OK, I get BF, but am totally fucked off with the smugness

[FunnysInTheGarden]

Most of us are failed BF, but the tone on here recently has really pissed me off. We generally FF? Non? So why the smug shit and the passive aggressiveness towards those who have to/chose to FF?

So tempted to name names, but I won't.

Just stop being so smug and holier than thou please, some people

The thing that really puzzles me about the "smug" accusation is that people who are really smug and judgemental about something tend to want to keep being able to be smug - they want to be in a minority so that they can look down on those around them. They enjoy having something to feel superior about.
They don't tend to waste their time typing long replies to those asking for advice. They don't push the thing they are smug about and discuss ways in which it can become available to everyone.
So why are the people who do these things on this forum being accused of being "smug".

Tittybangbang, I posted quite a lot. I have even explained that I was angry, and why, when I posted the first post but you have resurrected it and ignored all that has passed since then.

You have ignored all my additional points and told me to piss off, stand down and other such things. You have never addressed the complexity of the word "need", for example, or why it might not be such a good idea to dismiss women's experiences that led them to formula feed merely because, physiologically, they were "able" to feed. I think it closes peoples minds.

I have every right to have an opinion on breastfeeding (on MN of all places!) and I have every right to have that opinion informed by my experiences. As do you. I don't mind being "challenged" but "piss off" does not count as a challenge, nor does "stand down". I also reserve the right to have shades of grey in my reaction to how this is discussed.

I remember reading a thread on here when I was pregnant (and obviously going to have no issues breastfeeding! ), where a woman whose child had severe allergies and who was advised to ff by a variety of consultants had "evidence" thrown at her to beat the band about how that could lead to cancer and to x, y and z maladies. I found it really, really awful..

I will say again - and you can misinterpret it again if you like - that I just think that threads like these are not the right threads to engage about quality breastfeeding evidence. Why quote evidence and argue ahout the politics of breastfeeding with people who don't? Let them off. You have said yourself that my choices don't interest you, so why engage? There are so many threads here where information could be shared for good, let people who have different views to you rant on from time to time without feeling the need to make a song and dance about things and shout at people to 'piss off' who have 'no case to answer'.

I pointed that out as you said I was being 'unfair and unkind' to that monolithic, wondrous group that is "breastfeeding mothers". Mothers are just mothers, regardless of feeding style.

Yes, I sometimes feel anger about the fact that I was so blinded by the 'breast is best' evidence that I actually let my child waste away in front of me, arguing against taking formula etc.. In hindsight, I look back and wish I hadn't been so stubborn because I think it did my boy no good at all. I wish, like gaelicsheep, that I had never heard of evidence that ff'd babies have greater risk or x or y or z and that I hadn't been so hellbent on doing it all myself when I was being told, and the signs were clear, that in my case, I really did need to put my son above my principles. No doubt someone will call this a strawman, but it is my experience, not some academic argument. We can only live our own lives. At the time I was doing what I thought was right, but it is so clear to me, in retrospect, that my judgement was clouded by my fear of formula, which was definitely informed from discussions on here.

The most helpful information I have ever received from a professional was when I finally 'gave in': he told me that very few mums have issues with supply or feeding on a subsequent child.. that the first child, in evolutionary terms, was a 'test case' and that yes, there was a time when babies like mine would have simply died because of these minor blips in the breastfeeding dynamic.. but my body will know for next time. That, to me, is a helpful bit of information because it is forward looking, not about how formula has buggered up my baby's gut or increased his chances of respiratory illness or gastric difficulties etc. I despise coming across these articles because they do make me feel bad, and I do find it uncomfortable when I see breastfeeding women and formulafeeding women throw these things around when it is so emotive. I don't think it is helpful or supportive of breastfeeding to even those who have not struggled.. it certainly had an impact on me when I struggled to have read this on here before.. and that is not always a good thing.

And again ((sigh)) I didn't say that formula was evil, I said that was the impression I got in a particular encounter.

It is a shame you have to just harp on about the minor things I posted in one post a few days ago that I have discussed ad nauseum since. I was not shit-stirring, I was ranting, yes, and it has moved on. Please keep up.

