Anyone else prepared to admit that they didn't b/f just because they didn't want to ??

[IllegallyBrunette]

Just wondered really.

I have 3 dc and didn't breast feed any. I was 19 when I had dd1 and was asked by a midwife if i'd be breastfeeding and I said no. There was no argument or discussion, that was that.

When I had dd2 at 34 weeks she had to be tube fed. I offered to express milk for her but was told i needn't bother.

With ds, again I didn't want to but even if I had it would have been hard as he was supposed to be on phototherapy 24/7 for a week.

I think the attitude towards ff mums on this forum by some bf mums is disgusting. I would never dream of saying anything against any mum for feeding her baby by whichever way she chooses, yet some of the comments on here like 'formula should only be available if there is a proven medical need' are just awful.

RSB I can say Bmilk is one size fits all, just the same way that another mother can make the same comment about Formula. I don't agree with her comment just like you don't agree with mine. You still havn't answered my questions from earlier in the thread.

titty

"That's not really the point though is it? This thread has been about the choice to ff in the absence of breastfeeding failure.
I don't think there's anyone anywhere that would want a child do starve if its mother couldn't breastfeed.
TBH it's a bit annoying making comments like 'should we let our babies starve'. Why say it? Nobody's implying that formula isn't the best and only real alternative to breastmilk when breastmilk isn't available."

Actually it is the point. As a mother who COULDN'T BF her DD I am offended by the comments made about FF.People can say they are 'aiming' it at mothers who make the CHOICE not to BF but the comments that are then made about how obiese/ ill and unhealthey her child is going to be and how it is not the 'natural' thing to do OFFEND me. The things you are talking about refer to my child too. If you look earlier in the thread you will see that people are tslking about children in thrid world countries dying because of this milk. TBH I found these comments annoying and completely off the point. the comments that were made WERE implying that Formual is BAD and shouldn't be avaliable, hense why I made that comment.

tiktok "Well....in fact, if a mother is a drug abuser in pregnancy, she will be encouraged to breastfeed or at least supply breastmilk for her newborn, as this reduces the often painful withdrawal symptoms for the baby. Obviously she would be encouraged to come off drugs as long term ingestion of drugs via breastmilk is not safe.
Moderate alcohol intake is not unsafe for a breastfeeding mother's baby."

Again contradictorary advice. While some parents fee a BF baby should not be fed by his drug-taking mother, aonther thinks this is for the best. We ALL have our own opinions on what is best for our children.

maria I agree.
How can most FF women see that BF is ok, yet some BF women feel they have every right to criticize a FF mother.

Does the superiority come in the Bmilk?

You're right, oneyummymummy - we do know what's it formula. For example:

Ingredients in all SMA Gold Products.
Reduced minerals whey, vegetable oils, skimmed milk powder, lactose, emulsifiers(soya lecithin and monoglycerides of fatty acids), calcium chloride, potassium bicarbonate, sodium citrate, vitamin C, taurine, potassium hydroxide, ferrous, sulphate, potassium citrate, zinc sulphate, cytidine-5'-monophosphate, calcium hydroxide, disodium uridine-5'-monophosphate, vitamin E, antioxidant(tocopherol-rich extract),adenosine-5'- monophosphate, niacin, disodium inosine-5'-monophosphate, disodium guanosine-5'-monophosphate, pantothenic acid, vitamin A, copper sulphate, potassium chloride, thiamin, vitaminB6, riboflavin, beta-carotene, mananese sulphate, folic acid, potassium iodide, vitamin K, sodium selenite, biotin, vitamin D, vitamin B12.

And we don't know exactly what's in breastmilk because it's infinitely more complex than a man-made substance.

I think you are being deliberately obtuse in refusing to accept the statement that breastmilk is not a one size fits all situation. Every woman's breastmilk differs, as each child's needs differ. It is as far from 'one size' as can be. Using the clothes analogy, it is bespoke.

I know that BM is not 'one size fits all' but at the same time neither is FF. However nobody here is defending Formula. Picking up on little things that are said is also being obtuse. Look at the wider picture. Neither FF or BM is a 'onesize fits all' milk, as I explained earlier.

But thank you for going to the trouble of posting the ingredients list, although I feel this a little bias as we couldn't possibly list the things in breast milk (good or bad), you cannot really compare the two in this way.

