for fucks sake leave breastfeeders alone

[ohmeohmy]

aaargh, news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7867686.stm twunts.

To all the people who are angry because of the article, think about it this way.

All through my 1st pregnancy I was bombarded with 'breast is best', 'breast feeding is so easy', 'the baby regulates the milk supply', 'a baby who sleeps well isn't hungry', 'lots of babies feed very efficiently, if they're not grisly they're fine'. etc etc All fantastic pro-breast-feeding stuff.

Ds1 was born and though he latched on PERFECTLY didn't feed AT ALL for 48 hours. He just didn't 'do' sucking! The hospital monitored his blood sugar levels, and sent us home after 1 good feed. He then fed sporadically, didn't poo for days (but I had been told 'that was fine, breast-fed babies don't poo very often' - but this does not apply to newborns), slept BRILLIANTLY - up to 8 hours at night, was very happy. At 10 days he had lost 15% of his birthweight, and it was emergency stations to get his weight back up - by this point he was sleepy, lethargic, had to be woken for feeds. But I had been filled with the whole 'breast feeding is SO easy' literature, so felt a double failure. Firstly because I hadn't managed to feed him properly, secondly because it was SO EASY and I'd still not managed.

We ended up mix-feeding him - 3 top-up bottles a day, but I did manage to b/feed him to 13 months. But a bit more info about the difficulties, and the importance of avoiding dehydration would have been really useful, and with my subsequent children, that experience (plus the amazing tiktok on here!) really helped me through.

Promoting breast-feeding isn't all about 'how wonderful it is'. It is really hard sometimes.

I should add, the reason he slept so brilliantly was because he simply wasn't taking in enough calories to wake up.

Tik-tok - do babies not get weighed on days 3 and 4? ANd nappies monitored? Those really are basic measures.

I've had two home births and each time my baby was weighed daily for 5 days, and I had to keep all dirty nappies for the midwife to check. I also bought nappies with a urine indicator to make absolutely certain ds was weeing(he had a potential kidney problem).

belgo, not everywhere, no....my guess is that most places do not weigh on day 3-4. And many mothers are not told about the important sign of poos.

All those of you angry with this obviously haven't had babies rushed into hospital thanks to this problem- I have.

I think you should just be thankful that your baby has never been ill in this way instead of selfishly wanting to deny those babies that have been of research that could save lives.

I am sooo grateful this is finally being addressed. The consultant who cared for dd in SCIBU 4 years ago wanted more research into this as she felt dd and other babies suffered needlessly. She was furious with my midwife for blindly pushing me down the exclusive bfeeding path(which I so badly wanted to achieve) instead of just getting some bloody nourishment into dd any other way.

Foxytocin my baby had jaundice as yours my midwife told me to do what you wanted yours to say ie breastfeed constantly- I did. The problem being she was NOT getting enough to wash it through,she was too skinny and de-hydrated. In short the breast feeding WAS NOT working and she was slowly starving.

Fine if I'd have had my own midwife 24/7 the breast feeding may have been more successful(I doubt it as we have a long family history of bfeeding being a problem not through lack of trying)but the fact is many babies should be monitored better and are suffering needlessly.

This study could stop babies being seriously ill. Having a baby in SCIBU is no laughing matter especially when it could so easily averted ie through having a bloody bottle for gods sake. For some of us breast feeding just doesn't work well enough and even if it may in the long term it's cruel to babies to just deny them badly needed food in order to battle on with it. For some babies battling on doesn't cause problems for some it does.

Such a selfish attitude- my baby is ok stuff those that aren't just because I successfully breast feed,to call those that are going to run a study that may stop parents and babies going through what we went through"t**s"

If I had another baby I'd never try exclusive bfeeding again( 2 ill babies is enough for me)the way things stand at the moment. However if I knew there was a monitoring program for underweight ill babies I would attempt it so actually in the long run a study like this would actually help with raising bfeeding take up as I can't be alone in feeling like this.

mila im sorry you had such a ropugh time but if you read through you'd find other experiences

from what i see most people just want better support for bf mums out there.

the only reason my baby wasnt in scbu was that it was the millenium nd i couldnt get anyone tosee him, I firmly believe that. wellborn full term and aged 4weeks dropping to weighing 4 lbs and a bit...... yes he should have been there.

hewent on to soy ff and wise fine after but with extra education I bf ds4 and he's doing well, itsd been in stages though- ds2 mixed fora 4 months, ds3 mixed for 16 months. its been a learning curve.

