On Thu, 10 Apr 1997, Carol Brussel wrote:

> Nursing Mothers' Counsel, which i was once briefly associated with, will tell
> mothers to introduce a bottle at 3-4 weeks rather than 5-6 because there is
> less chance of refusal. i no longer have the material that may indicate the
> source for this, or if it is just opinion. in practice, it seems that the

I'd like to add my experience with this issue.  My daughter was an
**artificical nipple refuser from day 1.*** She nursed about 25 minutes
after she was born, and despite the nurses trying **everytime** they came
in the room (even when she was happily lying in the bassinet) to give her
a pacifier, she *never* would accept it.  Less than 48 hours after she was
born, a 'helpful' nurse tried to give her a bottle of sugar water because
my milk had come in and my nipples were FLAT. (She said she wanted to see
if the baby was "hungry")  My daughter acted as if that bottle nipple was
*on fire* she screamed so bad.  I was **never** able to get her to accept
breastmilk from a bottle, though at about 6 weeks she did break down ( :<
)  and take some water from a Munchkin nipple from my mom while I was
gone  (it took *hours*).

I can only *imagine* what would have happened had my daughter's first
feeding experience NOT been at the breast. I don't imagine she *ever*
would have breastfed had she had a bottle first.  Some babies will take
bottle, breast, pacifier, never blink.  Some are so sensitive that ONLY
one will do, and I'm not truly convinced that timing (in the sense of
waiting a certain amount of time after breastfeeding has been established)
truly matters.  I think it may have something to do with a sort of
"imprinting" maybe?

> later the bab states that babies will accept a bottle "easily" at one, two,
> or three to six months and cites a study (pg. 211, new edition).

Bwahahaha! ;)  They missed *my* kid in this study.

Heidi Murphy
Peer Counselor
University of Florida