Is our fighting scaring off the newbies? How do we stop?

[liquidclocks]

We're getting new members all the time and this week I've read quite a messages from newbies saying how they're shocked and the argumentative nature of some of our threads. I don't know if I'm expecting answers or comments on my thoughts really though I'd be interested, I just needed to post what I'm thinking.

It seems, reading recent threads and SO many others, that no matter what we choose as mothers we will be criticised, privately or sadly as some of us have found, publicly. I think after a week of reading the latest batch of BF/FF threads I am left with a feeling of sadness that so many BF and FF mums feel unsupported, however, at least BFers have some consolation in knowing that their babies are getting the best?

So, instead of fighting each other, a recent thread seemed to have partly become a real discussion which is very refreshing. My hope for MN is that instead of shaming FF mums and making us feel worse, the BFers among you can help us 'next time' by not posting antagonistic thread titles designed to hurt feelings or shock and not de-valuing our reasons for 'giving up'. In return maybe FF can stop being so defensive about their decisions and just accept that that's what happened and maybe next time it will be different. I do believe we all genuinely make the best of the situation we're in at the time and no-one wants to do less than best for their precious baby.

What we NEED is a wider culture change that extends far beyond mumsnet. As long as we're arguing amongst eachother it's not going to happen. It's been proven that change happens faster and more readily when there is a consensus of opinion and the change is perceived as positive.

In 4 weeks time I hope to BF my second baby, I know if I'm struggling MN will be there for me. I think one of the best ways we can help new mums is to spread the word, get them to come to our forums and discuss their decisions before they're set in stone. We need to normalise BF but also some of the more activist BF need to accept that there are some real reasons why women can't, and it's not just that they won't.

So how do we do it? - do we need a national campaign, if so how should it be done so we don't alienate FFers who choose, make FFers who can't feel guilty and still satisfy the BFers?

Hi, I haven't read all the posts but I do think that some of the threads on mn can be very off putting.And Scary! I always think v carefully about what I say as I'd hate to get abuse.
I saw a thread the other day about how someone wanted help on stopping bf but she felt that nobody wanted to help her and only help the people who were still feeding. I worry that when I want to get help on stopping ( I'm still going at mo, dd is 12 months) that it will be the same.
I didn't feed my ds for very long(long story) and I felt really guilty/down/depressed about this and if I had been on mn then I would have felt even worse as everyone seems to be so anti ff.
Can't we all agree to disagree and be friendsI come on mn as it makes me laugh and feel part of something, aswell as getting fab advice. Isn't that what its all about.?

Totally agree. I love MN but have been sorely tempted in the past to move to a different site. Some posters are very quick to make a smart comment without realizing how it may affect the OP. I do try to consider how my post will affect others and how it is contributing to the thread as a whole. If you want to be snide, etc. there's always the chat board to mess around on.

Very sensible approach with your friend elf, I know it's difficult to judge where to help and where to stand back. I think perhaps I just felt that the NHS literature and most of themidwives glossed over the fact that sometimes BF is really hard and doesn't come easily to everyone. btw - I too would have been pretty p'd off at someone giving my DS chocolate at 4 months but then I'd think of how my mum used to tell me that ladies at her church had given my older brother gin at 3 months and then I wouldn't feel so bad!

Gave up bfing at 10 weeks with ds1, and reading all the threads on MN was what made me cry myself to sleep about it every night before I did give up. Now, I'd start a new thread & ask for support (pg again & would love to bf for longer this time) but as a newbie with a newborn I was just intimidated. I wouldn't have dared post a reply, much less started a thread back then! I think it's easy to forget just how sensitive & lacking in confidence most 1st time mums are, they're completely at sea & accidentally launch WWIII on a b/f'ing thread! Encourage 'newbies' to say so when they post, and those who've been here longer to be kinder to them?? or is this same line as we all love our children

Tiktok - I think you'll find that, that is exactly what I said

So please don't quote me out of context - it really isn't necessary!

'The logic is 'well yes, that is an interesting view', the emotional, 'when the fck will they stop going on about it, how much more fcking facts do we need rammed down our flipping throats, before they stop going on and on and bloody on about it!'

I really do feel, that there is very little that could possibly be left to say about the positive aspects of breastfeeding on MN. Really! Perhaps the general b/f threads have just had their day on MN. Nothing new left to say, so people just pick over the bones of past fights and disagreements.

However, on a case by case basis it is still important to provide support to newbies, and to those who are making choices as to how to feed their babies. And it is hard to reconcile these two positions. Maybe us oldies have to just keep off the threads and maybe the pro-breastfeeders just have to be a bit more aware of the sensibilities of those who have chosen (or not) to breastfeed.'

why is saying breast is best taken as criticism by ff.you make a choice and live with it but it has to be an informed choice based on all the facts surely?horribly sensitive issue and debates turning nasty helps no one.

