Agree we need to start saying risks of artificial feeding instead of
defending bf with "adv. of bf"...however I think all this takes time. I say
in my class a bit about the superiority of bf, I read from the AAP statement
which is very "compelling" to quote them and reading that "all substitute
fdg options differ markedly from it."(AAP policy 1997). Then I say "nowadays
we really say "risks of artificial fdg or risks of not bf." So this plants
the seed but doesn't shock them too much. After all they are immersed in the
bottle feeding culture.
Inevitably they want to know how long they should bf. I let them know the
recommendations and that many mothers nurse "years." This is very foreign to
lots of them but they hear it and how normal I view it. I let them know that
giving colostrum for 1 week or bf for 6 wks, while very worthwhile, and much
preferred over not bf, still it does not confer lifelong good health like so
many believe. I let them know that bf is dose dependent and exclusively much
superior to mixed fdg. All this is new, new, news to them. Everything takes
time.
Today at our hosp. "maternity fair" which is a promotion of our women's
services I got alot of positive feedback from moms and saw beautiful older
babies still bf becoz we were there to help them. This made my day!

Laurie Wheeler, RN, MN, IBCLC
Violet Louisiana, s.e. USA

________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com

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