Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To be annoyed at someone on the bf/bottle feeding forum saying that formula should only be available on prescription

270 replies

pigletmania · 12/12/2009 18:48

That person obviously has found bf a complete and utter doddle and might not have encountered any problems with it. These comments do nothing to promote bf imo only reaffirm the stereotype of bf matrons. If formula were to only be available on prescription it would penalise those who are struggling to bf and need that extra to top up, or those who have made the choice not to bf though respecting their decision is a bit to me.

OP posts:
AitchTwoToTangOh · 12/12/2009 22:03

funnily enough louby, that was my interesting ethical question of earlier.

StealthPolarBear · 12/12/2009 22:04

MrsM, I agree with that
Yes IMLH, I agree the system is flawed (understatement of the century!). But within the flawed system, that's how to get results IMO

InMyLittleHead · 12/12/2009 22:05

It's her own child. I'm not going to go into the whole BF research thing, but it's not conclusive anyway. I don't think the (possible) negative effect of FF is enough of a reason to enforce a diktat about how a mother looks after her child. Where does it stop? Should everyone have to conform to every bit of research about childrearing? There is some evidence that co-sleeping can be dangerous. Should we ban it?

AitchTwoToTangOh · 12/12/2009 22:05

i think that the hands-off 'for whatever reason' thing is only acceptable in a culture where the 80% of women who initiate bfing are supported to the point where they can actually do it and THEN make a decision not to.

at the moment it's a moot point, tbh, and not one worth concentrating on.

AitchTwoToTangOh · 12/12/2009 22:08

ah, the OP of the other thread has come back to say that she wasn't making any comment on ff, but on the manufacturers. as i thought.

MrsMattie · 12/12/2009 22:09

Which is what I said, Aitch.

Feel like I'm going round in circles, to be honest.

AitchTwoToTangOh · 12/12/2009 22:10

why? does it surprise you that we don't fundamentally disagree?

Louby3000 · 12/12/2009 22:11

IMLH, I get what you are saying, sure, we want to live our lives freely. I think for me, its about giving everyone opportunity and support to access the right information so then parents are making an informed choice, which is simply not the case.
I think what I am really saying is that if all mums were properly supported and informed no one would "choose" formula. They would give babies formula in medical cases. Is that so wrong?

InMyLittleHead · 12/12/2009 22:16

Up to a point Louby, but you don't know that. What about people who just hate doing it? A lot of people seem to find it a wonderful experience, which is great. But some people find it restricting and tedious and don't want to do it. Fine. Just because you are not attracted by that particular aspect of motherhood does not make you a shit mother.

scottishmummy · 12/12/2009 22:17

how would such extra BF help manifest and be implemented?

staffed helplines
on call response model
community and Home visit support

such 24/7 provision and response is costly.how would response work in remote areas

how would this be paid for?
with many other nhs areas are all facing squeeze.
with birth rates rising,it is v costly

this is the financial dilemma.limited cash, unlimited needs

how would trusts all be compelled to comply and have uniform bf support?given we already have patchy and erratic compliance to nice guidelines in other clinical areas

AitchTwoToTangOh · 12/12/2009 22:19

"Just because you are not attracted by that particular aspect of motherhood does not make you a shit mother."

wow, that's a tremendous leap.

sm i think it's pie in the sky, unf, particularly now with 36bn or whatever to squeeze.

Louby3000 · 12/12/2009 22:22

I'm not calling anyone on here, or anyone ff a shit mum.
Can we say that it is not just the mums decision, that it is an impactful decision for whole family.

I have no clue how it would be paid for...we have about a 40 year period to crack it though.

scottishmummy · 12/12/2009 22:27

well,that's the rub,how to pay in theses demonstrable outcomes and clinical efficacy times

and yes any costly intervention has to justify why it rather than that be chosen

healthcare is a finite pot (esp in recessionary times)

AitchTwoToTangOh · 12/12/2009 22:32

sure, but i do think that the op of the other thread should have been able to raise the issue without getting her face clawed off. although that response is probably evidence of a fundamental problem with turning round the bfing thing.

