Do you think attitudes will ever change?

[tyler80]

From another forum I frequent (not parenting based, very male) but perhaps more indicative of the general mindset?

"Agree with the don?t fixate on breast feeding point, My Missus went mental trying to get it to work, if you can great but most women have some trouble, almost all supplement it with formula, Not all women are Super-lactating, Earth mothers types, and in all honesty bottle fed babies aren?t growth stunted, midget, thickies like the ?Brest is Best? brigade would have you believe, Obviously Dad can share the feeding workload with formula which is actually a massive help, we wound up doing shifts early on and it meant that she actually got some sleep?"

Do you think we can ever get to the point where breastfeeding is considered normal?

Not really sure how the orthodontic teats are different. They're more expensive

re: banning formula - it's not because the NHS/etc are tight bastards, IIRC it's to do with getting the UNICEF baby safe hospital accreditation. I am sure I read somewhere that hospitals with this status have better initial breastfeeding rates AND better rates of breastfeeding duration. I think this is a good thing; it doesn't stop those who want to formula feed from doing so but does offer better 'chances' for BFers

re: attitudes - I'm lucky to come from a family where breastfeeding has been discussed at length, and is seen as the norm. I think this helped me to breastfeed, and continue breastfeeding successfully. In theory my confidence in BFing will therefore encourage others to BF who will encourage others to BF and so on.. (ego much? ) We will get there eventually.

pomme and loa - you're discussing this from a position of not-knowing-enough, sorry.

Where to start?

Breastfeeding counsellors' training and expenses come from the voluntary organisations, in the main. Not 'tax payers money'.

Research into the differential health outcomes does control for social and economic factors - and it shows that health outcomes are different in all countries, developed and developing. Just ask if you want some references for this, which will pass exacting standards of quality. Of course you can have a control group - what you can't have is a randomised controlled trial where babies are randomised to bf or ff. This is because it would be unethical to randomise a baby to ff, when the evidence is so clear this risks detriment.

GPs are not, in the main, a good source of info about infant feeding - again, there is research on this.

Something I've noticed about attitudes to bf, even where it's seen as the normal thing to do, is that it is assumed it's only for tiny babies. I have a 6 m.o. DS and a number of people have asked when I'm going to stop feeding / how long I'm going to feed him for.

The people who ask are those who wouldn't know about the 'ebf for the first 6 months' advice, so it's not to do with DS's age.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I doubt people who ff get asked as much when they plan to give up bottle feeding.

jemjabella, I think that's what many of us hope. I do find there's a generational difference, though, even when people see bf as the norm at first. My mum bf my brother & me for a few months, my SIL bf my nephew for a year and my mum was keen on me bfing. But she too has been asking when I plan to stop, and when I told her the WHO advised continuing till the age of 2, she nearly had a fit.

DH's grandma, on the other hand, keeps telling DS he doesn't know how lucky he is to have his food on tap.

And to say child obesity has increased since the breast is best campaign - as if it is cause and effect?!! Breathtaking....

Tiktok - just because we disagree doesn't mean I don't know enough.

My starting point on this thread was that as a FFer I had not encoutered any negativity from BFers and likewise had not seen any the towards BFers. I see now there is plenty of negativity to FFing from patronising twonks like you who are unable to accept that a choice different to your own can still be rational.

Unlike you, I don't need to criticise other mothers or allege they are misinformed in order to vindicate my choices in respect of feeding or anything else.

LolaKnickers, tiktok didn't say you didn't know enough because you disagreed. She said you didn't know enough because you demonstrated in your answers you didn't know enough.

For example, you said studies don't control for socioeconomic differences. This demonstrated you don't know enough because it's, erm, wrong.

Throwing a hissy fit about people patronising you looks a bit silly if you fail to engage in the substantive facts. If you had come back by saying "studies don't properly control for socioeconomic factors and here's an example of what I mean and how it fails to do so", then you'd be engaging in meaningful debate.

And unlike you, I don't need to argue that the facts aren't the facts to vindicate my choices in respect of feeding.

