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:
Anne Grider <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Lactation Information and Discussion <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 28 Apr 2009 09:43:16 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (108 lines)
My four children used pacifiers, all my grandchildren and all of my nieces
and nephews. Breastfeeding continued, and went well.  No baby was just left
somewhere with their pacifier instead of mother. What I don't hear about is
our situation: babies who needed a lot of sucking and mothers with frequent
milk ejections. These babies could sometimes take the least full breast -
usually late in the day when we were tired, had slower letdowns and less
milk, but most of the time the babies were miserable taking in more and more
milk, spitting up a great deal, extremely gassy and uncomfortable.  With my
first baby I did not want to use pacifiers, so delayed introduction for 6
weeks.  I did learn that it had to be used judiciously to keep up my supply
and taught my relatives how to do that.  When I hear LCs teaching mothers to
avoid pacifiers altogether I cringe. Our babies would have cried incessantly
without them. That was not acceptable to us. Baby carriers and walking the
floors was not all that  they wanted. I wish LCs would individualize these
situations.
Anne Grider, LLL, IBCLC
Private Practice, Marietta, Georgia, USA




On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 7:16 AM, Pamela Morrison <
[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Gonneke is quite right.  Research showing the apparent protective effect of
> pacifier use against SIDS made sense to me immediately I heard about it.
>  Years ago I read a book about cot death which described five cases from
> different families.  In all instances, the babies had been put in their
> cots, left to cry themselves to sleep, and some time later had been found
> squished up in a corner of the cot no longer breathing.  Ever since, I've
> wondered about the link between extreme distress and SIDS.
>
> As we know, babies just love to suck - it soothes and comforts them - quite
> apart from whether they receive nutrition as a reward.  Thus it makes sense
> that there would be fewer deaths when babies who would otherwise have no
> other form of warm, close cuddling and contact, were given pacifiers to suck
> on for comfort and for self-soothing, rather than leaving them to cry and
> scream alone with all the dangerous physical consequences that would ensue.
>
> Clearly, babies who are breastfed whenever they show signs of wanting to
> suck are safest.  Those whose mothers are unwilling or are persuaded not to
> provide this continuous day and night care are at most risk.  Pacifiers
> probably "work" to reduce the risk by providing at least some substitute
> comfort-sucking and reduced distress/crying and screaming.
>
> But it's no accident that in many English-speaking countries the word for
> Pacifier is Dummy - a substitute for the real thing.  Physicians can bypass
> the dilemma of needing to counsel mothers about the risks and benefits of
> pacifier use and how it might interfere with breastfeeding when they
> recommend allowing infants unlimited access to the breast in order to
> _facilitate_ breastfeeding.   Or is this too simple??
>
> Pamela Morrison IBCLC
> Rustington, England
> ------------------------------------------
> Date:    Mon, 27 Apr 2009 22:07:59 -0700
> From:    gonneke van veldhuizen <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Pacifier use may not affect breastfeeding?
>
> Dear friends,
> How well done can any study be that starts from the wrong hypothesis:
> [qout=
> e]"Physicians who counsel families about pacifier use must now weigh
> the=0A=
> potential protective effect against SIDS [sudden infant death
> syndrome]=0Aa=
> gainst the potential deleterious effect on breastfeeding," write Nina=0AR.
> =
> O'Connor, MD, from University of Virginia School of Medicine
> in=0ACharlotte=
> sville (at the time of the study), and colleagues[unquote]. Of course
> pacif=
> iers are only a safeguard for children that do not have unlimited access
> to=
>  the breast. Breastfed children do not need any artificial replacement to
> s=
> afeguard them from the results of taking away their natural protection
> from=
>  them.
>
> Warmly,
>
> Gonneke, IBCLC in very early morning southern Netherlands
>
>            ***********************************************
>
> Archives: http://community.lsoft.com/archives/LACTNET.html
> To reach list owners: [log in to unmask]
> Mail all list management commands to: [log in to unmask]
> COMMANDS:
> 1. To temporarily stop your subscription write in the body of an email: set
> lactnet nomail
> 2. To start it again: set lactnet mail
> 3. To unsubscribe: unsubscribe lactnet
> 4. To get a comprehensive list of rules and directions: get lactnet welcome
>

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

Archives: http://community.lsoft.com/archives/LACTNET.html
To reach list owners: [log in to unmask]
Mail all list management commands to: [log in to unmask]
COMMANDS:
1. To temporarily stop your subscription write in the body of an email: set lactnet nomail
2. To start it again: set lactnet mail
3. To unsubscribe: unsubscribe lactnet
4. To get a comprehensive list of rules and directions: get lactnet welcome

ATOM RSS1 RSS2