Babes in Arms: looking back

I originally wrote the following article and had it published in the (then) NMAA Newsletter [Vol 39, Issue 1]  when my eldest was 18. 

Rare photo of the family photographer!
Wearing 6 week old Kaitlyn
in an NMAA Meh Tai 1987

Babes in Arms - a rod for your back?

Not long after I left home aged almost eighteen, I became the owner of a fluffy, black kitten I named Midnight. My boyfriend’s mother visited to see the new arrival and found me stroking her as she lay curled up on my lap, asleep. This was greeted with “You don’ t her to get her too used to that - she’ll expect it all the time”.  

I thought that was why I got a cat! It has actually been documented that stroking or patting a pet can calm and relax you - even causing a drop in blood pressure. The animal also enjoys it - a kitten must surely remember with pleasure the sensation of its mother’s tongue, mimicked by the hands of their new family.

 A few years later, I was married and the mother of our first child, Melissa. Having spent my pregnancy reading every book I could get my hands on about raising babies, the reality came as a great shock. My reading told me that babies would sleep for long hours between regular feeds and would learn to settle themselves if placed in the cradle when awake. Feeding to sleep was frowned upon and “over-handling” discouraged. Trying to get Melissa into any sort of routine seemed to only end in tears - hers and mine! She settled best when allowed to feed as long as she wanted and always fell asleep at the breast. She seemed to know what she was doing, so I decided to forget the rules and do what worked best.

 Melissa was fed when she wanted, for as long as she wanted. If she cried, she was put to the breast and it always seemed to work. She was held a lot, carried in the Meh Tai, massaged daily and slept in our bed frequently.

 It was years later that I read the books by Dr William Sears and learned the things I was doing were called “attachment parenting” - I just called them Instincts!

 My mother-in-law (previously boyfriend's mother!) was not comfortable with the way we did things. Others felt the same way. But we continued to parent in the way most comfortable for us, despite the grave warnings we received. The set of rods I was making for my own back was coming along nicely - at the rate we were going, my husband and I were set to produce clingy, dependent children who would never learn to sleep in their own bed, would never wean, would be spoiled etc etc.

 Along came Kaitlyn, when Melissa was three and a half. She breastfed more often and for longer, slept in our bed earlier and longer and was raised with even less regard for the “rules” than Melissa. I read more books, this time ones that didn’t make me feel bad about the way I did things. I became much more confident as a mother. I enjoyed my baby, holding her while she slept, without an underlying feeling of “doing the wrong thing”.

 When Kaitlyn was three, Kieran was born. Unsettled from the word go, he rarely left my arms, sleeping only at the breast, in my arms, the Meh Tai or a moving pram. The disapproving mutters grew louder. I read again William Sears book, “The Fussy Baby”  - it could he been written just for us. Kieran was a ‘high needs baby’, and what we were doing was just right.

 As Kieran continued to breastfeed to sleep for longer than either of the girls had, things came to a head when he was 18 months old. I declined to attend a family wedding because Kieran was not welcome. I was unwilling to leave him with my patient mother who would not be able to settle him in the way that worked best. (Although later on she spent memorable evenings looking after Kieran and my also-breastfed niece, who was the same age, with all three of them asleep on the couch when we arrived home!)

  My husband, when discussing my decision with his mother, was told “ Kieran wouldn’t be like this if she didn’t carry him in that sling thing all the time”! Time went on, still co-sleeping, still breastfeeding, until Kieran weaned himself at 2 ¾ years.

 At 3 years, Kieran was no longer sleeping in our bed, nor needing the breast. However we were having difficulty getting him into his own bed at night. We kept finding him asleep on the floor of his sisters’ bedroom. When we talked to him, he told us he didn’t want to sleep alone. Thinking about this, I realised sleeping arrangements in our three bedroom home were unfair. Because of his gender and convention, the youngest member of our family of five was the only one expected to sleep alone. After all, even Mum and Dad got to share a bed!

 So we took the radical step, after discussion with our children, of putting all three in one bedroom and converting the third bedroom to a badly needed study. People tut-tutted - a girl Melissa’s age (11) shouldn’t share with a young brother, she needed her own space etc. But we did it anyway.

 But this was all years ago. Our children are now 18, 15 and 11. How have they all turned out? I know many other new parents are torn between the way that feels right and the “right” way. 

Today there is a trend back to “settling techniques”, “teaching babies to sleep” and something called a “feed, play, sleep” routine. Babies are again seen to need teaching and routines are often considered necessary. So, did we spoil or ruin our children by the way we cared for them as infants?

 Well, Melissa as a teenager is a confident, independent young woman. She is warm and openly affectionate to her family - even in front of her friends! Kaitlyn is a quiet, gentle, helpful girl, with a natural ability with babies and young children. And Kieran, our fussy, unsettled little boy, sleeps happily in his own bed and is cuddly and shares a wonderful relationship with his sisters.

 They have all have been complemented by others for their independent ways. The clingy, dependent children never eventuated.

