| Author |
Message |
    
Wendyn
Supporter
Username: Wendyn
Post Number: 3173
Registered: 9-2002
| | Posted on Friday, July 28, 2006 - 1:06 pm: | 
|
"I don't want my son or husband to accidentally see a breast they didn't want to see."
What she meant to say was she didn't want her son or husband to accidentally see a breast SHE didn't want THEM to see. |
Wendy
Supporter
Username: Wendy
Post Number: 2835
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, July 28, 2006 - 2:11 pm: |
|
Quote:What she meant to say was she didn't want her son or husband to accidentally see a breast SHE didn't want THEM to see.
Very astute Wendy! (must be something in the name ) |
Lou
Citizen
Username: Flf
Post Number: 214
Registered: 8-2005
| | Posted on Friday, July 28, 2006 - 9:39 pm: |
|
So did I understand correctly that a woman is now allowed to breastfeed at the Maplewood Pool? |
hch
Citizen
Username: Hch
Post Number: 323
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Friday, July 28, 2006 - 10:12 pm: |
|
Breastfeeding in public is cool, as long as the mom brings enough for everybody. |
Virtual It Girl
Citizen
Username: Shh
Post Number: 4877
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, July 28, 2006 - 10:59 pm: |
|
I breastfed at the pool, discreetly on the lawn. I wouldn't do it in the pool! |
sac
Supporter
Username: Sac
Post Number: 3625
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, July 28, 2006 - 11:01 pm: |
|
That Maplewood pool fiasco took place about 13 or 14 years ago. By the time my second child was born, right before pool season in 1995, it was history and we all nursed our kids happily and without interference there. I've never heard of any problem since, although I didn't have any more children after that, so I haven't had any further opportunity to test the system since then. |
yabbadabbadoo
Citizen
Username: Yabbadabbadoo
Post Number: 370
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Friday, July 28, 2006 - 11:05 pm: |
|
Breast pump?
FF |
kriss
Citizen
Username: Kriss
Post Number: 320
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 6:04 pm: |
|
Ewww. I would NEVER pump at the pool. |
mimi
Citizen
Username: Mimi
Post Number: 277
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, July 30, 2006 - 7:57 pm: |
|
here's the law:
In 1997, New Jersey enacted a law that sets forth the importance of breastfeeding, and clarifies that women have a right to breastfeed her baby in public. This was one of the first laws that provided a fine and penalty for its violation. N.J.S.A. 26:4B-42. Notwithstanding any provision of law to the contrary, a mother shall be entitled to breast feed her baby in any location of a place of public accommodation, resort or amusement wherein the mother is otherwise permitted.N.J.S.A. 26:4B-5 3. a. The local board of health or such board, body or officers exercising the functions of the local board of health according to law, upon written complaint and having reason to suspect a violation of this act has occurred shall, by written notification, advise the owner, manager or other person having control of the public accommodation, resort or amusement of the initial complaint and of the penalties for any subsequent complaints. Thereupon, any owner, manager or other person having control of the public accommodation, resort or amusement receiving such notice who knowingly fails or refuses to comply with the provisions of this act is subject to a fine not to exceed $25.00 for the first offense following initial notification and not to exceed $100.00 for the second offense and not to exceed $200.00 for each offense thereafter. When there exists no local board of health or such board, body or officers having the authority to exercise the functions of the local board of health according to law in the municipality in which a violation of this act has allegedly occurred, the State Department of Health and Senior Services shall exercise the functions of the local boards of heath for purposes of this act.
b. Any penalty recovered under the provisions of this act shall be recovered by and in the name of the Commissioner of Health and Senior Services or by and in the name of the local board of health. When the plaintiff is the Commissioner of Health and Senior Services, the penalty recovered shall be paid by the commissioner into the treasury of the State. When the plaintiff is a local board of health, the penalty recovered shall be paid by the local board into the treasury of the municipality where the violation occurred.
c. Every municipal court shall have jurisdiction over proceedings to enforce and collect any penalty imposed because of a violation of any provision of this act, if the violation has occurred within the territorial jurisdiction of the court. The proceedings shall be summary and in accordance with the "the penalty enforcement law," N.J.S.2A:58-1 et seq. Process shall be in the nature of a summons or warrant and shall issue only at the suit of the Commissioner of Health and Senior Services, or the local board of health, as the case may be, as plaintiff.History: Approved May 19, 1997 |
yabbadabbadoo
Citizen
Username: Yabbadabbadoo
Post Number: 371
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, July 30, 2006 - 8:15 pm: |
|
I was suggesting pumping (in private) before the public feeding is necessary.
FF |
Wendy
Supporter
Username: Wendy
Post Number: 2845
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, July 30, 2006 - 9:42 pm: |
|
Why in heaven's name would you suggest that yabbadabbadoo? Do you eat at home before going out to a restaurant so no one can see how much you eat in public?
