should women unwilling to breastfeed rather not have children? - Page 3 - Mothering Forums

View Poll Results: should a woman totally unwilling to breastfeed rather not have children?
yes, she shouldn't 53 19.85%
no, I don't think so 120 44.94%
don't know,depends on her reasons 94 35.21%
Voters: 267. You may not vote on this poll

Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-17-2005, 03:52 PM - Thread Starter
 
huggerwocky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 5,396
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by loving-my-babies
yeah, that's why we are born with breasts on our chest and bottles built in our hands... to feed "however"?
That's not an argument, is it?Yes, it is what nature intended but does that automatically mean it is the natural desire of a baby to be Breastfed instead of bottlefed...instead of being fed "however (meaning bottle,breastfeding>>WHATEVER other way there is)

Does that mean a baby that is bottlefed will not have all its needs met?
huggerwocky is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 02-17-2005, 03:52 PM
 
loving-my-babies's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: From Chile but live in Pgh, PA
Posts: 6,142
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by huggerwocky
I'd like one,too...never heard THAT before.
here you go:

http://www.naturalfamilyonline.com/B...la-report2.htm

Quote:
It is clear that feeding infants artificial formula instead of breastfeeding increases their relative risk of death. A number of studies point to this fact. Table 1 shows figures from two studies measuring infant mortality risks during certain age ranges. A risk number of 3 in the chart represents three times the risk of infant death for infants who are artificially fed.
Quote:
A relative risk of 13 here means that a child who was not breastfed through the time period has thirteen times the risk of dying during his first year as a child who had received any breast milk through that period.
Quote:
Infant Mortality Rates (IMR) are the number of infant deaths per 1,000 live births, from 0 to 12 months of age.
A relative risk of 5 here means that an infant who receives formula statistically faces five times the risk of dying as an infant who is partially or completely breastfed.
Quote:
Based on the current U.S. infant death rate of 6.75 and an average breastfeeding rate of 50%, the American infant mortality rate would climb to 9.4 if all infants were formula-fed and would drop to 4.7 if all were breastfed. Twenty-two nations with high rates of breastfeeding have infant mortality rates below 5, while the U.S. ranks higher in infant death than 41 other nations.81 Clearly, lower rates for the United States are a possibility.
loving-my-babies is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 03:55 PM
 
loving-my-babies's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: From Chile but live in Pgh, PA
Posts: 6,142
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by huggerwocky
That's not an argument, is it?Yes, it is what nature intended but does that automatically mean it is the natural desire of a baby to be Breastfed instead of bottlefed...instead of being fed "however (meaning bottle,breastfeding>>WHATEVER other way there is)

Does that mean a baby that is bottlefed will not have all its needs met?
um, are you serious? obviously NOT! a baby has physical needs that formula cannot provide... you seriously don't know that? I'm not being snarky, I am just surprised you don't know that. you do know that breastmilk is the superior food, right? you do know, that formula is a one-size-fits-all and that babies have individual needs, satiesfied by the way breastmilk is individual for each baby.
loving-my-babies is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 03:55 PM
 
IdentityCrisisMama's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 10,677
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 121 Post(s)
Another issue here is if anyone should ever think another person shouldn’t have had a child because we’re talking about two people here. I think that’s what’s coming up with the bottle fed people here ~ like, “Hey, you’re saying I shouldn’t have been born.”

I’ve heard from time to time that someone really shouldn’t (in someone’s opinion) had a child (or more children) and I always feel that’s SUCH an odd thing to say.

In the end, we’re talking about the well being of the child and I imagine that the vast, vast majority would prefer to be born.

Mama to DD September 2001 and DD April 2011 *Winner for most typos* eat.gif
IdentityCrisisMama is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 03:57 PM
Banned
 
kathipaul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 582
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I think it would be a perfect world if all babies were breastfed. There are a lot of other things parents could also do to help babies live in a perfect world, like being happy together, eating and living heathly, putting family first, taking care of the environment, etc. But, we don't live in a perfect world. People make choices and some are selfish and some are just the best they can do. There are plenty of women who don't breastfeed because of very personal reasons. Maybe if they had more support, they would do it and do it for a while. That would be awesome for all babies. But, they should not be condemned just because they choose not to breastfeed. Rather than making assumptions about mamas who don't live a fully natural life, the perfect Mothering life, I think we should just let them be and offer support when asked.

Of course, if they are truly being abusive, which formula feeding is not, then we should intervene for the babes' sake.