 The three shared a room for nearly two years, until we moved into a four- bedroom home. Melissa then got her own bedroom (aged 13). Kieran and Kaitlyn shared until Kailtlyn turned 12, with Kaitlyn moving into her own room with Kieran’s “blessing”.

 Despite all our bad ways, they seem to be pretty good kids. The added bonus was unexpected.

 Through my ABA involvement, I have a lot of contact with mothers and their babies and through this, my children also spend a lot of time around them.  Our extended family has also ‘extended’ in recent years. The way they confidently handle young babies is a pleasure to watch. They enjoy holding and rocking babies and seeing them fall asleep in their arms. They instinctively want to hold a baby who is crying. Only when a baby makes that certain cry do they hand them back to Mum, already recognising the sound of a baby who needs the breast.

 Not only have our own children benefited from attachment parenting techniques in their infancy, but they have gained confidence and skills they will use when they become parents themselves. I recently heard a speaker discuss mother and infant bonding, who spoke of mothers remembering how they were mothered as babies and how this is brought to their own parenting skills. What a wonderful gift to pass on to our children.

 As a society we speak highly of mother/child bonding, nurturing and motherhood. Why is it then that so many are quick to condemn the very acts of these qualities - indeed, warning against them? Close physical contact from birth is the very basis of maternal bonding - the type gained by feeding according to need, co-sleeping, massage, carrying and holding babies.

 In traditional cultures babies are rarely put down. Carried all the time, primarily by their mother, but also by other females within the family unit. And these babies rarely cry. So often, when our babies cry, it is blamed on “wind” or other physical ills. Perhaps all our babies are really asking for is the loving touch of their mother, supported and encouraged by those around her to do so. We need to teach society that these acts do not get in the way of a mother “doing her work” - this is her work, and infancy is frighteningly short. Our babies only need this intense commitment for such a short time. By meeting their emotional, as well as physical, needs we are not making them dependent. Rather, we are giving them the security to develop independence, so highly prized by our society.

By the way, I still have the cat! And on a cold, winter evening in front of the television, there is nothing I enjoy more than stroking her, as she lays asleep on my lap! I still have my mother-in-law too, only no longer do I feel the need for her approval. After all, my way seems to have worked pretty well, so far!

Vale, Midnight,At the grand age of 19 1/2 years, Midnight quietly passed away in her sleep.
When our new cats, Frodo and Merry joined our family, they bonded quickly - Frodo with Kaitlyn, Merry with Melissa. All enjoy snuggling up together, patting and cuddles.

2013 Update: 
Kaitlyn is due to have her first child in April 2013 and is expecting to bed-share with her daughter, incorporating an Arms Reach co-sleeper in the early days. She also plans on baby wearing and breastfeeding her babies. I can't wait to sit around holding my granddaughter too much, wearing her when I can and reminding my daughter of her own breastfeeding and bed-sharing infancy! Aunty Melissa and Uncle Kieran, now 29 and 22, are excitedly looking forward to the new arrival and spoiling her with love :)

October 2013:

My granddaughter Charlie is now six months old and, as expected, her mother is doing all those things I was warned against, with the same, delightful results! Charlie is breastfed whenever she wishes, carried in a range of baby slings and shares her parent's bed most nights, occasionally spending time in the attached co-sleeper.

When people try to cast doom on her future, she can explain Charlie will eventually sleep in her own bed, wean from the breast, not need to be held - just like her mother did! 

All these years later, people still try to convince parents it is wrong to follow their child's lead, bad to let them sleep (safely) in their parents' bed, breastfeed when they want, be carried and held when they need. In the past thirty years, the evidence to support all these things has grown, not diminished!

We still have Frodo and Merry, now about to turn 14! Charlie loves to pat and stroke them and Frodo, in particular, will seek her out to do so. I still have my mother-in-law too! And when she saw Kaitlyn wearing Charlie in a sling for the first time, she asked if it doesn't hurt her back!

Love and enjoy your babies - too soon they will be grown.

Bed sharing - Kaitlyn & Melissa woke up together on the day of Kaitlyn's wedding

Experts call for tighter regulation of baby formula marketing

Please watch this excellent interview with Julie Smith. But first:

• Remember that regulation of infant formula advetising and marketing is NOT a criticism of mothers who cannot breastfeed.

• Marketing of formula to women who are breastfeeding is a known factor in premature weaning.

• There is very little difference in composition between different brands of formula. Most are much the same.

• Advertising of infant formula for babies under 12 months is not allowed. Toddler formula was introduced as soon as that regulation came into place.

• Previously, the cut off for advertising was six months. Follow on formula, suitable from six months, was swiftly invented.

• Most health professionals do not encourage the use of formula of any kind beyond 12 months.

• Formula companies promote toddler formula as an aid to brand awareness, not because children need them. 

• As well as toddler products, we are now seeing some labelled for pre-school aged children. 

