Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Infant feeding

Get advice and support with infant feeding from other users here.

tik tok

482 replies

daisymlaisy · 02/01/2007 10:01

I have just wrote such a lengthy reply and just lost it just before I posted it, how annoying so this will probably be a bit blunt, as I haven't got time to go into detail all over again!

I take great offence in you saying that if I have only done a 3-day course at Unicef I am not allowed to call myself a bf counsellor( sorry this is one word, I have always had a mental block on how to spell it, even though I use it lots, and its my job - its really frustrating!) as you said in one reply "I am not a professional but a volunteer" so does this mean you have had no training as such? as in the next reply you say " I am a Nct bf counsellor" So how come you are allowed to call yourself but I am not????

My training is as follows I am a qualified nursery nurse, Nurse, and did the 3-day Unicef breastfeeding course, which is one of the most respected in the country.

I have worked a as a maternity nurse for 9 years , this is where I have had huge amounts of experiance and it is here where I have usually found that feeding more regularly than 2 hourly after the age of 3-4 weeks and if the mother has a well established milk supply can be helped, and many mothers if they are honest will say they are allowing their baby to snack when they want, rather than encouraging proper full feeds. I have a very long testimonial record for mothers who when I went to see them they were feeding very regularly as in every 30 mins -1hour thinking thats what they should be doing. However once I had explained to them to look out for other sign for example crying cause they are tired etc and obviously making sure that there are no problems of tongue tie, poor milk supply, over milk supply etc , we could encourage the baby to demand feed 2/3hourly instead. I for one who bf my own daughter til she was 7 months,if I was feeding her every 30 mins -an hour would of welcomed someone to tell me this needn't be the case. So I still stand by the fact that if the baby is over 3-4 weeks old and the mother has a GOOD milk supply 2 hourly feeds should easily be maintainable, and it is quite often mis-guided information why the mother is allowing the baby to snack every 30mins, or poor attachment, milk supply etc could be a reason for it. however it in most cases can be successfully turned around to frequent feeds every 2-3 hours.

To finish my qualifications- I have worked as a nurse on a neonatal ward for 2 years, here I did see the extremes where babies are being encouraged to feed every 30 mins-1hour to help with the mothers milk supply.

I have been practicing as a bf councellor for 2 years now.

I do feel like i have been interogated by you, and will not be posting on here any more, you have made that impossible for me anyway by tarnishing my name. So keep up the good work helping all those mothers out there and lets hope you never word anything wrong. Of course I wouldn't do this in real life, it was one of the very few times I had been on here, and I was just writing facts,and my opinions wrongly not thinking about emotional ,sleep deprived mothers who may have read it, how it was most certainly not meant. I hope to have learnt by this mistake, and think more when I am writing.

If you feel like you need to justify yourself to me , like I did to you, please do not worry, if you want to call yourself a bf counsellor, reading your threads you sound more than capable to do this. Though please do not doubt other professionals. We are all going to have slightly different views depending on our experiances and qualifications and training, certainly doesn't need one to attack another, this most certainly would put the fear of god, into already confused new mothers, who feel they don't know who to trust.

OP posts:
tiktok · 03/01/2007 18:35

Sorry - I mean it - you are feeling a bit battered, daisymlaisy.

Thanks for the poetry, sherl

Corrie - yes, the fattier components of the breastmilk tend to adhere to the storage cells in the breast, while the more watery components do not. A comparatively empty breast will have less of the watery stuff, proportionate to the contents of the breast.

Babies who feed very frequently - the 'snackers' despised by HVs! - or who feed on and off all evening, on breasts which don't feel full, are probably getting relatively creamy milk, because there has not been time for the watery stuff to float off...

The meal analogy is not helpful as a description, and saying 'good better best' is just misleading.

