No formula milk available from foodbanks

[CaraDuneRedux]

Times article:
www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/food-banks-ban-on-formula-leaves-babies-to-go-hungry-tcghd25gm

Maybe someone cleverer than I am can do the share token.

But in a nutshell, in order to follow Unicef guidelines, food banks like the Trussell Trust are refusing donations of formula, so as not to be guilty of encouraging women to give up breast feeding.

Note that we are not talking about the infamous bad old days of formula companies handing out free samples on post natal wards so that women never start to breast feed.

We are talking about families where a decision has already been made to use formula, and where the mother's milk has therefore stopped, who then find due to change in circumstance (eg. job loss during the pandemic) that they are unable to feed their babies. They can't magically restart breastfeeding at this point - the choice (given the 5 week delay between starting a UC claim and receiving the first payment) is formula or starvation.

Are others as horrified by this box-ticking piece of insanity as I am? What can we do? How do we exert pressure on the foodbanks to get them to help the people they were set up to help (rather than pursuing some Unicef-approved tick of self-righteousness)?

Wow!

I hope you never have cause to use a food bank. But if you did you'd probably change your mind about the 'do-gooder'...

And it's massively patronising to say that food banks shouldn't give out formula because the mother should be breastfeeding. Her body her choice, not some middle class do-gooders'. Yes you tend to use the same brand with a young baby (I used SMA and Hipp with my ds) but it's not exactly difficult to ask a mum what brand she uses.

@cologne4711 rtft

The food banks are not refusing provide formula because they are telling the mother should be breastfeeding. That's not what the article says, which is explained below. The op @CaraDuneRedux has misrepresented the facts from the article.

Sorry, that posted too soon....

Sugar and chocolate are not essential items.

The bags we give out are designed by dietitians. Every bag is essentially the same as every other bag.

We have a help yourself shelf, sugar and chocolate would go there, but we don't ask for such things and sometimes, like Christmas, ask for them not to be donated because we don't have enough room, may already have had a lot donated!

@EvilPea

With my first I didn’t see a health visitor once They never contacted me and the clinic was quite a drive away.

You don't need to see them if you don't have a problem. If I literally couldn't feed my baby, I would call.

[quote InFlagranteDerelicto]@StellaGib I've no idea. She knew we were struggling to pay the rent, that my mother was buying formula for us, that I'd quit BFing with much regret due to DD being a determined biter who left tooth holes in my nipples, that I'd had urgent dental surgery with a general anaesthetic & had to pump for several days due to that which affected my supply, that I'd lost my milk & struggled to re-establish it with limited success, that I am chronically ill & although my symptoms abated during pregnancy (thankfully as the medication had been stopped as it causes birth defects; we were fortunate DD was born healthy, she was a surprise baby) but my symptoms were returning & the medication is passed on through breastmilk as well. Not taking it isn't an option. Despite all this, she never mentioned anything about vouchers. I don't know if she was aware we weren't eligible, or if she was just a crap HV. Probably the former, as the CAB did a pretty thorough check & they said we didn't seem to be eligible for any additional help either. I did ask about Healthy Start vouchers, but it looked like we were not eligible, on paper our income was too high. There was also a £500 maternity grant at the time, for prams & suchlike, but we didn't qualify for that either.[/quote]
You’d definitely be eligible for universal credit these days on that income. And a few years ago should have got housing benefit and council tax reduction at the very least. I do wonder if someone cocked up the calculation?

No, I didn't bloody say that the foodbanks were telling women they should be BF!

FFS. I've said repeatedly, this isn't a BF/FF issue. This is a "given that women are FF, and you can't go backwards, what do we do for families who can't afford formula" issue.

I've also repeatedly said that in an ideal world, we'd have an adquate social security safety net. But we have 4 sodding years to go to the next general election and there isn't that social security safety net. So what do we do in the immediate crisis situation?

Wasn,t everyone elidgable for the maternity grant?

I made some suggestions....

@cologne4711 - do you donate to a foodbank? If not why not?

I volunteer my free time at a foodbank to ensure that specific packages of food are available for those referred for help

If you took the time to check the foodbank websites you would see what food is needed and shortages. Advent calendars are given out - in fact at the foodbank I volunteer at we will probably have enough for two for each child.

You may need the help of a foodbank in the near future. You and your DH could be made redundant this month and have to wait weeks for your benefits to arrive. Would you not want your DC’s to have a foodbank package for meals at Christmas?

@june2007

Wasn,t everyone elidgable for the maternity grant?

I think at one point, yes. Then it reverted to being means tested.

It's brand advertising. Advertising formula doesn't make a breastfeeding mum choose formula instead, it gives formula-feeding mums information about what brands may be out there. It's so patronising to say that women are so stupid that they will stop breastfeeding because of formula marketing. It's up there with telling pregnant women they can't buy a bottle of wine because they might drink the whole thing themselves. How about giving women some respect?

It does lower breastfeeding rates though, that is why the WHO and UNICEF have guidelines about it. Formula companies do not spend that much money just to give parents information, they do it because successful breastfeeding rates are bad for business, the more people switching to formula = more profit for them. What more awareness of a brands' exisitance do you need other than going to the shop and picking one off the shelf?

Breastfeeding is considered important because there are proven benefits for both mum and baby. Babies die when formula companies are given free reign to advertise how they please www.businessinsider.com/personal-finance/nestles-infant-formula-scandal-2012-6?r=US&IR=T

Baby milk should never have been allowed to become a profitable business. It has only taken less than a couple of centuries to completely undermine womens' faith in thier ability to feed thier babies the way they have been doing since the human race began. Some (fewer than formula companies would have you believe) babies will need a substitute, and some women may not want to breastfeed but no one should profit from that substitute.