• Most toddler formula companies use marketing such as clubs, websites, taste testing (at baby expos), balloons, showbags etc to encourage and maintain brand loyalty.

• Multinational companies marketing formula around the world adapt their products and marketing to fit within the regulations in each company. Where it is legal to do so, aggressive marketing commences in pregnancy. 

Now watch the story. 

Experts call for tighter regulation of baby formula marketing

If you were not able to meet your own breastfeeding goals or chose not to breastfeed, please understand that calls for regulation are not a criticism - indeed, it is you and your baby who are the potential targets of more aggressive advertising and marketing. Consider how much of your family budget you spend on infant formula and ask yourself who would profit from you continuing to use it beyond the first year?

(This link is to an Australian TV website and is probably not available outside our country. If I can get hold of a transcript or report I will share it here.)

Around six months

At five months of age, my granddaughter Charlie is now the only one of ten babies in her Mums Group not to have started solids.

This despite none of those babies yet reaching the "around six months" age recommendation for doing so.

Sometimes, it feels like we are banging our heads on a brick wall trying to achieve the guidelines of babies being exclusively breastfed in the first year of life - between the push for supplements of infant formula from as early as the first week to solids being actively encouraged at four months of age, it seems that many health professionals are either ignorant of, or disagree with, both the World Health Organisation AND the National Health & Medical Research Council, both of whom clearly state the age at which foods other than breastmilk/infant formula should be introduced to a baby:

Breastfeeding is an unequalled way of providing ideal food for the healthy growth and development of infants; it is also an integral part of the reproductive process with important implications for the health of mothers. As a global public health recommendation, infants should be exclusively breastfed1 for the first six months of life to achieve optimal growth, development and health2. Thereafter, to meet their evolving nutritional requirements, infants should receive nutritionally adequate and safe complementary foods while breastfeeding continues for up to two years of age or beyond. Exclusive breastfeeding from birth is possible except for a few medical conditions, and unrestricted exclusive breastfeeding results in ample milk production.World Health Organisation Infant Feeding Guidelines

In Australia, it is recommended that infants be exclusively breastfed until around 6 months of age when solid foods are introduced. It is further recommended that breastfeeding be continued until 12 months of age and beyond, for as long as the mother and child desire. NHMRC Infant Feeding Guidelines 2012

Now, these are not some wacko group with an agenda to push, they are the formal bodies who provide guidelines on all aspects of health care globally and in Australia. I wonder if those health professionals are also defying the recommendations in other areas?

Call me cynical, but you have to wonder who else has an interest in starting babies earlier than these clear guidelines - oh, that's right - the very large, multinational baby food industry! You only need to browse the aisle of your supermarket to see row after row of jars and packets stating "suitable from 4 months".

When babies are given "solids" (actually a misnomer) before they are developmentally ready, the foods need to be so liquified that they are nothing like the foods we eat. So all these "4-6 months" jars are pureed and contain nothing lumpy. They slip into the open mouths of babies, don't challenge the tongue thrust reflex very effectively and slide down the throat without much difference to the milk feeds the baby is used to.

Which is why the media reports of a recent study in the UK make such interesting reading:

Commercial baby food too sweet, lacks nutrition

The nutritional content of commercial foods was compared to typical homemade foods in the study.

The comparison showed commercial foods generally had half the nutrients of typical home made foods with the exception of iron content.

A 50g service of homemade food would supply the same amount of energy and protein as 100g of a similar commercial product, say the authors.

The reason for introducing solid foods is to increase the energy content of a baby's diet and provide more nutrients.

"Yet the most commonly used commercial foods considered in this study supply no more energy than breast or formula milk," the study says.

"While it is understandable that parents may choose to use these products early in the weaning process, health professionals should be aware that such food will not add to the nutrient density of a milk diet," the authors say.

But what about that other "first food", almost universely used with fondness, despite agreeance that it tastes on par with something like wall-paper paste: Farex and other brands of rice-cereal?

As long as iron-rich foods are included in first foods, foods can be introduced in any order and at a rate that suits the infant, NHMRC experts say.

But a national obesity conference in 2012 was told a baby's first solid food should be mashed vegetables - not the traditional baby rice cereal.

Endocrinologist and Obesity Australia chief Professor John Funder says the first four years of a child's life is crucial in determining whether they will develop eating habits that lead to obesity.

Starting a child off on a diet of rice cereal was like giving them "an oral glucose tolerance test''.

Children fed high carbohydrate, high salt and high fat diets as toddlers will have their brains wired to desire these foods for the rest of their lives, Professor Funder said.

So why are these products so blatantly marketed as being  the first foods for infants, if they are clearly not the healthiest options for parents to choose? This is a question that has been put to the FSANZ - (Food Standards Australia & new Zealand) who sets food labelling standards in the Food Standards Code. These standards are enforced by the Australian states and territories and, in New Zealand, by the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI).

