Medela & the WHO code - Page 6

[junipermuse]

Originally Posted by felix23

: And as a mom of a former preemie, nursing at the breast is not always possible either. Bottles and feeding tubes were the only way for a long time that dd1 could eat. I'm getting ready to start WOH and I'm very lucky that I can take dd2 with me and nurse her, but if I didn't she would have to take a bottle. Medela is advertising bottles to people who are most likely already going to be using bottles.

If they're advertising the bottles to people who'd already be using them, then why not just not advertise them. If someone decides to purchase a medela pump they will likely see the medela bottles and nipples in the breastpump aisle at Babies r us or when they search for pumping supplies online. Chances are if they've decided to buy the pump they'll buy the bottles that go with them if their intention is to bottle feed.

But the fact is that the purpose of advertising is to convince someone to buy something who otherwise wouldn't. And that's why you don't want bottles and nipples being advertised. Because there's a good chance you're going to convince some women to bottlefeed who possibly would have breastfed instead. Advertising bottles normalizes bottlefeeding. And while bottlefeeding breastmilk is a great alternative when feeding directly from the breast isn't an option, direct breastfeeding needs to be considered the standard. Advertising bottles and nipples undermines efforts to change society's view of bottlefeeding as standard.

[felix23]

Originally Posted by junipermuse

If they're advertising the bottles to people who'd already be using them, then why not just not advertise them. If someone decides to purchase a medela pump they will likely see the medela bottles and nipples in the breastpump aisle at Babies r us or when they search for pumping supplies online. Chances are if they've decided to buy the pump they'll buy the bottles that go with them if their intention is to bottle feed.

But the fact is that the purpose of advertising is to convince someone to buy something who otherwise wouldn't. And that's why you don't want bottles and nipples being advertised. Because there's a good chance you're going to convince some women to bottlefeed who possibly would have breastfed instead. Advertising bottles normalizes bottlefeeding. And while bottlefeeding breastmilk is a great alternative when feeding directly from the breast isn't an option, direct breastfeeding needs to be considered the standard. Advertising bottles and nipples undermines efforts to change society's view of bottlefeeding as standard.

They advertise because people don't know that they sell extra bottles. At least I didn't until this thread. With my first I used preemie bottles and then Avent even thought I pumped with a Medela pump. When I rented the pump there was no mention of bottles that I could buy. With my second I was given a Medela pump and Playtex bottles. I really haven't seen Medela bottles sold anywhere. Of course there is no Babies r Us around here. My cousin and sister who both used Medela pumps didn't use Medela bottles. Medela is trying to get the people who use their pumps, but don't use their bottles to switch over.

Until American society changes so that women can stay at home and nurse their babies for the first year, bottlefeeding is going to be the standard. I just wish that more women were given the option to pump at work so that their babies could get breastmilk instead of formula.

[junipermuse]

Originally Posted by felix23

Until American society changes so that women can stay at home and nurse their babies for the first year, bottlefeeding is going to be the standard. I just wish that more women were given the option to pump at work so that their babies could get breastmilk instead of formula.

So unless we have paid maternity leave, companies shouldn't be expected to follow the WHO code? That's kind of biting our nose off to spite our face. Especially since the more we normalize breastfeeding from the breast, the more our government is likely to see the importance of paid family leave for new mothers. Besides while needing to work is one obstacle to breastfeeding I know lots of SAHM who still choose to bottlefeed. While I think it is really important to support working mothers who want to breastfeed, I don't think normalizing breastfeeding is a lost cause just because we don't have paid year long maternity leave. However I do agree that a year paid leave would be ideal.

[felix23]

Originally Posted by junipermuse

So unless we have paid maternity leave, companies shouldn't be expected to follow the WHO code? That's kind of biting our nose off to spite our face. Especially since the more we normalize breastfeeding from the breast, the more our government is likely to see the importance of paid family leave for new mothers. Besides while needing to work is one obstacle to breastfeeding I know lots of SAHM who still choose to bottlefeed. While I think it is really important to support working mothers who want to breastfeed, I don't think normalizing breastfeeding is a lost cause just because we don't have paid year long maternity leave. However I do agree that a year paid leave would be ideal.