2plus2, I TOTALLY agree with your post from earlier; I think our perception of the problems with this issue is clouded at the moment because of these threads started pretty obviously to cause a big hoo-ha rather than actually help or promote bfing. It's the internet and some people get their jollies in odd ways - people who can't cause this sort of 'splash' in rl have the perfect forum here to get their attention and cause a bit of friction.

As you say, these 'junk' and mars bars threads add nothing, they simply take away.

But I'm sure on mn there is more helpful stuff than otherwise, it's only the minority creating this atmosphere. I think the subject will run and run and long may it do so.

Nice to see this thread, and some excellent posts, which have me going "hear, hear".

The one thing that has struck me, as a "6 monther" on MN now, is that the posters are, in general, an intelligent, articulate bunch. Sure, occasionally there is some numpty who gatecrashes (trolls, I think they are known as? may have got that wrong, in which case I'm the numpty!! ) but they are usually chased off quite quickly. Debate can be pretty heated, and sometimes OTT but as was said earlier (sorry, can't remember who by), a poster you strongly disagree with on one thread can turn out to be your strongest ally on another!

In agreement with the OP, a national campaign to educate everyone about BFing is absolutely necessary. I mean everyone - the businessman tutting into his latte over someone BFing in a cafe, to the MWs and HVs handing out conflicting and confusing advise to new mums. BFing should be totally acceptable wherever, whenever and appropriate support should be avaiable freely - in all senses of the word. (BTW, I have FFed my DD since she was 6 days old - my choice, just so you know I am not a militant BFer! )

Elf, I'm going to try an answer your last post to try and help you and hopefully others understand a bit in the same way other BFer's (and mixed feeding mums!) have helped me today and I don't mean to cause any offence at all (hope it's obvious by now that wasn't my aim with this thread )

why is saying breast is best taken as criticism by ff? - it's not, we know that breast milk is nutritionally better for babies than formula. What we object to is being told that formula is bad for them - it's just not as good, there's a big difference in how you say it.

you make a choice - not always, personally I did not choose, it was an impossible situation, formula or starve, not really a situation in which I had any control.

but it has to be an informed choice based on all the facts surely? - for people who do choose not to try or to stop trying after a short time, it may have been for reasons beyond their control (illness, emotional issues etc) or it may be because they were not provided with enough of the right support or are given misinformation. Often it is only after BF has not succeeded that women find that they were misinformed which can add to the guilt/sadness because it's then they realise that they could have carried on if only they'd discovered the right help sooner.

In addition to the above, I accept that some FF mums do make an informed decision not to BF because they decide that their situation and BF do not 'fit'. However, if you or anyone else, were bing told consistently that you were poisoning your baby or feeding them junk food it would be easy to find yourself becoming annoyed.

Hope this helps you understand a bit why FFers can get so upset when sweeping generalistions are made like 'you decided to do it, live with it'.

Again, really don't mean for this to be atagonistic at all, just trying to explain some very strong feelings in the most non-inflammatory way I can (finding it harder than I thought!)

BTW, thanks for all the posts from BFers explaining some of the reasons you get upset too - I hoep it will help me respond better in the future, make less assumptions, and be a bit more compassionate. I didn't realise quite how much you all put up with and the nastiness of some of the comments you've had makes me so angry for you. I really hope we can change things to make it easier for mums who come after us.

oops,sorry, wasn't elf - was el! very confusing

this issue is horribly sensitive and always offends someone.i dont want to but feel people afraid to be honest about negative effects of ff for fear of offending but we happy to discuss neg effects of smoking,why the difference.if you are happy with your choice particulary if you could not feed then surely you shouldnt feel guilty anyway as you didnt really have a choice.

genuine question
but what has guilt from ff always come into this discussion by bfeeders.

does it?i thought it was ff,s sayin they fed up with being made to feel guilty?

Have been sticking to ante-natal thread as well ... mostly due to time constraints.

My Mom and sisters had an easy and enjoyable, bonding, lovely time BFing. I was looking forward to everything happening the same way for me.

Instead, postpartum depression set in.

When BF became a problem for me, my Dr. (I'm in the States) told me that while breast is best, with todays's new DHA/AHA formulas, the differences in results between performance of FF babies and BF babies in hard numbers - studies, charts, graphs - are much smaller than they used to be. Breast is still best, but it's relative.

There's never a really right answer to BF v. FF for any one woman. It's too personal.

