>I had hesitated because I do enjoy >participating in discussions and I don't like to create bad feelings. I >also do not wish to be slammed or ignored by the list (esp if I need help >at a latter date. You haven't been on this list long enough to know that the slamming and insults are not standard fare for Lacntet. We *all* would like to return to the equanimity that we are used to, as I am sure we will. >What has really >stood out is the differences in opinion that for me at least sounds >........well......not mainstream. Lori, I read back through the posts that you have written since you joined Lactnet, and I think that you know that one of our challenges as advocates of breastfeeding is that *breastfeeding* is not *mainstream.* What is "mainstream" is formula given to parents who make it clear that they are breastfeeding, formula as the first solution for any breastfeeding problem, and "breastfeeding is best, but..." The bottle is THE symbol of baby in the mainstream culture. >However you cannot expect the mainstream establishment to follow suit or >even at times view us as valid when we compare a very necessary procedure >(such as suctioning) for infants to rape... What has been questioned here is "a very necessary procedure." What has been proposed is that we look at what we are doing to mothers and babies that makes this procedure necessary so often. Not until we acknowledge that vigorous suctioning is traumatic for an infant will there be any incentive to change standard hospital birthing protocol in order to prevent it. When we look at babies born in a home setting or in true birthing centers, we find that the there are ways of preventing the "stress" of the infant before birth so that meconium staining is prevented and that an alert baby clears her own mucous, hence preventing the suctioning. We have to see what is normal before we can see that anything is wrong with our standard practices. It's similar to the '50s and '60s when some people were trying to get the "mainstream" to see that a baby who wasn't breastfed was at a disadvantage. Anyone who thought that formula was anything unhealthful "sounded like fanatics." If those of us who were working hard to change the infant feeding practices in the US had been assuring the comfort of the mainstream, little progress would have been made. Can you imagine a group of women taking on the entire pediatric community in challenging their assertion that formula is the preferred food for infants? My Ped called me selfish for "making" my baby breastfeed. He was solidly mainstream. But >we turn people off... big time.... and are dismissed as kooks if we are not >careful in how we speak to not only others but to one another (especially >when the list is read by far more people than actually participate...we >need to remember that this is not a private conversation). Would *you* want to be on Lactnet if all of our posts were such that everyone who may be lurking here would be comfortable with and in agreement with all that we are posting? The only advantage I can see is that it wouldn't take so long to read a day's posts. If Lactnet were just for mainstream practices, I would never have heard of Cranio-Sacral therapies, or Gentian Violet, or mothers breastfeeding after breast-reduction surgery, or herbs as galatagogues, or allergies as a cause of FTT, or "Chicken Hair", or Diflucan for intraductal yeast, or the intelligent use of %iles in growth charts. My LC practice would be severely handicapped if Lactnetters were not at ease in sharing their personal and clinical experiences as well as their "wonderings", and I consider this sharing a vital part of my on-going education. I'm just glad that I didn't wait for the AAP to declare that breastfeeding is the healthiest way to feed my babies. >There are other MDs that read our posts as well as nurses who are on the >front line so to speak with these infants. Which is the reason for us to not keep from them what we are observing and learning in our practices, as well as how their choices impact those infants after the short hospital period. >We loose them when we become >emotional and make statements without thinking about how they may sound to >someone not as passionate about breastfeeding. Lactnet without emotion? LCs without emotion? How can anyone in health care not be passionate about breastfeeding, the basic nutrition for an infant? >When we make statements like "suctioning is comparable to rape"...many >health care profesionals just tune out.... One would think that they would, instead, perk up and take notice. Just think how recently the medical community discovered that infant boys experience pain with unanesthetised circumcision. When they learned this, they changed their procedure. Someone (outside the community) had said, loud and long, that this is traumatic for these infants. To an infant the mouth is the major center of pleasure, along with skin, so it behooves us to respect these areas of sensitivity and make sure that we are not violating them if we can aviod it. We must consider what we may be doing that would be a violation. >this means nothing to them... Really? >because we come off sounding like fanatics? A fanatic is someone who feels strongly about something that I don't feel strongly about. Do people control their enthusiasm so that no one will call them "baseball fans" (short for fanatics)? If someone calls me a breastfeeding fanatic (It's been done.), I just hope that, in time, they too will become enthusiastic about optimal health of infants. >some of these people are in a position to help our cause if we present our >ideas as well thought out, without the emotion, in a way that is usefull to >their practice. Lori, I know what you are saying in your post. I'm sure that you don't want us to become people without emotion or for the list to become sterile. And we would all like to be able to write with well-thought-out composition, fit for publishing. Lactnet is a place where we can improve our writing style as we create a mix of spontaneity and deliberation and find satisfying ways to get our opinions understood. I suspect that the reason that Lactnet is an "uncomfortable place to be" right now is not that you want us to give up our enthusiasm or to serve our explorations on a plate of status quo so that it is palatable to anyone who comes by. You are disturbed by the demeaning, insulting, and inciteful writing that is going on. You are ashamed for your colleagues (known and unknown) to see such behavior. Believe me this is not the usual spirit of this forum. If it were, I would have unsubscribed long ago. Hopefully we will soon return to Lactnet, an outstanding educational forum, and a "friendly place to be." Patricia Gima, IBCLC Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA mailto:[log in to unmask]