Jessica LaBaugh wrote:
> How responsive would I be if I had to work 9 hours a day?
>
> Is an attached, breast-fed baby a prize only for those in an economic situation to afford one?
>
Certainly not. Some of the lowest paid women in the world, who are feeding their entire family from manual labour 12 hours a day, manage to breastfeed and attend to their babies biological needs. For them poverty keeps them attached to the baby, not the other way around. They can't afford formula, so no matter what, breastfeeding works.
The question isn't how to work around it, for most Mums. The question
is how much to they prioritise the mothering, over the income. And
that's not to suggest they all don't need the income, but it is to
suggest that there are a huge amount of mothers who operate on the
income they think they need, and then work out what's left for the
baby. So the mother you quoted, may have overlooked options that would
have allowed her more than 2 hours with the baby a day, but didn't, as
she was locked into the spending patterns, and earning patterns, she had
before she birthed. It was either or, to her, and not "where can I
tweak this?"
Sears talks about it well - are you earning to put food on the table,
versus earning for the 'extras' you think you need? Most mothers can
find some lee-way, somewhere. And I know this because so many of my
friends are lower-income, in the USA, and still breastfeeding their
infants at 2 years, after they returned to work at 3 months pp. And are
picking up food from church basements, even as they juggle low paid part
time work, breastfeeding, and three other kids.
The essential structure, as I see it, is not income, but support. Good
old fashioned people support. Whether it be a MiL or a sister who does
the day care, and supports the breastfeeding, or a hubby who takes a
split shift to take baby to Mum for feeding during Mum's break, or...
the list is endless.
It's women who have no people in their lives to support, that I feel are
the most disadvantaged. Take out willing hands to hold baby and juggle
feeding arrangements, and pick up older kids from school and .. and...
and a Mum is in trouble.
In terms of women working externally to the home, the biggest issue I'd
say, is not the breastfeeding. It's the standard of care when Mum isn't
there. And on that, there are huge amounts of info and support to be
given. Explain out what 'good' versus 'damaging' day care provision
looks like (be it family or paid for) and give all the support on how a
non-breastfeeding skills person can give bottles to a breastfeeding
baby. Those two elements, are vital, in allowing Mums to stay attached
and close to their babies when they get back to them. A determined Mum
will usually make the breastfeeding work, as she believes in it. With
support, she can juggle. Without it, she may be lost.
So I'd argue that the difference between the women who work and who go
on to breastfeed successfully, and those who work and don't, isn't
income. It's belief.*
Also, you are working more than 9 hours a day! We're all doing that.
The issue isn't are you working for more than 9 hours a day, and then
are tired. The issue is you are absent from your child for 9 hours a
day, and then need to find ways to reconnect. Totally different ball
game. Hence saying the standard of day care is key. Baby needs secure
and loving attachment from a stable care-giver, when Mum isn't there.
Let Mums know that, and let them know the right things to look for in
both day care and friends and relatives, to ensure baby is getting it
when she's absent. Then Mum won't have problems to overcome when she
picks baby back up into her arms. Income won't guarantee this in any
direction. Again, it's about getting the right support, and if you have
no actual people support, and a low income, it's going to be harder.
Certainly, if you have a lot of income, it should be _easier_! Hell,
that's why we all want more money, to make our life easier!
I'd also argue the baby/Mother sleep dance is also crucial. Many Mums I
know cope with 12 hour workdays, by bed-sharing, and reverse cycling.
Baby eats all night long, and there is good evidence that this is a
biological 'norm' in many cultures where Mum and baby don't see much of
each other during the day, as Mum is working. And if they are eating
all night long, they are skin to skin all night long. and both Mum and
Baby are getting all the attachment hormones they would need. Skip
forward to modern work and family practices, and many woman who can't
sleep through continuous night feeds, can't cope with not having enough
sleep and the pressures of working and running the house and being the
sole person in charge of keeping an entire family going .. and they
night wean as it's One Demand Too Many. And that has a knock on effect
on the breastfeeding and attachment.
Conversely, the mother who can gain rest in a night time feeding
pattern, and who is happy to sit on her butt all day on Sunday and baby
moon while hubby runs around the house doing everything else, stays in
really good attachment with her baby. Because spending time with the
baby when she can, comes first. She allows others into her life to do
stuff for her, that she can pass by whilst she's concentrating on the baby.
The lower the income, and the less support, the harder it is. I'd
accept that. But I wouldn't accept that only those on good to high
incomes, can afford to be attached. As everything, it just means you
have to work harder! :-) Conversely, many of the lowest income in both
UK and USA, are very very attached. Being on benefits as a family,
often means 24/7 share in parenting, and baby gets what baby needs - two
loving parents all day long, and Mum isn't isolated on her own all day,
struggling for lack of adult support and contact. People in this
position, are often completely overlooked when discussions of income and
attachment parenting are discussed. It's as if 'low income at home' is
always 'bad'. When it may always be a financial struggle, but in other
ways, a lot of women would give their eye teeth to have that sort of set
up. And before everyone goes on about rose tinted viewpoints.. I'm in
this category.
I often think if we positioned it with women... think on it this way,
formula doesn't exist, if you don't get your milk into this baby, it
will die... makes for a change in thinking. Suddenly, they'd find the
bounce points and see how it can work. As ever, it's having formula
there, that makes the picture fuzzy, and they can't see the issues
clearly. Take the formula out, and the picture is in focus real fast.
And no, it's not something I've ever said.. but it's something I've
itched to say sometimes... ;-) It's also not in the core thinking of
many women who make it work. They don't accept formula in their heads
as acceptable, and therefore they _find_ the bounce points, as there is
no other way to do it in their thinking (belief!). So work and family
and breastfeeding and baby-bonding time works.. because she puts
baby-bonding time in as 'vital'.
Culture tells women they can't do it. But usually, they can. And this
has so meandered off the point.. does breastfeeding promote attachment?
Of course it does. Can breastfeeding be made more difficult, by return
to work? Of course it can. But it can also be worked around, in ways
that are not dependent on income.
Morgan Gallagher
(*Standard disclaimer, of course I'm talking in general and you will
know someone who believed and tried and didn't make it as the odds were
too great... but we all know hundreds who made it as well, so they do
not cancel each other out! The issue there, of course, is if you have
good support, it's easier to have good belief! ) ;-)
***********************************************
Archives: http://community.lsoft.com/archives/LACTNET.html
To reach list owners: [log in to unmask]
Mail all list management commands to: [log in to unmask]
COMMANDS:
1. To temporarily stop your subscription write in the body of an email: set lactnet nomail
2. To start it again: set lactnet mail
3. To unsubscribe: unsubscribe lactnet
4. To get a comprehensive list of rules and directions: get lactnet welcome
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.173 / Virus Database: 270.7.6/1709 - Release Date: 10/5/2008 9:20 AM
***********************************************
Archives: http://community.lsoft.com/archives/LACTNET.html
To reach list owners: [log in to unmask]
Mail all list management commands to: [log in to unmask]
COMMANDS:
1. To temporarily stop your subscription write in the body of an email: set lactnet nomail
2. To start it again: set lactnet mail
3. To unsubscribe: unsubscribe lactnet
4. To get a comprehensive list of rules and directions: get lactnet welcome
|
