Im not sure who the MCH nurse was, but she operates in the Berrigan area (actually rural NSW - my mistake)
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jo Zoch Sent: Monday, 3 June 2002 10:46 AM To: ozmidwifery Subject: Re: Melbourne's Child article Can I ask where in rural Vic did you get that 'advice' from? That's just scary. Many women have asked me if their milk is good enough for their baby becuase they just 'keep eating' in hospital. I do my best to quash that idea as soon as I can, but it is hard to convince women not to worry, when they think their baby isn't getting enough food. They are worried about their baby, and they need to see it be full and sleep for a few hours before waking for more food. Women need to be better educated about what to expect from a newborn regarding feeding. Given this, women DO decide to formula feed based on the length of time a baby might sleep between feeds :( Jo ----- Original Message ----- From: "Macha McDonald" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "ozmidwifery" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, June 02, 2002 11:27 PM Subject: RE: Melbourne's Child article > As a recent consumer, I can say that the (over) emphasis on technique and > latch, although it is important, is very confusing. When I had my daughter, > in a baby friendly hospital, every midwife had a different idea about what I > was meant to be doing. Confusion is not the word. My mind was in chaos!!! > This baby friendly hospital recommended formula to me. So much for the 10 > steps!!! Also, their LCs were very limited in their advice. For low > supply, I was told on more than 10 different occasions over 3 months to just > keep expressing. I agree with the baby friendly initiative, but seeing it > 1st hand, I dont think its working. Some staff are just not committed > enough. Friends and family who are also recent consumers have sited that > the MCHN and midwifes in hospital (rural VIC) told them their milk did not > have enough nutrients in it, and that it wasnt strong enough. I think the > whole situation is worse than we think, and I am surprised that anyone is > breastfeeding at all, considering the current climate....in my humble > opinion!!! > Regards, Macha. > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Johnston > Sent: Sunday, 2 June 2002 8:04 PM > To: ozmidwifery > Subject: RE: Melbourne's Child article > > > Dear Liz > While I agree wholeheartedly with most of the discussion on this, and I > have seen the article in question, I feel I need to make a comment about > your statement : > < > The 'baby friendly initiative' I believe, was aimed at developing countries > whose children were dying of diarrhoeal disease through contaminated water, > incorrect formula and lack of hygiene. > > This is a not uncommon response, and it worries me greatly - I believe it's > wrong. I was involved in both the Victorian and the national BFHI set-up. > I am not actively involved in it now, but I support the underlying > principles wholeheartedly. > > I know of no reason why every maternity service in Australia should not > implement the '10 steps to successful breastfeeding', and seek external > assessment through the Baby Friendly Hospital accreditation process. This > has very little to do with dirty water - babies die unnecessarily in > Australia too because they are not breastfed. The reasons for failure of > breastfeeding (most are willing to initiate breastfeeding, but the drop-off > rates are alarming) are many. There is reliable evidence that practices > which have for many years been common in maternity services across the > developed world, such as separation of mother and baby, timing of feeds, > use of artificial supplements, use of dummies and teats, advertising of > alternatives to breastfeeding ... all contribute to early weaning. These > are the issues that are dealt with in the global Baby Friendly Hospital > Initiative. Sally's comments about babies who are brought into this world > doped up to their eyeballs in narcotics are also relevant here. These > babies and their mothers require special skilled support, and it can all be > done within the baby friendly process. There's nothing daunting, or > excessively focused on technique in the baby friendly initiative that I > know about. (I'm a realist - not everyone gets it right all the time, but > that's life!) > > Finally, we all agree that most mothers, most of the time, want what's best > for their babies. Midwives who seek to provide woman centred care will do > all that they can to support the mother-baby bond, working with the natural > process, and only interfering when we have a good reason. That's being > mother-friendly too. > > Protecting, promoting and supporting breastfeeding doesn't come easily. > There are many deterrents in our society. Our work should be underpinned > by reliable evidence, and I would ask anyone who knows of evidence contrary > to the BFHI '10 steps' to speak up now. > > With my best wishes > Joy Johnston > > > > -- > This mailing list is sponsored by ACE Graphics. > Visit <http://www.acegraphics.com.au> to subscribe or unsubscribe. > > -- > This mailing list is sponsored by ACE Graphics. > Visit <http://www.acegraphics.com.au> to subscribe or unsubscribe. -- This mailing list is sponsored by ACE Graphics. Visit <http://www.acegraphics.com.au> to subscribe or unsubscribe. -- This mailing list is sponsored by ACE Graphics. Visit <http://www.acegraphics.com.au> to subscribe or unsubscribe.