It is no ones business at all whether or not a mum breastfeeds and for the record I hated it, put my little one ones formula when they was a week old. Breastapos, keep your noses out where they are not wanted.

However, I do think it is wrong to criticise a mother for FF. Whatever the reason for her choice, it is just that her choice. I think that - for all its attractiveness in some respects - tittybangbang's attempt to see things from a baby's p.o.v. is just not workable.

However, I also think it is wrong that our society does play down the normality of breastmilk and breastfeeding (bm is the norm; FF, while a functioning alternative, is, nutrionally, not the norm in infant nutrition - that's just the case, I'm afraid, regardless of those extremely rare occasions where a child is intolerant of its mother's milk).

The problem on MN is it is mostly peopled by women who a) either bf their babies or b) who tried, but had to switch to FF for one reason or another (this is my perception, at least - forgive me if this is way off mark).

Therefore, in many ways, a thread like this is completely atypical. Few women on MN - although I may be wrong - choose not to bf just because they don't want to.

And even if they did, I might still argue that this is all to frequently down to the general inclination of society to problematise bf-ing, rather than down to a totally unloaded and agenda-free 'choice' on their part.

I can see how threads which point out the rare but real risks of FF are upsetting to FF-ing mums; likewise, those that point out the (normal) benefits of bf-ing are upsetting too.

Does that mean we shouldn't talk about the problems associated with FF-ing, or the normality of bf-ing? To spare feelings?

all too frequently

Somehow the mothers who BF seem to think that their own comments about FF are acceptable yet when comments are made about BF look at how defensive you become. How about stepping in someone elses shoes. BF does NOT make you a better mother. And before everyone jumps on that comment, by suggesting that formula is not good for children so you decide to BF surely (in your opinion) you feel you are being a 'better' mother for it?! Otherwise you wouldn't care about whether other peoples children are FF or BF.

What I also meant to say in my post is:

because MN is full of bf-ers (or one-time bf-ers, now ff-ers) it is not that representative of society as a whole.

Now, perhaps bf-ers on MN respond to this kind of thread as if MN was easily representative of society as a whole; that is, they feel the need to defend bf-ing in the strongest terms (which can, all too often, appear to become personal criticism of ff-ers).

Agree that BF-ing does not make you a better mother.

Of course not.

oneyummymummy It sounds as though you are being offended about the research on obesity, immunity etc and it doesn't matter whether you chose to ff or if circumstances forced that decision on you, facts are facts, or rather, reliable research is just that. No one wants anyone to feel bad about this, but ignoring the evidence won't help in getting mothers the support they need when they are struggling.
Breastmilk is made for and adapts to the specific needs of an individual baby. Formula is not. That's not my opinion, it's just how it is.

Its not that we shouldn't 'talk' about it penthesileia A nice disscusion where the FF mothers were not being judged would be lovely. I would love to talk about my experience and how I wished sooo much that I could have BF my DD. But in doing so people are offending FF mothers.

It is not a nice discussion where MNers are giving advice and listening to reason behind that choice, its people somehow thinking they have the right to offend and belittle other mothers who have had to make this choice.

Hopefully, here's some more info for you ...there is no need for the emotive shroud waving about babies starving without formula which I've seen on here. Throughout the history of humankind, as far as we can tell, a few babies have not been breastfed. This has happened when their mothers have died; when the particular section of society they were born into had a 'taboo' on breastfeeding; when mothers and babies were separated for some reason ( all in The Politics of Breastfeeding if people want to know more, by Gabrielle Palmer).

Babies have always been given some substitute or other. Right up until the 50s and 60s here in the UK, non-breastfed babies had (usually) boiled and diluted cows milk in bottles. Well-to-do country babies might have had it fresh from a special, specially-tended cow. Wet nursing has often been used at various points and places - this was common in the UK among the upper classes and royalty up until 100 or so years ago. Even today, babies in special care get donor milk.

People have always known that babies who are not breastfed are sicker and more likely to die than the ones who were breastfed, because this contrast was stark in situations where infant death was not rare anyway.

Non-breastfed babies tended to die not of starvation but of infection - and this means one of the major advantages formula has over ordinary cows milk is because as a packaged product in powder or carton form, it does not need refrigeration.

oneyummymummy - it's not a matter of my opinion that mothers who have abused drugs in pregnancy should be encouraged to breastfeed/provide breastmilk for their newborns....get real! It's a matter of fact that these little ones are born already addicted and need breastmilk to cope with withdrawal symptoms which are horrible for them.

