Editor's comment re: Jordan OK! article

[boogiewoogie]

I don't know whether this has been mentioned already but I read this yesterday from the Times.

Melanie McDonagh

Sounds as if she feels guilty about not being a "successful" breastfeeder. I am pro choice and do not have a problem with formula feeders but it's the smug and sanctimonious tone of the article that annoys me as well as the sloppiness in accuracy re breastfeeding. Is the point of her article the reason why women formula feed is because they're selfish? An insult to many who do ff. Also misses the point about the Jordan OK! debate that's going on.

[Nightynight]

stupid times article. oh, a tautology

[meandmyflyingmachine]

Quite LL...

[Kirst9]

Fedupwasherwoman

I know one myself - not quite as extreme but went from breastmilk to ice-cream with her second DS. I do think they are the exception though.

[CatIsSleepy]

interesting choice of insult
maenads
is she saying members of NCT are pissheads?


agree with alycat re

"And it?s rather sweet the way the baby tongue teases the nipple, presumably to get the most out of it."

what a cringe-making and somehow revolting comment...
Also makes me think she might actually never have breast-fed at all. I certainly don't remember being "teased"

[hunkermunker]

Fio, that is the main point.

Unfortunately, some women feel the need to launch full-scale attacks on anyone who breastfeeds in response.

Which is odd.

[mixedmama]

have not read all the posts but read the article. when i stopped BF that was the attitude that i got from BF's the attitude expressed in the article towards BF.

Some women do feel like cows and do feel it infringes on their life too much and i think if they feel that way then they are better off ff.

I like to think everyone is intelligent enough to make an informed choice regarding FF and is not going to be swayed by Jordan feeding her baby.

I think far toomany people get on their high horse when it comes to feeding - from both sides. at the end of the day the most important thing is that the child is well nourished.

a journalists job is reaction - and she achieved it.

[Elasticwoman]

Women who don't like bf may be "better off" in some respects by ff, Mixedmama, but they are putting their own preferences before the optimum nutrition of their baby, if that's their only reason for ff.

Whoever said that Jordan probably can't bf after all the breast surgery she's had, has hit the nail on the head. It will make her feel better to say she doesn't want to do what she now can't do as a result of her own vanity and foolishness in having unnecessary surgery.

[mixedmama]

No they are not putting their babies nutrition first, but equally if a mother is unhappy breastfeeding and has such a negative attiitude towards it it wont result in positive BF anyway and I think it is important to have a happy mother as this reflects on the child as well. And, although BF is clearly the better option of the two FF is not actually detrimental to the babies health.

Dont get me wrong I am all for BF and plan to BF my second child, i just think if you are not happy doing it then your child being fed should be the main priority.

[Pruners]

Message withdrawn

[Pruners]

Message withdrawn

[fedupwasherwoman]

Elasticwoman

Parents put their own preferences first in other ways too. Smoking around their children, getting pissed and not wanting to get out of bed the next day to care for their kids, single mums taking up with unsuitable men with no interest in the welfare of their kids, single dads taking up with self-centred women who resent their kids being around.

[Difers]

This woman's article is just another nail in the coffin of breastfeeding. I'm am sick of this antibreastfeeding society, no wonder midwives are coming across as bullies, when you consider what they are up against.

I am one of the 2% brigade - that's still feeding at 18 months.

[casbie]

badly written, shoddy researched twaddle.

you can quote me on that!

[Elasticwoman]

Quite right, Fedup, there are all kinds of ways in which mothers, and fathers for that matter can do less than their best for their children.
A mother who bfs is not automatically faultless in all other respects.

However, a mother who smokes and is not prepared to give up, is still giving her child a better start by bf than by ff, because that child needs the antibodies more than ever, if surrounded by all those nasty chemicals from the smoke.

Mixedmama I strongly disagree with you that an unhappily bf mother is worse for a baby than a happy ff mother. For a start, it's not as simple as that. Once bf is established, the mother may change her mind about how she feels. Only if bf leads to maternal suicide would the baby be better off ff imo. And I've never heard of such a case.
Ff is not without its own problems, not least of which is the FIVE TIMES greater likelihood of being hospitalised for respiratory infection, to mention just one of the many, many other health hazards to babies from the use of formula. Oh but of course, I'm talking about the baby's health here, not the mother's. She only has to contend with an increased risk of breast cancer if she doesn't bf.

[Cloudhopper]

Am I the only one who finds the term Maenad a fairly accurate description of myself?

[daisythedog]

Oh, Elasticwoman, where does one start? I guess there's really no point...

But, "Only if bf leads to maternal suicide would the baby be better off ff [iyo]"??? Really???

For some reason you don't really stike me as an authority on what's best for babies.

[puffling]

I'm not too fussed about this article, she's simply taking a stance to fill some column space.
I am, however, still annoyed about the magazine article article. The celebrity, magazine and formula company all stand to do very well out of each other in quite an unsavoury way.

[Pruners]

Message withdrawn

[Elasticwoman]

Am not claiming to be an authority, just giving an opinion, as I said in my post, Daisy.

[macneil]

"Only if bf leads to maternal suicide would the baby be better off ff imo....Oh but of course, I'm talking about the baby's health here, not the mother's. She only has to contend with an increased risk of breast cancer if she doesn't bf."

You may not think you're doing any harm to your baby by being a sourpuss around her, but studies have shown that even young babies can be affected by exposure to a ridiculous inability to empathise with other people.

[madamez]

You know, every time anyone starts implying that ff is not just not as good as bf but that formula is actually poison (with the expection of the specific difficulties faced by women with no access to clean water, etc) I start thinking they must be either very young, very stupid, or very prone to exaggeration. The vast majority of Uk-born infants born in the late 50s, early 60s and so on were ff as it was then percieved as 'better'. And we're not all dying like flies, nor suffering more than the normal range of health issues. Use a bit of f*88 logic next time.

[Elasticwoman]

Who is saying that ff is poison, Madamez?
And Macneil, I'm still laughing at the ridiculous inability of some mnetters to formulate an argument, never mind empathise.

[macneil]

I'm not as amused. Do you really think that people will be encouraged to breastfeed because you have said that nothing short of suicide is sufficient reason to use formula? I can scarcely believe that's your motive when you phrase things in such a bullying and unkind way - as if switching to formula because of infection or pain or clinical depression is an act of selfishiness. How many people do you suppose you have turned onto breastfeeding with that advice? I am a little tired, also, of the claim that not breastfeeding increases the risk of breast cancer to the mother. Anything that restricts our exposure to oestrogen reduces the risk - including breastfeeding and being pregnant. To invert that and say that not breastfeeding is carcinogenic is not just untrue, it's irresponsible, and, once again, very unkind. Once again, I'm asking myself if you really believe saying these things is helping more women to breastfeed. And if not, why do you say them? When intelligent breastfeeding women are really keen to share their tips and advice with women struggling to breastfeed here, and are afraid of being labelled breastfeeding fascists, I hope they understand that the comments are aimed at the few women who do seem only to write things that insinuate formula feeding mothers are recklessly endangering their children, selfishly. When these insinuations contain untruths, they're just not acceptable.