The question INSTEAD becomes: What's enjoyable to you? What do you want to do, as a Mom? What are you able to do? What makes you happy?

I agree that women are too hard on themselves, and for no reason. We mother how we can. We each do the best we can with our own circumstances. Every woman needs to do what feels good to her, what feels right, at the time. My own decision, this time around, is that these DDs will return to Cs A.S.A.P. (DS2 is due any day.) I figure DH is fine (completely FF) ... DS2 will be fine, too. And the kicker is, this time, so will I.

Just logged back on before bed...
Having just read a thread on guardian website - the link about 'formula feeding equals 120 mars bars' or something like that - I think MN does seem to be very supportive and tolerant!-I couldn't believe some of the postings on the guardian - am prob a naive newcomer to all this as my dh who's a bit of a cyber-geek didn't seem surprised at all.
Anyway, thanks for the responses and for the intelligent comments, maybe I'll start a new thread or maybe just carry on working things out as I go along!

The big problem is that when you're on mn you just don't know who is reading the posts.

Say for example Mum A is bf but finding it hard. She starts a thread along the lines of "Is breastfeeding worth all the hassle?"

If you post a list of reasons why bf is healthier than ff, you're telling her exactly what she wants to know.

But Mum B is also reading, and last week she gave up bf after a huge struggle. A list of reasons why bf is healthier than ff is exactly what she doesn't want to know.

It seems to me, as a dedicated lurker, that a lot of these firefights start off from Mum A/ Mum B-type mismatches: Mum A is pleased to be told that bf is great, while Mum B feels "got at".

Not convinced that there is any cure for these bf/ff wars.

Welliemum - what an eloquent post for 5am! I think you're right, there's definitely something to be said for staying off the threads at times we feel vulnerable. Hopefully mum B in the future will not take a thread directed at mum A to be a personal attack - which it was never meant to be to begin with. I do think we need to think about what what we post on threads, and try to keep within the spirit of the OP, rather than taking any thread in the section as a go-ahead for debate.

Purplejennyrose - that was the thread I was talking about in my OP, when I last looked at it Iwas happy to see it had remained a discussion (teetered a few times but manaed in the end!) and there was a fair bit of interesting info there.

El - I think there's a huge difference between discussing smoking and formula. There's lots of different reasons that come to mind but the bigget one is that smoking is not something that must be done to survive and it's not really that good for you. It's also something tht has been proven to be very bad for a person wheras though formula is not as good as breastmilk, where it is a necessary alternative it's not actually bad for the baby. Smoking is also something we would tend to have responsibility for ourselves in, formula feeding is something we do in which we take on responsibility for someone else who we love - hence the guilt/sadness if we feel like we're doing something wrong.

sorry to be horribly controversial but I am El's friend and have been a nurse in Neonatal Nurse for 11 years. I have had responsibility in that time for teaching on infant feeding.
Basically the arguement comes down to this. Humans are mammals - animals who have survived over the generations by suckling our young. In recent years we have increasingly fed our infants an alternative milk adapted from cows milk - which is meant for baby cows. In it's adapted form this feed is an acceptable alternative for infants who cannot have breastmilk. However - it was never originally presented as an equal alternative and no clinical trials were ever performed. In recent times numerous pieces of medical research have begun to give us a picture of the health advantage breastfed babies have. But given what is actually the "normal" way for humans to feed there babies what they actually show us is the health problems assoc. with bottlefeeding. These include - More upper resp. tract infects, colds and chest infections due to not recieving any passive immunity through breastmilk. More ear infections and urine infections. More diarhoea and gastro-enteritis due again to no passive immunity but also no friendly bacteria and very high levels of iron in formula which cannot be absorbed this helps unfriendly bacteria thrive. There is a hormone in brestmilk which helps absorb iron which is in much lower levels in breastmilk.
That's the basics but research also links formula with , appendicitis, childhood cancers and leukaemias, allergies, diabetes any many more.
In preterm babies they are 10 times more likely to get a life threatening bowel infection and mothers who haven't breastfed have an incresed risk of pre-menapausal breast cancer and osteoporosis.
In short there are health risks in bottlefeeding which are rarely presented that way as health professionals are very concerned about making mothers feel guilty. Most research which presents an equal benefit of formula is payed for by a Formula company and in the US Drs may even be partially funded by these companies or recieve perks from them - that is against the law in many other contries thanks to the WHO who recognise the health problems of formula feeding and recommend breast until 2 years of age.

