2. Why are some baby clinics telling mothers their child should be weaned from the breast by a year? Directly contradicting guidelines from the World Health Organisation and ironically using a poster featuring a child using a sippy cup! An item which in itself may be linked to poor oral formation...
3. Why are some health professionals telling mums that posterior tongue ties don't exist when this simply isn't true?
b) How can these same people then tell mothers that a posterior tie doesn't hinder breastfeeding anyway and as such isn't worth treating. As one mum questioned, how could one treat what you just claimed didn't exist?
4) Why are some midwives advising parents of newborns that it is normal for their breastfed baby not to stool for up to 2 weeks. No as a newborn this IS NOT normal, regardless of how the baby is fed! Output is a key sign of intake, particularly in the first few weeks.
5) Why are the NHS allowing Bounty to profit from parents? Ok so I actually wondered this in March 2012 when I wrote the afore linked blog piece; however it's up for discussion again this week as Mumsnet have launched a campaign and the BBC are even Tweeting about it too!
6) Why does anyone say that cracked/damaged/agonising nipples are a normal part of establishing breastfeeding? No, no, no, no, no, no, no!
7) Why don't some health professionals not listen to mums? If their gut instinct is something isn't quite right, listen, parents have those instincts for a reason.
8) Why are some babies readmitted to hospital for slow weight gain/weight loss, supplemented with additional formula/breastmilk in hospital and then sent home without any plan other than "just breastfeed"? If the initial problem wasn't resolved and/or feeding hasn't been assessed, why would anyone assume cutting the supplements out again won't result in the same problem? Furthermore, if mum isn't told how to cut out the top ups AND ensure baby is still getting enough by monitoring output, isn't this rather irresponsible?
What have you pondered this week?
