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:
Morgan Gallagher <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Lactation Information and Discussion <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 6 Oct 2008 19:50:15 +0100
Content-Type:
multipart/mixed
Parts/Attachments:
Jessica LaBaugh wrote:
> How responsive would I be if I had to work 9 hours a day?  
>
> Is an attached, breast-fed baby a prize only for those in an economic situation to afford one?
>   

Certainly not.  Some of the lowest paid women in the world, who are feeding their entire family from manual labour 12 hours a day, manage to breastfeed and attend to their babies biological needs.  For them poverty keeps them attached to the baby, not the other way around.  They can't afford formula, so no matter what, breastfeeding works.

The question isn't how to work around it, for most Mums.  The question 
is how much to they prioritise the mothering, over the income.  And 
that's not to suggest they all don't need the income, but it is to 
suggest that there are a huge amount of mothers who operate on the 
income they think they need, and then work out what's left for the 
baby.  So the mother you quoted, may have overlooked options that would 
have allowed her more than 2 hours with the baby a day, but didn't, as 
she was locked into the spending patterns, and earning patterns, she had 
before she birthed.  It was either or, to her, and not "where can I 
tweak this?"

Sears talks about it well - are you earning to put food on the table, 
versus earning for the 'extras' you think you need?  Most mothers can 
find some lee-way, somewhere.  And I know this because so many of my 
friends are lower-income, in the USA, and still breastfeeding their 
infants at 2 years, after they returned to work at 3 months pp.  And are 
picking up food from church basements, even as they juggle low paid part 
time work, breastfeeding, and three other kids.

The essential structure, as I see it, is not income, but support.  Good 
old fashioned people support.  Whether it be a MiL or a sister who does 
the day care, and supports the breastfeeding, or a hubby who takes a 
split shift to take baby to Mum for feeding during Mum's break, or... 
the list is endless.

It's women who have no people in their lives to support, that I feel are 
the most disadvantaged.  Take out willing hands to hold baby and juggle 
feeding arrangements, and pick up older kids from school and .. and... 
and a Mum is in trouble. 

In terms of women working externally to the home, the biggest issue I'd 
say, is not the breastfeeding.  It's the standard of care when Mum isn't 
there.  And on that, there are huge amounts of info and support to be 
given.  Explain out what 'good' versus 'damaging' day care provision 
looks like (be it family or paid for) and give all the support on how a 
non-breastfeeding skills person can give bottles to a breastfeeding 
baby.   Those two elements, are vital, in allowing Mums to stay attached 
and close to their babies when they get back to them.  A determined Mum 
will usually make the breastfeeding work, as she believes in it.  With 
support, she can juggle.  Without it, she may be lost.

So I'd argue that the difference between the women who work and who go 
on to breastfeed successfully, and those who work and don't, isn't 
income.  It's belief.*

Also, you are working more than 9 hours a day!  We're all doing that.   
The issue isn't are you working for more than 9 hours a day, and then 
are tired.  The issue is you are absent from your child for 9 hours a 
day, and then need to find ways to reconnect.  Totally different ball 
game.  Hence saying the standard of day care is key.  Baby needs secure 
and loving attachment from a stable care-giver, when Mum isn't there.  
Let Mums know that, and let them know the right things to look for in 
both day care and friends and relatives, to ensure baby is getting it 
when she's absent.  Then Mum won't have problems to overcome when she 
picks baby back up into her arms.  Income won't guarantee this in any 
direction.  Again, it's about getting the right support, and if you have 
no actual people support, and a low income, it's going to be harder.  
Certainly, if you have a lot of income, it should be _easier_!  Hell, 
that's why we all want more money, to make our life easier!

I'd also argue the baby/Mother sleep dance is also crucial.  Many Mums I 
know cope with 12 hour workdays, by bed-sharing, and reverse cycling.  
Baby eats all night long, and there is good evidence that this is a 
biological 'norm' in many cultures where Mum and baby don't see much of 
each other during the day, as Mum is working.  And if they are eating 
all night long, they are skin to skin all night long. and both Mum and 
Baby are getting all the attachment hormones they would need.  Skip 
forward to modern work and family practices, and many woman who can't 
sleep through continuous night feeds, can't cope with not having enough 
sleep and the pressures of working and running the house and being the 
sole person in charge of keeping an entire family going .. and they 
night wean as it's One Demand Too Many.  And that has a knock on effect 
on the breastfeeding and attachment.

Conversely, the mother who can gain rest in a night time feeding 
pattern, and who is happy to sit on her butt all day on Sunday and baby 
moon while hubby runs around the house doing everything else, stays in 
really good attachment with her baby.  Because spending time with the 
baby when she can, comes first.  She allows others into her life to do 
stuff for her, that she can pass by whilst she's concentrating on the baby.

The lower the income, and the less support, the harder it is.  I'd 
accept that.  But I wouldn't accept that only those on good to high 
incomes, can afford to be attached.  As everything, it just means you 
have to work harder!  :-)  Conversely, many of the lowest income in both 
UK and USA, are very very attached.  Being on benefits as a family, 
often means 24/7 share in parenting, and baby gets what baby needs - two 
loving parents all day long, and Mum isn't isolated on her own all day, 
struggling for lack of adult support and contact.  People in this 
position, are often completely overlooked when discussions of income and 
attachment parenting are discussed.  It's as if 'low income at home' is 
always 'bad'.  When it may always be a financial struggle, but in other 
ways, a lot of women would give their eye teeth to have that sort of set 
up.  And before everyone goes on about rose tinted viewpoints.. I'm in 
this category. 

I often think if we positioned it with women... think on it this way, 
formula doesn't exist, if you don't get your milk into this baby, it 
will die... makes for a change in thinking.  Suddenly, they'd find the 
bounce points and see how it can work.  As ever, it's having formula 
there, that makes the picture fuzzy, and they can't see the issues 
clearly.  Take the formula out, and the picture is in focus real fast.  
And no, it's not something I've ever said.. but it's something I've 
itched to say sometimes... ;-)  It's also not in the core thinking of 
many women who make it work.  They don't accept formula in their heads 
as acceptable, and therefore they _find_ the bounce points, as there is 
no other way to do it in their thinking (belief!). So work and family 
and breastfeeding and baby-bonding time works.. because she puts 
baby-bonding time in as 'vital'.

Culture tells women they can't do it.  But usually, they can.  And this 
has so meandered off the point.. does breastfeeding promote attachment?  
Of course it does.  Can breastfeeding be made more difficult, by return 
to work?  Of course it can.  But it can also be worked around, in ways 
that are not dependent on income.

Morgan Gallagher

(*Standard disclaimer, of course I'm talking in general and you will 
know someone who believed and tried and didn't make it as the odds were 
too great... but we all know hundreds who made it as well, so they do 
not cancel each other out!  The issue there, of course, is if you have 
good support, it's easier to have good belief! )  ;-)


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

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



No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.173 / Virus Database: 270.7.6/1709 - Release Date: 10/5/2008 9:20 AM              *********************************************** 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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2