"Proud Formula Feeder"?

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-23-2004
"Proud Formula Feeder"?
1054
Thu, 12-14-2006 - 8:27pm

In my playgroup, I've noticed some members have a blinkie I haven't seen before: "Proud Formula Feeder". In the past, I've seen the "Formula Feeding Mom" and "It's formula, not rat poison", but this new one struck me as odd. I can understand simply stating that you formula feed or saying that formula isn't rat poison (because it isn't), but I've been trying to figure out just why someone would be "proud" to FF.

While I don't think that women should necessarily feel guilty about not BF, I don't get what about FF there is to be proud about. Most (or maybe even all) of the women with said blinkie acknowledge that breastmilk is better, so why would they be proud to feed their babies something they know is substandard, even if they couldn't BF and FF was their only choice? What do you ladies think? Is/should there be such a thing as FF pride?

vanessa.jpg

Lilypie 1st Birthday Ticker



happilymarried.gifprincess_breast.gif
survivor1.gifprofessionalmama.gifikeajunky.gif
borntobebreastfed2.gifCIO.gifCCCAdult.gifth_72.gif

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-21-2006
Sun, 01-07-2007 - 9:41am

"I had to choose and no amount of additional information about how horrible formula feeding is will change what happened..."

But, Spud, did you actually *choose*? It doesn't sound like it from what you've posted already. It sounds like you worked hard to try to overcome problems. Sometimes it works out that the problems are too much to deal with so you have to go to formula.

Heck, I'm harder on *myself* than anyone who at least tries to deal with problems. I didn't have problems and I still switched my older kids to formula. I guess my "problem" was ignorance, but it took me until the 4th child to overcome that!

RPS

 

Photobucket

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-21-2006
Sun, 01-07-2007 - 10:01am

"See, I have a problem with that kind of blanket statement that does not allow for exceptions. It's like you're saying it could never be ok. Your statement doesn't allow for extenuating circumstances. It says that no matter what reason's a mother might have for ffing, her reasons could never be good enough. It is not ever ok."

Actually, I think the confusion comes from the use of "ok." I was using it to mean "good." I don't think choosing to use formula is "good" because of the potential health risks, the cost overall to our society and environmental factors.

The reasons a mother might have for using formula are different. Her reasons only have to be good enough for her and her family. I'm just some stranger, so my feelings about using formula shouldn't matter. If she believes her reasons for using formula are sound, she's in good shape.

FWIW, my biggest beef is with women that choose formula right off the bat without even trying to breastfeed. I had a client at WIC who was a sexual abuse survivor; for months, we worked with her, encouraging her to breastfeed, but we (the other peer counselor and I) both understood that she may just not be able to go there. She not only started breastfeeding, but she was still at it when I left several months later. If she can do it, I see no reason why Mrs. Smith in Anytown USA with no history of abuse and no health issues can't do it.

My second biggest beef is with women who switch to formula even though they are not having any problems breastfeeding -- and I fell into this category.

I have no beef at all with women that quit due to problems. Yes, I'd love to see more of them getting the help that they need because it's a great feeling to overcome issues, but I don't think we're at the point where all women who have problems have access to *good* help and our society certainly does little to support women through *really* tough breastfeeding issues. How are they supposed to keep going when people are quick to chime in with "It's ok, you did the best you could" and "Formula's just fine," etc.? When you have problems and can't get the help you need to continue breastfeeding, I don't think you're really making the choice to use formula.

I hope that helps to clarify where I'm coming from.

RPS

 

Photobucket

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-12-2006
Sun, 01-07-2007 - 11:03am

"Actually, I think the confusion comes from the use of "ok." I was using it to mean "good." I don't think choosing to use formula is "good" because of the potential health risks, the cost overall to our society and environmental factors."

Okay... so I think we are actually in agreement then :). I don't think formula is "good" either and that does clarify your position a great deal. I just wouldn't want someone to say it's never ok.

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-25-2003
Sun, 01-07-2007 - 1:14pm

"You quoted me yourself - it says "claim to be proud". I never said they were actually proud, just claiming to be."


Oh OK.

Cathie

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-05-2003
Sun, 01-07-2007 - 2:30pm

"FWIW, my biggest beef is with women that choose formula right off the bat without even trying to breastfeed.
My second biggest beef is with women who switch to formula even though they are not having any problems breastfeeding -- and I fell into this category.
I have no beef at all with women that quit due to problems."

In my experience, those who switch to formula from a positon of strength (no problems, they just *want* to) seem to have the best handle on the facts about risks of not bfing. They accept them, they don't feel judged by bfing advocacy.

While I do not blame those who switch from a position of weakness, (bad advice, poor info, no confidence in normal baby behavior) they are the ones who do not want to hear about bfing advocacy. It hurts them. They are the loudest screamers about being judged a bad mother, and the ones who may use the 'proud ffer' blinkie. They wanted to bf, but couldn't. I use that term loosely, b/c nearly all of them could have with proper support and education. (they don't want to hear that either!).

Those that ff from the get-go may fall in either category. I do have the biggest problem with those who do not even attempt to bf. I don't understand it.