Do you make sure you blow your nose and take a prophylactic decongestant in the privacy of your home so you don't have to blow your nose in public? Please edify us peasants about the best way to be prepared. Thanks in advance.
Wilma Flintstone. |
yabbadabbadoo
Citizen
Username: Yabbadabbadoo
Post Number: 372
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, July 30, 2006 - 9:50 pm: |
|
Perhaps "suggest" was the wrong word. What I am asking is why couldn't (shouldn't) one put the little one's nourishment in a universally acceptable "container" (for lack of a better word)for feeding in public.
I wasn't making any value judgements, btw. Just asking a question. And yes I do take a "prophylactic decongetant" when the need requires it. And your restaurant analogy makes no sense at all in this context.
FF
|
Wendy
Supporter
Username: Wendy
Post Number: 2846
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, July 30, 2006 - 9:54 pm: |
|
But it is a universally acceptable container FF. Anyone who has a problem accepting that has the problem. That's my point. The restaurant analogy is quite apt. People eat in public. Babies nurse in public. Same thing. No need to do anything in advance before you go out to eat. No need to do anything in advance before you take your baby out in public and he/she gets hungry. |
susan1014
Supporter
Username: Susan1014
Post Number: 1727
Registered: 3-2002
| | Posted on Sunday, July 30, 2006 - 10:02 pm: |
|
Yabbadabbadoo, I'm assuming that you have never breastfed, or at least have never pumped.
Pumping often adds a huge nuisance factor, delivers less milk, and is less comfortable for a baby used to nursing. |
Virtual It Girl
Citizen
Username: Shh
Post Number: 4882
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, July 30, 2006 - 10:02 pm: |
|
FF, perhaps you don't realize this:
with a young baby whose feeding schedule is not necessarily regular, pumping can make your body will produce MORE milk and when the baby is fed the bottle of pumped milk your breasts may become engorged and you will have to pump again.
Maybe you would like to see engorged breasts at the pool.
Also, with young babies is the issue of nipple confusion or preference. My 4.5 month old one day decided she wouldn't drink from a bottle. Of course this was when I was working one day a week. She went without food for about 6 hours!
Why should a mom have to go to the extra steps of pumping, storing, etc. just because someone finds nursing a baby offensive???
|
yabbadabbadoo
Citizen
Username: Yabbadabbadoo
Post Number: 373
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, July 30, 2006 - 10:06 pm: |
|
Susan and VIT: Thank you for your illuminating responses. Wendy, take a chill pill.
FF |
Wendy
Supporter
Username: Wendy
Post Number: 2847
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, July 30, 2006 - 10:16 pm: |
|
Not sure what I said differently than the others. But I'm chilling fine thanks. No need for pills at this time. Were it not for my response Vig nor Susan might not have edified you anyway. I'm sure you are thinking that we're crazy lactivists anyway. I might as well put words in your mouth since you're doing the same to me.
Wendy Lauter aka Wilma Flintstone |
Brett Weir
Citizen
Username: Brett_weir
Post Number: 1709
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 1, 2006 - 1:56 pm: |
|
My wife breastfed all the kids, though somewhat discreetly in public. She usually draped a burping cloth or something over the little one- a sort of "hospitality tent". This was more for the child's privacy than anything else.
I have seen women nurse older children in public and it can get a little strange. Children talking, running and playing, and then suddenly making a standing pit-stop is a bit much to process. But what the hell... |
growler
Citizen
Username: Growler
Post Number: 995
Registered: 11-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, August 3, 2006 - 5:34 pm: |
|
'Breastfed Babies Cope Better With Stress'
Thursday, 3rd August 2006, 08:56
Category: Healthy LivingBreastfed babies cope better with stress later in life, according to new research.
A study of almost 9,000 British children found those weaned naturally suffered less anxiety as they grew older than those reared on the bottle with formula milk.
Previous research has shown mother's milk staves off a number of health problems for their young including heart disease.
The Swedish analysis found bottle fed children were over four times as likely to be highly stressed by difficult life events than their breastfed peers.
Their findings published online by the Archives of Disease in Childhood are based on children who were part of the 1970 British Cohort Study which regularly monitors a sample of the population from birth onwards.
Relevant information was obtained at the children's birth and at the ages of five and ten from midwives, health visitors, parents, and teachers. This included how much the children weighed at birth and whether they were breastfed.
When the children were 10-years-old their teachers were also asked to rate the anxiety of their pupils on a scale of zero to 50 while parents were interviewed about major family disruption - including divorce or separation - which had occurred when their child was between five and 10.
Unsurprisingly when all the data were analysed the findings pointed to a greater likelihood of high anxiety among children whose parents had divorced or separated.
