LACTNET Archives

Lactation Information and Discussion

LACTNET@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
7bit
Sender:
Lactation Information and Discussion <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Bob Gelletly & Pam Bell <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 25 Mar 1997 19:43:20 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=us-ascii
MIME-Version:
1.0
Reply-To:
Lactation Information and Discussion <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (30 lines)
I've only had access to Lactnet for a few days and have enjoyed
looking through all of the correspondence.
        To anyone who has read it, I would like to offer another point
of view in response to Virginia Thorley's case review, "Cup Feeding:
Problems Created by Incorrect Use," in Vol. 13, Number 1, March 97 issue
of JHL.  I believe that the text of the article more aptly describes the
importance of appropriate intervention and continued follow up of
infants who demonstrate breastfdg difficulties in hospital.  The author
catalogues a series of events, culminating with the mother's incorrect
cup fdg technique, that led to an infant's poor sucking ability.  In
the hospital, had this mother been counselled in patience, shown
positioning and latch on techniques, given a breastpump, and shown how
to cup feed on day 2, she would have been followed up there for an
amazing 6 more days.  Perhaps the rest of the scenario could have been
avoided.
        It is unfortunate that the mother poured milk into her baby's
mouth using a cup.  The article recalled an incident that happened to me
while teaching a group of L.C.s-to-be about cupfdg.  One person asked
about the use of cupfdg in a hypotonic infant with a poor gag reflex (I
had stated that it could be used with neurologically impaired infants.)
I was horrified to think that anyone would try such a thing and hastily
clarified myself, then went home and revised my handout to include a
warning.  One cannot always account for another's lack of common sense.
        I agree with Ms. Thorley's advice to teach the correct technique
and to evaluate the return demonstration.  I do also, however, think it
unfair to blame cupfdg as the only cause of the infant's problems in
this instance.  Has anyone else read the article?
        Pamela Bell, RN, IBCLC
        Frederick, MD

ATOM RSS1 RSS2