I think this is a great question to ask and makes us all think a bit. My coffee is setting in and I am enjoying the debate!
kathipaul is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 03:58 PM - Thread Starter
 
huggerwocky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 5,396
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by loving-my-babies
hm, If I read this correctly it did not show that the lack of breastfeeding was the direct link to the higher mortality rate.It just puts the mortality rate number of breastfed babies next to the number of bottlefed babies.

I in fact think that the higher number of SID for example is more related to whether parents co-slept or not.

I also think that the numbers from non-industrialized countries are misleading, in those countries people are often cheated and get formula that really isn't any, they get cheated ( there was a recent report about this happening in China)
huggerwocky is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 03:59 PM
 
loving-my-babies's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: From Chile but live in Pgh, PA
Posts: 6,142
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
and btw, I'm not saying that someone should be forbidden to have a child. NEVER. I am saying that it would be irresponsible to have a child and if I feel they should think twice about having children, if they are not willing to breastfeed for selfish reasons. I do not think there should be a breeding police or that anyone has a right to tell others that they cannot procreate. That would be wrong. HOWEVER my opinion is that having a child, already deciding not to breastfeed for selfish reasons, is incredibly irresponsible and selfish.
loving-my-babies is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 04:01 PM
 
loving-my-babies's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: From Chile but live in Pgh, PA
Posts: 6,142
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by huggerwocky
hm, If I read this correctly it did not show that the lack of breastfeeding was the direct link to the higher mortality rate.It just puts the mortality rate number of breastfed babies next to the number of bottlefed babies.
um, did you not read it? and btw, comparison is the way this study was done. Just like how they do other studies. It's the only way to know... how else would we know the difference between formula fed and breastfed babies, if we didn't have a point of comparison?
loving-my-babies is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 04:02 PM - Thread Starter
 
huggerwocky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 5,396
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by loving-my-babies
um, are you serious? obviously NOT! a baby has physical needs that formula cannot provide... you seriously don't know that? I'm not being snarky, I am just surprised you don't know that. you do know that breastmilk is the superior food, right? you do know, that formula is a one-size-fits-all and that babies have individual needs, satiesfied by the way breastmilk is individual for each baby.
yes, I in fact do know that it is the superior food.I actually wasn't thinking of the pure nutritional factor , but anyway...
huggerwocky is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 04:02 PM
 
IdentityCrisisMama's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 10,677
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 121 Post(s)
LMB ~ that looks like a great article, thanks. I have no doubt that even with adequate formula supply and clean water the infant mortality rate is higher with FF babies but 20% still seems really high to me. Could you point me to that?

Mama to DD September 2001 and DD April 2011 *Winner for most typos* eat.gif
IdentityCrisisMama is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 04:06 PM - Thread Starter
 
huggerwocky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 5,396
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by loving-my-babies
um, did you not read it? and btw, comparison is the way this study was done. Just like how they do other studies. It's the only way to know... how else would we know the difference between formula fed and breastfed babies, if we didn't have a point of comparison?
But comparism isn't enough.You have to make an argument,too!


Like that I could easily prove that teadrinkers die later than coffeedrinkers.Now what does that prove?Nothing basically, because it is more a matter that maybe a teadrinker is mroe crunchy than a coffeedrinker and lives healthier overall seen. ( no, i don't want to prove that tea is in fact better;-))
huggerwocky is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 04:06 PM - Thread Starter
 
huggerwocky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 5,396
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by loving-my-babies
and btw, I'm not saying that someone should be forbidden to have a child. NEVER. I am saying that it would be irresponsible to have a child and if I feel they should think twice about having children, if they are not willing to breastfeed for selfish reasons. I do not think there should be a breeding police or that anyone has a right to tell others that they cannot procreate. That would be wrong. HOWEVER my opinion is that having a child, already deciding not to breastfeed for selfish reasons, is incredibly irresponsible and selfish.
I said something about the "selfish" aspect earlier in the thread
huggerwocky is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 04:21 PM
 
loving-my-babies's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: From Chile but live in Pgh, PA
Posts: 6,142
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
about the 20%.. the first time I heard that, was when the breastfeeding advocacy ads were going to come on national TV... but they never did, apparently that was one of the things the AAP did not want on there, according to them it was untrue

I looked for more on google but couldn't find it. I know I have read it though, sorry I can't provide any more facts right now, I promise I'll have more time to look online later on today.

