"Best" for family
Find a Conversation
| Fri, 05-11-2007 - 3:06pm |
I'm confused by the concept of "best for the family" and how it differs from "best for baby". It's been thrown about her alot. Mom acknowledges that breastfeeding is best for baby but formula feeds because she's taking account the whole family and thus bottle feeds.
My question is - if there is a breastfeeding solution to what's not working for the family - is bottlefeeding REALLY best for the family? If mom needs a break once in a while, why can't mom take a break once in a while - and continue to breastfeed? Baby is not going to starve over a couple of hours, an occasional pumped bottle is an option, even an occasional bottle of formula is an option. Switching to formula is a fullt time solution - is mom taking a full time break? Or the daddy bonding thing. Is it REALLY BEST for daddy to "share the feeding" for find a daddy-only activity (like playing with raspberries, or baths, or rocking).
I think what is really meant by "best for family" is, it works for the family. But does "what works" mean BEST?
I love analogies and I was thinking about this on the way home at lunch. I'm really busy lately and to stop at the grocery store on my way home from work means I'm about 20 minutes late picking up my kids. And then I usually send them out to play when I make dinner which could be another 45 minutes before we sit down to supper together. I COULD go through the fast food drive through on my way home, and have an extra hour with my kids, which certainly has many benefits. I could do it and it could work. AND, my kids are not obese, are not otherwise at risk for obesity (they play outside and are active in sports, they eat breakfast, ahve a healthy snack and a decent lunch). It could work for my family! But is it best for my family? No - I think it would be BEST for me to buy in bulk and freeze what I can and prepare supper for the crockpot the night before after the kids go to bed. I can have a better meal AND have that same hour. That could work too! Or, I could pick the kids up first, do our grocery shopping together (getting them to choose healthy items they like), and prepare the meal together. Even better - and it still works!
I think very rarely is formula for baby, "best" for the family. It's an additional financial burden, any risks that might come to fruition will be an aggrevation for the family (statistically more missed work days for parents, colic and constipation are not fun, etc), it's an environmental burden. It might be the quick and easy option, it may work - but it's rarely the ONLY option and while there is another relatively easy option that ALSO meets what's best for baby - THAT is what's best for family.
Note in my analogy above, the "best for family" option does require some change, sacrifice and patience over and above what is easy and works. Note that I also acknowledged in another thread that there are "good" reasons to not breastfeed. There are SOME exceptions to this, of course - is it best for family for mom to lose her job? Or for mom's very health to be jepordized?
I don't think there's a general expectation that mothers always make the BEST choices available for every decision (nobody is perfect), so why don't we acknowledge the difference between works and "best"? In a debate, of course, it IS what the expectation is - when you are debating the choices between two things, isn't that what it's about? But IRL, mom isn't REALLY expected to always do what's always best all the time.

Pages
"Before that, I just thought BF was "best" but FF was "fine, good enough"."
I don't see how it can be "fine" and "good enough" for someone who physically can't BF, but not for anyone else. That seems like a major oxymoron to me.
<<>>
And I ask again: how is a woman "completely disabled" by her breasts? In a previous post, you said "incapacitated", and I am having trouble imagining this situation. It would be helfpul to elaborate on these descriptions.
Some woman on a debate board told you that breast reduction surgery was akin to "mutilation"? I have to say it's ridiculous of her to say such a thing, and I think it would be helpful if you took it with a grain of salt. If you really had your surgery as a matter of restoring "capacitation" to your life, then just be glad it worked and get on with getting on.
"Nope, I wouldn't describe it as foolish; more like selfless."
The converse, of course, being "selfish"?
<<>>
Because whether you CAN or CAN'T physically BF your child, she is still getting inferior nutrition by being FF. It doesn't matter that you CAN'T BF her. It matters only so far as to say that without formula available, she would have nothing to eat at all. But the necessity of formula in your situation doesn't change the composition of the formula, nor does it add things that would be in breastmilk. The fact that you CAN'T BF is unfortunate, yes, but it doesn't render the formula into a better and more wholesome substance just because you CAN'T BF. It's still formula, with all the risks inherent in its use, and with inferior nutrition for your child.
"Their reasons will be the nobelest in their own eyes."
Not at all! Plenty of people make choices for bad reasons and can admit so. I've made choices for bad or stupid reasons plenty of times in my life, and I usually was well aware at the time.
"I think we, as a society, have every right to establish a validity zone for "reasons" in general and individual parents have every right to make decisions inside or ourside that zone, but they are accountable and responsible for those that are outside."
I don't think so. That may be the way it is, but that does not make it the way it should be.
"Try to to assume much from tone in a debate board on the internet."
? I can't really help it if I detect a tone. I could be wildly off base, or not. My perceptions are what they are.
<<>>
Do you think your actions were "selfish"? It seems like you're reading into Lisa's post and seeing a word she did not use.
"Can you provide some examples of the "variety" of answers you got?"
It was over seven years ago so I can't recall specific examples, but they ranged from "anyone who has had a breast reduction can BF and don't believe them if they say you can't" to "almost no chance."
The problem was that there was no black and white answers even after I gave birth. I knew that I was lactating, and that at least *some* of the milk was getting through, but I had no way of knowing how much, or how much she was getting. I got conflicting information from just about every medical professional I asked. I never knew for sure if it was *really* because of the reduction or if I just wasn't trying hard enough. That kind of thing really messes with you over time.
"How was she "incapicitated" by her breasts?"
If she were in my shoes she would have been, because I was. I was in severe and intractable pain due to the stress on my spine and cervical discs. I could not sit or stand for more than 15 minutes. I couldn't go to class, work, do anything.
<<>>
I can understand that, and I'm sorry you had so much stress. I'm wondering how you knew she wasn't getting enough breastmilk. Was she gaining too slowly, or losing weight?
"I will though - My personal opinion is that that is one of the poorer reasons once can give."
Why? The way I see it, having the desire to BF is pretty much a necessity unless you have no problems with it at all. How does one gain the desire if they simply don't have it?
Pages