Whilst not disagreeing with the sentiment in the slightest, I don't 
think the mother is the primary victim here.

The baby's rights have been breached far more fundamentally than the 
mothers.  This is not to reduce the injury to the mother in the 
slightest, she had been robbed of much and injured greatly.  However the 
injury to the baby is far more pervasive, fundamental and long term.

I'd suggest to anyone presenting anything to do with issues like this, 
to boards or committees, to consider framing it primarily as an issue of 
the rights, health and well being of the infant.  (Or at very least, 
present both cases clearly and separately: nature of the injury to the 
mother, _and_ nature of injury to the baby.)   Within 'Nursing Matters', 
we've found a huge difference in response, when we do this.  I don't 
know if it's to do with fear of censure of the baby's Human Rights (The 
European Convention of Human Rights upholds a baby's right to breastfeed 
if the mother wishes it, and deems separating a willing dyad as a 
failure under the said Human Rights legislation.) or simply that they've 
never thought of it until we've highlighted it... but it does make a 
difference.

It's a hard one, for many instinctively resist the paradigm, as the 
issues of mothers who choose to formula feed - which is their right too, 
it's their body after all - muddies the water.  Some can't get their 
head around an 'injury' that is routinely inflicted on babies by their 
mothers, and resist seeing it as such, in order to ameliorate the 
cultural  issues around choosing to formula feed.  But, again, we've 
discovered that once a _professional_ with the remit of care of the baby 
is presented with the factual nature of the injury inflicted upon the 
baby, that has had to be taken note of.  All those WHO/Unicef 
guidelines, and national strategies, suddenly _mean_ something.  And it 
means they are failing in their duty of care not to consider them.

In fact, when preparing advocacy statements in the cases we've been 
involved in recently, we do not do so in the name of the family, or the 
mother.  We prepare them, and present them, in the name of the baby.

I'm attending a reception/reading on Sunday evening, at the Young Vic 
Theatre in London.  It's to raise awareness and money for mothers and 
children being mistreated by the UK asylum system.  Whilst it's called 
"Motherland" and is being run on Mothering Sunday (our Mother's Day is 
different from others, and is fixed by the Christian church calender) 
much of the material being read out by actors, is centred upon the 
effect the system is having on the children of those mothers.  The 
segment on Janipher Maseko, where some of my reports from visiting 
Yarl's Wood Detention centre are being included, highlights the injury 
to newborn Collin Maseko, in his own right.  This reflects that much of 
the activism and protest around the detention centres, is increasingly 
concentrating on highlighting the plight of the children - no one seems 
to give a damn about the parents.

Mothers, and mothering, are easily dismissed.  Attacking babies, 
however, still raises the eyebrows, no matter how aggressive the system 
is.  

What has to be made clear on all levels, that which is clear to all of 
us, is that if you attack/challenge breastfeeding, you are not primarily 
attacking the mother.  Attack breastfeeding, you are attacking the 
baby.  Attack the mother, and you are interfering with her personal 
choice - and a choice that you may not approve of, so it has no 'sting' 
to those doing the attacking.  Attack the baby, raise it's risk of 
developing gastro-enteritis, ear infection, diabetes, heart disease and 
cancer... and a whole new paradigm can open up in their tiny little 
bureaucratic minds...

I'm filled with sadness that the role and status of the woman, the 
mother, is still so reduced and reviled.  But hopeful, that, at least, 
there is still some sense of the imperative that the child has to have 
protection.

Morgan Gallagher


[log in to unmask] wrote:
>  It also indicated how little anyone involved 
> in her health care  knew or cared about breastfeeding.
> No woman should have that right taken away from her. Breastfeeding is a  
> feminist issue
> Sadly once again
> Carole Peterson Ms, IBCLC, RLC
> Indiana
>   

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

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