Even if it were 10%.. or 5%.. how can a mother *choose* to give her child a 5% chance of dying, just for purely selfish reasons.. how? all of you would go NUTS to see a baby in a car without a carseat, driving along the highway.. right? yeah, and that's ONLY A RISK OF DEATH that a baby takes in the car.. not being breastfed is not a risk! it's a fact! you KNOW that baby will be forever deprived.. her body will be.

I think our perspectives would be different if we could actually observe a baby's inside body, to see how the body reacts to breastmilk, and then see how the body reacts to formula. especially on a day-old baby that needs special colostrum, and how I'm sure the body doesn't know how to react, as it *expects* to receive breastmilk, liquid gold, or "while blood" as I like to call it. Babies are born to be breastfed. no, I don't think there should be a breeding police, I will repeat this again. But babies come into this world without asking, we choose to bring them into this world, and we should be responsible.

I am all for a little selfishness.. (only I don't like to call it selfishness because in my eyes, if it's not hurting my baby.. it can't be selfish) but always putting the child first!! I went to the gym last night, call me selfish, but I wouldn't go unless I knew my 1 year old 100% breastfed baby is safe at home with daddy (never the gym daycare! never!) and making sure he will not need to breastfeed in the time that I am gone. That's just how I do things, because I feel my baby should always come first. That doesn't mean I have to mistreat myself.
loving-my-babies is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 04:33 PM
 
AngelBee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: New Brighton, MN
Posts: 19,261
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I am surprised at how this conversation is going.

I guess I misread the original post. To me it read a woman chosing not to bf. That made it sound like before she had children she knew she wouldn't bf. That to me is wrong!

And what is all this bull about lack of support and lack of education. Talk about pointing fingers! I DID NOT have support when I was a single mom to ds1. I still bf. I educated MYSELF about my choices. That is my responsibility as a mother.

What support do you really need??? You want someone to hold your shirt up for you and sing kumbya around the booby! We are adults. We shouldn't need others to constantly comfort us about our choices.

Breast milk is best. Period. Mothers who are so eager nowadays to dismiss that scare me. It makes me worry about their childrens well being in the future. To knowingly do what is not best for your child....

This DOES NOT include mothers who had difficulties bfing, sexual abuse, etc. I am talking about mamas who just don't WANT to bf.

Mama to 9 so far:Mother of Joey (20), Dominick (13), Abigail (11), Angelo (8), Mylee (6), Delainey (3), Colton (2) and Baby 8 and Baby 9 coming sometime in July 2013.   If evolution were true, mothers would have three arms!

AngelBee is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 04:39 PM
 
loving-my-babies's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: From Chile but live in Pgh, PA
Posts: 6,142
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I totally agree with Angela.. I was a teen-mom actually with my first, Valentina. My mom left to a whole other country when my daughter was born, so I lived with my dad (who is a work-aholic attorney so you can imagine he works 16-hour days) and I still breastfed, coslept, etc.. even though I had no one to explain to me why breast was best. In fact, my OB told me that formula was even better than breastmilk. that didn't keep me from nursing!!
loving-my-babies is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 04:40 PM
 
loving-my-babies's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: From Chile but live in Pgh, PA
Posts: 6,142
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by AngelBee
What support do you really need??? You want someone to hold your shirt up for you and sing kumbya around the booby!
sorry, but I had to laugh
loving-my-babies is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 04:43 PM
 
Changed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 7,146
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by huggerwocky
So do you really think that breastfeeding is soo sooo important that if a mom does not breastfeed she could no way be a good mother otherwise?
Here is the problem with this thread! That is not what you asked originally or what you polled on. This is baiting and very much against what MDC stands for. Breast is best. Period.

Now, should a woman refrain from concieving a child she has no intention to feed? Yes, absolutely.

You forget so easily that FF is not a second choice but according to the WHO it is the 4th best choice. 4th!

This my be the norm and certainly an option in the US but look at primitive cultures and ask this question again.

Without the use of formula, as a 4th choice, it goes like this;

"should women who will choose not to feed their babies refrain from having children at all?"

That does sound a bit stupid now doesn't it?

The answer is crystal clear.

You are not asking if it's ok not to breastfeed, your asking if it's ok to just give the kid a bottle of formula if you don't want to breastfeed. IMO, it's certainly not.

It serves no one but enfamil and similac to just ok that as a 2nd choice and a great alternative.

I totally agree with loving-my-babies, if you are going to have children, you have to be willing to feed them.

Is that to say that you can't be a good mother without breastfeeding? No! It's saying that you dhould breastfeed. If you are going to concieve a child, you should plan on breastfeeding that child. If some freak occurance prevents you from doing so, you'll still likely be a great mother.