And I have to say, it's very easy to say 'oh everyone here knows formula is necessary sometimes, don't distort the argument by going on about it", because if you have a specialist interest in the area, you know when and how it may be necessary and when the benefits outweigh the risks.. but when you are not particularly abreast of every last bit of literature, and cannot independently assess, reading that you can't really trust your HCP's decisions because they are operating off substandard evidence can be damaging, I feel..

Because, when I had a tiny screaming baby immediately post-partum, I didn't really have time or energy to become more of an expert than my own HCP's... but I stupidly distrusted them because of my probably poor understanding of what had been said on forums like these.

I think people need to be careful about suggesting that people have been given inaccurate advice from medical professionals because they don't know the case. I am an AHP and I wouldn't dream of commenting on someone's care online or on the suitability of their professionals to provide them with advice.

It's fine to discuss AHP education in a separate context, divorced from threads where women who feel like "failed" breastfeeders are discussing their experiences, prejudices, feelings etc. But having a general debate about the State of Breastfeeding Today in this context is wrong, IMO.

That is my point. Challenge away. But do refrain from swearing.

pommedeterre If you know what you are doing is right for you and your baby and you are loving every minute with them then it does not matter. You don't even need to reply, it should just wash over you. it does not matter what they think.

That is so very true!!!

I was having a coffee a month or so ago with someone who FF, who knows I BF. They went on to tell me about a friend who BF and how the BF is causing relationship problems because he can not see a way in to bond, because it seems that the mum is constantly bfing the child.(This person knows my baby is a monster cluster feeder).

She went on to say that she is so glad her DH can share in the feeding experience ...

Her and the Dad had discussed how he can not bond until the baby starts solids!

I started suggesting that there was an awful lot the Dad could do besides actually feeding the baby - I was thinking changing nappies, playing, cuddles, putting to sleep, bathing, helping out the mum, but then I just let it wash all over me.

Sorry what does AHP stand for - A Health Professional??

TBE " And people get 'someone-is-wrong-on-the-internet' syndrome and 'have' to post something."

I love this concept. I think this is so true (not just of this or here or anywhere, and I am as guilty of it as the next person!).

I suppose that advice I mentioned related to supply issues related to milk not coming in etc.. my milk (like my mothers) didn't really come in until 3 weeks in (though of course I didn't realise this, everyone kept asking me had it "come in" and I thought, hey, he's sucking away, he must be getting something.. but then he did no poos or wees and the rigmarole began and all the expressing and round the clock feeding took a while to get things going..

So again, I guess, an example of how there are always shades of grey related to specific bits of "advice" that someone with a specialist interest can pull together easily but isn't so clearcut for someone without that interest.

Ooops. AHP is an Allied Health Professional (but nothing to do with bfing in my case ).

I think one of the problems is the sense of having "failed" if you don't BF "enough". In fact, if you BF as much as you can, you've done well, and even if you choose not to, that will be for various reasons that should be respected. Yes BF should be encouraged but part of that is understanding why people choose to FF when they don't need to.

For me, I hope I'm not smug. I BF until 9 months with DS and am still BF DD (6 months). I love it, because I like being able to give my baby what she loves to have and it is a close and bonding experience. Plus it's more convenient when out and about.

BUT, my god, it was bloody awful until about 3 months and I only just managed to keep going, and I would fully understand anyone who gave up in my shoes. Also, although I treasure it, at the same time I do look forward to stopping. It hurts, my breasts still get engorged, O have oversupply and drip non-stop, I can't sleep comfortably, they are continually threatening blocked ducts/mastitis and need a lot of care, I'm fed up of having huge, agonising boobs to lug around.

I get annoyed by the myth that BF is just lovely and wonderful and "well you shouldn't be having any problems by now" and "oh as long as it's a good latch, it shouldn't hurt" etc etc. Millions of women find it does hurt especially at first and there often are really major problems that are hell to deal with when you also have a newborn.

Some people who promulgate these myths should accept once and for all that BF isn't a perfectly functioning system. If it was you would just plonk the baby on and away you go. It would be as easy as going for a wee or scratching your head, and would very rarely go wrong. There wouldn't be all this need for BF counsellors and latching-on training and gallons of lansinoh and people being treated for mastitis and abscesses and thrush etc etc. The fact it, it often doesn't work very well and it is a bugger to deal with.

