Baby magazines giving unrealistic expectations?

[Cailleachna]

From the Daily Mail - don't have access to the article but it was basically suggesting that baby magazines are giving women PND by messing up their expectations of pregnancy/childbirth/parenthood:

1. by suggesting that expensive equipment/accessories are needed that many women cannot afford
2. by suggesting that they will have choices when it comes to childbirth and parenting which may not pan out, e.g. natural childbirth plan that ends up EMCS
3. by suggesting that returning to work and arranging childcare will be easy and straightforward

Any thoughts? Is this on a par with arguing that fashion magazines are responsible for exacerbating eating disorders and shopping addictions? Does anyone else feel like they were led up the garden path by the media (or anyone else for that matter) and did it contribute to negative feelings after the birth?

There is definitely an issue about pressure to buy stuff that you don't need. I've wasted a lot of money, but luckily I did have some money to spend.

However, I can't really blame baby magazines, or any of the things listed in the OP for my own PND.

The reasons for it were complex, and I won't go into them here, other than to say there are things in my past which probably made it more likely.

People can tell you about the realities (positive and negative) of motherhood when you're pregnant but I don't think you really listen anyway.

It's impossible to know what to expect until it happens.

I think I bought about 2 baby/pg mags in total. I thought they were rubbish and never needed any advice from them as I had MN!

Message withdrawn

I didn't read a single baby magazine whilst pregnant and still had galloping PND.

Wish I'd found MN earlier, might have helped me more!

I think I read half a dozen baby magazines in total.

In some ways they give unrealistic expectations, like many magazines, but I also found them quite informative.

I thought PND was hormone related more than anything so I'm not sure how these magazines can be the cause (although I understand how they may exacerbate it)

I've got to say I agree with Pruners; magazines are mostly about marketing, even when they contain the odd useful bit. I'm never inclined to trust advice in magazines anyway because, like baby books, they don't account for the fact that everyone's baby/experience/situation is different. And yes, very patronising too. I'd say that goes for "women's" mags, "men's" mags and "teen" mags too. They're going for the widest audience possible so they're full of low common denominators.

Anyway, thanks for the views and perspectives.

I never read one.

For me in same category as "bride" magazines (i read about 2 of those).

Full of people looking and being terribly wonderful in an unattainable and not very helpful way.

I can just imagine what those baby magazines are like from the covers.

Things like "10 top tips for labour. 1 - tea tree oil will be tremendously relaxing for you".

Am I right?!!

I read the odd one - they tend to be pretty duff. And I broadly agree with the news item - they put unnecessary pressure on mothers
1)by marketing super expensive nursery items as being some sort of necessity
2)by implying that all women can get the birth of their choice with cover titles like "get the birth you want!".

obviously mental health issues such as PND don't happen just due to magazine articles - and complex real life factors come into play - but these sort of pressures are unhelpful.

I'd agree about the birth choice issue - but I actually found most of the pressure I felt was from my NCT antenatal classes. They were brilliant in terms of meeting people and the discussions we got going, and the lady who ran the class was really nice, but she seemed determined to convince me that hospitals were all desperate to sedate me and pull my baby out using a robotic arm, and the only way to get an experience that wouldn't leave me - and my LO! - traumatised was a nice, unmedicated, water homebirth.

"1) by suggesting that expensive equipment/accessories are needed that many women cannot afford
2) by suggesting that they will have choices when it comes to childbirth and parenting which may not pan out, e.g. natural childbirth plan that ends up EMCS
3) by suggesting that returning to work and arranging childcare will be easy and straightforward"

Re no 1: how insulting! we are perfectly capable of reading vogue etc and seeing the latest "must have" bag(worth £5,000) and realising that we dont need it! Same goes for a £500 high chair! magazines are window shopping, we're not stupid!

I hate baby mags though as they are all aimed at older mums and they all seem to assume everyone who works whilst pregnant or returns to work work in an office. I am nowhere near 40 and do shift work and find them frustrating! I do enjoy the "wonder products" thought, mostly to laugh at (a bouncer that costs more than most people's first car LOL)

salbysea: I searched out some references for your partner last week, and posted them on the thread we were both on here

Were they of any use?

they never covered third degree tears in any of the mags that I read, so no, I don't think they are realistic at all. they make childbirth and pregnancy seem all airy fairy when it's actually not the case for most women.

ticktock thanks but no, they are not relevant to his patient's problems

OK,Sal....the intention was that they were relevant to his claim that there was no good evidence that bf made a difference, not that they would help with a patient's problem (which I did not know anyway). Feel free to come back to the thread and discuss

"his claim that there was no good evidence that bf made a difference"

Oh FFS he made no such claim and neither did I, find one anti-BFing reference from me (or indirectly from him)! I did not say that there is no evidence saying its good!

I was just warning the OP that there is a hell of a lot less good research about BFing out there than you'd think! (can you see the difference there between that statement and your version of what I said he said? I dont think you want to somehow!)

And there IS little or no good research about many aspect of BFing. My husband was not "claiming that there is no good evidence that bfing made a difference" - he has patients with specific questions and problems relating to BFing and expected to find lots of research relevant to them so he could advise them as best he could and found a deficit. This was a surprize. He expected to find lots of good solid research about all aspects of BFing. Saying that more research needs to be done does not = "it doesnt say anywhere that BFind does any good so dont bother"

There's more to it than "is it good or not?" - eg (off the top of my head) effects, risks or benefits of combining breast milk and formula, BFing when the mother's diet is poor etc. How long does any benevolence last (if BFing is prolonged) and when does it cease to make a difference... and so on

(sorry OP, I had abandoned another thread because of tiktok's assumptions but am not being accosted here on an unrelated thread so am hoping it is now nipped in the bud and I dont have to abandon the whole of mumsnet due to being followed around by someone who wont drop the bloody bone!