Stepahine,

In this area, it may be useful for you to look outside your own culture. 
The term "breastfeeding jaundice" is not one even used in most 
countries, and the aggressive practices you mention are not standard, or 
even common, in most maternity units across the world.  If medical 
proceedures and terms are not standard, it's often useful to investigate 
why: has culture made a problem when there isn't one?

I can imagine how difficult it might be, to be asked to do a paper on 
something by your lecturers, to find that it doesn't exist, especially 
when you have so many papers stating it does.  But I think if you look 
closley, there is no such thing as 'breastfeeding jaundice', there is 
only jaundice in newborns, and the issues on how that is best treated, 
if at all.  That jaundice presents differently, sometimes, for those 
newborns on formula, is an issue of looking at what the formula is doing 
and/or checkign assumptions about what is actually going on.  Jaundice 
is not caused by breastfeeding.

If this sounds topsy turvey to you, I'd reccomend you read this 
article:  http://www.fresnofamily.com/articles/watchyourlanguage.htm

It explains that the language used in the past few decades around 
breastfeeding, has had a tendacy to pitch formula as the 'norm' and thus 
describe breastfeeding, and breastmilk as 'extra' or 'different'.  This 
is not a rational approach.  Breastmilk, and breastfeeding, are the 
norm.  Evrything else should be described in relation to it: it is the 
default.  Thus we can't have breastfeeding jaundice - only jaundice.   
I'm hoping that makes sense: I'm suggesting you widen out your search to 
look at all issues of jaundice in newborns, and not just concentrate on 
the myth of 'breastfeeding causes jaundice'.  You may be surprised by 
what you find.  You might want to start with 5.3.2 here... 
http://www.who.int/reproductive-health/publications/msm_98_3/msm_98_3_6.html 
whereby the WHO states it is "It is both normal and common for healthy 
newborn infants to become jaundiced."  If it is both common and normal, 
then it is not a problem and it is not related to breastfeeding, but to 
being born?

This may sound spectacularly useless advice.   But there are those of us 
who'd argue that it's only by staying in touch with the normal and 
common, and changing the language, that real change can occur.   If you 
'defend' against 'breastfeeding jaundice' you are always going to be 
arguing within a faulty structure - and you will never win - for you are 
agreeing such a thing exists.  If you change your own language so you 
only discuss "common and normal jaundice in healthy newborns" then you 
make them have to prove otherwise.  :-)

You could actually start your report off on the langauge issue, and 
state up front, you will be discussing 'newborn jaundice'.  :-)

Hope this helps

Morgan Gallagher 
(In the UK, where we don't have "breastfeeding jaundice" - just jaundice)

Stephanie Lloyd wrote:
> Hello.  I am a nursing student in Indianapolis, IN and was assigned to study 
> and present a report on breastfeeding jaundice.  I am appreciative of this 
> assignment as I have learned so much; however, my studies have raised many 
> concerns for me.  JCAHO has issued an alert regarding BFJ and the alert 
> focuses on improvements in patient care in order to prevent BFJ.  These 
> improvements focus on assessment, follow-up care, education and aggressive 
> action with babies that are not feeding effectively.
>
>   

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

Archives: http://community.lsoft.com/archives/LACTNET.html
Mail all commands to [log in to unmask]
To temporarily stop your subscription: set lactnet nomail
To start it again: set lactnet mail (or [log in to unmask])
To unsubscribe: unsubscribe lactnet or ([log in to unmask])
To reach list owners: [log in to unmask]