And get a grip, no one said adults who were FF should have never been born.

What has happened to this place?
Changed is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 04:45 PM
 
loving-my-babies's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: From Chile but live in Pgh, PA
Posts: 6,142
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
thank you!! as I responded to all the questions above.. I had to double check on my browser to see if I mistakenly hit on "babycenter" instead of "mothering"...
loving-my-babies is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 04:51 PM
 
Changed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 7,146
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
it's depressing... where are the very women who taught ME this?
Changed is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 04:51 PM
 
loving-my-babies's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: From Chile but live in Pgh, PA
Posts: 6,142
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I Know!!!!!
loving-my-babies is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 04:58 PM
 
Changed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 7,146
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
ewwwww! THAT was in your browser? Time to clean that computer up!


(ok, now someone jump in to defend it. I know it's coming.)
Changed is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 04:59 PM
 
RubyV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Western NY (I miss NYC)
Posts: 1,092
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by AngelBee

And what is all this bull about lack of support and lack of education. Talk about pointing fingers! I DID NOT have support when I was a single mom to ds1. I still bf. I educated MYSELF about my choices. That is my responsibility as a mother.

What support do you really need??? You want someone to hold your shirt up for you and sing kumbya around the booby! We are adults. We shouldn't need others to constantly comfort us about our choices.
I have to respectfully disagree.

I think a lack of support is a HUGE reason why most women don't bf, and why those who do don't go very long. When doctors are woefully uneducated and unsupportive, hospitals keep babies from mommas, give formula without consent, when mothers who need pumps can't afford to rent or buy them, then yes, a lack of support is a problem.

My baby is bf today, going strong at 14 mos because I had a lc who loan me a hospital grade pump for free when dh lost his job, and a total stranger sent me a PIS by mail. We had abosutely ZERO money to pay for a PIS, and rental. WIC wasn't willing to give me one, and my health insurance wouldn't pay.

My mom kept trying to give her formula.

My ped wanted me to give her formula.

The hospital insisted on giving her formula.

I'm damned stubborn, but without the support of my very bf positive dh and friends, I don't know if we'd do as well as we did.

Our society insists that breasts are sexual, that nip is shameful, dirty, and wrong. We insist that women not pump, that they don't get adwquate leave from work.

We set women up to fail as a society. It's a wonder more don't.

To thank those people who reached out and helped me, I am taking a bf counselor course so I can help other mothers. I think that may go a long way towards helping.
RubyV is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 04:59 PM
 
the_lissa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Southern Ontario, Canada
Posts: 11,838
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
There is a difference between being selfish and being a selfless martyr. No, one decision does not make somebody a bad parent, but that wasn't the original question.

I just don't understand how it is okay to make a decision that increases the baby's risk of leukemia and female cancers, asthma, obesity, allergies, ear infections, etc. No one answered my earlier question if it is okay for parents to do other things that dramatically raise the risk of these potentially serious illnesses. Yes, some risks are unavoidable, but shouldn't we as parents keep our children as safe as possible and give them the best?

Jam 7, Peanut Butter 5, and Bread 2.

the_lissa is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 05:01 PM
 
loving-my-babies's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: From Chile but live in Pgh, PA
Posts: 6,142
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by the_lissa
There is a difference between being selfish and being a selfless martyr. No, one decision does not make somebody a bad parent, but that wasn't the original question.

I just don't understand how it is okay to make a decision that increases the baby's risk of leukemia and female cancers, asthma, obesity, allergies, ear infections, etc. No one answered my earlier question if it is okay for parents to do other things that dramatically raise the risk of these potentially serious illnesses. Yes, some risks are unavoidable, but shouldn't we as parents keep our children as safe as possible and give them the best?
loving-my-babies is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 05:02 PM
 
mmace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Southwestern Pennsylvania
Posts: 2,936
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I am the mother to three wonderful children. I did not breastfeed the first two at all. I knew the facts, I had family and friends that would have gladly supported me, there was no medical or emotional reason not to, I just chose not to.

With my third I chose to breastfeed, thanks in part to a friend from here (Hi Keri!). I'm so glad that I breastfed her, and if Mr. Right comes into my life and I have more babies, I would definitely breastfeed them as well.

I don't know if I can explain this clearly, but I don't regret not breastfeeding the first two - I made the decision that was right for me at that time, and I have no regrets - but I do wish I had breastfed them. Does that make any sense at all?

