Want to exclusively FF

[justpoppingintosayhello]

I'm being made to feel inferior because I want to formula feed my baby, how do I carry on with this? I'm being made to feel bad because of my choices.

After about a dozen pages of being told that formula is junk, that we're abusing babies, don't love and prioritise them, oh and babies dying from infected formula, it's a bit late to say not to mention illness or death now, just because it relates to best feeding.

There are risks to both, there are benefits to both. Ensuring that a child is fed is the priority. But if people want to scaremonger about formula, that can easily work both ways.

I'd much rather we were all just supportive of each other, but as this thread shows, ask for some support when bottle feeding, and judgement is what you seem to get.

Assassinated beauty, I'm not suggesting any doesn't breastfeed, it's totally up to them. Just to say that not all consequences of breastfeeding are beneficial. Pros and cons like everything.

If you post things that are scaremongering then people will challenge you on that. Women should choose to formula feed based on accurate information, they don't need to be scared into it by tales of poorly babies. Equally they shouldn't feel forced to breastfeed because of the same.

Its no more inaccurate to say there is a risk of hospitalisation, and serious illness due to the baby not getting enough milk through breastfeeding, as it is to say that there is a risk of hospitalisation and serious illness due to contaminated formula.

People scaremongering about formula is something that formula feeders have to put up with constantly.

No one should scaremonger about using formula, or breastfeeding. But it also seems like any mention of any risks associated with formula feeding are rejected as false, and also taken as criticism and judgement.

But formula carries measured, proven risks. That's not to say that babies who are formula fed are any less healthy/intelligent/awesome, and it's not to say that all breastfed babies will be super healthy - anecdata here, but the majority of BF babies I know of have had illness after illness. But that doesn't mean that BFing doesn't impart health benefits on a population level.

These statistics can't tell you whether your baby will be healthy or not, they can only tell you what scientific studies have found on a population level.

It's not right that a thread from someone asking for support has been turned into a debate, but these threads always descend into this, because it's such a touchy subject thanks to the "mummy wars" - a concept created by formula companies and their "breast is best" mantra. I just don't think tit for tat "well __ babies die too" is helpful for either side of the debate.

Ffs why do both sides have to get so judgy and defensive!

I BF my ds until 6 months (interspersed with the odd bottle of apparent toxic waste formula) at which point he decided that the bottle was a lot easier for him, thanks very much. Henceforth he was ff.

No big fucking deal and no one else's business. Every time you take your baby in a car you're technically risking its life.

Do what you want op.

I think there have been only two posters who have been rigid and rude enough to judge formula feeders (might have been the same person #sockpuppets). Everyone else has contributed in a mostly supportive and sometimes informative way, sharing experience and taking care not to raise the temperature.

People should not base their decisions about infant feeding on fears that breastfeeding will increase their baby's risks of harmful conditions. Neonatal jaundice is more common in BF babies, but not so much when the studies control for babies being separated from their mothers and/or being 'allowed' to feed ad lib, or in more recent studies where babies and mothers are routinely kept together with no feeding restrictions (the usual type of care in the Uk).

I really dislike the way Blueskies has brought in dead and dying babies into the discussion. It has to be refuted - no one can let that one go :( Blueskies, you say you have done loads of research. But anyone who has a bit of knowledge about infant feeding can drive a coach and horses through your arguments....which have ended up being scaremongering. :(

Also the risks of formula feeding are mainly to do with not preparing it properly.

Every woman has the right to make an informed choice about how to feed her baby. Informed choice means knowing the pros and cons of both types. Right now, women are being let down in all directions - they're not told that BF can be hard; they're given unrealistic expectations of beautiful, picture-perfect breastfeeding from Day 1, rather than being prepared for the fact that it's a skill and - like any skill - it takes practice and decent practical support. When they do find BF hard, the support isn't there. They're not signposted in the right direction.

Mums aren't warned about the potential risks of formula feeding. It gets swallowed up in "breastfeeding gives you a better bond", "breastfeeding gives a higher IQ" - spurious population-based claims that are emotive and get in the way of what is needed - we need HCPs saying "Look, this is the safest way to prepare formula, because otherwise your baby is at risk of ". Then you've got the people who insist that formula and breastmilk are nutritionally equal, which means that mums who want to breastfeed feel like there's no point because "they're exactly the same".

There's no honest discussion, just silly claims being flung back and forth that make people feel bad and take the onus off the formula companies to improve their practices and the government to fund practical breastfeeding support.

Go on then, drive a 'coach and horses' through them.
Dehydration is a real risk at the beggining of breastfeeding. It can in rare instances cause serious problems. These can include brain damage and death. I agree that we need to be careful about which studies and accounts we look at, but its undeniable that it happens from time to time.

Just look at the Spanish doctor. She's an emergency doctor for goodness sake, and she sought frequent attention for her baby, who ended up very ill by day 4, and now has permament disabilities. She's not someone who avoided medical attention.

Its not nice to think of babies being harmed by any form of feeding, but I find it deeply hypocritical that as an intended formula feeder, I should expect to put up with being told that I'm harming my child, I'm abusive, and that my baby might die of contamination, but when I talk about risks from breastfeeding, suddenly its like the world has ended, and I'm scaremongering.