I can quite understand that you wouldnt feeda gain by bf, totally. But fwiw i dont know that people are somuch against theresearch (thatwould be odd) as the promotion of it, iyswim.

Mila, surely if your latch was fine and byour baby was feeding but your baby was still skinny and looking dehydrated because enough was not getting in to wash it through, (paraphrasing what you said) then any midwife worth her salt would have picked those up as warning signs that something was wrong.

These are basic non invasive ways of assessing a baby to conclude that something is still not right. Looking at nappies and counting them anyone? like Belgo said below?

So for me, your and my experiences come back to basic training.

My daughter was not producing enough wet or dirty nappies either despite them telling me that she was feeding fine (after she was latching) so for me not enough was getting through and I was right there under their noses to check. On day 5 her poo was still had meconium in it. I have the postnatal notes - and when they copied it to me, the did not copy me the feeding notes which show that for the first 36 hrs she hadn't fed- at all- but the PN notes contradicts reality from day 1 stating that she was feeding beautifully. But then the kicker, in the same PN notes it records meconium in her poo on day 5.

Milamae, you say "many babies should be monitored better"....abso-bloody-lutely, this is what many of us are saying.

In your case, it's not possible to say what might have worked, but maybe skin to skin contact, ad lib after birth, hand expression of colostrum if baby not feeding well within three or four hours, careful checking for milk transfer, monitoring weight, urine and poo...all of this is basic care but with a jaundiced baby it is even more important. If it's done properly, babies can be spotted before they hit a crisis, and hospital admission can be avoided.

It may be that some babies will need intermediate formula (or ebm, or donated human milk) if careful monitoring and management does not work - but it shouldn;t be in response to an emergency re-admission, which is traumatic for everyone

"Fine if I'd have had my own midwife 24/7 the breast feeding may have been more successful"

Funny you say that. In fact, I had my own midwife for the first 24 hrs, 24/7 and dd's lack of feeding was still not addressed properly.

I was in High Dependency Unit and when my midwife went on a break another one replaced her before she could leave my room. My blood pressure was so high and I was already going into an eclamptic fit so dd was ventoused out in a bit of a hurry.

ds also had meconium in his poo for days. I didn't realise this was out of the ordinary. Gosh, I am still so ignorant in these matters. Will have to do more research into this before next one born.

There is nothing wrong with the article, it's not scaremongering this is a very real problem and to pretend otherwise is wrong.

The fact so many on here want to pretend it isn't a problem highlights the fact that this study is long overdue.

To call those in favour of the research(me I guess) "w*s" and ts is appalling.

There was nothing particularly offensive in the article imo though the journalistic style was a bit irritating at times. I thought the comments from the person leading the study were sensible and balanced.

Another myth............bfed babies don't get colic. Yeah right

milamae, it is a problem...who is saying it isn't?

Tik toc and Foxy we were way past the collostrum stage and had been home a few days,latch was crap,I had gallons she just wasn't getting enough to fight the jaundice.

I was desperate to breast feed exclusively forever,I'd read up on the benefits, had a special interview by a LaLeche woman in hospital was praised as being a good mother for being so determined.

It was my own determination and that of the midwife that caused dd's emergency re-admittance. It was our joint snobbery towards formula and ebm( I thought bottles would make her latch even worse).

I know my midwife was at fault here but on reflection I had a part to play as did all the literature I'd read. To be fair she did keep asking if I was happy to battle on.

Milamae, you had a really bad experience, and I am cross and sad for you

Babies do not suddenly become dehydrated. This is a process that begins shortly after birth. There are warning signs which mothers can be taught to watch out for, and preventive measures that all mothers should be ecouraged to put in place.

My guess is you were not told about the warning signs, and your baby was not weighed (accurately) on day 3-4... or if she was, the result was not acted upon.

Errrm the title of this thread Tictok kind of indicates there are those who think there isn't a problem.

I'm only light mumsnetting(my reward after 2 days into half term) in amongst chaos,so my speed reading of a lot of the posts may have made me jump to conclusions. Apologies if that is the case.