But children who had been breastfed were significantly less anxious than their peers who had been bottle-fed.
Breastfed children were almost twice as likely to be highly anxious - while children who had been bottle fed were over nine times as likely to be highly anxious about parental divorce or separation.
The findings held true irrespective of other factors likely to influence the results.
Epidemiologist Dr Scott Montgomery, of the Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, said: "The analysis found parental divorce and separation were associated with a greater anxiety among children who were not breast fed than among breast fed children."
The researchers said the study does not prove breastfeeding itself makes children cope better with life stress - instead it could be a marker of some other maternal or parental factors.
But they cite animal research which suggests the quality of physical contact between mother and baby during the first few days of life may influence the development of the offspring's neural and hormonal pathways involved in the stress response.
Babies with more of the type of contact experienced during breast feeding coped better with stress when older.
Breastfeeding could also affect the quality of the bonding between mother and child and the way in which the two relate to each other.
And this could have a lasting impact on the child's anxiety levels in response to stressful life events.
Dr Montgomery said: "Breast feeding is associated with resilience against the psychosocial stress linked with
parental divorce or separation.
"This could be because breast feeding is a marker of exposures related to maternal characteristics and parent–child interaction.
"The benefits of breast feeding are well recognised and this study indicates it may be associated with lower levels of anxiety among children who have had the potentially stressful experience of parental divorce."
Copyright © 2006 National News |
crabby
Citizen
Username: Crabbyappleton
Post Number: 749
Registered: 1-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, August 3, 2006 - 6:32 pm: |
|
This is what I don't get...What do "militant" breastfeeders (for lack of a better word) think of people who adopt their child? Obviously an adopted child can't be breatfed, so do they make those mothers feel bad? Would anyone really say that adopted kids are worse off than breast-fed kids? Cause that would just be crazy. HTe notion that mothers who don't breast feed or stop early are doing a disservice to their child, is pure bunk.
Breasts are fine. Bottles are fine. We're all fine. No? |
doulamomma
Citizen
Username: Doulamomma
Post Number: 1646
Registered: 3-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, August 3, 2006 - 11:44 pm: |
|
Crabby,
Actually, with much work, some adoptive mothers do in fact lactate & breastfeed...no personal experience with it so I may be off base, but I believe it is more for bonding & most nutrition comes from other sources. There is also a way to use a supplementer that gives formula while the baby is at the breast.
|
Virtual It Girl
Citizen
Username: Shh
Post Number: 4910
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, August 4, 2006 - 8:09 am: |
|
I read that too DM...basically the nipples have to get stimulated enough (by sucking...tough job but someone's gotta do it) and supposedly will lactate.
A friend of mine who had breast surgery years ago used that supplementer system to nurse her first and then was much more successful nursing her second (without it).
|
Pippi
Supporter
Username: Pippi
Post Number: 2697
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, August 4, 2006 - 8:53 am: |
|
that's not a good answer to crabby's question because MOST adoptive mothers do NOT breast feed. I imagine we are talking about a very small percentage that do... |
doulamomma
Citizen
Username: Doulamomma
Post Number: 1648
Registered: 3-2002
| | Posted on Friday, August 4, 2006 - 8:54 am: |
|
VIG,
Most everyone experiences an increase in milk supply with successive children...up to 30% more. Re. breast surgery, depending on what was done (increase or reduction), when it was done & method used, some women will always need to supplement while others will have enough... |
crabby
Citizen
Username: Crabbyappleton
Post Number: 750
Registered: 1-2004
| | Posted on Friday, August 4, 2006 - 9:02 am: |
|
doula- are you saying that adoptive mothers (or mothers who don't BF) aren't bonding? Cause that would be a really erroneous notion. |
msmith
Citizen
Username: Msmith
Post Number: 27
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Friday, August 4, 2006 - 9:24 am: |
|
Crabby,
It is not "pure bunk" that there are many documented health benefits to breastfeeing versus formula feeding. The American Academy of Pediatrics states:
From its inception, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) has been a staunch advocate of breastfeeding as the optimal form of nutrition for infants. Although economic, cultural, and political pressures often confound decisions about infant feeding, the AAP firmly adheres to the position that breastfeeding ensures the best possible health as well as developmental and psychosocial outcomes for the infant.
Breastfeeing and formula feeding are simply not equal nutrionally. Of course there are many reasons why women don't or can't breastfeed their children and formula provides a good alternative. Adoptive mothers are an excellent example. Someone who is on medication that would be harmful for breastfeeding or a person who is ill are other examples. Others simply choose not to. In my opinion, it's their bodies, their children, their choice. Their may be many factors that go into this decision. But the fact is that women who make this choice are foregoing certain health benefits of breastfeeding. You really can't argue against the science on this.