Their final report makes interesting reading and contains this telling statement:

Most parents relied on two main signals from their baby in determining if he or she was ready for solids – these were regarded more as signs of hunger rather than developmental readiness: 

• an indication of strong interest in food by following with their eyes when others eat around them, or reaching for food from an adult’s plate; and 

• disturbed sleep patterns at night, indicating that the breast or bottle feed was no longer enough

You will note their is no reference to being physically ready - the tongue-thrust reflux gone, able to sit in an upright position to eat safely.

You can read the full report here. You will note this document is dated 2004 and clearly labelling has not changed as suggested.

So we are left with the following confusing picture for parents:

• The WHO and NHMRC guidelines say around six months is the age to introduce foods other than breastmilk.
• The commerical baby food industry continue to label their products as suitable from four months.
• Health professionals and others continue to suggest starting solids will improve infant sleep and infant growth - despite the normalcy of increased night waking and weight gain plateau in the 4-6 month age group.

Its time we asked the question of our Local, State and Federal Governments WHY so many mothers are starting solids at 4 months and not around 6 months. In Victoria, solids are discussed at the four month Maternal & Child Health visit. One has to question if the emphasis of that talk is on waiting until 6 months or if mothers are being encouraged to start earlier. Statistics on breastfeeding rates may tell the story:

Statistics from the 2010 Australian National Infant Feeding Survey³ results indicate that 96% of mothers initiate breastfeeding. Thereafter, exclusive breastfeeding rates drop off. Less than half (39%) of babies are still being exclusively breastfed to 3 months (less than 4 months) and less than one quarter (15%) to 5 months (less than 6 months).

Is it really a move to infant formula replacing breastmilk that gives these figures or are our exclusively breastfed babies during this significant age range decreasing because of the early introduction of other foods?

Questions you might like to ask your State and Federal Health Ministers.

Review: Breastmilk jewellry

I received the most wonderful gift this week: a pendant encapsulating my daughter's breastmilk!

Now, if breastfeeding is just a way of feeding babies in your mind, you might well be wondering ... "Why??"

But if breastfeeding to you is an incredible bond between mother and child, a source of connection, love and love as well as food, then you will understand. And if you have read Breastfeeding Charlie: It Took a Village, you will know that the early days of Kaitlyn's breastfeeding experience meant every drop of milk was like liquid gold and valued even more.

I meet many women whose breastfeeding experience is a treasured time - perhaps only brief hours or days with a baby born too soon or whose life was too short; or time of great sadness when it just didn't work out as they had hoped. Some women have a cache of frozen expressed milk they cannot bear to throw out long past its use-by date, their only tangible connection to that special time.

All of these mothers will understand the appeal of this unique memento.

In fact, when Kaitlyn ordered my pendant, she got one for herself too. And so we have an extra bond between us now too.

My pendant

Kaitlyn's pendant

When I posted the photo of my piece on Facebook, friends clamoured to know where they came from. I contacted the creator and she was so happy we were happy with them, she has offered a special discount for ABA members!

Blackbird Accessories is a small business that can also create pieces including placenta or hair, other ways to safely keep treasured memories.

You can find Blackbird Accessories on Facebook and to get your discount, quote your ABA membership number - on your members card or the mailing sheet from Essence magazine, or phone Head Office to look it up for you.

My gift was part of a thank you from my co-workers at the Breastfeeding Centre, which I sadly left in May. Breastfeeding has connected me with so many women over the past three decades, not least of all those I worked alongside as we gave practical support to mothers visiting the Centre. That they should conspire with my daughter to give me what they all knew I would treasure is just another example of the bonds of women who come together to support women. It is a time and a gift I will always remember.

Why I still love ABA meetings

This week, Kaitlyn and I did our double-ABA meetings - Frankston Group and Dandenong Group. Once again, I was reminded why the volunteer work I do is so important.

Both groups have welcomed new people and embraced them into the community of mothers they needed. I just wish more women joined the Australian Breastfeeding Association during their pregnancy and then they would have that support right from the start of their journey. It makes a huge difference when they do.

Join now!

Attachment Parenting: for life

I was drawn to Attachment Parenting  before I knew its name. I have written previously about that journey:
Babes In Arms: A Rod For My Own Back.

What is attachment parenting?

Attachment parenting (also called “natural parenting” or “instinctive parenting”) is an approach to parenting that has been practised widely for thousands of years. There has recently been a renewed interest in this approach to parenting in Western societies. Attachment parenting is based on the principle of understanding a child’s emotional and physical needs and responding sensitively to these needs. The focus of attachment parenting is on building a strong relationship between parents and child.

A strong and trusting relationship with your child can be developed by following your intuition; responding to your baby’s cries; “demand” breastfeeding for an extended period; carrying or “wearing” your baby; using gentle ways to help your baby sleep; co-sleeping with your baby and minimising separation from your baby during the first few years.