Yes, TBE.. definitely. It also really helped me that the guy who had this conversation with me (who is some bfing guru, wrote some textbook on it or something) was very supportive on celebratory of what I did do.

Something like: "you are not a "mixed feeder", you are a breastfeeding mother who has given some supplemental formula". I found this quite helpful, because I didn't like the label or feeling, for whatever reason, that I now had to identify myself as someone who was not a "proper breastfeeding mother".

I think this type of supportive attitude has helped me to continue feeding, and I hope to keep going for as long as my supply will now let me. I know he may self-wean earlier, but so far it is going well and I do think that a non-judgemental, supportive attitude helps with that.. vs information on the "risks" of formula, which I sometimes see explained as supporting "informed choice". Fine if it is a choice, I guess.. but it was gone beyond that for me, so it was more helpful to have information like this.

I've forgotten his surname

Mike somebody.

Regardless of bf/ff, may I say how I admire everyone on this thread who can post with such eloquence at ungodly hours.

OK - sorry for swearing at you. I was VERY tired last night and not a little peeved with the whole thread. Should have stepped away from the keyboard rather than letting rip. Was also posting without continually going back over previous posts, which isn't in the interests of clarity.

But - still want to address several of your comments in your long post above:

" You have never addressed the complexity of the word "need", for example, or why it might not be such a good idea to dismiss women's experiences that led them to formula feed merely because, physiologically, they were "able" to feed. I think it closes peoples minds."

I DON'T and never would 'dismiss' the experiences that lead someone to feel they need to stop breastfeeding or supplement. I strongly believe that all mothers do the best they can for their babies with the resources - informational, social and personal - that they have. But the reality is that most of the breastfeeding difficulties discussed on this board arise from physiological problems - most of which are transitory or can be overcome with skilled help. Most breastfeeding problems that women experience - physical and emotional (because they're bound together) are rooted in ignorance about how breastfeeding works - on the part of parents and on the part of health professionals. I don't think it's fair to allow the myth that most breastfeeding problems are intractable, even with good help, to stand, as it so often does on other forums and in R/L when mothers discuss this issue with their friends.

"I have every right to have an opinion on breastfeeding (on MN of all places!) and I have every right to have that opinion informed by my experiences".

"where a woman whose child had severe allergies and who was advised to ff by a variety of consultants had "evidence" thrown at her to beat the band about how that could lead to cancer and to x, y and z maladies. I found it really, really awful.. "

Why 'awful'? She's lucky to have the advantage of having another opinion - which she is totally entitled to accept or reject.

"that I just think that threads like these are not the right threads to engage about quality breastfeeding evidence.

The evidence of benefit was offered quite logically in the context of the argument that developed on this thread.

"Why quote evidence and argue ahout the politics of breastfeeding with people who don't?"

Usually because the arguments they put forward in support of their view can only be challenged with reference to the facts.

"that my choices don't interest you, so why engage?"

Because I'm not debating with you about your personal choices, but about comments you've made about a range of other issues related to infant feeding.

"I really did need to put my son above my principles."

Did you hold off supplementing your son on principle, rather than because you felt there were real benefits to him from exclusively breastfeeding? Surely not?

"he told me that very few mums have issues with supply or feeding on a subsequent child.. that the first child, in evolutionary terms, was a 'test case' and that yes, there was a time when babies like mine would have simply died because of these minor blips in the breastfeeding dynamic.."

I'm sorry - but that doesn't make sense to me at all. The reason why many mothers struggle with breastfeeding their first child is a lack of knowledge and experience of breastfeeding - not because of any intrinsic problem which is somehow miraculously resolved by subsequent births. It's also because so many first time mums have difficult births which means that breastfeeding gets off to a poor start, which is then often made even more difficult by early supplementation with formula.

"That, to me, is a helpful bit of information because it is forward looking, not about how formula has buggered up my baby's gut or increased his chances of respiratory illness or gastric difficulties etc. I despise coming across these articles because they do make me feel bad, and I do find it uncomfortable when I see breastfeeding women and formulafeeding women throw these things around when it is so emotive."