What you've said is not controversial at all. It's been acknowledged and pointed out on many occasions throughout this thread (and others) that we all (BF and FF mums) generally are aware of the benefits of breast milk over formula. That's not what this thread is about, I was more hoping that we could discuss why we become upset (both BF and FF) and help eachother work out how to have a discussion without inadvertantly hurting one-another's feelings. I think in many respects we've succeeded in that and a lot of positive things have come out of it.

As a health professional myself, currently employed in the area of research, I am well aware of bias in research and what to watch out for. However I am also aware of the new (ish) wave of research about 'relative risk' and while worthwile, such research should be considered alongside one's personal situation. In the case of formula, relative risk of the complications you mention may be compared to the risk of baby dying, developing serious illness, and the emotional/physical cost to yourself.

Thank you for your thoughts. Have you considered joining MN under your own name? The experience you have would undoubtedly be of great help to a lot of mums here.

"why is saying breast is best taken as criticism by ff? - it's not, we know that breast milk is nutritionally better for babies than formula. What we object to is being told that formula is bad for them - it's just not as good, there's a big difference in how you say it."

I think it's very true that you can say things in different ways - "breastmilk has benefits"; "formula has risks" - those are logically almost equivalent but emotionally very different.

"Formula has risks" makes more sense overall in one sense, because of course formula came along second, and breastfeeding is the norm for the species against which the alternatives should be compared. But that's only one reason for referring to it that way, and in some contexts that's very easily be outweighed by considerations of tact and sensitivity.

What's problematic is that very issue of context, and audiences. Always saying breastmilk has benefits, and never referring to formula as having risks (i.e. talking about it as if formula is the basic norm with no problems at all, absolutely fine), is the more sensitive and tactful way of putting it for an audience of mums who no longer BF - an audience of Mum Bs in Welliemum's great post, if you like. But it also contributes to a culture in which breastfeeding will never get easier - we'll have a constant supply of Mum Bs who might have had the chance to keep going with their first choice of feeding method if it hadn't been for bad support etc. That's because a culture in which formula is not seen as risky but rather breastmilk is seen as having some nice extras isn't one in which breastfeeding is seen as deserving much family/social/government help or effort - it seen as something worth a try, but if it needs more help than that then you'd only go on if you were a bit of a pushy earth mother, for instance. It's only when we start thinking of formula as a risk worth avoiding that breastfeeding becomes thought of as something correspondingly worth supporting and helping in a way that it's just not supported now.

So, as well as Mums A and B, we have to consider Health Professional C, Government Funder D, and Formula Advertising Regulator E, for instance. Those three all have a great excuse, in the "formula is fine; breastmilk just has extra benefits" way of putting things, for letting BF support slide and giving the formula companies a freer rein to push their product.

If all we're all concerned about is Mum B (who's very worth being concerned about, don't get me wrong), then yes we should never refer to formula as having risks relative to breastmilk, and we should only ever refer to breastmilk having extra benefits relative to formula. The reason why lots of people do deliberately refer to formula as risky is not to annoy the Mum Bs out there, or to try to hurt them, it's because referring to it the other way seems like going along with (and therefore also not changing), the current culture under which Health Professional C, Government Funder D and Advertising Regulator E let more and more mums have Mum Bs experience - over and over again - when they needn't have that experience at all. A system that pays lipservice with a few "breast is best" posters but doesn't follow through with support is giving people the worst of both worlds - the misery if it doesn't work out, but nothing to help it work out.

So what's sad is that when people (often but not always BFers) talk about formula having risks, they're usually doing it from the very best of motives - wanting to change things so we all demand, and get, better support, help and information (from everyone from GPs to MILs), and fewer people end up unhappily FF. It's very hard to get that across, though, and many many people (often but not always FFers) simply cannot believe that it isn't simply a case of those people wanting to hurt people who FF by putting things as harshly as possible. It's a real shame.

PS And on a huge internet forum, you've got a huge mixture of audiences and loads of different contexts for discussing the issues, and you just can't have a one size fits all way of talking about things. I think that's where good, tactful subject titles that help people know where to go and where to avoid if they're in an emotionally vulnerable position re the issue come into their own.

hear, hear fireflighty, what a thoughtful post.

And isn't 'formula has risks' a much more grown up way of putting it than 'formula = mars bars' or 'formula is junk'!

that's a really thought provoking post firefly - thanks.

It made me feel like there's a word missing in our language. Unfortunately the word 'risky' provokes feelings in me that make me want to be defensive, on the other hand I completely agree that it shouldn't just be a case of 'breast milk has nice extras' as it's clearly more important than that. Have to have a think...

sorry fireflighty - what's my trouble with names at the mo? must be pg hormones!

Excellent post fireflighty.

and very informative els friend