So does anyone else find the term 'artificial feeding' in relation to the use of formula milk a bit irritating?

[bangandthedirtisgone]

Or is it just me?

EvilEdnasTwinSister please don't beat yourself up about your dd's diabetes. you did at the time everything you could have done adn that is all any mother can do. even some breastfed babies develop diabetes when they become teens / young children. These statistics are what is thrown out when the numbers are crunched over large populations (10s of thousands). so being breastfed may not have prevented it either. there is at least one mum who is a fantastic bf advocate who posts on MN who has one child who was bf and also developed juvenile diabetes.

so why are breastfeeding rates so low? Really, what do we reckon- it seems very strange given all the benefits of bf.

I can not beieve its really ignorance, I certainy dont think its laziness. I wonder what proportion is down to child illness, mother illness, depression etc

I think if we could really think about the reasons sensitively and compassionately we would probably get further. If a mother really does not want to bf I'd be really interested to understand why and think it highy likely that it would not be best for her to do it as although the benefits of bf are known, the impact of psychological difficulties can also be huge and to pressure a mother into using her body in a way that does not feel comfortable I could imsgine may also be damaging.

"What, even if it meant that you had healthier blood pressure, a more aesthetically formed palate and face, and were about 6 IQ points brighter than you are now?"

I know for a fact that I have quit e low blood pressure, my face is purdy and I'm one bright cookie. Whereas you speak in meaningless 'what if' language.

Why are bf rates so low?

LOADS of reasons - I will list some off the top of my head (and some of them are more "trivial" than others, but all contribute to the drip-drip persuasion that ff is the same as bf for everyone).

Cultural expectation - we are a bottlefeeding culture. 92% of babies have formula at some point in their lives; the expectation is that babies will move from bf to ff at 6m if they haven't already done so (seeds sown by television commercials and advertisements in all sorts of publications).

Talking of publications, health journals carry loads of adverts for INFANT formula - see how many HVs recommend Aptamil by name for evidence of that (there was one the other day, in fact) - they advertise heavily to HCPs.

Also, baby magazines - they all feature adverts for formula (yes, follow-on, but it's all building brand awareness and sowing the seed that ff is just the same, bf is something you can do for a bit if you must, but really, it's hard, you don't want to be bothered by it and look, here's a tin with a duckling on, how can a duckling be threatening? If the adverts weren't there, the articles themselves in the magazines could be written in a more accurate fashion - as it is, the editors of these magazines know it's not a good idea to commission anything called "The risks of formula" because it would be biting the hand that quite literally pays their bills.

Society in general - have a look at any article about bf in the Daily Mail for a demonstration of how swathes of the general public seem to perceive bf - it's "disgusting", "unnecessary", "showing off", women are "flaunting themselves", it's "for their benefit", they are "perverts" and bfing for longer than is akin to child abuse.

Health professionals - a lot of the time, they're overworked, under-trained and it does take time to sit with a woman and help her to latch on (and it's bloody impossible if you don't know what you're doing) - far easier to sling her a bottle of SMA (did anyone answer me about what that stands for, btw - v apt for this thread) and tell her bf will never work so she might as well have this bottle.

Commissioners of services - have been spun the line that bf isn't important, that you mustn't draw attention to bf by promoting it because you might make women who can't do it feel guilty (when actually, if there was better support, there would be fewer women to feel guilty in the first place).

Employment's not set up to be bf friendly in many places, so some women don't start bf because they know they'll be going back to work soonish and don't see the point or see how they can make it work with employment.

And there's not the general wealth of knowledge and peer support from friends, relatives, etc - and we're back to the bf culture/society there - mothers and MILs saying, "That baby's HUNGRY, you will NEVER have enough milk for him, I never did, you are being CRUEL, give him a bottle". And lots of women have never seen anyone bfing and have no idea what's a problem, what's the normal course of bfing, what can be fixed with a minor adjustment.