Its not nice, but its what a lot of us put up with. Either we properly clamp down on people who are being judgemental about bottle feeding, or we should accept that criticism goes both ways.

Chelazla

www.nhs.uk/news/2014/12December/Pages/More-breastfeeding-would-save-NHS-millions.aspx

This is the thing Ovaries. There's so much point scoring that it takes away the real issue. I FF my children. I'm not going to get into a debate about why etc but I wouldn't ever say that FF has the same qualities as BF. It's obvious to me that BF is actually tailored to meet our human young, after all that's what we're designed to do. That's not to say that all breast milk is the same or of the same quality. Ultimately Ovaries is spot on with regards the support of people making their own choices for them and their babies. The needs to score points on each side has totally detracted from the issue. Tiktok made an excellent point up thread about feeding being more than simply nourishing our baby. This is a special time and women shouldn't be fostering feelings of inadequacy either in themselves or in others. It's totally unhelpful. We are all entitled to our opinions but to throw a child's death down like a gauntlet is really distasteful.

^ Deaths were first mentioned in relation to formula feeding, not breast feeding btw.

I agree about feeding being more than just nourishing a baby. Part of the reason I'm bottle feeding is to promote bonding between baby and dad, as well as baby and myself.

As long as a baby is fed, it makes absolutely no difference which way.

It pisses me off to see bonding with dad as a reason for FF - I have 4 children and their dad has never fed any of them. Not once.

Yet you couldn't find children with a better bond with their father.

It has bollocks all to do with how they are fed.

Blueskies, no, I am not going to tackle your arguments again. I have explained in separate posts about dehydration and inadequate BF plus inadequate care, and about the apparent risks of neonatal jaundice. You can PM me if you want to know more.

The individual case you raised is a well known one, and I am absolutely not going to take a distressed mother's experience and dissect it here. For it to be used as an argument one way or the other when we don't have full facts is not acceptable. Studies from peer reviewed journals are fine, of course, when we have a fighting chance of objective understanding and crucially a context.

Whatever. I've also made it clear that a mother's preference trumps everything and all mothers need support to feed their babies safely and happily, whether that's BF, FF or both.

Just don't use dead and dying babies in an effort to demonstrate the 'facts'.

Well as my dm would say "two wrongs don't make a right." There are always people who want to sit in judgment. If it makes someone feel good to make others feel bad well bully for them, sadly life's littered with them. If you're happy and your babies happy who cares. I wish you well with your little one. Enjoy every minute because it passes soon quickly

It is indeed insulting to the fathers of BF babies to suggest they are in general less likely to bond.

However there may be individual situations where a mother may feel her partner needs to bottle feed in order for him to build a relationship with the baby, and she thinks using formula will give her this control over the formation of the father's relationship.

It's actually not very mature of the father, if he really needs this, and it shows a lack of knowledge of how relationships actually happen (babies bond with a person, not with a pair of breasts and not with a bottle). Most fathers will bond just fine, and the choice of BF and FF is irrelevant.

Ah, so the bonding thing is a myth?

In which case I'll know to ignore it every time someone says that breastfeeding promotes a close bond between mum and child...

Delightful how you've now taken to insulting my husband by calling him immature.

I don't think that feeding creates any special form of bond, but I do think it's calming time spent one on one with the baby, and that is good for promoting a bond. There are other ways to create a bond, feeding is one that is convenient to us.

THE OP IS GOADING

KLAXON KLAXON KLAXON

For goodness sake blueskies. I haven't the faintest idea if your dh is mature or immature. I postulated a scenario where feeding with a bottle might assist an immature father (they do exist) to bond because in his immaturity he can't see the million other ways he can build a relationship with his baby. I wasn't talking about you or him. Sheesh.

Bf is sometimes presented as a means of bonding. It's not something I say, because if the mother doesn't want to do it, then she prob needs to find bonding opps elsewhere. I think it's hard to find an evidence base for bonding and bf. Individually mothers say it helps them develop a close and loving relationship, but ff mothers can feed closely and responsively too - and should be supported to do so.

But the bonding thing is not really about feeding.

Jaa read the thread. We know! It's a troll.

Sorry. Jaago.

BF does promote bonding between mother and baby, largely because of the hormonal release due to the process of lactation.

This is not reproducible with bottle feeding from mother or father.

Can I say something although I know this is a troll probably.

Breastmilk the product and breastfeeding the process are two related but different matters. The product contains living organisms that formula as a product does not. If the process of giving a baby that product results in complexities that are irresolvable easily or detrimental to maternal mental health then the bestness of the product becomes a lesser point to consider than to consider the outcomes of the process. So what is "best" would be shaped by specific contexts.

It is in the best interests of public health bodies to establish ways in which to support the process when it encounters problems which could be resolved with support.

But it is at that moment - that intersect - of issues arising with the process + support being available or not - that the conversation gets derailed into emotional fervour, side taking, rule declaring from either anecdotes to evidence (wrong) or from large scale evidence to Sally and her baby as though it were so simple (also wrong)

For me (breastfed for ten months) it was always important to distinguish process and product. And understand that what is best for baby is less often a simple question of the evidence biological constitution of breastmilk and more often a complex interplay of the nature, contexts and outcomes of the process.

Thank you. I will now head into my job interview for a potential promotion at a new university. (Vomits. Nerves)