Mothers who produce gallons of milk and suffer from over-fullness and a baby who splutters and fights at the breast and yet who gains mahoosive amounts of weight are helped by deliberately reducing the volume of milk their baby takes in. The baby takes in rather more watery milk - 'cos the breasts are always full - and grows just fine on this (and it has everything the baby needs in it, and as long as he gets enough of it he will grow just great). So what mum does then is to feed on one side only for several feeds on the trot, leaving one breast under-stimulated as a result, full of milk, and therefore ceasing or at least slowing production (because of the presence of FIL - feedback inhibitor of lactation, do keep up at the back!! ) . And the breast that is being used empties over a period of a few hours, getting fattier milk into the baby.

This is simnplified a bit, and the process of change over - from over-production and full breasts with waterier milk to more normal breasts - takes a few days.

Phew!

VeniVidiVickiQV · 03/01/2007 18:41

Tiktok - I found the watery stuff used to leak out so much in the early days. Especially on one side whilst feeding from the other. So, when feeding from the second side, would the milk be less 'watery' than the first side?

PeachyClair · 03/01/2007 18:41

Actually it was the feeding on one side thing that saved DS3's feeding- my let down was so strong that he went off the rbeast spluttered and refused to get back on, which meant that my breast became overfull, which ahd the same effect as a too abudant supply (there was actually downside after a while btw! DS3 as we now know has autistic tendencies, refused to ever feed from the other breast (other being just the one not in use at the moment the tendency kicked in) and I ended up with one sided feeding LOL! )

daisymlaisy · 03/01/2007 18:50

As a particular feeding progresses, fat content increases, milk volume and flow decrease, and milk synthesis speeds up. Because every baby varies in the amount of time it takes him to receive his fill of the higher-fat milk at the end of the feeding, it is important not to switch breasts while baby is actively nursing.

this is what kellymom says at the end, so her theory is not disimilar to mine.

Dizzy blint your suggesting I have said there is a time limit to feeds:
I certainly have never said their is a certain time limit to reach the hindmilk, as it is a gradual process all babies will reach it, as kellymom says above you cannot deny the hindmilk is at the latter stage of the feed, not disimilar to a pudding.

However I still think it is slightly better way of saying it especially online, the meal theory is fine in rl though if you are confident that you can explain it well.

Yes I am battered tik tok, not unlike you I should suspect! I wish I could tear myself away and put it all behind me, but its proving really hard, do people get addicted to this site?

OP posts:
PeachyClair · 03/01/2007 18:54

LOL yes, people do get VERY addicted!

maisym · 03/01/2007 18:56

tiktok - you say that you are covered by the nct insurence you when you give bf couselling on mumsnet. Are you sure on this?

DizzyBint · 03/01/2007 18:56

i'll try again.

when you eat your main course, you eat it, then you stop and you start to eat your pudding.

you don't eat your main course while also picking at your pudding until eventually you find that your main course has turned into your pudding.

main course does not flow into pudding.

mums on here who were told the 3 course meal analogy have said that they were left thinking literaly of a meal. main course, stop, pudding, stop.

and as far, good, better, best..tiktok has explained why that isn't the case. saying the hindmilk is 'best' and must be 'reached' leaves mums worrying about lengths of feeds. as evidenced on here and on other threads.

DizzyBint · 03/01/2007 18:57

unless of course you like to eat bits of trifle with your sausage and mash.

Twiglett · 03/01/2007 18:58

I've never fed for longer than 10 minutes .. ever .. and I've had much more experience than I ever thought I'd be able to thanks to mumsnet

I'm wondering how that stacks up with the startermaincourse theory

as my babies had no issues growing and were sated by 10 min feeds from birth through to almost a year

daisymlaisy · 03/01/2007 18:58

when mothers have constant overfullness in their breasts, I would suggest they express the first bit of waterey milk as this has a lower fat content, this way the baby is likely to get the hind milk quicker. So I would say yes vvv that your second breast if it had been leaking would have less of the lower fat milk and more of the fattier creamier milk.
Although I will probably be told this is wrong!