But one really big thing is that there's not the general knowledge that bfing changes as babies get older and it won't always be like the establishing bit at the beginning - because there really aren't all that many people who do it past that - so most of the experience that's out there is "it hurts", "it's a nightmare", "don't let anyone make you feel guilty for stopping".

Oh, yes, anyone who does try to help is sneered at and called a nazi and that gets old really, really quickly

There's probably more, but that'll do to be going on with

hunker, I really find those reasons inadequate. Im not saying theres nothing in them but it reminds me of the debate about causes of anorexia -yes images of skinny women in the press are very unhelful but in my mind there is more to it when a girl becomes anorexic.The personal stories are missing. On this thread we have examples like mine where we have had babies facing life and death issues who coudnt bf and various others where bf became traumatic.These clearly cant account for all non bfers and while I applaud you for rallying against the political elements I think you and others are missing the personal and this is demonstrated in for example the lack of support for those of us who find the term artficial feeding insensitive.

Evilednastwinsister please see my post yesterday 9 pm ish. Don't feel bad about your daughter's diabetes. There isn't a cause and effect relationship with ff, just a general statistical assocation. My bf obsessed (in the nicest way!) Mum has tortured herself over why I have type 1 diabetes despite her breastfeeding me for over a year (which was apparently seen as a bit odd in olden days). Sometimes there are no answers.

The lack of support is partly commissioning the services, partly it's because of the culture we live in "I was ff, I'm healthy, don't feel guilty, it's not a problem", partly that bf support's not valued at all as a career choice for women (why not, why aren't there funded posts in all PCTs for women to be peer supporters, beyond the voluntary stuff that some PCTs set up?). We rely on (frequently amazing) volunteers for one of the most important things for ensuring greater health equality across the population - why is that?

I didn't get too personal in my last reply deliberately, really.

What support would you like women who find the term artificial feeding offensive to receive (genuine question, am really NOT being flippant here!)?

Mums in other countries & also formula companies call formula 'artificial milk' & no one gets offended.

The offence at "artifical feeding" in the UK is partly because we are a bottlefeeding culture, I suspect, and LOTS of women stop bfing before they wanted to because they've been let down by people who ought to have supported them.

As I say, I don't use the term myself - I understand it causes offence and every word counts when you're trying to do something so sensitive as encourage women to bf.

Honestly by the time the term 'artificial feeding' feels painful it is probably not the time for bf support. Just really imagine what it would be like (particularly given your passion) if your baby could not bf. Imagine how youd feel. Maybe youd rally against the docs but then imagine your baby falling off the charts and struggling to breathe while on the breast- honestly it was hideous.

Please believe me when I say Im glad people like you are fighting for political level changes (media etc)for mothers and babies regarding feeding but I do also really think we need to understand more deeply why mothers do not bf and I think there is more to it than sma adverts.

You're right, Mybox, heck, SMA stands for Synthetic Milk Adapted - and I didn't know that until very recently (started a thread about it and it was not common knowledge at all).

Oh, heavens, RA29, what a horrendous cross-post!

My offence (or rather hurt) at the term artificial is not because we are a bottle feeding culture but because I feel my ds has had to have something inadequate. He has also had to have a donor heart valve to keep him alive- I wouldnt much like it if people said he was the boy with the dead persons valve even if it is correct.

I remember my upset when the midwife told me DS2 would have to be topped up with formula (gestational diabetes, blood sugars "too low", the pressure I put on myself to bf him, the pressure put on me to give formula by every midwife and consultant paed (except one) who saw me and DS2 in the course of the two days I was in hospital with him (eye-rolling, head-shaking, tutting, dire warnings of dreadfully ill baby if I persisted with my stubborness despite DS2 being completely asymptomatic, weeing, pooing, good colour, etc, etc).

I have NO idea what I would have done if I'd had a very sick baby who was struggling to bf, RA29 - I would have been very angry if the only support I had was the same as what I DID have when I had DS2 - ie the midwife wheeled the electric breastpump next to the bed and told me I'd probably not get anything like enough out.

