomes and that formula feeding carries risks. It's about whether the risks are worth taking. For me it was.

Pretending there are no risks or disadvantages isn't helpful though.

Lies dame lies and statistics, they can be manipulated and twisted to suit. Sad some live their life by them!

Ahhh, Mark Twain

Many of us conclude that the risks are minimal or outweighed by other risks. It really is possible to thoroughly research and come to those conclusions.

Fairylea, were you not asked at your 6-8 week check whether you were breastfeeding? I thought everyone was; it's recorded in the red book. Presumably this is the source of the NHS stats.

Because I hated it.

Hated it.

Hollie Disadvantaged means in unfavourable circumstances. Sorry not seeing that with my 3.

The risks you mention were beyond tiny as if prepped right ffing is very safe particularly when you consider the amount of bottles babies consume and how difficult it is to lay d&v directly at the door of bottle prep.So yes there are risks but tiny risks- something swept conveniently over by the bfing brigade.

Then we come to disadvantaged.Like many ffing parents I have 3 very healthy,robust,never ill,very bright children with no allergies. Soooo what are the unfavourable circumstances exactly?

Breast milk was literally pouring out of me within hours of dd being born. But she just couldn't latch. She would get on,two sucks then fall off again,then get in an absolute state crying her eyes out meaning it was impossible for her to get back on. No tounge tie, no medical issues she just couldn't do it. I intended to breast feed,i tried, it didn't work out and I have no guilt about it.

I pumped and fed her exclusively this way for 3 weeks and I can honestly say it was horrendous,it used to take 45minutes to do each boob and I needed to do it every 3 hours. If I have another baby I won't be doing it again.

Because the box she ticked wasn't partially breastfed. It was a binary choice between FF and BF.

And when the stats come out about x% of babies still being bf at six weeks the person quoting rarely ever says that this encompasses everything from ebf to a dribble of BM. I think it's dishonest.

Catgirl - there is a huge amount of empathy for people's problems and insistence that how you feed a baby doesn't matter one bit. Do I really need to add another voice to the chorus?

I've acknowledged that women struggle emotionally and physically with feeding and that they must do what they can do and what they believe is best. I don't need to say more about it.

What is going on in the UK with exceptionally low rates of continuing breastfeeding is about more than the mechanics of breastfeeding - because these are the same the world over. Our breastfeeding rates reflect our cultural attitudes to caring for newborns, and our almost total trust and acceptance of formula as a way of feeding babies which - from the snapshot of attitudes from this thread - is seen as a better way to feed babies FOR FAMILIES if breastfeeding is anything other than completely unproblematic.

I think someone needs to speak up for the other side of the argument - to say how a baby is fed is important and that our situation with feeding in the UK is not good, with so few babies being breastfed for more than a few weeks.

I don't think it's right that the general response on mumsnet to anyone expressing this view is to draw down a shed load of personal abuse and accusations of cruelty.

And I certainly wouldn't have said I was bf at six weeks.

What do you think are our cultural attitudes to caring for newborns, minifingers?

Mini.

I am an advocate for breast feeding when it is working well for both mother and child.

I am an advocate for breast feeding being promoted.

I am an advocate for women who want to breast feed getting support and help when it isn't going well.

I am also an advocate for looking at other choices when breast feeding isn't working well for mother or child be it in terms of medical issues, personal issues, PND, exhaustion, life style issues or personal choice.

I am mainly an advocate for women not being judged on how they feed their child.

I don't think I have ever seem women being judged or patronised for breast feeding.

I have however seen countless instances of women who choose / have to formula feed being judged.

You have done this yourself on this thread.

There is a world of difference between saying how a baby is fed is important and that breast feeding rates in the UK being so low being a bad thing and suggesting that women who formula feed either do not care how they feed their babies or are simply uneducated.

Which you did with your post suggesting "most people on here probably spent more time reading up on which buggy to buy than the merits of breast feeding".

You cannot make comments like that and then try to say "Oh I am just trying to balance the argument and say it's a shame breast feeding rates are so low in the UK"

I think someone needs to speak up for the other side of the argument - to say how a baby is fed is important and that our situation with feeding in the UK is not good, with so few babies being breastfed for more than a few weeks..

Sorry, I just need clarity. Are you saying that FF parents don't think how their baby is fed is important? What I am reading here basically says that FF mothers are making bad choices for their babies because they don't breastfeed, hence the "our situation in the UK is not good etc.". Is that what you are saying Mini?

Interesting article. Have a look!

www.telegraph.co.uk/women/mother-tongue/10911177/Breastfeeding-wars-is-breast-really-best.html?fb

When DS was born he had formula on his 2nd day of life because I couldn't get him to feed and I remember absolutely sobbing when the midwife gave it to him. Although I absolutely know that formula isn't poison (to steal a phrase I see on here often) it felt like poison at the time. He had to have it another two times before we were discharged (day 3 of life) and I hated it. I made DH feed it to him because I didn't want to. I had an absolutely awful time establishing breast feeding, I was a wreck for months, and I'm not sure if I were to have another baby whether I'd put myself through it again. But maybe I'd find it easier 2nd time around because I was no longer facing the unknown? Who knows.

Although I EBF and formula did once seem like poison in my shattered and emotionally crazy state I doubt I would have kind of issue with giving it now if I had to.

I think when DS was born I perceived him as something so tiny and new that I only wanted him to have natural milk in him and when I was having all my difficulties I think they was what kept me going.

He is 5 months now and when we start weaning him and he starts to get an established diet at about 9months-ish I may stop BF and give formula instead.

Now I'm out of the 'new mom' emotional wreck phase that I was in for months over breast feeding I do sometimes wonder why I put myself through it. DH mentioned a few times about how concerned he was for my mental state (as did my HV on one occasion) and he suggested formula but I was so engrossed in the idealism of breast is best that I just couldn't bear the thought of it.

The irony is that I support a lot of new moms with breast feeding and am constantly telling them that if they feel switching to formula us best for them then of course they should do it as there's nothing wrong with giving formula - but when it came to me I couldn't take my own advice.