But if women need to know these things in order to make an informed choice with their next baby? Where else will they come across this information? Most women are VASTLY more exposed to formula marketing, which idealises baby milk, than they are exposed to the evidence of the possible risks associated with using it. I mixed fed my first baby but was profoundly interested and grateful to come across this information on the internet as it helped me when it came to making clear choices with my second and third baby. And yes - women will throw information around. Thank god - in the rough and tumble we all learn a lot about each other and about babies and feeding generally.

"And again ((sigh)) I didn't say that formula was evil, I said that was the impression I got in a particular encounter."

I was pointing out that you used this word to imply that there are people who see formula use as 'immoral'.

"nd I do think that a non-judgemental, supportive attitude helps with that.. vs information on the "risks" of formula, which I sometimes see explained as supporting "informed choice". Fine if it is a choice, I guess.. but it was gone beyond that for me, so it was more helpful to have information like this."

Again, you keep referring to people making moral judgements - yourself included - about how they are feeding their baby. Maybe it's because you can't stop yourself interpreting every discussion of infant feeding - no matter how chaotic, random, chatty or feisty, only through the lens of your own experience. Honestly - it's not all about you! Can't you just take what you need from these discussions and dismiss what seems irrelevant to your particular situation? Why do you feel a need to tell everybody here what's appropriate (supportive comments) and not appropriate (casting doubts on the advice of HCP) material for the board? The thing I love about mumsnet is that people feel so free to speak their minds here - and if someone is really cruel or out of order they get taken to task. We are all adults - if we don't like the direction a discussion has taken we're free to stop reading it. If we don't like the advice we're given we can disregard it.

Sorry - should add, that it's not unusual to find damaging and downright dangerous advice on infant feeding being handed out by health professionals. There's a long history of 'you won't believe what my doctor/health visitor has just told me' threads on this board. My own GP told me to stop breastfeeding my son at 12 months and to start giving him more cheese, as my milk was 'no good now'. Also lots of inappropriate and non-evidence based advice handed out on medications and breastfeeding, medical conditions and breastfeeding. Thank goodness women have access to a second opinion. If it wasn't for mumsnet there would be many more women out there not breastfeeding after blindly following crap advice from midwives and doctors.

I've read a number of complaints saying people shouldn't have been posting evidence about BF on this thread. As one of the people who has done, I would like to point out that the evidence discussion was kicked off by the OP, Funny, saying "After a small amount of research, it transpires that the number of babies who fall ill in the UK having drank a poorly prepared bottle of formula is less than 1 a year.......according to WHO stats."

What kind of meaningful discussion would have been possible without engaging in debates backed by evidence, given that?

"What kind of meaningful discussion would have been possible without engaging in debates backed by evidence, given that?"

You need to go to netmums and bounty for those sorts of discussions slhilly!

Tittybangbang, just a few points:

RE my comment:
"where a woman whose child had severe allergies and who was advised to ff by a variety of consultants had "evidence" thrown at her to beat the band about how that could lead to cancer and to x, y and z maladies. I found it really, really awful.. "

You say:
Why 'awful'? She's lucky to have the advantage of having another opinion - which she is totally entitled to accept or reject.

It was too late! She was finished her family and was not breastfeeding! That was why it was awful. As I have repeatedly said, advice in the context of an actual occurring situation I understand and would welcome, but after the event in a "research shows that.." vs "would you like some help in understanding how to do it differently next time?" way just seems, well, a bit pointless.

This has been my point, time and time again. Yes, discuss evidence. Yes, discuss issues related to bfing. Yes, promote and celebrate breastfeeing, with reference to research where possible.

But do NOT preach to people who are NOT breastfeeding about how they didn't "need" formula and HCP's shouldn't be trusted etc.

You are choosing to see something else in what I am writing e.g.

Re: "Again, you keep referring to people making moral judgements - yourself included - about how they are feeding their baby. Maybe it's because you can't stop yourself interpreting every discussion of infant feeding - no matter how chaotic, random, chatty or feisty, only through the lens of your own experience. Honestly - it's not all about you! ."

I'm NOT talking about me! I am talking about whow I feel it would be better to save some of the research-led discussion for different, less acrimonious threads and NOT, as TBE so eloquently conceptualised for me, just be like a dog with a bone trying to myth-bust the converted and argue endlessly over the same information. In the context of that, I also spoke about my own experiences, which apparently you would never dismiss?

