To think formula feeding parents are bent over a barrel?

[inpixiehollow]

Just been discussing this with a friend and interested to know peoples thoughts.
Am I being unreasonable to think that the NHS/govt should manufacture a nutritionally complete formula for babies, sold at cost price to families? Not disputing the importance of real access to proper breastfeeding support but we have to acknowledge that some women cannot/don't want to breastfeed and instead are victim to formula companies turning over huge profits. If people want fancy formulas/special additives then the option should be there but with rising cost of living I don't think its acceptable that something so necessary for many babies is getting to the point of unaffordable.
I am a massive advocate for breastfeeding so please don't take this as an attack or downplaying the massive lack of help for bf in the UK, I just wish both options were made more accessible for whatever feeding choices people make.

Just to reiterate I did state sold at cost price, not supplied for free (unless of course families are using vouchers they are entitled to). Lets not beat around the bush, the Govt takes some of the big formula company's money in taxes so it absolutely benefits them to keep people buying formula and turning over a company's profits.

Got to agree!

If you are falling at the first hurdle in your kids life I kind of wonder how anyone could think they could afford one in the first place

I think maybe just tighter rules on how much companies can charge for it or restrictions on price increases? So only in line with the consumer price index or some such? Otherwise, I think it’s something parents need to factor in when planning a family. Plus as others have said, there are already healthy start vouchers for those on low incomes.

No I don’t think it needs to be provided at cost, unless the breastfeeding associated costs are going to be subsidised also?

Decent breast pads are £6-7 a box. Then there’s nursing bras, nursing clothes etc. I enjoy breastfeeding but it isn’t free. There are societal benefits on a population level in reduced illness in children with breastfeeding too.

No. Breastfeeding is already damaged by politics. There are certain rules regarding the sale of formula to overcome this.

Yes so think it through first!

Disclaimer before the rant, I breastfed for 8 months with the odd bottle of formula and then FF from 8-12 months. So, anyone who think I have a weird projection going on because I don’t agree with them can stop right there

I don’t think formula ‘undermines breastfeeding’, it has saved many many many more lives than it has damaged. It is already illegal to advertise formula for use before the age of 1. How can you ‘undermine breastfeeding’ anyway? It doesn’t have feelings, it isn’t a person

The fact is breastfeeding, while it has a small benefit which means it’s the NHS encouraged method, simply doesn’t have the incredible properties that mean it is worth spending £££ promoting it. There is zero noticeable difference between a breastfed child and non-breastfed child, you can only see the effect if you look at hundreds of thousands of children. And even then it doesn’t protect completely against any
one thing.

I think mumsnet has a strange cognitive dissonance in which it believe in freedom of feeding choice on paper but in reality wants formula to be a dirty word, hidden from view in case it ‘undermines breastfeeding’. If you trust women to make the right decision for them, then they should have the information on both methods (with stats, not just talk of ‘amazing health benefits’ which turn out to be a slightly lesser chance of an ear infection).

I also once saw a poster on here who genuinely believed her child didn’t need the MMR as she was breastfeeding and ‘I had measles therefore
my child will be immune through my milk’. When another poster pointed out the measles antibodies have no effect after the first 2-3 months of feeding the poster never came back to the thread 😬

The govt could save a hell of a lot of money on NHS services by investing in proper bf support, reducing occurrence of illness in mothers & children. Sadly though they choose not to invest and we have one of the poorest bf rates in the world. They do get a nice big chunk of those formula company's money though by taxing them so they of course will favour that option.

We need better support for mothers who formula feed.

(Stop the shame, so many genuine medical reasons why a woman doesn’t want to breastfeed)

We need better support for mothers who breastfeed.

(breastfeed as pp has said is not free either, making sure BF mother is eating enough and the emotional labour or BF is astonishing)

Culturally we can do better. The NHS can also do better It’s possible to make and circulate very high quality formula feed.

