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:
"Kathleen G. Auerbach" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Lactation Information and Discussion <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sat, 27 Feb 1999 09:45:39 -0800
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (88 lines)
I vowed a couple of years ago NEVER to watch 20/20 again--after they did
that ghastly piece on "breastfeeding fanatics".  But, because of my desire
to avoid seeing other things last night when what I really wanted to do was
simply zone out on something requiring minimal brain power will crocheting
a new lap robe, I ended up seeing that show.

Did anyone else note that the lawyer was the only one who mentioned output?
And her professional training is highly unlikely (far less than a
physician's for example) to tell her this is important?

Anyway, I tried really hard to hold back my ire and just let the angst show
through.  Below is my letter to abc.  I encourage ALL to write to them
DISPASSIONATELY, perhaps more than I did.  Toward the end, I could barely
stomach remaining civil.

By the way, I wrote to: [log in to unmask]


Dear Sir or Madam:

Airing an issue as important as a baby's death is important.  Airing an
issue as important as how such an event could have been avoided is even
more important.  Unfortunately, I suspect that the information viewers
really needed remains on the editing room floor.  ONLY the attorney
interviewed mentioned "output."  Perhaps the TV editing people are unaware
of the meaning of that term.  It means that what the baby puts out (as in
urine and stools) tells very nicely whether what is going in (milk from the
breast--or any other source, for that matter) is of the expected volume.
This information should be have shared with the mother prior to her
hospital discharge.  IF it was not, the hospital staff who cared for this
mother and her baby are at risk for a lawsuit which surely could be won
against them.

To suggest that mothers can avoid insufficient milk production by weighing
the baby before and after feeding is ludicrous and would be laughable were
it not so disappointing that an esteemed news organization such as ABC
would not have included this.  Frankly, I find it hard to believe that
Marianne Neifert did not mention this.

Her comment about 5% of newborns not getting enough milk DEMANDS, even
BEGS, documentation. In more than 25 years of working in the field, and in
reading the professional literature, I have yet to see an article on which
that percentage figure can be based.  Was that 5% based on ALL babies Dr.
Neifert sees as a pediatrician?  Was it based on those babies referred to
her for breastfeeding problems (not necessarily all she might see at her
clinic)?  As a referral practice, I can tell you I see far MORE than 5% of
the babies in my practice with poor infant growth (which, if unchecked,
could result in infant death).  WHY is that?  Because I am referred babies
whom others have seen and who need specialized help to start gaining
weight.  None of the babies I have seen have died. WHY? BEcause we work on
improving milk production AND the baby's ability to obtain it.  Is that 5%
based on women with primary breast insufficiency?  OR only on those who
have had breast surgery? Or only on those whose babies have some oral
anatomical defect that makes breastfeeding more difficult (you will not I
did not say impossible)?  Without answers to these questions, that 5%
figure serves only to frighten mothers.

By recommending before-after weights, you have done a great service to
people who sell baby scales.  But are those scales accurate? You did not
specify balance scales or electronic ones or mention that scales MUST be
calibrated in order to assure that the data they output is accurate.

Have you helped potential breastfeeding mothers?  Not really.  I
suspect--strongly--that you have helped much more the multi-national
companies that would have all new mothers buy formula, which is a known
risk of infant health, both short-term and long-term.  When are you going
to do an expose on their marketing tactics, and (more to the point) the
outcome of using their products? I doubt I will see such a problem aired,
however.  What a shame that you did not accurately alert people on how to
avoid the unfortunate MISeducation of the young woman you highlighted.  You
missed a wonderful opportunity.

I wonder if this relates to the advertisers I see on your network who sell
"that other stuff."

Sincerely,

Kathleen G. Auerbach, PhD, IBCLC
Ferndale, WA

     mailto:[log in to unmask]

"We are all faced with a series of great opportunities brilliantly
disguised as impossible situations."
Kathleen G. Auerbach,PhD, IBCLC (Ferndale, WA USA) [log in to unmask]
WEB PAGE: http://www.telcomplus.net/kga/lactation.htm
LACTNET archives http://library.ummed.edu/lsv/archives/lactnet.html

ATOM RSS1 RSS2