>Thus, given the uncertainties of the long term effects of the
>antidepressants on the baby, what should we advise the mother?  We
>should tell her that we do not know the long term possible risks, but
>we do know there are definite risks with artificial feeding, some of
>them serious.  It is true that most babies fed artificially are do not
>get serious side effects, but then we do not know who will get the
>side effects, and there are quite likely other long term side effects
>we do not know about, given the very great differences between
>breastmilk and artificial baby milk.  AND THE MOTHER, ONCE SHE HAS AS
>MUCH INFORMATION AS SHE NEEDS, SHOULD THEN MAKE HER CHOICE AND ALL OF
>US, INCLUDING THE PHYSICIAN, SHOULD SUPPORT HER.

I think we often feel the dilemma is ours in this kind of situation. We
ask ourselves "What would I do?" and try and advise accordingly. In
fact, our responsibility, IMHO, is to give all the information we can,
help her talk through it and then stand back while the mother makes
*her* decision. It is not *our* dilemma, it is hers.

This happened to me when I decided to try and get pregnant a few years
ago, despite my (at that time) appalling health and the numerous drugs I
was on. I was *told* not to get pregnant or I'd have a terribly deformed
baby, or I was told it would "probably be all right". What I *needed*
was impassioned information about the pros and cons, ways to reduce the
risk etc, and support to make my decision free of emotional pressure -
similar in the way that genetic counselling works. What I got was
personal opinions, evasiveness, dogmatism and a whole load of emotional
baggage that was not my own. Being me, I decided the doctors were all
idiots and researched the medical facts myself. I subsequently went
ahead and had a perfectly normal, healthy baby and my health was
*improved* by pregnancy :-)
--
Anna (mummy to Emma, born 17th Jan 1995 and Alice, born 11th Sept 1996)
Email: [log in to unmask]  Web Page: http://www.ratbag.demon.co.uk/anna