Thanks for your nice post.

Lila please dont feel bad,it can be very traumatic to want to BF and then not be able. I can 100% agree with that,took me years to come to terms with it.

But we can only do our best with the resources available.

The artivcle does seem to get at BF I think hence the title. The research isn't so much the issue.Research is good. How you word press releases matters too though.

Imagine if I wrote a press release about bacterial gastroenteritis in nweborns and talked about religious FF! Again the research would be justified but the wroding crap.

(There arereligious FF out there btw- my MIL!)

mila - having been through a similar experience, I have a great deal of sympathy with the sentiments you express. like you, bfing went completely pear-shaped after the initial discharge period (at 2.5 weeks in DS's case). I just didn't have the nouse to realise that because DS had been having regular formula top-ups, that would have compromised my supply, and I so I believed (and was completely encouraged in the belief by the hospital mws) that I could go from several top=ups per day to exclusive bfing.

many babies are weighed at day 10, there isnt the community support for breastfeeding from HCP. they turn up for 20 minutes do the checks and go. They may or may not be there when baby is being fed. When in hospital as first time mum I had a disinterested HCA glance at me whilst breastfeeding and say thats ok second time I asked she appeared to think I was being a bit cautious in asking for an opinion. 3 days later we were at the Drs as DS1 had a depressed fontanelle, no milk had come in. I gave up feeding. DS2, tried feeding again this time ended up on ward with 5% dehydration. Agai I stopped feeding. DS3 I haven't tried because I couldn't face the stress and failure.

I do think that my failure to feed was due to lack of support. If I was not a nurse I wouldn't have recognised the signs of dehydration.

If this research shows significant numbers of dehydrated newborns being admitted to hospital then it then supports money being spent on support for breastfeeding mums.

IMO studies like this will do more for increasing support than anything else, because it will be seen as cost effective.

IMO the main problem here is that BBC wrote a very bad report on an important issue: for a starters this isn't the first study on hypernatremic dehydration... it's not even the first study by Dr. Oddie on this topic.... Badly researched by BBC!! He reported on this important issue in this similar study (in 2001)???

The main focus of the article on BBC should have been that there is evidence that in some cases BF babies get ill because there is a lack of support/proper info for mums when they start breastfeeding (and there is plenty of evidence of this on this thread). When this leads to baby becoming so dehydrated that they need to be readmitted to hospital, this is awful for mum (and dad) and baby, as can be read in many of the posts on this thread.

If Dr Oddie's study will lead to a realisation that more support is needed (which he says himself he hopes it will) that would be brilliant!

Normansmum, in that previous study the numbers were 32015 live births, 907 readmissions of which 8 due to hypernatremic dehydration. All of these babies were breastfed and the authors suggest that the sole reason for the babies' health condition was the poorly established breastfeeding.

Interestingly, in the discussion they also mention other studies that have been done on this topic, and that most of the babies described were first borns. This would suggest that with better (BF) education of first time mums many cases could be prevented.

So 8 in 32015 admissions were dur to the xcondition?

Defintely worth a look but not a thing to concern parents of average bf'ers with pe3rhaps- the sort of thing mums (given the propernsity of new mums towards worry) should really be watched for by a decent HCP rather than warned about?

well, i don't know...
2.5: 10,000 doesn't sound much, but it is higher incidence than some of those syndromes tested for at the neonatal screening (cystic fibrosis, PKU). Also, if all it takes is making sure that mums get better support when they start breastfeeding, parents check the nappies, and check baby for signs of dehydration...

But I reckon if that got 'out there' in books etc aimed at first timers more than that number by far would be put off BF

Now,if the books MW HV ask mums at delivery to jot down or note how many wet nappies they get in a day and the HCP is there and asks for that, you'dpick up more.

If it said 'You should seek immediate help if your baby hasnt produced a wet nappy for X hours' it'd make a difference

There's a disclaimer in the book what to expect (PG) that you should only read the problems section if you nee to:I dont in any way believe in witholding info but there is sense in making it available but not scaring people at the same time

I think you word is as ' If your baby has less than x wet nappies in X hours you should chat to your HCP urgently as this can be a sign of....' it is better than 'Some babies who are bf can get a dangerous condition called...

IYSWIM (Coz I do but know I amwaffling)