Mime-Version: |
1.0 |
Sender: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Date: |
Tue, 5 Feb 2008 07:48:49 -0500 |
Content-Type: |
text/plain |
Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
quoted-printable |
Reply-To: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Dear all:
I really beg to differ on the averages about how a baby and pump "perform".
I am sick and tired of seeing women who have been detered by hospitals, society, family
etc from actually establishing their milk supply with the baby. Then everyone tells them
NOT to pump because the baby is more efficient.
No baby should EVER be judged by efficiency standards. They are not designed to be
performance machines that take milk out quickly. This is a set up for disaster both in the
expectations of the time it takes to feed a baby normally and for a mom who had barely
drained her breasts for two weeks and now expects the baby to make up for that fact.
I NEVER say "The baby is more efficient than the pump". And in fact the data in my own
charts really does not support this statement in the vast majority of cases. If the pump
can still get milk out after the baby is done, it means the pump can drain more out than
the baby. I've documented what the baby takes out of the breast and what the pump
takes out and most of the time, the pump takes out more. The one big exception is for
women who never got out of sync with their babies from the beginning. When those
babies are 3-6 months old, some of them (not the majority) will take out milk faster than
the pump.
Instead, I use some of the points that Norma brought up:
The pump isn't cute and you're not going to bond with it.
You need time for bonding and practice with your baby.
Don't put your baby on his/her first performance test this early --- your baby is still a
baby. (I always talk about the ridiculous testing of preschoolers in Manhattan --- and how
its far too early to start on that as a newborn)
Now that Nikki has put time measurements on the fact that an infants feeding time has
been reduced by 10-FOLD at birth - I have even more ammunition to point out that babies
really need you and will add that to the reasons why mom must spend time with the baby
rather than handing the baby off to the baby nurse for the first month of life.
Based on how awry the synchrony has gone, and how a mother actually responds to the
pump versus anyone's expectations have gone --- if she needs to ramp up her milk
supply AND she does respond to the pump, I explain that:
The pump doesn't get fatigued and stop taking milk out.
The pump doesn't get hungry and frustrated if the the milk doesn't come out fast enough.
Since you can't bond with your pump you need to spend ... time with your baby for skin-
to-skin and/or practice on the breast for bonding.
And if a mother doesn't respond to the pump, I resort to other measures to help her
increase her supply.
What I do say is "The baby is more PHYSIOLOGIC than the pump and you can BOND with
yoru baby."
Machines can be judged by "EFFICIENCY" standards. Babies should not.
Best, Susan
***********************************************
Archives: http://community.lsoft.com/archives/LACTNET.html
To reach list owners: [log in to unmask]
Mail all list management commands to: [log in to unmask]
COMMANDS:
1. To temporarily stop your subscription write in the body of an email: set lactnet nomail
2. To start it again: set lactnet mail
3. To unsubscribe: unsubscribe lactnet
4. To get a comprehensive list of rules and directions: get lactnet welcome
|
|
|