Even though there no NO justication for giving
> free formula as a gift, the givers probably did do it in good faith.
They
> are under the misimpression that formula feeding is normal, and
believe --
> correctly in one sense, but wrongly in another -- that if the family
doesn't
> want to use the formula it won't. So to them it just seemed like a nice
> gift, period, I betcha. (Don't get me started on the formula company
that
> donated the free case to the hospital -- another story altogether -- but
I'm
> just focusing on the sadly clueless hcp's, right here.)
>
> Mary, I think you are absolutely right to protest to them, but their
response
> makes it clear that what they need is not more bullhorns but more
education.
> Just like with the mothers, we need to meet them where they are. I know
some
> time has gone by and perhaps this is moot already in the particular case,
but
> since we all know this is not a one-time event, here's how I might
organize a
> second letter. The main rhetorical points are:
>
> 1) Start by praising the person you have come to criticize for whatever
you
> can legitimately praise them for -- no lies, but stretch yourself!.
> 2) Next bring the problems with what they did that you don't like -- but
> don't focus on their having done it, just on the problems. What they did
is
> water under the bridge now; your job is to persuade them for next time.
> 3) Starting here, and for the rest of the letter, put them and yourself
> together in the category of "we," rather than standing apart from them as
> "you" vs "me." Nobody takes advice from enemies.
> 4) End by imagining the situation you would prefer.
>
> Here's an example.
>
> "Dear Hospital Flunky," [obviously don't write this in your letter, but
it
> does feel good to write it in private!]
>
> "Thanks for responding to my letter about the free formula our hospital
gave
> to So & So. I want to assure you that I am confident that this gift was
> given in good faith. and with good intentions. . . [That's #1]
>
> "But even with those good intentions, there's a lot of research that
shows
> that the good health choice to bf a baby is easily undermined by the
ready
> availability of formula. I'm attaching a couple of those studies, in
which
> you can see that mothers who were perfectly confident about their bf at
the
> time of discharge nevertheless weaned earlier if they got gifts of free
> formula. And we know what the results of that earlier weaning are for
their
> babies: ..... [That's #2]
>
> "Even though the mother may have felt at first that she has gotten a
great
> present from us, in the long term the only one who will benefit from our
> having given out formula is the formula company, which has used us to
> persuade one more mother that switching bf to artificial feeding is a
> predictable step, one that she will take soon, and well before the first
> birthday that the AAP recommends as a minimum term of bf. Otherwise she
> wouldn't need that formula at all. [That's more of #2, and #3]
>
> "I hope in the future that our good will toward mothers can be expressed
with
> a gift that will not only please them when they receive it, but also
> contribute to their health and their baby's health over the longer
term -- or
> at least not undermine it." [That's #4]
>
> If any of this helps, feel free to steal it or emend it at will! (Not
just
> Mary, either -- this is a blanket permission to all and sundry...)
>
> Elisheva Urbas
> who writes editorial letters all day for a living...
>
***********************************************
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(TM)
mailer for lightning fast mail delivery. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html
|