Hi Rachel
you bring up some very important points, thank you
> One piece of info we are missing (and I don't know that it is worth
> obtaining it now, since things are progressing at last) is how much milk
> baby is actually transferring during a feed.  Starting pre- and post-feed
> weighing now seems superfluous since baby is gaining and stooling.

I was waiting for this to come up ;-)  As far as test weighing goes it is
not a regular practice here downunder, at least not down this way and hasn't
been for years (gosh I reckon it would be about 12 years since I test
weighed a baby!!). I would be interested to hear what other Aussies have
experienced or can back me up here. The information obtained would be great
as you say, but I think originally it fell out of vogue for several reasons:
mother's fear of the 'test', inaccuracy of scales, abuse of test weighing
(that is when I first did midwifery just about every baby in the SCN was
test weighed, like being proven guilty before innocent) and one test weigh
is useless, you need several weighs to get an overall picture. I would hate
to see us go back to that scene. I can see the value of it though.
Has there been any work done on how accurate test weighing is? I am not
challenging you, but genuinely asking as I am unaware of any.

> I couldn't help noticing you mentioned that the mother was to give the
baby
> a feed every 3 hours.  I know we often say that where I work, about babies
> who need very frequent feeds.  I am struggling to get my colleagues to see
> that 'every 3 hours' is not especially often - not for a healthy term
> newborn unaffected by medication or intervention and certainly not for a
14
> day old who is more than 10% below birthweight.  I've tried to change to
> saying 'at least 8 times in 24 hours, and more is even better, if baby
> wants', emphasizing that some babies will feed evenly throughout the
period
> and others will cluster feed at times and take a long nap at others.  The
> problem is, clocks are notoriously bad instruments for determining infant
> hunger or adequacy of intake.  We need to help mothers to LOOK AT THE
BABY,
> and let her know what signs should alert her that there is something
wrong.
> We need to help our colleagues do the same.

What you say is so true Rachel. I do tell them that their baby will 'come
out of hibernation' once we get some food into them. I guess we use the
phrase "3 hourly feeds" very flippantly sometimes when what we really mean
is  *at Least* 3 hourly.
Actually what I said in my original post was
"each feed after a breastfeed (using breast compression), at *least* 3
hourly BF's."
and in my second post
"I suggested the 60 mls as an estimated amount after working out that this
baby needed at least 80 ml every 3hrs"
This mother is in key with her baby cues and does offer the breast if
demanded at other times, but the feeding averages out to 3 hourly. I did not
want her going over the 3 hours.. I am sorry if I gave the wrong impression.
Lets see what happens tomorrow
Cheers
Karen

             ***********************************************

To temporarily stop your subscription: set lactnet nomail
To start it again: set lactnet mail (or digest)
To unsubscribe: unsubscribe lactnet
All commands go to [log in to unmask]

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