However, attachment parenting is not a set of rules and does not necessarily mean following all of the above. These practises simply help to develop a close, empathic relationship with your child in order to better understand your child’s needs and feelings. Children are not seen as manipulators who must be controlled. Attachment parenting extends beyond the early infant period and involves a life-long desire to know your child and to parent in an understanding and nurturing way.

 http://www.attachmentparentingaustralia.com/

 But now my children are all grown, and one has even started a family of her own, is Attachment Parenting still relevant? How does an approach associated with infancy flow into childhood, the teenage years, early adulthood and into a new generation?

Kieran (22), Kaitlyn (25) with her Daughter Charlie, Melissa (29)
Mothers Day 2013

Firstly, let me reassure you that all my babies have weaned, sleep in their own beds and are no longer carried in slings! These were the key fears raised by others about extended breastfeeding, co-sleeping and baby-wearing - that they would never be able to stop! They did :)

So, how did AP have role in our family once everyone was eating family foods, sleeping in their own beds and moving independently away from the parental circle?

Firstly - and perhaps surprisingly to some - my children enjoyed occasional child care, 3 & 4 year old kinder and were educated in the local primary and high schools. I wasn't drawn to home-schooling and having the children attend neighbourhood  schools was important to us from a community perspective. Each of our children was challenged by learning difficulties and there were times I considered if they would be better off at home with me teaching, but their social bonds to school were strong and they voiced desire to stay there. By working hard to get the teachers to understand how our children learned and what made it difficult for them to do so, we were able to support them all to complete 13 years of schooling and pass VCE (Victorian Certificate of Education) and a successful Year Twelve.

10 years ago - 2003 - not your average family portrait!

They also took part in extra-curricular activities of their choice - except for swimming lessons, which are really not optional when you live alongside the sea and surrounded by swimming pools. They were encouraged to try what they were interested in and supported to stop if they felt it wasn't right for them. One daughter took ballet lessons until she became shy about being on stage at eight, while her sister danced for nine years - she dropped ballet and took up soccer! My son preferred solitary activities and we respected that choice. With zero interest in sport, he had an early passion for games and joined a Pokemon Club! All three were involved with Rock Eisteddfod at high school - our extrovert was onstage, our introverts happily in the back-stage crew!

So - independent, educated people. But what about emotionally? Some people fear that strong attachment to the parents - particularly the mother - might stifle the ability to form other attachments. But that misunderstands how attachment works:it is normal and natural for children to have their first attachment to their mother but to embrace other relationships as they grow. First, with other immediate family, then extended family and moving on to the friendship circle of the family. As they begin to explore a wider circle of community, they begin to make independent friendships. Each of my children developed a strong bond with a best friend around age three, with children they met through my friendship circles and our playgroups. By the time they reached kinder (age 4/5), they embraced multiple friendships and in early primary school this continued. As their mother, my role become one of being the base-station they returned to each day. We encouraged talking about feelings and respected their's during the beginning or end of close relationships. The middle childhood years allow children to practice relationships and the parent's role is to model good ones and allow the child the freedom to make their own choices - and give support when needed. You don't have to like your children's friends - and they don't have to like yours!

By high school, my children had closely bonded with a group of friends and some of those relationships have continued into adulthood. Interestingly, I have adult friendships with many of those now-grown children and my adult children have independent relationships with many of my friends! As adults, they have wide friendship circles and continue to make new friends easily.

My 29yo daughter lives independently as a single woman. My 25yo daughter is married with a baby and my 22yo son continues to live with us at home. All have grown up knowing they are welcome here as long as they wish: the eldest back-packed overseas for two years, returned to the family home and moved out in her mid-twenties. Her sister moved out a couple of years earlier. They live in the same suburb as we do and we see them regularly and happily spend time together.

"Look Mum - no hands!" Attachment Parenting of adults means letting them fly -
and being there if they fall. Melissa back-packing alone in NZ 2004/5

And so, finally, to the new generation: ten week old Charlie is the daughter of my second daughter and her husband. Born to a woman who was drawn to motherhood from her own infancy, there was never any doubt about her choice to have a family. So - what sort of parent is she?

Kaitlyn and NMAA Meh Tais - right from the start!

My granddaughter is asleep against my chest as I type, while her mother and uncle are in another room, sorting out their childhood toys for her. (Aunty will be disappointed she is missing out, she is at work!) Charlie is fully breastfed whenever she needs and we have no idea how often or how long those feeds are! She is growing in leaps and bounds! Charlie sleeps alongside her mother in the family bed, with her father tucked on the other side. The co-sleeper bassinet alongside the bed is a safe place to lie her when mum needs the toilet, as is the cot in her nursery, otherwise, they are handy places to keep stuff! Her baby-wearing options are many, with a wardrobe of slings and carriers purchased by this baby-wearing Granny, for use by all the family . There is also a pram, which she does use but not as much as it is used to carry shopping and her nappy bag when out, while she sleeps in a sling! Oh and those nappies are cloth ones, for the record!

As her grandmother, I have seen Charlie pretty well every day of her life, as the attachment between her mother and I continues to grow stronger. She is often in my arms and sleeps happily on my chest - babysitting with mum still in arms-reach gives her some time out and me some time-in!