It would be a lot more straightforward if you'd said "I don't think the benefits of BF vs FF are sufficiently strong that I needed to do it with my child". Instead, you've argued (a) that hospitals and HCPs shouldn't actively make one choice easier than the other, implicitly linking that to a second argument that (b) the benefits don't exist.

yes, Lola, don't get your knickers in a twist... You are misinformed about the research relating to bf vs. ff and there's no crime in this. Honestly I don't mean to be offensive, but do feel you are kind of demonstrating the defensive attitude that bf mums sometimes encounter in ff mums. Your own personal choice is completely up to you - we all agree about that, I think.

While tiktok obviously doesn't need me to defend her and might even resent me doing so, I feel compelled to point out that she is possibly the least judgemental person who posts on these threads, and definitely one of the best informed. There really is loads of research out there to substantiate the points she is making.

Really glad that you have never before encountered negativity from bf mums. Hope yo have enjoyed your first (and hopefully last) experience of it

Greenbanans - sounds like you actively enjoyed being a part of that negative experience. How pleasant. You also demonstrated strange logic on this thread by declaring that ff children took up valuable resource with their ear infections but then admitting your own bf child had had lots of ear infections. People in glass houses...
Tiktok - my point about obesity is simple. It cannot be ff vs bf in terms of obesity. Back in the day when bf rates were very low and everyone was ff obese children were very rare. I remember one fat boy in my infant school that was teased mercilessly. Now fat children are de rigeur. That is due to inactivity and bad habits on solid foods NOT the milk a child has. Use of computer games and lack of running around and the prevalence of junk food has increased as bf rates have also risen and we have an issue with the health of the nation's youth despite these increased bf rates.
It is the stupid bf arguments such as obesity and intelligence that make me laugh in MY case as I look at my ff self and my ff husband and the rest of our ff families.

pommedeterre erm. historically obesity was uncommon. Historically BF was common.

Obviously it isn't as simple as BF=slim child; FF=fat child but statistically it's more likely that a FF baby will be a fat adult. IIRC a study showed that it isn't until those FF babies are in their 40s that this really becomes apparent. Can't for the life of me find the study though I'm afraid.

no no, you misinterpret me. Perhaps I didn't put that very well.

My argument was that that fewer ear infections generally means fewer resources used generally to treat them. Investing money in bf support would increase bf rates among women who wanted to bf and perhaps save the Nhs money in the long term (you've made it clear that this would not have affected your decision but many other women would appreciate more bf support)

Statistically, it's true that bf babies have fewer ear infections, tummy upsets and allergies, but of course there are individual anomalies - that's the nature of statistics. Yes, my DS has had ear infections. He has severe allergies. And also tummy upsets (once, during a rather severe tummy upset, a GP told me that DS would have probably had to be hospitalised for dehydration if he wasn't being breastfed). Not for one minute am I suggesting that GPs start withholding treatment on the basis of bf / ff

You are being so defensive about formula - I am genuinely pleased that your family are all fine, and not surprised either as formula has come a long way in terms of quality since the 1920s. Sadly, all our argument is serving to prove is that attitudes have a long way to go...

WoTmania - intelligence and obesity are surely far more linked to genes and socio-economic factors than bm vs ff. I cannot believe looking at her genes that dd will be a fat thicko (and so far she has remained stubbornly on 50th percentile whether she has been bf, mixed fed or ff!). I am obviously just looking at one example here but it's the one right in front of me!
Actually greenbananas maybe more support would have meant me continuing to bf for longer. The attitude and lack of empathy/stupidity of the midwives in the hospital certainly made it all much harder and more emotional than it already was. I got off to a really bad start. I would not prioritise this over other uses of the national monies though.
My main point on this whole thread however would be - society ain't going to change very much very soon so whatever method of feeding we choose for our children we just need to deal. I don't mean to come across as defensive but it is an emotive subject and I so strongly believe in genetic dispositions (brainwashed by dh with a phD in genetics perhaps!) that I struggle with some of the arguments.
I also think that there is a bit of a guilt trip from the establishment if you do give up/don't start bf and given that midwives are generally crap at helping out with bf and give rubbish advice this is wrong and unfair.
End of rant.