The research doesn't bother me, people forcing it in my face, when I had no choice but to FF is whats upsetting. Think how you would feel if you had no choice but to give your child something only to be told over and over how bad it is for them and how it will effect them later in life. You sit and you wait and just hope that they are wrong. Just try to imagine how that might make you feel.

Oneyummymummy: You say: "by suggesting that formula is not good for children so you decide to BF surely (in your opinion) you feel you are being a 'better' mother for it?!" I'm not sure I understand what you say correctly. Are you saying then that those of us who choose to breastfeed (and are lucky enough to be able to do so) are doing it because we believe it makes us better mothers? If so, I simply don't get this argument, because if for every choice we make people will tell us 'so you think you're a better mother for doing this' then there won't be any room left for choice! I make a combination of choices for my boy, some made out of necessity, others through my reading, others through laziness, others through my desire to do this or that. I don't believe I'm a better mother for making my particular combination of choices, it's just that, the choices I've made given my circumstances & my knowledge at the time. Being a 'good' or a 'bad' mother is a wholly different discussion anyway (and oh my god, look how competitive we mothers can become with all these labels about good & bad parenting!!) but it has nothing to do with particular, individual choices, it has all to do with the whole picture, the whole relationship with the child.

My point was that you say that this is fact yet someone else has already said that these women 'should not' BF. So already this person can see that their opinion is already contradicted by research.
I think you need to read what im saying and try to understand the point i am trying to make.

There's research that suggests c-sections can cause problems for the baby later - I read it, took it in and won't read it again. I don't suggest that it's not true, or merely someone's opinion. If I got upset by it on a thread, I would stop reading it.
The research is only brought up on threads like these when people suggest that there are no drawbacks to ff, or refute the evidence.

Oh for goodness sake, oneyummymummy - it was you who implied that it would be better if drug abusing mothers did not breastfeed, not 'someone else'. My post was in reply to yours.

I don't get your point at all. Try making it more clearly and I'll have another go

maria I am refering to women on this thread who have suggested that I am not doing what is best for my child and that they have done all thier research and have decided that they are doing what is best for thiers. Surely if this were true then they would be 'better' mothers. I am not refering to all BF mothers. Sorry I didn't make that clear.

People shouldn't judge, oym. Agree.

It is frustrating that these threads often seem to degenerate into emotional turmoil.

The problem, as I see it is (and please please please, I hope I don't put this in a totally offensive manner. I really don't mean it), at some point in a thread like this 3 things happen:

a) a FF mother says: "well I was FF and so was my DH and my children are too. And we're all fine, so ner." - this is a red rag to bf-ing bulls as it appears to be a direct refutation of scientific research. People therefore leap in to defend the research, and ka-blooey. Fight!

b) a BF-ing mother says: "hmmm, not sure you really made a choice, actually. Society is against BF-ing, as a whole, therefore your choice was no choice at all". Again, BANG - Fight on.

c) A sad mum comes on who says, "I wanted to, but couldn't. I FF and very occasionally worry about it because of emotive threads and smug contented BF-ers. In fact, a mum like this shouldn't join this thread at all BECAUSE SHE DID WANT TO BF (whereas the thread asked who out there didn't, IYSWIM).

Phew. It's all a minefield.

Incidentally, BF-ers shouldn't have joined either, as they don't answer the question either.

And before I'm jumped on, the smug was a joke.

I bf, and am not smug. Honest...

No, think you should read back and see that someone else suggested that this woman should not BF her baby.

My point is that as a FF mother. Some of the comments on this thread have offended me. NOT all of the comments and like I say everybody is entitled to thier own opinion, however I think that some BF mothers who look down on FF mothers because of a choice they had to make is WRONG.

Again like i said I am not aiming this at all BF mothers but just the few that somehow feel that they are 'better' for doing what they have done. And my comments made earlier on were in responce to comments that other people had made, so you are taking them out of context.

Rueful LOL at Penisthelia - the way these threads go is very much as you say!

I disagree that people should stay off them if they have no direct experience to answer the thread's OP, though.

Threads are a conversation, and they very naturally veer into other, related, territory. In any case, the OP on this was mentioned the 'attitude towards ff mums by some bf mums' so it did rather invite a response to that.