LACTNET Archives

Lactation Information and Discussion

LACTNET@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
James O'Quinn <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Lactation Information and Discussion <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 18 May 2006 21:41:15 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (231 lines)
Okay I promised to be quiet for awhile and I'm breaking my promise  
but I just
noticed that I missed Rachel's post...

Okay... so I misunderstood you...
if your problem with me isn't that I couch the issue in a moral  
framework...
then what is your problem with me?

I mean I am starting to take it personally since you first told me
ever so politely, to shut up-
that infant mortality was off topic for the list....
Of course that was absurd on the face of it...
which leaves me no choice but to think that you have a problem with  
me personally-
not with a discussion of infant mortality
and not with the neuroendocrine effects of breastfeeding...
but with me personally...

You are splitting hairs over the *better* for *every* mother...
Do you not make such generalizations about breastmilk?
I know some babies who never got sick while being formula fed,
so I am I being inaccurate when I make such sweeping statements
as *breastmilk is best*?

I am not suggesting we make judgments of the mothers we help...
I don't pretend to know all of the circumstances facing every mother  
I help...
and I too resented it when I sought help for sore nipples with my  
first child
  and a pediatrician determined my problem was ambivalence about  
motherhood since I was a single mother...
those kind of judgments are not at all what I am talking about and I  
resent that you are making that leap-
that is passing a judgment on me!

I am using the word moral as a shorthand way of saying "what is right  
for the child, what is justice for the child"

Sorry you couldn't resist teasing me about my mis-spellings...
So I guess I'll have to tease you back...
Since breastfeeding is the normal endocrine state for mothering  
babies and young children
I think you'd better be prepared to prove that a lack of  
breastfeeding doesn't negatively affect mothering behaviors...
Where are your studies? Where are your *linear correlations* and your  
*straight lines*?

Cheers!
Jen O'Quinn IBCLC
support group leader



Date:         Thu, 18 May 2006 15:49:11 +0200
Reply-To:     Lactation Information and Discussion
               <[log in to unmask]>
Sender:       Lactation Information and Discussion
               <[log in to unmask]>
From:         Rachel Myr <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:      Neurotransmitters and  'better' mothers
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"


I had no idea that my query would set off such a discussion.

Jen O'Quinn has identified that my 'problem' is that I view a  
discussion of

the physical benefits of the baby as out of the realm of morality,  
whereas I

seem to view a discussion of the physical benefits to the mother as  
within

that realm.  All of this is news to me.

I have never even hinted that I doubt that the neurochemistry of

breastfeeding exerts a powerful influence on mothers.  My question is

whether we have grounds on which to assert that EVERY mother will be a

BETTER mother if she experiences these effects.  Not happier, not more

relaxed, not with lower depression scores, but BETTER, for EVERY mother,

which was the original claim.  I will confirm that I do have big  
problems

with the notion that I am in a position to judge the goodness of a  
mother on

a normative moral scale, based on whether she is under the influence  
of the

neurotransmitters active in the lactating woman.  Kathy Lilleskov also

mentioned the lack of a linear correspondence between  
neurotransmitters and

human behavior, and that is the crux of my skepticism to this approach.



One thing I strive to be clear about is that when a mother seeks  
information

and support from me in order to solve her breastfeeding problem, she is

rarely looking for an argument couched in moral terms about why she  
should

want to breastfeed.  In fact, I don't think I have ever had such a  
request

from a mother, and I know that when I perceived such a response from a

breastfeeding peer counselor the one time in my life I sought help for a

breastfeeding challenge to myself as a mother, it made it hard for me to

take seriously any of the information that followed.  Likewise, any  
mother

seeking such an approach would be disappointed if she came to me.  I  
find

that asking the mother what she thinks is the problem is a useful way to

begin.  It shows that I respect her as the expert on her own life,  
which I

find is a good starting point for any further collaboration.



So, I think my problem is that I prefer to handle moral issues without

involving the individual who is helping me to breastfeed, or become more

physically fit, or sort out my tax return or repair my car.  My  
choice of

helpers in any of those matters will be based on my ethical  
sensibilities,

as will my choice of places to work, shop or vacation, but unless  
morals is

the subject of my quest for help, I don't want my individual helpers to

include a portion of their own version of morality as part of the  
package.



I think imprecision of language is a serious pitfall, and when we are

communicating in writing it is even more serious.  All we have is  
language

on this list - no non-verbal cues, no tone of voice, no handwriting  
even.

So the language needs to be painstakingly precise if we are to get  
the point

across.  If what you mean is that most mothers will feel better if they

breastfeed than if they don't, then say that.  If you mean that all  
mothers

will be better mothers if they breastfeed, then be prepared to defend  
your

claim with solid evidence, because you will likely need to do so.



The editor in me insists that as long as I am on the topic of  
imprecision in

language, I mention that 'illicit' is an adjective meaning unlawful,  
while

'elicit' is a verb meaning to bring to light; 'illucidate' is not in my

dictionary at all, though it would make a nifty cross between  
'elucidate',

to clear up, and 'illuminate', to supply with light.  Elucidate is  
listed in

my dog-eared Funk & Wagnall's as a synonym for illuminate, actually.



And the lactivist who has been inhabiting my body and soul for over  
25 years

is mildly amused that by becoming antagonized by the claim that  
lactational

neurotransmitters make every mother better, I seem to have joined the  
ranks

of 'apologists for bottle feeding'.  Live and learn!



Cheers

Rachel Myr

Kristiansand, Norway



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

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(R)
mailer for lightning fast mail delivery. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html

ATOM RSS1 RSS2