I picked up the May 2009 edition of Parenting Magazine, saw “6 Baby Health Scares that are really no biggie” on the cover, and flipped to that. I’m always interested in reassurances, after all.
Upon reading it, however, my poor dear sweet long-suffering husband was forced to listen to me rant for a solid 15 minutes.
You see, while this article written by Rosemary Black contains good information about the condition of dislocated hips, abnormal heartbeat, crossed eyes, swollen genitals, and pigeon toes/bowed legs.. It also contains a section on “not gaining weight”.
The first suggestion is helpfully titled “A skimpy diet”.
Is it a discussion of the recession and how mothers should not water down infant formula? Is it a talk about how infant formula can cause digestive problems that cause baby to not gain weight? Dare I hope?
Nah. It talks about the a baby that might not be getting her fill at meal because the baby is “laid back” and mom’s milk flow is at an ebb for some reason. Naturally it jumps to that conclusion. It’s always related to mom’s supply, and not other – more common- reasons.
The suggestion? See a lactation consultant and supplement with formula.
Great. Wonderful. Not only does the advice potentially sabotage mom’s breastfeeding success and lower mom’s supply.. But it suggests that you ask the doctor about supplementing with formula rather than asking the doctor to help you get to the bottom of why baby’s losing weight.
This is wrong for SO many reasons.
First- If the baby is losing weight, do we know if it’s caused by allergies? If the baby is allergic to something in mom’s diet, this should be investigated. To jump to formula supplementation without first eliminating the possibility of an allergy is GROSSLY IRRESPONSIBLE. If the baby is allergic to milk in mom’s diet, what will the result be when baby consumes milk-based formula? Anything from severe gastrointestinal problems to an allergic reaction that causes swelling of the airways.
Second- Do we know if it’s caused by HYPER supply? Maybe mom’s milk supply is not “at an ebb”. Maybe mom’s milk supply overfloweth. Maybe baby’s losing weight because mom has TOO MUCH MILK. The solution for this is simple.
Third- If baby is the “laid back type” that doesn’t fuss when not getting enough at the breast, the baby will likely adopt the bottle the way the couch potato adopted the remote control. The solution is to rouse baby to nurse more frequently, and to try to increase mom’s milk production.
Fourth- Have we ruled out genetic problems? The possibility of a genetic disorder should always be considered when a baby is failing to thrive. Certain genetic disorders that cause FTT in exclusively breastfed babies that are making 6-8 wet diapers a day also cause standard infant formulas to be an extremely toxic choice.
Fifth- Have we even considered the possibility that the weight issue might be a misdiagnosis? Scales are notoriously miscalibrated. Weighing practices are far from standardized. And then what about milestones? If baby hits a mobility milestone they might lose weight and this is no cause for concern.
Infant formula has a place in the discussion of weight gain. But it is NOT at the beginning of the discussion. It’s NOT when your pediatrician first notices that there is an issue (unless it’s severe and life threatening). It’s when your pediatrician has sat down with you and gone through the possible causes of the weight loss, and eliminated all other possible routes.
In all of the other bits, Parenting Magazine takes the “don’t worry” approach. Why… Why.. On the issue of breastfeeding does Parenting Magazine decide to jump right to recommending a medical intervention with so many downsides and no upsides? Wouldn’t the space have been better used to suggest a few more common possibilities for why baby might be losing weight? If the same approach had been taken to the article about pigeon toes and knock-knees, Ms. Black would be recommending that parents ask their doctor about early surgical correction instead of saying that it will likely resolve itself.
What’s the point? I don’t get it.
Hmm, the point. Well, let’s see, since these magazines are almost ALWAYS sponsored in some ways by formula who have a HUGE stake money wise, especially in these times of recession, well, the logical conclusion is that the point is to scare the parent into going right to formula so that formula companies do not lose money. I mean, unfortunately, most of the people who read these kinds of magazines are not also reading Mothering so naturally, they’re going to take what is said as gospel and then go on to tell everyone that yeah, she couldn’t breastfeed because the baby was losing weight so yeah, had to put the baby right on formula. *sigh*
Yes, I came here to say what Janeen said. Those magazines are all funded by formula companies so they need to tow the line.
I don’t even know that it’s so simple as that. I think that it’s even more that that the culture of failure and of formula feeding is so ingrained in this country that it’s the first thing that springs to everyone’s lips when someone is having a hard time or anything seems to be going wrong.
Most women simply do not know that other things can cause weight loss in an infant. Most DOCTORS do not know that other things can cause weight loss in an infant. It’s always the mother’s supply that is suspect.
And when mother’s supply is suspected to be low, there is never a “wait and see” attitude. There is never a ” let’s build it back up” attitude. It’s seen as a somewhat permanent condition that requires supplementation.
And the ways that we are supposed to supplement are ways that destroy our supply, cause bottle preference in our infants, and gradually transfers us to formula feeding.
I think that it goes way beyond formula companies advertising.
Formula companies are one of the few groups in this country that are doing well financially. This doesn’t come simply from successful advertising. It comes from a culture that has forgotten how to make breastfeeding work.
I was shocked with how quickly they went to “you need to supplement” with Sammy when she had lost 10% of her birth weight (even though I’d had IV fluids for several hours before the birth). They did say to do it with a cup or dropper, but they said to do it. I knew enough to nod and smile, but there was no way I was going to do that right then – she was 2 days old and filling her diapers quite impressively.
Turns out, they did the math wrong and she’d only lost 6% anyways! Sheesh. At least the pediatrician caught it. My mind was entirely too fuzzy to catch that kind of math mistake, even though I THOUGHT I had figured she could go down to a much lower weight before they started bugging me.
Ugh. I remember reading that a baby that is bloated with IV fluids can lose up to 20% of their weight and be just fine. That the baby should be monitored for other symptoms such as severe jaundice, lethargy, low blood sugars etc. and that if those other symptoms are not present and if the baby is soaking diapers, that it should be assumed that it’s simply the retained water.
ESPECIALLY with c-section babies. Going through the birth canal squeezes all sorts of fluids out of the baby. The c-section baby is more likely to lose a higher percentage of weight because of the IV fluids and the lack of squeezing.
Clueless doctors agitate me.
I don’t even know how much my baby lost from his birth weight. I was never told any weights and they did not show any concern at all. I even had a C-section with an IV. I guess I’m lucky. The only time any supplementation happened was with my first and I was experiencing complications after 36 hours of labor and the resulting C-section. They did, however, have my hubby finger feed with a SNS. I was so sick and couldn’t even hold the baby so he got formula for a few feedings. Now that I know the dangers of formula, I feel guilty that he got any at all but I can’t change what happened almost 8 years ago.
Pingback: Fun Things With Stats « Custom-Made Milk
Pingback: Crunchy Domestic Goddess » Booby Traps Set Up Breastfeeding Moms for Failure