>
>There is no particular point to weighing a baby who is obviously thriving.


Totally agree, Barbara  - except to say mothers and fathers seem to
quite like a record of growth, and if they like to have it, then they
can get it! I wish all HPs would realise that this is *all* they are
doing when weighing clearly healthy, happy babies.....not placing a
seal of approval on someone's mothering skills : (

>  Weights are not the only information one needs, but with
>poorly feeding infants, they give a piece of the puzzle that can be useful
>for planning and monitoring.


I have no argument at all with that, Barbara,  and in fact, I wish
some babies here in the UK were weighed more often, and with a clear
idea of what was going on.....here, some HPs are actually scared to
weigh (see Magda and Sam's article) because of what they might find.

Our experience here is that poorly feeding babies are missed, to the
point at which some are seriously ill; accurate weighing would
certainly add to the picture, and help. It sometimes happens that
babies are readmitted to hospital with dehydration, and they have
lost 20 per cent or more of their birthweight. The 20g or 30g leeway
in accuracy that  weighing seems to give is irrelevant - these babies
have lost 500g and no one has picked up on how seriously poorly they
are feeding.  It really doesn't matter if the scales are 30g out when
it's as bad as that.

Heather Welford Neil
NCT bfc, Newcastle upon Tyne UK

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

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