Okay I promised to be quiet for awhile and I'm breaking my promise
but I just
noticed that I missed Rachel's post...
Okay... so I misunderstood you...
if your problem with me isn't that I couch the issue in a moral
framework...
then what is your problem with me?
I mean I am starting to take it personally since you first told me
ever so politely, to shut up-
that infant mortality was off topic for the list....
Of course that was absurd on the face of it...
which leaves me no choice but to think that you have a problem with
me personally-
not with a discussion of infant mortality
and not with the neuroendocrine effects of breastfeeding...
but with me personally...
You are splitting hairs over the *better* for *every* mother...
Do you not make such generalizations about breastmilk?
I know some babies who never got sick while being formula fed,
so I am I being inaccurate when I make such sweeping statements
as *breastmilk is best*?
I am not suggesting we make judgments of the mothers we help...
I don't pretend to know all of the circumstances facing every mother
I help...
and I too resented it when I sought help for sore nipples with my
first child
and a pediatrician determined my problem was ambivalence about
motherhood since I was a single mother...
those kind of judgments are not at all what I am talking about and I
resent that you are making that leap-
that is passing a judgment on me!
I am using the word moral as a shorthand way of saying "what is right
for the child, what is justice for the child"
Sorry you couldn't resist teasing me about my mis-spellings...
So I guess I'll have to tease you back...
Since breastfeeding is the normal endocrine state for mothering
babies and young children
I think you'd better be prepared to prove that a lack of
breastfeeding doesn't negatively affect mothering behaviors...
Where are your studies? Where are your *linear correlations* and your
*straight lines*?
Cheers!
Jen O'Quinn IBCLC
support group leader
Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 15:49:11 +0200
Reply-To: Lactation Information and Discussion
<[log in to unmask]>
Sender: Lactation Information and Discussion
<[log in to unmask]>
From: Rachel Myr <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Neurotransmitters and 'better' mothers
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I had no idea that my query would set off such a discussion.
Jen O'Quinn has identified that my 'problem' is that I view a
discussion of
the physical benefits of the baby as out of the realm of morality,
whereas I
seem to view a discussion of the physical benefits to the mother as
within
that realm. All of this is news to me.
I have never even hinted that I doubt that the neurochemistry of
breastfeeding exerts a powerful influence on mothers. My question is
whether we have grounds on which to assert that EVERY mother will be a
BETTER mother if she experiences these effects. Not happier, not more
relaxed, not with lower depression scores, but BETTER, for EVERY mother,
which was the original claim. I will confirm that I do have big
problems
with the notion that I am in a position to judge the goodness of a
mother on
a normative moral scale, based on whether she is under the influence
of the
neurotransmitters active in the lactating woman. Kathy Lilleskov also
mentioned the lack of a linear correspondence between
neurotransmitters and
human behavior, and that is the crux of my skepticism to this approach.
One thing I strive to be clear about is that when a mother seeks
information
and support from me in order to solve her breastfeeding problem, she is
rarely looking for an argument couched in moral terms about why she
should
want to breastfeed. In fact, I don't think I have ever had such a
request
from a mother, and I know that when I perceived such a response from a
breastfeeding peer counselor the one time in my life I sought help for a
breastfeeding challenge to myself as a mother, it made it hard for me to
take seriously any of the information that followed. Likewise, any
mother
seeking such an approach would be disappointed if she came to me. I
find
that asking the mother what she thinks is the problem is a useful way to
begin. It shows that I respect her as the expert on her own life,
which I
find is a good starting point for any further collaboration.
So, I think my problem is that I prefer to handle moral issues without
involving the individual who is helping me to breastfeed, or become more
physically fit, or sort out my tax return or repair my car. My
choice of
helpers in any of those matters will be based on my ethical
sensibilities,
as will my choice of places to work, shop or vacation, but unless
morals is
the subject of my quest for help, I don't want my individual helpers to
include a portion of their own version of morality as part of the
package.
I think imprecision of language is a serious pitfall, and when we are
communicating in writing it is even more serious. All we have is
language
on this list - no non-verbal cues, no tone of voice, no handwriting
even.
So the language needs to be painstakingly precise if we are to get
the point
across. If what you mean is that most mothers will feel better if they
breastfeed than if they don't, then say that. If you mean that all
mothers
will be better mothers if they breastfeed, then be prepared to defend
your
claim with solid evidence, because you will likely need to do so.
The editor in me insists that as long as I am on the topic of
imprecision in
language, I mention that 'illicit' is an adjective meaning unlawful,
while
'elicit' is a verb meaning to bring to light; 'illucidate' is not in my
dictionary at all, though it would make a nifty cross between
'elucidate',
to clear up, and 'illuminate', to supply with light. Elucidate is
listed in
my dog-eared Funk & Wagnall's as a synonym for illuminate, actually.
And the lactivist who has been inhabiting my body and soul for over
25 years
is mildly amused that by becoming antagonized by the claim that
lactational
neurotransmitters make every mother better, I seem to have joined the
ranks
of 'apologists for bottle feeding'. Live and learn!
Cheers
Rachel Myr
Kristiansand, Norway
***********************************************
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(R)
mailer for lightning fast mail delivery. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html
|