Your posts are confusing to me. You just want to argue as is clear from this sarcastic comment:

"Did you hold off supplementing your son on principle, rather than because you felt there were real benefits to him from exclusively breastfeeding? Surely not?"

I have again and again said I understand and agree with the breastfeeding evidence and that breastfeeding was important to me and that I worked hard to maintain it as EBF and found it difficult to change. So your comment is just bizarrely rude and again, aggressive.

Let me break it down for you:

1. I think breastfeeding is great
2. I think it is important to discuss the evidence related to bfing
3. I think the evidence is best discussed when it is relevant to a woman's current experience (e.g. as support) or on threads that are not about ffing vs bfing eg. adversarial
4. I think it's best not to engae in long debates about the merits of bfing with evidence - say your piece and leave if you so wish, but it creates an atmosphere of 'them' vs 'us' etc and leads to aggressive language use on both sides, which is neither good for women or infants anywhere
5. I think some women can be a bit thoughtless and preachy and - last of all
6. I really think you shouldn't be psychoanalysing my experience if you are going to be so reductive and limited in your interpretation of my reflections.

Though you say you don't care how anyone feeds their child, so I don't really understand why you participate in this discussion at all.

As for the netmums and bounty comment, why would that sort of snobbery help your message?

"3) I think the evidence is best discussed when it is relevant to a woman's current experience (e.g. as support) or on threads that are not about ffing vs bfing eg. adversarial"

Oh for goodness sake - this is a PUBLIC forum, not an individual counselling session! There are no rules as to how threads should develop, neither should there be!

And how on earth you can come to the conclusion that there shouldn't be robust debate about the pros and cons of breast and bottlefeeding! (because of course robust debate is IMPOSSIBLE in relation to this issue if you don't refer to the evidence!)

"I think it's best not to engae in long debates about the merits of bfing with evidence - say your piece and leave if you so wish"

Yes. Do. And leave the rest of us who want to continue and develop the discussion to get on with it, without loads of whinging objections.

"but it creates an atmosphere of 'them' vs 'us'"

No - what creates an atmosphere of them and us is accusing people of smuggery and using moral language about feeding choices. Both of which you have done on this thread.

"I think some women can be a bit thoughtless and preachy"

You are preaching now about the appropriate way to conduct these discussions on a public internet forum. If you don't like the tone and the content - well, don't let the door bang your arse on the way out.

"why would that sort of snobbery help your message?"

Have you visited the debates board or the feeding boards on Bounty? They have separate breast and bottle feeding boards to reduce the likelihood that people who can't/don't wish to breastfeed will stumble across comments that might make them feel uncomfortable about their choices.

"Though you say you don't care how anyone feeds their child, so I don't really understand why you participate in this discussion at all"

You've made that point already, and I've answered it already.

That's a really aggressive post, what a surprise.

I really don't understand your posts. I don't understand how you can say that you feel breastfeeding is important for babies and it is sad when more women don't take it up and then rage and rage on because someone takes a different viewpoint to you about how that could be achieved.

I have said that I think some women in life can be preachy, by virtue of being human. You continually misapply what I have said to all breastfeeding mothers or all MNers or whatever.

In terms of me repeating a point to you, you really haven't engaged on any serious level with anything I've said, which other posters have been able to do. You have repeatedly demonstrated that you have not read what I have written.

You are looking for the easy argument and for someone who suggests that there is no condemnation of other people's experience or viewpoints, you are continually posting in a highly aggressive and often sarcastic manner: "whinging objections"? So instead of swearing you are simply going to be rude?

Time and time again you refer to psychobabble and 'individual counselling sessions' and other such aggressive, reductive dismissals and miss the broader point that I am making.

You said that you wished more women breastfeed. I am guessing that being positive and supportive probably is important in this regard. That was my point, but apparently I was suggesting that it should be an "individual counselling session"

Let me say it a different way: I am a Speech and Language Therapist. Time and time again, I see posts on a different forum where someone mentions that their young child of, say, 2 or 2 and a half isn't talking and has been referred to Speech and Language Therapy met with responses that the HV doesn't know what she' talking about and Eintein didn't talk til he was 4 etc. In that case, I feel it is really important to share information about developmental norms so that the person understands that the referral is necessary.

