is it right to provide formula on maternity wards?

[nappyaddict]

take a look

i personally think, this is wrong. yes we want to encourage people to breastfeed, but if a was admitted to the children's ward say at 6 or even 12 months old, we would expect them to provide food for that baby. they would not turn around and say you can't have any he/she should be having bm. so why should it be any different in a maternity ward?

if i go to hopsital i expect to be fed, i expect the same for any new born baby.

what do you think?

no one will be able

agree sandcastles. so first its bottles of formula- and as shown on this thread people will argue that that is right. then it will be meals for all patients, then it will be pay per night for a hospital stay. You may breastfeed your baby and think that its right that the NHS dooesn't support ff., and that its an overstretched service that needs to cut costs. But what about when that baby gets to 3, and isn't talking, and you know that they need SALT- after all everything you read tells you that early intervention is essential, but your child is too complex to fix quickly so you won;t get it. (It wont be put to you like that- but that's the new guidelines locally- although tbh they've been dong that for years anyway). How about if your child has verbal dyspraxia- the literature you read suggests that they won't learn to speak without therapy- preferably 3 times a week. The NHS won't offer you any. How do you feel about paying 50 quid for a private SALT 3 times a week? Sounds a long way removed from not providing formula- the philosophy is the same. Balance the books and damn the service.

I'd be very careful about supporting cost cutting exercises when the care that remains in place is sub standard to what was previously provided. It's symptomatic of what is happening to the health service.

tortoiseSHELL - same here. People leaving nurse and speech therapy training can't get jobs, despite the entire service being completely short staffed.

Yes, JJ, that's it. Small things first..then move onto the bigger things.

So as we have it now, that children who need ortho don't get it unless they are severe cases. Working in this field....I know what the NHS class as severe & what they don't.

It's not a million miles from the proposal to charge for epidurals. The idealists are playing right into the hands of the accountants and managers.

so the opposite of SALT where they only get it if they're not severe.

It's all wrong wrong wrong. I know a very severely disabled child who has been told she has to wait 18 months for a wheelchair- she's outgrown hers- sittiing in one that doesn't fit is damaging for her, she can't go out without a chair.

What happened to meeting people's needs- seems to be a case of constantly looking for excuses not to treat people.

I know someone half way through her SALT training who is thinking of leaving as she said she didn't sign up in order to not treat people.

Am in NZ but the universal message I get from friends back in the UK is that the NHS is going down the tubes. Jimjam's post has just illustrated that rather vividly.

Well I was told that I would be required to bring in formula milk if I chose to ff, as I intended to breast feed ds I did not take any in. I had an horrendous time trying to establish breast feeding and on day 3 the midwife told me that I was starving ds because I was not trying hard enough, at this point I caved in and asked for formula which they provided if they had refused I think I would have jumped out of the window as I was so desperate.

JJ, that is terrible!

DD2 was admitted to hospital for 5 days when she was 6 months old. She was in 2 different hospitasls - in the first one, they used IV anti-biotics to try to shift it. When that didn't work, she went elsewhere for surgical drainage. In both hospitals, parents had to provide all milk and food for their babies. So, at least in my experience, the argument that hospitals should provide formula (where required) because they feed all their other patients as a matter of course is not based on fact.

Should they provide formula? I don't see why those who plan to use formula from the off should not provide their own. To my mind, the free provision of formula "on request" (rather than "where necessary") gives formula some sort of unofficial quasi-medical "seal of approval". Numerous studies have shown that most women who start formula feeding in hospital go on to use whatever brand they used in hospital. Anecdotally, I know I have heard women say stuff like "Oh, yes, I use Aptamil (or whatever) b/c that's what they used in hospital and it's supposed to be the best..."

I am pg with my 5th baby and am hoping to have my 4th homebirth (1st in hospital) and to bf as I have all along, a big part of why I want a homebirth is that I just completely do not want to use the hospital facilities! When I had my first baby the showers were dirty, there was blood on the toilet floor, another patient was in tears as the gown she had been given was horribly stained....all this at a time when you are feeling really vulnerable.
Anyway getting back to the issue in hand, if I wanted to ff my baby in hospital there is no way I would feel comfortable sharing sterilising/ washing up equipment etc with hundreds of other people at a time when hygiene is so important and standards are obviously so poor.
Wheteher bf or ff noone seems to be able to get enough help/support if they are struggling.

I have to say i agree with JimJams on everyting, I would.

I BF all three of mine in hospital, and I probably wuld again. That doesn't mean its right for everyone. And just because O BF my 3, does it logically follow that I will be able to BF DS4? What if I was too ill, for example? So the MW wills tart to advise taking formula in jic. Then because its in the house people WILL feed it when it is 2am and theya re tired and very vulnerable.

The way to enable good 0aprenting is to respect personal choice and facilliatate that, not to dictate and take that awy. The important part is that parents feed their child. Give all the knowledge of BF being better and employ BF counsellors, but ultimately respect parental wishes.

Formula milk keeps babies alive that would have died. Its not evil. What s evil is the alck of supprt for feeding that is available.

Should FM be freee in hospital? FREE? FGS!the NHS isn't free, its free at the point of care. We all pay for it. Its our bloody NHS, it should provide the basics. Food is a basic. Babies can die of dehydration. My ds1 had low blood sugar, had it not risen I would ahve changed how I fed like a shot (he had IUGR). But I wouldn't have been able to provide milkl.

Excellent post peachy.

Reread the original article:

She said: "As a trust, we are introducing a new system for mothers who choose to bottle feed their newborn babies in our hospital.

From January 8, we are asking mothers who wish to bottle feed their babies to supply their own ready-to-feed baby milk or baby milk powder, teats, bottles and brushes while in hospital.

