Barbara Wilson-Clay wrote,

> My
> experience tells me that early simultaneous positioning of twins is more
> a feel-good trick than a benefit to the babies.  These babies are always
> early, always a bit IGUR due to the fact there are two of them, and they
> need more early postural control and support to get the best latch.
>
> I do not understand why this type of situation is allowed to cont.  Where
> is the early follow-up these babies deserve?  Where is the safety net?
>
>
I agree with you completely that mothers of multiples and their babies
need more help than they sometimes receive. However, I have to wonder
about whether the principal problem was simultaneous feeding. In my
experience, mothers of multiples need to follow the same guidelines
about cue-feeding and make the same choices of parenting approaches as
mothers of singletons. A consistent choice of either simultaneous or
separate feedings all the time makes true cue-feeding impossible.
Moreover, having to listen to the second baby cry to be fed will
negatively impact a mother who is overwhelmed.
I would say, actually, that it is separate feedings in the early days
that is the most common current practice, and the effects I have seen
are not that wonderful!
We have had this discussion on lactnet before, in terms of scheduling
multiples, and I find the diversity of opinions interesting. I know that
mine is just one of many, and based only on a sample of four (2 X 2, one
set usually simultaneous, one set usually separate)
Jo-Anne

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