I don’t agree BF is exactly free. I didn’t eat any more (which is possibly why I was so thin), but I spent a small fortune on breast pads. I went through about 10 a day. For a year x2.

Just out of interest what would ‘proper breastfeeding support’ look like, ideally? What would be implemented specifically?

Better support for breastfeeding should be provided but not it's not the government's job to produce optional products. Very few women cannot breastfeed, I was told less than 3% of single babies born at term (so not including multiple and premature births).

It's hard to establish without support first time around (support can be from family, friends, volunteer coaches or professional) but nearly every woman is capable. If you choose not to, that is your prerogative but no the state should not be helping with the cost.

Having proper support in the community for breastfeeding is where the money should go. There's already financial support for those requiring specialist formula on prescription and I would personally support an additional one off payment for those who have twins or more to help with costs whatever their choice of feeding, it is possible to breastfeed twins too!

But formula isn't expensive compared with feeding a growing child. The government only has a sat pot on money. if you use government power it against something that brings in tax you only cut that tax pot.

Yabu. Why should government micro manage this beyond the healthy start vouchers they already have in place. It’s pretty obvious babies need feeding… that is up to parents to consider their options.

In my opinion, IBCLC in hospitals providing support and guidance to women at the start of any problems. An overall adjustment in societal expectations of new mothers/babies. A more accurate understanding of how newborn babies feed (very often, not on a schedule, sometimes cluster feeding, frequent night waking etc). Tongue tie assessments/revisions provided in a timely manner (many parents have to go private due to long waiting lists).
Employers who value breastfeeding and support their employees by providing space and time upon returning to work to allow women to express/have baby brought to them to feed/leave the premises to feed baby.
Could definitely go on but these are a few of the most important changes to be made imo.

*Very few women cannot breastfeed, I was told less than 3% of single babies born at term (so not including multiple and premature births).

It's hard to establish without support first time around (support can be from family, friends, volunteer coaches or professional) but nearly every woman is capable. If you choose not to, that is your prerogative but no the state should not be helping with the cost.*

there we go.

I agree with you OP

I don’t see why colleagues should pick up the slack for someone choosing to breastfeed? How would that work for a nurse or teacher for example they just leave the room?

Why is it the government’s role to pay for breastfeeding support but not formula then? If you think the state should not help with the cost of feeding a child?

The prescription is for the baby so is free in England too.

I understand your reasoning, OP, but I don't think parents would want this.

If everyone were happy to feed their baby a generic formula then no-one would pay the extra for Aptamil (the price point of which is part of positioning the brand as a 'premium' product') and everyone would already be using the cheapest own-brand. I think you'd have HUGE pushback from parents who would resent the lack of choice.

Just done the calculations on a tub of aptimal for a 5 month old which seems to feed the most. £13.50 to feed you child for 5 full days, £2.70 a day. Assuming I haven't made a mistake, you are going to get a shock when you have a teen that needs 3 huge meals plus snacks everyday.

Lets not beat around the bush, the Govt takes some of the big formula company's money in taxes so it absolutely benefits them to keep people buying formula and turning over a company's profits

Taxes that are also used to support the vulnerable with benefits which they use to buy food, including formula, to feed their children.

I think this is classic MN, assuming everyone is a middle class woman with plenty of cash, a year’s maternity leave and only one other child. The real world isn’t like this. Many women have to go back to work long before a year, and don’t do the kind of job where they can just pop out to breastfeed or pump whenever they like. Equally some women have 3-4 children and simply don’t have the time to lol about on the sofa for hours ‘cracking breastfeeding’.

I despair sometimes at what many posters on here think the average woman’s life is actually like.

I don't say we take the big brands off the shelves if people want to buy Aptamil because its 'better' then thats up to them but personally, I do believe they are all pretty much one and the same due to the rules and regulations around making artificial milk.

Cost was definitely a factor in why I chose to breastfeed