Louby3000 · 12/12/2009 22:34

g'night everyone

scottishmummy · 12/12/2009 22:35

frankly bf/ff threads are emotive and high octane affairs

Pannacotta · 12/12/2009 22:37

Someone asked about how they get it right in Scandinavia.
I dont know for sure but I lived in Sweden for a year and I think it has lots to do with breastfeeding being perceived as the norm over there.
It's unusual to see women formula feeding but very common to see women breastfeeding, in restaurants/cafes, on the bus, in parks, basically anywhere in public. The Swedes are less prissy than us and not too bothered about possibly showing some flesh in public which does make feeding a baby much easier...

I think they have better ante and post natal care and access to "baby hotels" following the birth (and I presume decent breastfeeding support).

I am pretty sure that all advertising for formula is banned.

Women also get good, paid maternity leave of a year, and men also get a decent amount of paternity leave, not sure how much but much longer than the paltry 2 weeks most men here get.

These things, put together, seem to have made a huge difference.

AitchTwoToTangOh · 12/12/2009 22:37

actually no, they aren't always, it often depends on the first few responses. if they're measured then they don't necessarily turn into that weird oppositional ff/bf thing.

TheCrackFox · 12/12/2009 22:40

"baby hotels"? I have never heard of that before. Is it free or do women have to pay for this service?

scottishmummy · 12/12/2009 22:40

aye right the scraps and how very dare you/what do you mean on this thread illustrate the humphy stance on mn and bf/ff

consciously and unconsciously feeding is powerful and emotive.hence the emotions it provokes

AitchTwoToTangOh · 12/12/2009 22:45

they do on this thread, sm, there have been plenty of threads that didn't go tits up, as it were. it's just they don't make it into active convos so much.

they have baby hotels in norway, my pal used them. he was in there with his wife and new baby for a fortnight, paid for by taxes. you can buzz for help and meals are provided. i don't know if he went when they had their second child, i suppose that if you're already bf once then more or less it's easier to spot problems the next time.

WeThreeNinks · 12/12/2009 22:45

DH is thinking that if and when formula is on pres that it will be a huge big free-for-all for the companies.

Please tell me that the idea is unbranded stuff with none of the immunofortis bollocks or constipating or "just like BF babies" poo formulas.

And no advertising! It makes me laugh when people say that they need to know about the different baby milks. They can easily, but not via their adverts! Adverts and information are very different things FGS.

Skegness · 12/12/2009 22:45

too true sm.

Where do we place helping to feed babies optimally in the health hierarchy? More important than funding an enforced hospital stay for someone suffering a severe schizophrenic episode? Than funding a heart bypass operation? An intensive care bed? A safe sex clinic? Sickle cell information and support? Special needs health visitors? Bereavement counsellors? Cbt therapists? Vaccination programmes? Chiropody clinics for OAPs? Alzehimers drugs (efficacy unknown?)? It's bloody difficult. Tbh, from that v v v v v v v tiny list of things off the top of my head, I'm afraid I would place baby feeding support v near the bottom if I had control of the purse strings. Despite it looming incredibly large in my life as an issue personally and accepting that it is also a public health issue to some extent so some savings might be made if more people were supported to breastfeed.

AitchTwoToTangOh · 12/12/2009 22:47

maybe it has more in common with free paediatric dentistry or prescriptions?

lilolilmanchester · 12/12/2009 22:47

YADNBU......

I was bottle fed because my Mum struggled to bf and didn't have the ante- or post-natal support that we do today. In my 25 years at work, I have not had a single day off sick (excluding a week off with an injury)
So not done me much harm, has it?

So why the hell do we keep making mums who don't BF feel so bad? I am very, very pro BF. Both DCs BF til c. 12 months (mainly because once you get the hang of it, it's a lot easier than making up bottles), BUT that doen NOT make me superior in any way. I suspect relatively few new Mums find it easy to BF, so find it really that the "smug breastfeeders" should make the new mums who are struggling to BF/choose not to/end up mixing feeds feel bad. Come on, everyone deserves to enjoy their babies. By all means support those who are struggling to BF to try to help them continue, but please don't make it any more difficult than it already is for those who decide to move back to the bottle

Swipe left for the next trending thread