Betsy has kindly provided another illustration of how the mother's 
goals are presented in the To Breastfeed Or Not To Breastfeed 
dilemma.  Once again the baby is not mentioned - it's all about the 
mother.  Karleen has made a good point - that as parents we do many 
things we don't necessarily want to do - because we believe that our 
children need them.  Should breastfeeding be any different?  Jennifer 
takes this further by mentioning the commonly held belief that it's 
important to the baby to have a happy mother.  Yes!  Many mothers 
have also said to me that once they made the decision to quit 
breastfeeding they felt free to enjoy their babies, and this is so 
sad - it's impossible not to wonder how many extra 
infections/allergies that baby/child is going to experience and the 
life-long impact this will have on mother or child enjoyment.

The importance of a mother's "happiness" is a very seductive argument 
so often used to persuade mothers that their babies don't need them, 
or their milk,  eg formula-feeding is nearly as good as 
breastfeeding, mothers should leave the baby to go out to work in 
order to feel fulfilled, or spend time-alone-as-a-couple with Dad so 
that he can have the mother's undivided attention etc.  Let's examine 
this:  Is the mother's own happiness really more important to her 
than her baby's health and well-being?   How much stress and distress 
do we as LCs and BF supporters see heaped on mothers as they attempt 
to comply with and juggle these societal expectations?

I don't think that the information we provide to mothers can be 
labelled as "our" agendas - I'm not using my own personal experience 
when I give a mother information about how often her baby needs to 
breastfeed, or why her newborn needs her precious colostrum or why it 
is worthwhile to provide her EBM for her baby when she returns to 
work, or why she's right to feel anxiety about leaving her baby with 
someone else so she can take a romantic weekend away with her 
partner.  It's not "my" agenda - it's researched fact.  Since we're 
the experts on breastfeeding, and since our expertise includes 
knowledge about the likely consequences on a baby's health of not 
breastfeeding, I'm not convinced that we can continue to honestly and 
ethically provide a mother with our unqualified approval for a poor decision.

Do we really believe that a mother would knowingly prefer to place 
her own welfare before her child's?  Or has she been seduced into 
believing this by an underlying societal apathy about the value of 
mother's milk, and of mothering in general?  Is there not an 
obligation to speak for the baby?  How will the mother feel when she 
realizes we have withheld information from her in order to "save" her 
feelings, or perhaps even to bolster her self-respect?  How will she 
feel months or years later if she comes to know that she had a chance 
to do something irreplaceable for her child and was not 
helped?   Where does motherhood fit in to what women want?  What 
could be more important than nourishing and nurturing the next 
generation?   As to according respect to women, wouldn't we agree 
that the value that we place on mothering and mother's milk is the 
ultimate compliment?  Perhaps we need to re-think the ways we 
communicate that respect;  I don't believe that "meeting a mother 
where she's at" can be translated into "acceptance" of the low value 
that she herself may be placing on breastfeeding.  If she is mistaken 
about her irreplaceable function, I don't believe it is respectful to 
agree with her.  Shouldn't we alert her to the fact that she is being 
tricked, or even manipulated by a society that seems to under-value 
children in general into trivializing her own self-worth?    Perhaps 
one simple mechanism for achieving this might be to keep the word 
"baby" in the conversation.

Of course, it would be helpful if governments put in place up-to-date 
public health policies which actively protected children, including 
promotion and support for breastfeeding, and giving effect to the 
provisions of the Code, enacting humane maternity protection, and 
proper training for all healthcare providers having contact with 
mothers and babies, so that breastfeeding supporters could carry out 
their primary function of facilitators, rather than having to take up 
so much time and energy in the role of advocates or even beggars 
speaking on behalf of children.

Pamela Morrison IBCLC

-------------
Even after we explain the "risks of not breastfeeding" (or as I have 
seen it written....the disadvantages of not breastfeeding)we still 
have to meet that
mother where SHE is and go with HER goals and NOT ours as 
breastfeeding supporters (no matter what the credential). Sometimes 
women change their
goals (either for or against) and our role is to facilitate her 
wishes NOT to push our own agendas.

The same happens with doulas on occasion. If the doula pushes HER 
agenda, the mother loses. If the doula gives the mother (and father) 
her total all to
support the mother's wishes (and they may change) then it is a win-win for all.

Each of us comes at our approach to breastfeeding through our own 
positive or negative experiences. We ALL have to remember to take 
that step back
and meet that particular mother where she is: not to expect that 
mother to meet us where we are coming from.

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

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 email list is powered by LISTSERV (R).
There is only one LISTSERV. To learn more, visit:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html