To think the 'information' the midwife gave me is almost propaganda?

[ethelfleda]

Recently had 24 week appointment. This is our first. Midwife asked if I had thought about feeding yet. I said I plan on breastfeeding. I say 'plan' because (as with everything else baby related) I am trying to keep an open mind as from what I hear, things don't always go according to plan! So I will try hard to breastfeed but I won't beat myself up if it doesn't work out for us.
She handed me a 20 odd page pamphlet thing and said it contained useful information on caring for a new born.

I started to read it today thinking it would be basic NHS info on how to feed, wind and change your baby etc. It was actually 20 odd pages of info telling me basically that if i don't breastfeed, my baby is more likely to develop cancer (as am I) as well as be admitted to hospital in their first year of life etc etc among other very scary statistics.
The language used was shocking IMO! And seemingly designed to make women who don't/can't breastfeed feel awful! Has anyone else had this information handed to them and thought it was way over the top??

"The more the 95% statistic is stated the more I feel like those that genuinely did have serious supply problems are either once again not being believed or being made to feel inferior."
I don't think anyone is dusvekuevei f or trying to make people feel inferior. But I'm not sure what the solution is if the mere fact of talking about it has that effect on you. What do you suggest?

My suggestion was to a) acknowledge that that 95% statistic may be slightly problematic b) to add a passage to the effect that: "Sometimes difficulties in feeding may be caused by a physical problem which requires more help. In case of persistent problems you may want to check for tongue tie; this can be resolved and the baby able to continue breast-feeding. There may also be some problem which the doctors are not able to fix. If this proves to be the case, your main priority will have to be to keep your baby's nutritional needs met by whatever method. Though some weight loss is normal after birth, persistent weight loss or failure to gain weight is a warning sign and should be taken seriously. "

mychild you say my phrase 'fit of the vapours' is loaded. I was referring to the shocked outrage that sometimes greets the info that 'babies who are not breastfed/mothers who don't bf have an increased risk of x y z'. And the phrase was expressing my observation that ppl seem unable or unwilling to understand that 'risk' is not predictive of individual outcomes. So yes my phrase was loaded with some eye rolling.

So what? I do roll my eyes that time and again, discussion about how best to inform and support women is affected by this. But I do understand that feeding, however it's done, is personal and emotional. And that language matters. I would never judge anyone for having strong feelings about what language is used.

But I am frustrated by criticism of the 95 per cent stat as somehow belittling physical problems. And by the idea that raising social issues as factors is insulting. And that risk is predictive.

At some point we are all going to have to stop with the vapours and have an adult, mutually respectful conversation, which acknowledges the multi-faceted issue - and to stop thinking that one person's physical barriers are worse/easier/more genuine/less genuine than another person's social issues.

I just don't like fit of the vapours tiktok is all. It's a phrase I find mysogynistic.

But surely the flip side of that is knowing that there are definitely women who can't, however much they want to, bf, must be validating, surely?

I'd always avoid misogynistic phrases when possible - I accept that 'fit of the vapours' might be categorised that way so I'll be careful .

theonlyway I have no idea why anyone would think I believe babies should never have formula, or that a phrase I have used supports that idea.

My two babies would have DIED without formula

My uncle DID die without formula, back in the 1920s - my father's older brother.

He couldn't suck. He died at two months old, may have been younger, I don't know the exact details now.

My father was the same but my grandmother was more experienced and gave him sugar water. You'd never do it now, obviously, but it kept him alive.

I was rubbish at feeding too but my mum ff me from the outset as she didn't want to bf me.

My son was rubbish at feeding too. I mixed fed from day one and stopped bf altogether at 4 months old.

And I totally agree with this:

IMO the whole bf culture, including healthcare professionals' approach and practices is symptomatic of the undervaluing of everything to do with women

I have to say that while I have huge sympathy for the individualswho have had horrific experiences Botha at the hands of nature and other people, I am a struggling a bit with the concept of formula users as group as some sort of beleaguered minority.

