The statements don't directly come out against the use of cup
feeding (and co-bedding).  They state that these should not be
ROUTINELY adopted without further research.  Nonetheless, the tone
does seem to be against the practices.  Here is my response.  I
suspect they'll chalk me up as "radical", but I felt the things must
be said.  I did put my RNC credentials on to help them see me as
credible.

Winnie

Regarding the proposed position statement on cup feeding.  You state

that basically the jury is still out on effectiveness etc., yet the
position statement seems to lean against the practice.  In addition,

you state: "the practice must be carefully evaluated for physiologic

soundness, risks and safety, and possible benefits."  I can't help
but wonder, has the bottle ever been evaluated for these?  It has
become so widely accepted as "normal" , but has it had to meet the
same standards now being applied to all unnatural (not breast)
feeding?    How often have infants aspirated, gagged, had desats,
etc. while bottle feeding.  However, that is only attributed to the
infant's difficulties, not a drawback to the bottle.  However, when
any of these occur at breast, breastfeeding is the first to be
blamed!

We need to strive to return to thinking of the breastfeeding as the
standard, the norm, and comparing everything else to it, not to
artificial means of feeding.  The artificial means certainly have
their place, but as second or third or even later choice to what is
physiologically the norm for infants.
Winnie Mading RNC, 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