"We are providing a special feed demonstration room, which will be equipped with a fridge, kettles and sterilisers for new mums to use.

"A member of staff will be on hand to help mums prepare feeds and show new mums how to use the sterilise feeding equipment and discuss any problems mums might have.

"There will also be written instructions for mums to follow.

"Current literature suggests that 89 per cent of bottle feeds are made up inaccurately.

"This is an educational initiative to help to equip mothers who choose to bottle feed to do so safely and in an informed and supported way."

There is no suggestion that women who have difficulties breastfeeding will not have access to formula (often not the answer though!).

There is an issue about mothers going home without the knowledge of how to make bottles and I do think there is something to be said for making bottles up rather than having ready made HOWEVER

In practical terms I don't see how this will work. Women don't stay long enough in hospital unless they have complicated births. If they have complicated births they will not be fit to make feeds. That will fall to a hard pushed assistant in the ward who will have a million ond one other things to do.

I don't think it is workable.

Beg to differ, Mears. This is the second paragraph in the second link posted.

"Mothers-to-be who are unable or unwilling to breastfeed will not be provided with sterilised milk to feed their newborn babies"

you missed off the 1st part "ANOTHER blow has been dealt to expectant mothers by cash-strapped West Hertfordshire Hospitals NHS Trust.

Mothers-to-be who are unable or unwilling to breastfeed will not be provided with sterilised milk to feed their newborn babies.

Previously, the maternity ward at Watford General Hospital provided ready-to-drink sterilised milk in sealed bottles." it clearly states the women who cant bf will be made to provide formula.

you missed off the 1st part "ANOTHER blow has been dealt to expectant mothers by cash-strapped West Hertfordshire Hospitals NHS Trust.

Mothers-to-be who are unable or unwilling to breastfeed will not be provided with sterilised milk to feed their newborn babies.

Previously, the maternity ward at Watford General Hospital provided ready-to-drink sterilised milk in sealed bottles." it clearly states the women who cant bf will be made to provide formula.

Is that journalist sensationalism though? The second part is a direct quote.

Bringing in formula is aimed at women intending to bottle feed from the start.

I hate the term unwilling- makes one think of a teenager who is unwilling to tidy his room. Has chosen not to- that would be mroe acceptable.

So many of the parents I ahve worked with over the years have no faith in their own aprenting skills. The ability to choose is something that should be treated as a positive. Yes BF is best for the baby, but FF isn't BAD. Letting mys feel theya re labelled as bad parents so early on becuase they choose to BF, sorry are 'unwilling' (to comply?). terrible. Reinforce aprenting confidence early as possible imo, give the info and then live with the choice.

I mean, if I did FF a potential 4th baby it would be becasue DS1 (HFA) was gping through a non sleeeping patch and I would know I couldn't be relied on to cope with something I find quite demanding on my time and energies. Taht wouldn't be a bad decision or even one I wanted to make, it would still be the best decision for my family.

Since when was the NHS appointed as moral judges anyway?

Getting Babyfriendly status would save money

Costing Report

The Costing Report published by Nice looks at how soon the cost of becoming Baby Friendly (paying for staff to be trained, paying costs of assessors? time and travel, materials etc) becomes a cost saving in terms of preventing early childhood illnesses.

The report takes three illnesses which are known to be reduced by breastfeeding ? gastroenteritis, asthma and middle-ear infection ? and works out how much of a cost saving would be gained from a 10% increased in breastfeeding rates.

It concludes that if work began on becoming Baby Friendly immediately, the NHS Trusts would start to see a cost-saving in the year 2009/10 which would grow thereafter, as the costs of staying Baby Friendly are much lower than the costs of becoming Baby Friendly. (Article dated July 2006)

It is worth noting that this report takes only three illnesses (breastfeeding has many more health advantages, including protecting against breast and ovarian cancer in the mother) and assumes only a cautious 10% increase in breastfeeding levels. The true savings to the NHS could be far higher.

Maybe Mears, but there is nothing in the quote from the rep to say that it will be supplied in this case. So the whole article to me says that nobody will get it.

'The move comes just a week after the trust axed all NHS antenatal classes'

Have just read this bit, must have missed it! This just goes to show what I mean about NHS healthcare going the same way as NHS dentistry!

i fully intended to bf and couldnt thru no fault of my own, ds was born at 10pm by crash cs htf could i have known to bring in fm? i stand by my thought that this decision will further alienate ff mums and i resent the fact that we are statistics not people, its bad enough that women who request extra care dont recieve it coz of understaffed hosps, and mw's are expected to work within "targets" but inititives like this do not take into account the individual.

we all know the benefits of bfing. if i have another lo i will try to bf, if i am unable to again, should i be penalised? the majority of women who have posted on here as ff mums, ffed coz they were too ill post lo. surely changes should be made to antenatal care, not by trying to force new mums into something they cant do? even mums who choose to ff, they pay ni and tax too. surely this is one of the 1st steps toward privatising the nhs, so even more mums on low earnings recieve substandard care because they live in the wrong postcode, dp isnt around doesnt earn enough and eventually it is the child who will suffer.

bfing is best for lo and mum, but it is still a choice and last time i looked everyone was entitled to the same level of care

The hospital mentioned here can't be a Babyfriendly Hospital.

Part of being Babyfriendly is that women are not asked how they intend to feed before they have their babies.

Babies are encouraged to be skin-to-skin follwing delivery. If the baby starts to root the mother is asked if she wants a hand to breastfeed. She will then say no I am bottle feeding.

The reason for this is that in the past, women who stated that they were going to bottlefeed in advance did not get an opportunity to change their minds. Many women also aren;t sure what they want to do. When the baby is searching for a nipple, some women then want to give it a go.

Since we are a babyfriendly hospital, we won't be going down that route.