@CuriousaboutSamphire

I made some suggestions....

There have been some brilliant suggestions upthread, Curious, and I'm glad to see that some areas do have joined up systems of foodbanks, local councils and HV referrals.

And I agree, letter writing campaigns to MPs are also good.

But it's so frustrating when there's a piece of investigative journalism , maybe not the best piece ever, but which nonetheless seems to identify a problem, to have lots of people respond with variations on: Murdoch press (shoot the messenger); this should be the government's responsibility (yes it should, but in the mean time...); I'm alright jack (good for you, now about the people who aren't...); we need to raise BF rates (yes, we do, but again, what do we do right now?); they're just following Unicef rules (except that there are suggestions upthread that Unicef rules really aren't as restrictive as some - some, not all - food trusts are interpreting them to be).

I don't really get the advertising argument, BFing rates are really, really, really low here and it's been banned before 6 months for a while- so I don't really consider it a factor in reducing rates here; elsewhere in the world, probably. The reason formula companies are blamed is because it then excuses the inadequate postnatal provision of BFing support here.

I don't really get the advertising argument, BFing rates are really, really, really low here and it's been banned before 6 months for a while- so I don't really consider it a factor in reducing rates here; elsewhere in the world, probably. The reason formula companies are blamed is because it then excuses the inadequate postnatal provision of BFing support here

As I have said before on this thread, formula companies find ways around these laws.

The whole point of food banks is they are a stopgap in an emergency

These days there is a lot of chronic need - we’ve like a lot of FBs gone from feeding people as a one-off during an emergency to feeding the same people weekly. The Trussell Trust did / do limit people to three visits a year iirc. Many of us don’t, and the people we support are in poorly paid work.

Here is an excellent post on the reasons food banks should not distribute formula

m.facebook.com/LucyruddleIBCLC/photos/a.1297863347014499/1918528358281325/?type=3&source=57&tn=EHH-R

As I have said before on this thread, formula companies find ways around these laws.

Do you honestly think though that it has a substantial impact? If you do, perhaps speak to mothers who didn't BF and get a clue about the far greater factors. They are a good scapegoat though I suppose, the government thanks you for laying the blame elsewhere.

@CaraDuneRedux

Times article: www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/food-banks-ban-on-formula-leaves-babies-to-go-hungry-tcghd25gm

Maybe someone cleverer than I am can do the share token.

But in a nutshell, in order to follow Unicef guidelines, food banks like the Trussell Trust are refusing donations of formula, so as not to be guilty of encouraging women to give up breast feeding.

Note that we are not talking about the infamous bad old days of formula companies handing out free samples on post natal wards so that women never start to breast feed.

We are talking about families where a decision has already been made to use formula, and where the mother's milk has therefore stopped, who then find due to change in circumstance (eg. job loss during the pandemic) that they are unable to feed their babies. They can't magically restart breastfeeding at this point - the choice (given the 5 week delay between starting a UC claim and receiving the first payment) is formula or starvation.

Are others as horrified by this box-ticking piece of insanity as I am? What can we do? How do we exert pressure on the foodbanks to get them to help the people they were set up to help (rather than pursuing some Unicef-approved tick of self-righteousness)?

Is this self righteous "tick" a requirement for funding? If so you give them the money instead hen they can have formula.

I'm sure it will be no problem for you

How about instead of a system where a few people donate money to food banks, so mothers with no way of feeding their babies can call up and ask if there's a volunteer available to nip down Boots for them and pick up some SMA - how about we campaign for a Universal Basic Income instead so no mother is in that position?

No, I didn't bloody say that the foodbanks were telling women they should be BF

@CaraDuneRedux you said in your op:

But in a nutshell, in order to follow Unicef guidelines, food banks like the Trussell Trust are refusing donations of formula, so as not to be guilty of encouraging women to give up breast feeding.

This is NOT what the article says, which has been extensively explained below.

These days there is a lot of chronic need - we’ve like a lot of FBs gone from feeding people as a one-off during an emergency to feeding the same people weekly.

Can you provide some evidence for that? The reports I have read is that in terms of families without other contributing issues (substance or other abuse etc), most users are not in "chronic" need but are driven there by an exceptional event (a benefit sanction, a one off unexpected cost etc).

@WrongKindOfFace - I can only assume that that must have beem the case. But I don't see how. The CAB checked it, twice, & said we were were entitled to nothing except child benefit until I was able to return to work & change to p/t hours. They recommended I contact my employer ASAP & change to p/t while I was still on maternity leave, but my employer weren't interested in speaking to me until I was due to return to work. I couldn't ever speak to a manager, I requested they call me back but no-one did. But when it was time to return to work, I was threatened with a disciplinary because I didn't immediately answer the phone to discuss my return to work date.

I really, really hated that job. They have pretty terrible reviews on Glass Door.

@Charleyhorses

So in a practical sense would I be best donating cash to the local food bank? I happily pick up stuff on a food shop but would I be better just doing a regular cash donation so they can buy stuff for cases like this?

Excellent post

But people just seem to love getting outraged these days.

@StellaGib

Formula should be available through health or social services for families who are struggling, not relying on charities.

It's too important to leave in the hands of charities - what if formula is available one week, and not the next?
It also leaves charities vulnerable to becoming reliant on formula company "donations".

This^ is the excellent post

That is dreadful.