Running in to make this point...
If you have decided, before giving birth, that you want to formula feed your child, then you damn well SHOULD take formula with you.

If you don't plan to formula feed, and try breastfeeding but there are problems, and a risk of your baby going hungry, then you SHOULD be given formula for your baby.

If you make the choice to formula feed, why should the tax payer have to pay for it (anymore than they already do with healthy start vouchers etc)?

It pisses me off as formula was getting handed out left, right and centre when I had DD, but when I asked for some cotton wool & a nappy (mine had ran out and my Mum hadn't turned up with more yet) to change her, I was told "You should have bought your own, this isn't vey good indication for you, is it?" Sorry, I didn't think I'd be here for 3 days as I'd planned a water birth, but ended up having a fecking C-Section due to being ignored for a whole day instead of being taken on to labour ward.... Tangent, whoops.

Anyway, I have no isshoooos with FF, but I don't see why it should be frely available in hospital for those who have madethe decision to. I couldn't get lansinoh when I was in hospital, nor breast pads to stop me leaking everywhere, and I couldn't ask for someone to go and fetch me a nursing bra either.

I'm just pointing out that that is what the research indicates - the study in the study I am thinking of adults who had been BF were less likely in their 40s to be overweight/obese than their peers who had been FF. Before their 40s there was no real difference in weight.
I don't think your DD (as lovely as she must be really stands up as a proof either way I'm afraid. Obviously there are loads of variables but afaik studies adjust for factors like socio-economic background.

Oh, well, at least that way as I roll around squelchily in all my fat glory I'll have someone to blame for it (and so will dd ).
Although (just to be annoying) surely you can still control that middle aged spread with good habits? So would that mean that the studies mean that ff are less likely to build good habits for eating/exercise? The one thing about being overweight as a modern affliction is that you are in control so that must be taken into account in the studies?

Pommedeterre this explains it better.

So bf reduces the risk of obesity later in life (here school age) by up to 25% due to a lower protein content (human vs modified cows). A formula with lower protein normalises this risk against bf reference group. The risk is reduced by the fact that bf babies are less likely to be fat babies than ff babies and infant fatness can affect you later in life.
That makes sense and it is annoying that the NHS would reduce that to the 'bf babies won't be obese!' strapline on all the patronising leaflets they distribute. Why must we all be treated like morons?
This is not so worrying for dd yet (as I said stubbornly on 50th percentile for weight and heading off the chart for length) but for me petrifying! I was the fattest baby! Better get the trainers out...sigh!

As they were also using two formula to prove the theory it also gives a good example of what to look for when choosing formula.

Also I don't think people should go on weight percentiles alone as my dd is fluctuating between 85th and 91st for weight but is skinnier (not chubby at all) than my friends baby the same age who is on the 25 percentile. The main difference being my dd is on a higher percentile for height than weight, where my friends baby is on a lower percentile for height than she is for weight.

I agree - length and weight are important. BMI principle I guess as for adults. DD is more a beanpole type like her father. I was just a round ball.

I was short and skinny bottom for both, but my ds and dd are both tall and skinny, god everyone is going to tower over me.

Cricking your neck upwards to tell a feisty teenager off!

slushy - I'm short and slim too DH is well over 6 foot though and I think I too am going to be towered over, even by DD the way sh'es going at the moment.

When I was little my friends mam was really little not even 5foot and had three 6foot tall rugby built boys I remember they were all fighting in her living room one day so she said right the slipper is coming off and chased them up the stairs slapping the slipper about they were screaming, she came back in the room grinning and said I have never actually hit them with it they just get scared by the sound.

It always tickled me but I have a dark sense of humor, I will have to make sure they are terrified of the slipper then so it won't matter that they are taller than me . I know the slipper was reserved for fighting because she said they would really hurt each other and it was the only way she could split them up.

My Nanna was like that - she had slipper and a stick