Looking back, looking forward - this still all seems so right, so natural so - successful! The days when I doubted, the nights when I struggled, have faded into their place in history: such a small part of such a long time. My children are three of my closest friends and people I choose to spend time with. My granddaughter is someone I plan to spend as much time with as I can, with no worries about housework etc taking me away from more stories, more play, more sharing treasures. And I hope, as I approach the mark of my first half-century, that I am lucky enough to be attached to her siblings, her cousins and even her children because it turns out, there isn't anything more important than holding them close before letting them fly!

Keeping it real: They still do like to hang out in the family bed!
Watching DVDs, drinking tea, hanging out with Mum.
Just in case you wondered!
Then they go home to their own ;)

Hold Me Close - skin2skin

I am passionate about skin to skin for newborn babies. It is the natural state human infants are born expecting. It stimulates baby led attachment at the breast. It stabilises body temperature, heart rate and breathing  in premature and mature babies and it encourages bonding and helps heal the trauma of medical intervention separating mother and baby.

It also feels great!

When my daughter was pregnant, we knew skin to skin (s2s) would be part of her postnatal plan. What we didn't know was just how crucial it would be when her labour, birth and breastfeeding establishment were far more challenging than expected!!

We had prepared with a couple of products that turned out to be wonderful resources.

The Breastfeeding Blanket by Bebitza is designed to provide cover for modest women when breastfeeding, however I have found it to be very useful as a wrap during s2s and baby-led attachment sessions. Kaitlyn found it kept her and baby Charlie covered and warm during their hospital stay, when they spent most of their time practicing skin to skin to help stimulate feeding and milk production.

 The light-weight wrap, made of beautiful, soft fabric, kept both mother and baby warm yet did not impede them being in complete skin contact.

Skin To Skin Kangaroo T-Shirt Once at home, s2s continued to be important, as Charlie needed lots of stimulation to breastfeed and overcome her jaundice, all of which was delaying Kaitlyn's milk production becoming established. Even once those hurdles were overcome, being worn close to her mother is Charlie's second favourite place to be after the breast! To allow easy switching between feeding and wearing, without needing to stop and put on a sling, wrap or carrier, especially when out and about. the Skin to Skin Kangaroo tshirt has been a real winner.

Charlie was four weeks old in these photos and had been quickly tucked into just the front pocket of the shirt while mum finalised some shopping, however she was then placed correctly into the cross-over straps, which would be skin 2 skin if she was only dressed in a nappy. The end result is just like their favourite Hug-a-bub wrap, but much eaiser for quick switches between breast and carrier for babies like Charlie who cluster-feed between short naps. This is great when Mum wants to eat dinner, walk around - or keep visitors hands off the new baby and is perfect when out shopping!

We were really happy to be able to source this Canadian-made product here in Australia, through Ninky Bear. In fact, Kaitlyn loves it so much, she is thinking of getting a one or two more, which should take her and Charlie through the next couple of months until she is 7kgs.

You don't need anything special to practice skin to skin, but these two products have certainly made it a bit more practical!

Artificial Feeding – Nothing To Do With Breastfeeding

There is no choice involved with breastfeeding.

Like natural conception, pregnancy, childbirth and all the other processes of the human body, breastfeeding is the default when it comes to feeding all infant mammals, including humans.

However, none of these natural processes are guaranteed fail-safe and society has brought alternatives when something goes wrong with nature’s plan.

IVF and other fertility programs, surrogate pregnancy and intensive care for premature infants, caesarean sections… and artificial feeding… each intended to step in when nature stumbles.

Why then, is there such a divide between women who breastfeed and those who resort to artificial baby milk? Why can the apparent decision to do one be taken as criticism of those who do the other? Such conflict can also arise between natural versus medical childbirth proponents but imagine such a personal debate between those who conceive easily and those reliant on IVF? Imagine the full term mothers in the postnatal ward questioning the actions of those with premmies in NICU! Imagine infertile women complaining about the promotion of contraception and family planning!

So what led to this great divide?

The Transition from Breast to Bottle

The answer can be found if we turn back a few pages in our history books. Originally, artificial feeding was only intended as the last option for babies unable to access human milk. Those abandoned by their mother at birth, foundlings without access to wet nurses, orphans without a lactating relative to take them in. It was insidious marketing by those with a commercial interest which saw artificial feeding leap from last resort to first option and it has taken the best part of the past century to undo the damage of their actions. And the repair is far from complete.

Safer Motherhood and the Hygiene of Life - 1934
(author's personal collection)

It would be bad enough if infant formula had been marketed as just an alternative to human milk, but far worse damage was done. Powerful advertising directed at family and medical communities led many to believe manufactured infant feeds were superior to mothers own milk. Generation after generation of new mothers had all choice taken away from them as brainwashed health advisors passed on the misleading information fed to them by those whose real interest was in the making of money. Lots of money.