Well, there's been quite a lot of language policing........

Surely if we are discussing an informative leaflet designed to promote breastfeeding then language policing (aka as listening to feedback in order to get it right) is precisely what we want?

When my students complain that something in my handouts is obscure or doesn't meet their needs, I don't moan about language policing: I thank them for taking the trouble and try to address the issue. Sounds a reasonable policy for anyone trying to promote or support anything.

"then language policing (aka as listening to feedback in order to get it right) is precisely what we want?"
There is a difference between language policing- as in "Don't mention statistics in case it upsets anyone" and feedback- "How about making sure the booklet makes it clear that there Is a small % of women and babies who have medical conditions that mean bf is not right for them"

Absolutely. And also a difference between "don't mention statistics in case it upsets women" and "don't use statistics without any attempt to think through what they actually tell us". As has been pointed out, some of those 95% may well be women whose babies are malnourished, others may be women who top up with formula. In the UK there seems to be quite a strong belief that once you have introduced formula your breast-feeding is bound to fail and you might as well pack in. This makes comparisons with e.g. Scandinavia very difficult as they do not seem to have the same belief.

cory, I have come across women who believe that once you use formula you might as well pack it in - but I am not sure where this idea comes from. I know of no book, leaflet, training course or antenatal class that has this in. NCT breastfeeding counsellors (whose work I know best :) ) would never say it and in fact much breastfeeding counselling work involves helping women who are already using some formula return to either exclusive breastfeeding or to keep the formula at a level which allows continued breastfeeding.

I think it may come from the entirely correct notion that unnecessary and casual supplementation with formula can reduce the chances of happy breastfeeding - what do you think?

Yep, that's why I'm currently sat in tears feeding my baby because I feel too guilty to stop

Bless you Holz, are you getting any real life feeding help?

Holz- can you say what's making you so unhappy?

Holz , it goes without saying just keep on feeding your baby - why are you in tears?

I am old. I have friends who did not breastfeed because they wanted to "look after their figure" . This is an anecdote it is not, not said to any poster on this thread.

I BF for 6 months because after that I went back to work so - couldn't practically do 12 months. - a choice but it was a practical choice. DS had a mix of formula and BF at around 5 .5 - 6 months.

Look , I'm of the option if you can / are able / are minded to BF when DCs are born it's a good thing. If you don't / can't - the sky is not going to fall in. Friend of mine has 3 - all FF , sporty , clever , doing well , who knows what the difference is. Personally I would always advise giving it a shot if you can but if it is shorter lived than average ( i.e. the 6 vs 12 mths by which UK mothers are measured) well - don't worry. & if you absolutely cannot physically can't - well don't panic.

@Holz657 would it help to try not to think about it as any kind of big decision? So just one feed at a time. If it's too distressing to do the next feed then give some formula instead, at that feed. Don't think of it as making any long term decisions, just think about coping with one feed at a time.

At the risk of being torn to shreds, this is why I care.
This text is from the Lancet: A highly respected medical journal and the articles, written by medics and peer reviewed, are from 2016 ( please be kind, I am just the messenger remember!!
Breastmilk makes the world healthier, smarter, and more equal: these are the conclusions of a new Lancet Series on breastfeeding..... The Series confirms the benefits of breastfeeding in fewer infections, increased intelligence, probable protection against overweight and diabetes, and cancer prevention for mothers. The Series represents the most in-depth analysis done so far into the health and economic benefits that breastfeeding can produce

Rates of breastfeeding vary wildly;...with less than 20% in many high-income countries and less than 1% in the UK
Wow that's a low figure for us. Surely not women's fault but NHS and society more widely are not helping us.

The reasons why women avoid or stop breastfeeding range from the medical, cultural, and psychological, to physical discomfort and inconvenience. These matters are not trivial, and many mothers without support turn to a bottle of formula......, this situation has catastrophic consequences on breastfeeding rates and the health of subsequent generations