OP posts:
VeniVidiVickiQV · 03/01/2007 19:06

Well, I would, DizzyB, but I'm weird like that

Can I just be a real pedant here and say that we are talking about "theories" we are talking about analogies, which are quite different.

As I thought daisyml.

I have never had weight-gain issues with my two, but I always wondered about the blue stuff that would leak everywhere all the time - up to 3 floz first thing in the morning (although DD slept for at least 5 hours at night right from the beginning and for 13 hours a night at 11 weeks )...she also, miraculously, never lost any of her birth weight, which was amazing, apparently for a fully b/fed baby who weighed 9lb 13oz at birth.

I am still b/feeding my 20 month old, which, I probably wouldnt be doing now because most mw's, GPs and HV's have said b/feed for 6 months, which, lets face it, is not strictly correct.......is it?

(That said - the MW with DS was miles better than any other I had met and would regularly speak of how b/feeding with her 11 month old was going which, at the time, seemed amazing to me....)

VeniVidiVickiQV · 03/01/2007 19:07

oh fgs - not talking about theories

and

probably wouldnt be doing now if it hadnt been for MN

tortoiseshell · 03/01/2007 19:08

Daisy, wouldn't that end up encouraging MORE production of milk though, because you're taking off some milk that is not used, so the mother would find the fullness gets worse not better? Not a criticism, more a question! Congratulations on your pg btw, and yes, MN is very addictive!

VeniVidiVickiQV · 03/01/2007 19:09

Depends how much milk you were expressing I would imagine, Tortoise...

DizzyBint · 03/01/2007 19:12
maisym · 03/01/2007 19:14

tiktok - are you really sure that the nct covers you when you give your help as a nct bfc on mumsnet? - don't know that any organisation covers it voluntary personnel in that way?

your post...

you posting - "in the same way that you are insured by ABM and I am insured by NCT. So if any ABM or NCT (or other vol.org) counsellor told someone something completely unsafe, or the mother interpreted it unsafely, we are protected and the mother is protected,"

As you write that you're a nct bfc how do we know this for sure? Has mumsnet validated you in someway?

tortoiseshell · 03/01/2007 19:15

I was told to do that for a totally different reason you see - my mw said to express off an ounce or so at the beginning of a feed, to promote weight gain (my babies were crap at putting on weight) and also to boost milk production. This is why I couldn't be a BFC!!!! Too confused!

VeniVidiVickiQV · 03/01/2007 19:19

Ah - if you are doing it just before a feed, then, you are increasing the requirement for milk from the breasts.

If you are just expressing an ounce or so off adn then just leaving it (to take the pressure of engorgement off), then it will adjust to fill just that amount over a few hours, eventually.

Does that make sense?

VeniVidiVickiQV · 03/01/2007 19:20

YUM Dizzy

DizzyBint · 03/01/2007 19:20

my understanding is that you would only express before a feed as a last resort. you would try 'uphill' feeding first, amongst other things. i could give another kellymom analogy here but i fear it'll cause a kerfuffle.

tortoiseshell · 03/01/2007 19:21

Ok, I see the difference. I read daisy's post as being 'at the beginning of a feed' as she went on to say 'the baby gets to the hind milk faster'. But this is a bit of a thread deviation - sorry!

VeniVidiVickiQV · 03/01/2007 19:24

WTF is uphill feeding? (cant shake the phrase "uphill gardening" from my mind eitehr )

DizzyBint · 03/01/2007 19:27

pics

hunkermunker · 03/01/2007 19:28

If you express before a feed, all you do is bugger about breastpumps (unless you hand express, obv) and increasing your milk production and fretting about how much to express - and it's the one thing you don't want to do with overabundant supply.

But that's not me speaking as a bfc - I am happy to be corrected.

DizzyBint · 03/01/2007 19:29

it then goes on to describe block feeding etc

Swipe left for the next trending thread