"There is obviously more to this than is being reported. If social 
workers have become involved (as is reported) then there are obviously 
multiple problems with this mother (and maybe other family members). 
The parents are not married (not that that matters) but that's just 
another red flag with this baby. The father was in agreement with 
surgery. Social workers are not brought in for absolutely no reason at 
all. I am often involved with new mothers and babies within the 
community and also work extensively with the Department of Children and 
Families on some cases. I have yet to ever see a case where social 
workers and DCF were involved where there isn't a risk of some sort."

Really? So, we always assume that one is guilty of something because 
that person is accused of being guilty? When my son was in PICU, social 
workers became "involved" because we had no medical insurance and they 
were trying to assist us with payment. Would their involvement alert 
you as a nurse in the PICU that there were multiple problems with me 
and my family? Recently, I worked with a mom whose sister provided 
labor support for her. Mom had become very well educated and refused 
the HepB vaccine, eye drops and vit K. Social workers became "involved" 
because the hospital was unable to pressure the mother into these 
things and the staff tried to gain the assistance of the social worker 
"to be sure the mother was making informed decisions". Funny, I never 
see them grill a mother who defaults to these invasive procedures 
without any education to be certain she is making "informed decisions". 
No one cares that the mother is educated or informed (or married) so 
long as she follows the medical construct.

I have also worked with DCF--the law states that they must investigate 
every single charge--not becuase it is legitimate, but because it has 
been made. I once testified in court on behalf of a mother whose 
breastfed baby was removed from her custody simply because the father 
made accusations against her. It so happened that the judge hearing the 
case was someone I knew and he told me that the judge who had ordered 
the emergency removal had no choice given the accusation--its validity 
was not relevent. The baby was returned to the mom--the father was 
behaving punitively b/c of his anger over their impending divorce. 
Frankly, I have seen numerous cases where DCF cases had no validity at 
all.

I agree with Nina Berry---mothers do not typically behave in desparate 
ways unless they feel powerless. In the US, IMO, the majority of 
medical people expect to be obeyed--there is precious little room for 
second opinions or the right to to choose our own path to healing. The 
system relies upon the power of fear to control and manipulate, 
especially when it comes to babies and children. Who truly has the 
right to say that a parent is wrong about her own child? We are not 
only physical bodies--we are complex beings with social, emotional and 
spiritual needs--anyone who has not, to borrow a phrase from Nina, 
"checked her brain at the door" knows there is far more to healing than 
keeping the body alive.
Jennifer Tow, IBCLC, CT, USA


________________________________________________________________________
Check out AOL.com today. Breaking news, video search, pictures, email 
and IM. All on demand. Always Free.

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

To temporarily stop your subscription: set lactnet nomail
To start it again: set lactnet mail (or digest)
To unsubscribe: unsubscribe lactnet
All commands go to [log in to unmask]

The LACTNET mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software together with L-Soft's LSMTP(R)
mailer for lightning fast mail delivery. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html