Oh I agree that breastfeeding should be the norm, I just don't see how it can be if so many women have to work out of home. Right now formula feeding is the norm for working moms. I would like to see that change to pumping and bottlefeeding. Of course I would love for all the moms who want to stay at home and nurse their babies to be able to, but right now that is not a real option.

[proudmomof4]

Originally Posted by Alice27

A lot of issues have come up here, and many tangents have been opened up - so compliments to those of you who have kept the discussion back on track.

A code is a code, and if Medela feel hardly done by because they cannot advertise some of their products, then they should be asking to change the code, rather than going ahead and advertising.

One of the things that came up in the conversation that worries me, is the division wealthy countries, versus third world countries. You know, there are wealthy women living in third world countries, as there are poor women with no access to clean water living in wealthy countries, and a whole range of women in between. There are also women and babies, with no access to clean water who could benefit from breastpumps and/or bottles (mothers of children with cleft lips and palate, for instance). It is a very complicated issue, and from what I can see, the code is trying to protect those who most need it - our children. Mums who need to know which bottles and or nipples are best for their babies, surely can ask around their friends and neighbours (I have learnt more about which teat and bottle combination to buy, if I needed them, from this thread ). If breastfeeding becomes the norm, and bottle feeding rare, then perhaps the code will have to be revised because there will be mothers out there who have never seen a bottlefed baby.

Alice

Well said!

[readytobedone]

Originally Posted by onlygirls

I watched the advertisement and it didn't make me feel yucky inside. Sorry.

So the commercial appeals to "upscale" people. I think that if someone is low on cash, they aren't going to buy a Medela pump anyway.

<snip>

I don't think anything is going to change my mind about this. The pump comes with bottles. Most babies who are fed EBM use bottles. But campanies are not supposed to market bottles? It doesn't make sense to me.

yeah, this.

it seems to me people are forgetting medela is a company, trying to sell products. this is a commercial for products, not a public service announcement for breastfeeding!

medela supports breastfeeding, but it can't MARKET breastfeeding and stand to make any money. it has to MARKET pumping and bottlefeeding.

before you go concluding that that's evil, consider the fact that pumping and bottlefeeding (part-time, anyhow) is necessary for the majority of women in the united states at the present time.

sure, commercials like this don't challenge the status quo, but that doesn't change the fact that this commercial is trying to worth with the status quo so that babies of working moms get as much breastmilk as possible!

[readytobedone]

Originally Posted by felix23

Having worked in daycare I can tell you that it is going to be really hard to find a childcare provider who is going to cup or syringe feed a six week old. And not all babies will take milk that way, mine wouldn't.

Nursing along with being able to pump at work and provide breastmilk via bottles, syringes, cups, or whatever should be the norm. When people see bottles they should automatically think of breastmilk, not formula. I think pregnant and new moms should see advertisements for pumps and breastmilk bottles, so that they will know that even if they are WOH, they can still provide breastmilk for their babies. I just had a conversation today with a lady who said she would have loved to breastfeed but since she had to go back to work when her baby was three weeks old, there was no point in starting since he would have had to go on formula then. I brought up pumping, and her response was "Oh, I never even thought of that." Maybe if there had more advertisements showing working moms pumping and feeding their babies breastmilk bottles, her baby would have gotten breastmilk, instead of formula.

i agree. there is nothing about bottles that HAS to mean ABM. maybe the solution is to work toward a normalization of breastfeeding that INCLUDES bottlefeeding EBM--not to replace BFing, but to complement it.

i also completely agree that cup feeding, SNS feeding, finger feeding, momsicles--all that is great. but good luck finding a caregiver who's going to cup feed your 2 month old EBM. i worked my a$$ off to get my DD to take a bottle because i KNEW that realistically speaking, no one would want to care for a breastfed infant that wouldn't eat the whole time i was gone.