Debbie

Photobucket

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-07-2005
Mon, 01-08-2007 - 12:19am

>>>But, Spud, did you actually *choose*? It doesn't sound like it from what you've posted already. It sounds like you worked hard to try to overcome problems. Sometimes it works out that the problems are too much to deal with so you have to go to formula.>>>

I guess that is what is hard is that I will never know if that really was the case. My mother is the one who reminds me of all the tears shed and all those nights when I cried to her about how I was not going to make it. Of course, I tend to blanket my successes with what I did not do...

I am just thankful that she is healthy despite a rough start and I am determined again especially since I had to work hard at bonding in other ways to make up for it.

Btw, it does feel like success now that she is willing to give hugs without being prompted...she just was never a snuggly (that a word) infant! And that is why it is hard to hear about all those negatives about formula feeding because sometimes it has to be an option and you just have to pray that it will be alright in the end...

Spud...hoping strong genes will be enough!







Lilypie




iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Mon, 01-08-2007 - 10:40am

Yeah but just because you say "it's NOT ok to smoke, it DOES affect other people" does NOT mean that tomorrow morning there will be a law against smoking at all. The same laws are still in place: no smoking in public places (at least in many north american places now, though not all over Europe yet :-(), an age limit which varies depending on where you live, etc. Smoking is not illegal. It is just illegal to do it in certain places/at certain ages. But it's STILL ok to say "it's NOT ok to smoke; it does affect other people negatively".

(Just as an aside, my husband has an idea that might hold some water, what do you think? He thinks that the minimal age for smoking should just go up every year. This year it's 19, for example, well next year it will be 20, then 21...eventually you'll be 90 and still can't buy cigarettes ;-)).

Fio

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Mon, 01-08-2007 - 10:53am

"But lets include the other things women in those 3rd world countries with the perfect rates face shall we? Being someone's property, no right to vote, no right to work outside the home, for example. I'm sure women in strict patriarchial societies all bf, but they also cannot initiate divorce,"

Without looking to 3rd world countries, there are some places with VERY good BF rates: Norway, Sweden, Australia. The women there do have lots of rights WRT voting, divorce etc. The laws are NOT all the same as in the USA or Canada (heck, our laws aren't all the same between our 2 countries, and even differ from one province or state to the next for some things) but IN GENERAL these are 1st world countries with similar living standards to other 1st world countries. These people are not starving, do not have muddy water they can't safely mix formula with. They aren't "uneducated" (at least in the modern "western" idealogy of the word). But somehow their countries have managed to either raise BF levels or keep them high (not sure which ATM: I don't know if they were ever lower like they have been since the 70's or so around here, or if they just stayed higher over the years than ours did). I suppose the biggest "difference", at least in some of these places (I can't vouch for them all) is a much better maternity leave than people in the USA get. Probably over a year, in general, in places where BF rates are really high. However, we've had a full year's worth of maternity/parental leave now here in Canada for at least 4 years (I think it came into being between my 2 kids who are 6.5 and 4) and I don't think that it has significantly helped raise BF rates...at least not yet. One of the biggest "excuses" I've heard from moms about why they don't BF is "I have to return to work so they'll eventually need formula". Without getting into why this ISN'T necessarily true, if you take mat. leave to 1 year, it REALLY isn't true since if you only BF until you return to work at 1 year, you can give straight cow milk (at least according to current recommendations) and never give formula. But the "I need to return to work at 3 or 6 mos so they eventually will have to have formula" holds little water nowadays and women still find other excuses. No matter what they be. My SIL basically didn't WANT to BF. Her son probably would not have been BF at all, despite a full year's mat. leave, except for the fact that he has been declared allergic to the regular formulae and is on the spendy stuff she says she can't afford well.

Anyhow. I just don't think you need to ONLY look at 3rd world countries' BF rates. There are other places with good rates too. Now we need to find out what makes those rates go up. Is it a lack of prudishness coupled with the longer mat. leaves? Or is it something entirely different? Whatever it is, if we can implement it in N. America, then rates should gradually go up to more "ideal" levels.

Fio

Fio

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Mon, 01-08-2007 - 10:58am

I feel that childbirth and BFing ARE somewhat different. If your birth is way too painful for you to handle, you can't get around it except with meds. If you can't easily Bf or don't want to, there is pumping or at least in some people's cases, mother-to-mother donation of BM. Formula is NOT the "first possible other alternative" at least not in most mothers' cases.

Fio

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Mon, 01-08-2007 - 11:01am

"I had a client at WIC who was a sexual abuse survivor; for months, we worked with her, encouraging her to breastfeed, but we (the other peer counselor and I) both understood that she may just not be able to go there. She not only started breastfeeding, but she was still at it when I left several months later. If she can do it, I see no reason why Mrs. Smith in Anytown USA with no history of abuse and no health issues can't do it."

Exactly. I can TOTALLY understand how a HX of abuse could turn someone off BFing. Everyone survives and "recovers from" abuse differently. Something that works for one would be horrible to another. HOWEVER there are enough mothers for whom BFing ends up being healing, the idea of using one's breasts for something totally NON SEXUAL in the end, rather than going back to the sexual-ness of breasts, can be great for some women. Since that is the case, I think it should at least be considered, and maybe if BFing is not an option, EPing (exclusive pumping) might be. Obviously this won't work for everyone with a HX of abuse but for ppl who DON'T have a HX of abuse, why should there be any problem there really?

Fio

Pages