However, in NO WAY, would I feel it was necessary or productive to respond to those posts by being aggressive or pointing out, say, that 77% of young offenders have speech and language needs or otherwise quote 'worse case scenario' literature.

In the same way, I feel that sometimes, as TBE mentioned earlier in the thread, it is more productive to share evidence that makes a difference vs evidence that formula is detrimental to infant health etc.

"Robust debate" involves a conversation, not just spitting and shouting at someone that they are wrong, wrong, wrong and should shut their 'whinging objections' etc. That's school yard rubbish, not robust debate. Part of debating is to try and find a way of explaining your argument and thoughts to the other person so you can reach a common thinking, or at least understand eachother's point of vieew a bit better.. It's not about being rude, really.

I do understand your point of view. I share your belief that women struggling with breastfeeding need support and sympathy. I share your view that women who have not decided how they feed their babies need to be treated with sensitivity.

I just don't except your view that we should vigorously self-censor when it comes to discussing formula within the context of the many wide-ranging and free-form debates (like this thread) that regularly crop up on this board, for fear of offending people's sensitivities.

"However, in NO WAY, would I feel it was necessary or productive to respond to those posts by being aggressive or pointing out, say, that 77% of young offenders have speech and language needs or otherwise quote 'worse case scenario' literature"

And what about if you were working as a speech and language therapist in a culture which barely recognised that therapy for speech problems had any value at all? That it wasn't worth trying to help children or adults improve their ability to communicate verbally because - hey! They can always use sign language instead! Because that's where we are with breastfeeding in the UK: breastfeeding is promoted within the NHS but outside of that it's simply not valued, not supported and not discussed openly or knowledgeably among women ANYWHERE EXCEPT ON FORUMS LIKE THIS.

You forget that most people you speak to on the internet on general discussion boards will have almost no experience or formal knowledge of speech therapy. Therefore, when discussions arise most people are speaking from a position of ignorance. When it comes to breastfeeding however, there are many, many, many women on this board in particular who have very good knowledge that they've acquired as experienced breastfeeding mothers and as trained peer supporters and counsellors. It's not 'preachy' to discuss the evidence on breastfeeding in the context of the debates we have here on this board. You speak as though women are constantly putting forward these comments with complete disregard to what has gone before on the thread and using this to bolster your argument that this type of discourse is insensitive and inappropriate.

I do understand your point of view. I share your belief that women struggling with breastfeeding need support and sympathy. I share your view that women who have not decided how they feed their babies need to be treated with sensitivity.

I just don't except your view that we should vigorously self-censor when it comes to discussing formula within the context of the many wide-ranging and free-form debates (like this thread) that regularly crop up on this board, for fear of offending people's sensitivities.

"However, in NO WAY, would I feel it was necessary or productive to respond to those posts by being aggressive or pointing out, say, that 77% of young offenders have speech and language needs or otherwise quote 'worse case scenario' literature"

And what about if you were working as a speech and language therapist in a culture which barely recognised that therapy for speech problems had any value at all? That it wasn't worth trying to help children or adults improve their ability to communicate verbally because - hey! They can always use sign language instead! Because that's where we are with breastfeeding in the UK: breastfeeding is promoted within the NHS but outside of that it's simply not valued, not supported and not discussed openly or knowledgeably among women ANYWHERE EXCEPT ON FORUMS LIKE THIS.

You forget that most people you speak to on the internet on general discussion boards will have almost no experience or formal knowledge of speech therapy. Therefore, when discussions arise most people are speaking from a position of ignorance. When it comes to breastfeeding however, there are many, many, many women on this board in particular who have very good knowledge that they've acquired as experienced breastfeeding mothers and as trained peer supporters and counsellors. It's not 'preachy' to discuss the evidence on breastfeeding in the context of the debates we have here on this board. You speak as though women are constantly putting forward these comments with complete disregard to what has gone before on the thread, and using this to bolster your argument that this type of discourse is insensitive and inappropriate.

arses step away from the thread. As I have learned TBB is so far up her own fundamental orifice she prob can't hear at all what you are saying. Same goes for some others, but hey at least they have backed off.

You are on to a no win situation when someone continually cuts and pastes your post and refuses to see the bigger picture