LACTNET Archives

Lactation Information and Discussion

LACTNET@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Carol Brussel <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Lactation Information and Discussion <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 26 Apr 2000 18:35:20 EDT
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (80 lines)
heather - i think ezzo's secret agenda (which may be unknown to them) is to
encourage moms to bottlefeed rather than breastfeed. why do i think so?
because everything about what they advise you to do is inherently
anti-breastfeeding.  regimenting breastfeeding in the way they teach is a way
to prevent breastfeeding from being a comforting, nurturing activity. i
suspect most of us have seen it - a mom who "just breastfeeds." that is, she
feeds the baby a certain amount of time every so often, pops the baby off,
and it is JUST feeding the baby.

this is as opposed to a mother who incorporates breastfeeding into a
nurturing relationship, and doesn't have to have it explained to her about
"non nutritive suckling' - its nourishing the body AND the soul for her baby.

and why would ezzo be opposed to breastfeeding as a nurturing approach to
parenting? its not a way in which you can express a patriarchal, domineering
power relationship that is entirely about control, and not about respect or
love. i sense a great fear of children when i read the ezzo/babywise
material. people who are afraid of their children and therefore want to
control them, really dig this stuff. people who don't particularly like their
children. there's plenty of 'em.

for instance, a recent mom i saw who has difficulties and whose baby has
difficulties as well. she can't nurse him beyond a certain point and will put
up with anything, and i mean anything, rather than "just" nurse him again
before it is "time." she will put him in his room in his crib screaming (she
recognizes that she must do this to avoid hurting him) and will try just
about anything . . . except nursing him. i can't fix everything that's wrong
with her (and the dad for allowing this, etc., etc.) - that is, unless jack
knows some handy mexican pharmacia that will send me large hypodermics full
of horse tranquilizers and giant economy size bottles of zoloft. she will sit
and nurse him when i am around and coo at him "you little monster" and worse.

and the information in the babywise books about the benefits of
breastfeeding. so what? every website for formula makers has the same info
(and every publication etc. that is actually promoting formula feeding). its
a subtle thing. you read a bunch of stuff about how great
breastfeeding/breastmilk is and when you finish reading it you realize the
word "but" is hanging in the air . . . and in capital letters.

i have a copy of babywise (ugh) for research purposes. i figure "know your
enemy" is good advice. i got it at a garage sale; the saddest part is that
someone actually wrote in the answers to the questions at the end of each
chapter. the edition i have is 1995, maybe not the same one someone quoted
from the other day, but here is one brief paragraph about the benefits of
breastfeeding. first it mentions that the uterus returns to its original size
more quickly (now when did you hear anyone worry about that?) it says its
"the most economical and convenient way to feed a baby." two more sentences
about convenience, and that's it.

the word BUT ought to appear next in big letters, because the rest of the
book is full of information that makes it plain that breastfeeding is the
road to perdition and since it really doesn't make any difference if you
formula feed (many comments about safe and adequate substitutes for
breastmilk) then why would you bother? especially when this book keeps
pointing out that breastfeeding is a way for you to be a "bad" mother by
giving in to those evil tendencies to let the baby snack, nurse the baby to
sleep, nurse the baby too often and not on a schedule, etc. etc.

oh, i could go on and on, of course. but the plain import of this stuff is
that sex between husband and wife is important ("obedience of wife to
husband" - i guess that means we can tell who gets to set the schedule!).
another physical relationship (breastfeeding) is inherently a threat to that,
and can't be tolerated - unless highly regimented. the effect of the
regimentation is to discourage the practice. also, if you are too fondly
connected to that baby, how are you going to listen to him cry? and how are
you going to then move on to slapping his little hand and withholding food
and all the other ways in which you are expected to raise the baby as he
grows?

it always makes me want to say "i am the other kind of christian - not
associated with anyone who believes in that kind of stuff."

carol brussel IBCLC

             ***********************************************
The LACTNET mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software together with L-Soft's LSMTP(TM)
mailer for lightning fast mail delivery. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html

ATOM RSS1 RSS2