>in establishing the milk supply, if baby lingers =
>on one side for an hour, for instance, and never gets to side two - then =
>sleeps for two hours, then repeats the process on the other side, the =
>individual breasts are being stimulated only every 4 to6 hours

I hope I get around this by telling mothers the only bad reasons for
switching a baby to the other side are reasoning that the baby will not
take the second side unless he is switched now, or reasoning that failure
to switch now will cause uneven breast stimulation.  Good reasons for
switching are:  boredom, irritation (mental or physical), a kink in the
arm, a desire to use that arm for some other purpose, the baby let go, the
other side is begging for relief, and so on.  Mother-led reasons.  This
needs to be coupled with a willingness to offer to nurse any time the baby
squeaks, without reasoning thru whether or not the baby is hungry.  (This
assumes no underlying problem like significant over- or under-supply.)

I doubt that any other mammal reasons through the baby's need for this teat
or that teat at this time or that time, so it makes sense to me that
"over-reasoning" on the mother's part is more likely to *cause*
breastfeeding problems than to solve them. For my part, I couldn't nurse on
one side for an hour solid without getting mighty bored and stiff.

I figure a mother dog nurses the puppies  a) to make herself more
comfortable and b) to shut them up.  If she stands up and lies down again,
it's because she was bored or needed the stretch, not because she wanted
the puppies to redistribute themselves on different teats  (unless, of
course, a couple teats got left out the first time around and are aching to
be nursed).  But then, at our house all we "do" is gerbils.  Any vets want
to comment?

Diane Wiessinger, MS, IBCLC, LLLL  Ithaca, NY