I do think that more needs to be done at a strategic level - and part of the way that CAN be done is for women who've had utterly dreadful support and really wanted to bf to feed their experiences back to their PCTs. The "don't feel bad" message is FINE - nobody should feel bad about circumstances dictating they ff their baby, but if those circumstances are never challenged by anybody, they remain, more women find themselves unsupported and so the cycle continues.

Because, you know, the pressure really ought NOT to be on new mothers themselves to fight for decent support - really, we're a supposed civilised society - why aren't we taking better care of women and babies at this vulnerable time?

"Whereas you speak in meaningless 'what if' language".

What - are we only allowed to talk about this issue in absolute terms?

marking my place

I can tell you one reason breastfeeding rates are so much higher in Sweden. And that is because in Sweden you are still counted as breastfeeding if you top up or give the occasional bottle.

Whereas I had several friends here in the UK who believed firmly that breastfeeding would be ruined by occasional bottle feeding: so once they had given in and given that first bottle, they thought they had lost it and were no longer breastfeeders.

The difference in attitude between Scandinavia and the UK is:

a) going to seriously mess up statistics (we are not comparing like with like)

b) make it far harder for British Mums to persever

The other BIG factor is that Swedish fathers get generous leave off at the birth, so can be around and support the mum, and that mums get far longer maternity leave. Also, Swedish dads tend to do more housework anyway, so easier for mum not to get too stressed out in the early days.

Hunker, can we also have some recognition of those women like me who have had all the support and all the education, but where there was something wrong with the child?

no sabire, I am saying your particular what ifs are meaningless to me and, I suspect, to the majority of people.

Why are breastfeeding rates so low?

Choice.

I was in a similar situation to cory. I had happily breastfed DS1 and fully expected to do the same for DS2. I was fully educated on the benefits, I wanted to BF, I had brilliant support, but I also had a very poorly baby. One of his many problems was an undiagnosed sub mucus cleft palate (so not visible) and was unable to get any latch at all.

I wasn't even able to bottle feed him, I expressed for a couple of weeks and then cup fed him. That was untill he was hospitalised and eventually tube fed with prescpription high calorie milk.

If someone had used the term artificial feeding to me at that time, I suspect it would have upset me deeply. It was only when we got his diagnosis when he was 4years old that it became clear why he had struggled with feeding in every form.

Of course it is true, I knew that it was artificial but some terms actually don't need to be said out loud imo.

Cory - in the uk you are still 'counted' as breastfeeding in the stats if the baby is having only one breastfeed a day (I'm thinking of the biggest survey - the DOH Infant Feeding Survey, which is done every 5 years).

There's actually not a lot of information available on rates of exclusive breastfeeding, though one survey put this at only 1% at six months in the UK (though that would include fully breastfed babies who had also started on solids by that time).

As for the issue of maternity leave - yes we get less than some other European countries, but 'having to go back to work' is very rarely given as a reason to stop bf before six months in the UK, as the vast majority of women have already stopped breastfeeding by the time their baby is 8 weeks old. And women who are most likely to breastfeed for an extended period (professional women) are also paradoxically the group most likely to return to work after having children. Women who are least likely to breastfeed are also least likely to have ever worked, or to return to work after they have children.

As for the issue of social support for women trying to establish breastfeeding, while I wouldn't argue that it's unimportant, the key factor in determining whether a mother will successfully breastfeed subsequent children seems to be whether she's bf previous children for six weeks or more. On a personal note, I live in an inner london area with very high breastfeeding rates and with a very high birth rate. 85% of the mums in my area initiate breastfeeding - despite the fact they have larger families than the UK average, and closer child spacing. It's partly a cultural thing - most of these women come from countries where breastfeeding is the norm, and they've brought their confidence and ease with breastfeeding with them when they settled in the UK.

op yabu.
artificial feeding is exactly what it is.