I DO NOT believe that not breastfeeding makes me a bad mom to those two kids, or a better mom to the third - I am a great mom to all three!
mmace is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 05:19 PM
 
Itlbokay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,358
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
"Should women unwilling to breastfeed rather not have children?"

This was the original question, correct?

I couldn't possibly vote yes - what if the Mother unwilling to breastfeed changes her mind? What if she decides to breastfeed after the birth of her child? What if like mmace and others she doesn't with the first, maybe not the second but the third or fourth?

These are the problems with trying to tell others what they should do, even with something as important as how you feed your baby. Of course we should try and do what is best for OUR children. I just don't think it's wise to start dictating what others do with THEIR children.

You can teach much better with patience and compassion.
Itlbokay is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 05:32 PM
 
AnnMarie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 2,946
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by loving-my-babies
I am not saying ALL women that don't breastfeed do this, it's the attitude that bothers me.
That's exactly how I feel. If you don't want to take the time to raise a child in a loving and caring manor and give them the best possible, then why have kids? If you can't be bothered to put in some effort I don't think you should have kids because it takes a lot of effort to raise them up right. I chose #3.
AnnMarie is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 05:39 PM
 
AngelBee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: New Brighton, MN
Posts: 19,261
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by my~hearts~light
Here is the problem with this thread! That is not what you asked originally or what you polled on. This is baiting and very much against what MDC stands for. Breast is best. Period.

Now, should a woman refrain from concieving a child she has no intention to feed? Yes, absolutely.

You forget so easily that FF is not a second choice but according to the WHO it is the 4th best choice. 4th!

This my be the norm and certainly an option in the US but look at primitive cultures and ask this question again.

Without the use of formula, as a 4th choice, it goes like this;

"should women who will choose not to feed their babies refrain from having children at all?"

That does sound a bit stupid now doesn't it?

The answer is crystal clear.

You are not asking if it's ok not to breastfeed, your asking if it's ok to just give the kid a bottle of formula if you don't want to breastfeed. IMO, it's certainly not.

It serves no one but enfamil and similac to just ok that as a 2nd choice and a great alternative.

I totally agree with loving-my-babies, if you are going to have children, you have to be willing to feed them.

Is that to say that you can't be a good mother without breastfeeding? No! It's saying that you dhould breastfeed. If you are going to concieve a child, you should plan on breastfeeding that child. If some freak occurance prevents you from doing so, you'll still likely be a great mother.

And get a grip, no one said adults who were FF should have never been born.

What has happened to this place?

Mama to 9 so far:Mother of Joey (20), Dominick (13), Abigail (11), Angelo (8), Mylee (6), Delainey (3), Colton (2) and Baby 8 and Baby 9 coming sometime in July 2013.   If evolution were true, mothers would have three arms!

AngelBee is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 05:42 PM
 
paquerette's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Poconos
Posts: 6,594
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by loving-my-babies
thank you!! as I responded to all the questions above.. I had to double check on my browser to see if I mistakenly hit on "babycenter" instead of "mothering"...
I just want to jump in and say I agree with you guys. I think there's a major lack of personal responsibility going on with a lot of people in many aspects of life, and this is just another one of those things that no one looks into very much. Just like with the law, ignorance is no excuse. Ten years ago, I thought childbirth was icky and babies got fed with bottles, and I'd probably never have any but if I did I'd want a c-section so none of that screaming bloody stuff had to happen. But then when I grew up and decided I did want kids, I read about it! And I learned things, here and from books and from other boards. And I made the most logical choices with the information that was available. But no one hit me over the head with a Sears book or anything, I went out and found it myself because I care about finding the truth.

And even though I find myself whining to my husband "I don't waaant to do this, can't we get some formula" I know, and he knows, that I don't mean it at all. It's just the thrush and the exhaustion talking. I don't have a ton of support, but how could I look at my baby and think of doing that to her? So I keep going, and if I encounter another problem, I'll research the heck out of it and do what I have to to fix it.
paquerette is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 05:42 PM
 
townmouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: home with 4 sons and a husband
Posts: 874
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
IMHO alot of this conversation has not been about the OP, but...

I can tell you I'm here today because I'm weary of IRL debates about whether formula is just as good as breastmilk! Or advice on why I don't need to work so hard to BF my special-needs baby!

I knew at MDC I wouldn't have to hear that it doesn't matter how a baby is fed!

I knew at MDC, everybody understands that breast is best, for all babies, and its just not up for debate!

What a shock this thread has been : .
townmouse is offline  
 
User Tag List

Thread Tools


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off