The most heartbreaking outcome is not the loss of breastfeeding confidence across the community, rather the failure of society to understand the risks of not feeding babies as nature intended. There are very real detrimental impacts on immediate and future health when we remove human milk from the human diet and replace it with artificially concocted substitutes. Just as there are risks with fertility treatments, premature or surgical birth, so to there are risks when artificial baby milk replaces breastmilk - whether at birth or at any time during the period nature intended humans to be fully or partly breastfed.

Right Royal Example

Any suggestion of these risks is shouted down by many in our society as unfair to mothers who have resorted to artificial feeding. For many years, these risks were cloaked in softer language and presented as benefits of breastmilk. This technique is akin to suggesting there are advantages to breathing air unpolluted by cigarette smoke! Benefits in not being exposed to toxic levels of radiation! Or perhaps reasons to consider not walking in front of a moving vehicle!! There are no benefits to breastfeeding – breast isn’t best, it is normal!

The decision to introduce artificial baby milk – either partly or fully replacing human milk in a child’s diet – should always follow full risk assessment. Artificial feeding is not about the choice to breastfeed or not to breastfeed. The decision has nothing to do with breastfeeding. When we add or replace a natural process with something else, it must be done with full awareness of the risks against benefit. Like organ replacement or renal dialysis, artificial feeding should only be considered when all else fails.

Emotional conflict

Any health awareness program is designed to alter people’s behaviour, change habits and encourage them to question their lifestyle. Give up smoking. Eat more vegetables, Do more exercise, Drink less alcohol. Avoid sun exposure. Reduce fat in the diet. Have a pap smear. Eat more fibre. Nag, nag, nag! Pick up a magazine, watch TV, visit the doctor or pass by a billboard. The message is simple: there are ways you can improve your health both now and in the future. By ignoring them you are denying your own power to act.

1930s  AMA poster

Put up a poster promoting breastfeeding though, and suddenly people complain it is only being done to make those who are artificially feeding feel guilty! Why is this? How can just another health message seem personalized and threatening? The answer might surprise you – there is certainly emotion involved but it is nothing to do with guilt. 

Guilt is how you feel having committed an offense; remorse caused by feeling responsible for some offence. It is an internally created feeling and can only occur if the culprit recognizes they have done the wrong thing. Surely this description would only apply to the smallest number of mothers who have not breastfed? 

The real emotion felt by the majority of women who resort to premature weaning is regret: feeling sad about the loss or absence of something treasured or valued. Put simply, when these women see promotion of breastfeeding, it reminds them of a time when they experienced sadness. This can lead to feelings of anger, as unresolved emotions come to the surface. What they need is support and understanding of their grief, recognition of their regret. 

Unfortunately, what they usually get instead is reassurance about the decision to wean and assurance of their baby’s health and well being despite being fed artificially. This failure to acknowledge their true feelings goes a long way to prolonging their emotional recovery. Raise the issue of breastfeeding in a group women at any life stage – those emotions will come flooding out just as fresh in the retirement village as in the new mother’s group.

If reminders of the value of breastmilk make you feel angry, then direct that anger not to those trying to increase the awareness of a whole population, rather to those who let you down. Mothers do not fail to breastfeed: our society fails to help them do so: the real blame lies with:

• Health systems that pay lip service to the benefits of breastmilk, yet expel new mothers from hospital before they have even grasped the basics of this learned skill;

• Communities who view breastfeeding as an intimate act to only be performed behind closed doors, promoting only the sensual role of breasts and denying their practical use;

• A society who expects women to resume paid work after brief, unpaid maternity leave while denying them access to workplace childcare and other support for combining work and breastfeeding;

• A medical system that has until this year charted the growth of breastfed infants against the unnatural growth patterns of those fed artificially in past generations and implied failure to mothers whose babies did not measure up;

• Unnecessary birth practices that interfere with the natural progression from womb to breast and strict infant regimes that deny babies access to the breast often enough for adequate nutrition;

• A society which destroys body image by portraying the pubescent female form as that of a fully mature woman and displays malnourished celebrities as role models for adolescents and women of child-bearing age.

It is time to break down barriers between mothers and join together. There is no us and them, no good versus bad mother. Every woman has the right to the support and information she needs to birth and breastfeed her baby as nature intended, without pressure from the marketing techniques of multinational drug and breastmilk substitute manufacturers influencing the professionals guiding them along the path of motherhood.

Originally published as a submission to the  2007 Parliamentary Inquiry into the Health Benefits of Breastfeeding.

http://aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/House_of_Representatives_Committees?url=haa/./breastfeeding/bfgovresp.pdf

Looking Back - way back!

Part of my library of books includes a small collection of vintage pregnancy and parenting manuals, dating back over last century.

My greatest treasure is a two-volume set passed onto me from my husband's paternal grandmother, Mary.


SAFER MOTHERHOOD and the HYGIENE of LIFE a 1934 edition of special health problems of women...sex and love in woman's life..the expectant mother..medicines in common use..photographs in monochome

I dusted this off the other day, seeing that Mary's great-granddaughter, my daughter Kaitlyn, is now pregnant. I thought it would be interesting to see the contrast between what these two women would be told about preparing for motherhood.

Here are a few favourites I captured to share.

I imagine the depression-era definition of "light housework"would be quite different from today's

I am quite alarmed that I could have written this section almost word for word and could almost publish as-is today!

This advice about scrubbing nipples with brushes still pops up today , nearly a 100 years later, passed inappropriately from mothers to daughters still.

Just like our Breastfeeding Education Classes, only NOT!

The pride is evident but the reality is these babies would be shuffled out to their mothers for four-hourly feeds and then whisked back to the nursery to be topped up by bottle by the nurses, who enjoyed the bond they developed with the babies during the two weeks or so their mothers were confined to bed on the ward. And continued you so until rooming-in was conceived - still optional when I had my first baby in 1984!

It's World Breastfeeding Week!

Celebrating the 20th World Breastfeeding Week - the first coincidentally the same year I qualified as a Breastfeeding Counsellor, everybody is talking about breastfeeding online: my Google Reader is full of news stories and blog posts about breastfeeding - mostly positive, a few beating the tired, old drum about making formula-feeding mothers feel guilty. But let's not let them rain on the parade that has a sole purpose of improving support for women who do breastfeed and helping those who so wish to meet their own breastfeeding goals.

 It would be lovely to be able to say that problems with breastfeeding only prevail in the western world and that mothers in what we consider to be traditional cultures are not exposed to the barriers that we see constantly threatening a mother's ability to easily meet the WHO recommendation of exclusive breastfeeding for the first six months, with continued breastfeeding until two years or beyond.

But it wouldn't be called WORLD Breastfeeding Week, if that was so. In fact, many countries which have traditionally practiced full-term breastfeeding are sadly following the pathways that led to its decline in modern cultures in the last century, which induces many heads banging against walls for those of us trying to return to that wisdom!

As a new mother in the 1980s, passionate about breastfeeding and active in the Nursing Mothers' Association of Australia (now the Australian Breastfeeding Association), I optimistically - perhaps naively - imagined my own children would become parents in a world where such support groups were no longer needed and where breastfeeding was considered every babies birthright. Nearly 30 years later, it is shocking that not only do mothers still face many of the barriers that we tried to break down in the 1980s, but new ones have been erected and mothers face even more risk of not meeting their own - and every health authority's - breastfeeding goals.

Sometimes it is disheartening to trawl through my blog roll and see story after story of negative news about breastfeeding, seemingly only broken up by well-intentioned but divisive articles promoting more "benefits" of breastfeeding and reinforcing the "breast is best" message long-dropped by those working to support all mothers. Breast isn't best, it is normal and there are no benefits to do what nature intended, only risks when humans try to replicate the default infant for for mammals.

There are sparks of hope in those posts - our neighbours across the Ditch, those Kiwis we love to taunt, have seen New Zealand breastfeeding rates reach their highest in 19 years. No wonder, given the amazing promotional and education programs funded by their government in recent years, including not only parent education, but also community education of what mothers need to help them breastfeed. Breastfeeding naturally videos

My own glimmer of hope occurred last week, when a journalist from the local paper contacted me about a story they were doing about WBW (a shock, as we normally do the chasing!) as she had seen the latest figures showing breastfeeding rates are "soaring" in the City of Greater Dandenong, where the Breastfeeding Centre I work at is located and I am the volunteer group leader of the ABA breastfeeding support group.
Article in the Dandenong Leader

One thing I do wish we could change, when talking about breastfeeding rates, is the term "exclusive breastfeeding" - meaning no food or drink other than breastmilk until 6 months of age. While this terminology is understood when referring to the introduction of solids, it gives a very poor result when comparing breastfeeding initiation rates with those still having only breastmilk at 6 months - simply because, despite the recommendations, many/most babies are starting solids between 4 and 6 months (sometimes earlier) and therefore, though they may still only have breastmilk as the primary part of their diet and have no formula at all, they are included alongside those babies who regularly are supplemented with formula. It would be far more beneficial for us to know what percentage of babies are fully breastfed at six months, excluding solid foods. Or - perhaps more useful - how many babies are fully or partly formula-fed at that or other ages. Perhaps it is time to flip those figures, so we can better use them to encourage continued breastfeeding, rather than as a marker for ending breastfeeding. In the case of CGD, using the figures quoted in the above article, we should be asking: why are 29.5% of babies being formula-fed on hospital discharge (2-3 days postnatal) and why are 69.3% of babies no longer fully breastfeeding at six months? Because the goal is really not about breastfeeding, it is about REDUCING the rates of formula-feeding.

I urge everyone to take the time to read a little more about World Breastfeeding Week - regardless of your own infant feeding experience or current life-stage. Because it takes a community to breastfeed a baby - it is society which creates the barriers to women meeting those goals and it takes society to demand change so they can.