I think it is a shame that La Leche league (of which I am not a member) gets so much negative backlash. They did a great service to children in informing people of the benefits of breastfeeding at a time when breastfeeding was considered something for hippie moms or people who couldn't afford formula. |
doulamomma
Citizen
Username: Doulamomma
Post Number: 1654
Registered: 3-2002
| | Posted on Friday, August 4, 2006 - 9:24 am: |
|
no, that would be dumb - I'm correcting misinformation...and you are looking for an argument that you are not going to get. |
doulamomma
Citizen
Username: Doulamomma
Post Number: 1655
Registered: 3-2002
| | Posted on Friday, August 4, 2006 - 9:27 am: |
|
last post by me was obviously directed to crabby:
no, that would be dumb - I'm correcting misinformation...and you are looking for an argument that you are not going to get.
|
Crazy_quilter
Citizen
Username: Crazy_quilter
Post Number: 377
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Friday, August 4, 2006 - 10:05 am: |
|
Many people grow up fine without being breastfed. However, it is true that you can nurse children you adopt. I nursed my oldest a little longer than i might have because i was planning on adopting and wanted to try to nurse.
|
Pippi
Supporter
Username: Pippi
Post Number: 2698
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, August 4, 2006 - 10:22 am: |
|
crazy quilter - may I assume you are the birth mother of your oldest? what about those who aren't able to have children and, thus, breast feed them long enough to feed an adoptive child? Of course, there are exceptions to every situation, but isn't it fair to assume that only a small percentage of adoptive mothers are able to breastfeed?
|
susan1014
Supporter
Username: Susan1014
Post Number: 1732
Registered: 3-2002
| | Posted on Friday, August 4, 2006 - 10:32 am: |
|
Of course most adoptive mothers don't breastfeed, and do bond with their children. However, to avoid discussion of the clearcut health benefits of breastfeeding (if you are able) out of deference to those who cannot or choose not do so is not good public health policy.
Obviously a little sensitivity is in order, but so is a little education. |
doulamomma
Citizen
Username: Doulamomma
Post Number: 1656
Registered: 3-2002
| | Posted on Friday, August 4, 2006 - 11:32 am: |
|
great point Susan1014
|
ffof
Citizen
Username: Ffof
Post Number: 4803
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, August 4, 2006 - 1:29 pm: |
|
susan1014- That seems to address crabby's point exactly. The hardcore breastfeeding folks have good intentions, but more often than not, they make lots of people feel like bad mothers.
It's really a sorry side effect.
I breast fed my kids, but one of them got extremely ill at 2 weeks old (even though he was being breastfed) and was hospitalized for 2 weeks. Pumping did not work (why is anyone's guess) and so the milk supply went down down down. The child went to a bottle.
THis child is now the most robust, healthy child I've ever seen.
So, even if someone would say, 'oh well, that's just an exception', I think that it is an example of the fact that kids are nursed in all kinds of ways, and they are loved just the same and are healthy just the same.
|
susan1014
Supporter
Username: Susan1014
Post Number: 1733
Registered: 3-2002
| | Posted on Friday, August 4, 2006 - 3:17 pm: |
|
I take major exception to crabby's dismissal of the evidence for breastfeeding as "pure bunk". Sure, most kids are healthy either way, but the science for short and long term effects is compelling enough to drive a public awareness campaign on the virtues of breastfeeding where possible.
Agreed that there is a "black and white" problem with much LaLeche and other material that suggests that anyone can do it, and that those who think that they cannot are wrong. The writers of some of these materials also need education. Address the side effect, but don't throw out the push to make breastfeeding more common and more accepted. |
crabby
Citizen
Username: Crabbyappleton
Post Number: 754
Registered: 1-2004
| | Posted on Friday, August 4, 2006 - 3:22 pm: |
|
okay okay. Change "pure bunk" to "not wise". And then reread my post for the gist of the meaning. Sheesh. |
Stuart0628
Citizen
Username: Stuart0628
Post Number: 317
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, August 4, 2006 - 5:20 pm: |
|
Crabby, there is a genuine difference amongst the following:
1) "Not breastfeeding your kids is child abuse, no matter what the circumstances."
2) "It is wise to make a genuine effort to breastfeed your baby until circumstances (low volume that does not improve, mastitis, etc) prevent doing so. The immune system benefits and metabolism benefits conveyed to the baby are demonstrated to have value throughout life.
3) "Breastfeeding is icky and I shouldn't have to be in the same time zone as anyone doing it."
1 and 3 are clearly not true and 2 clearly is. Even modifying "pure bunk" to "not wise", I can't agree with your statement. If you were trying to say that women who cannot breastfeed after making a genuine effort (or who need to supplement) should be supported by society, I'd agree. But anyone more than that I would not. |
crabby
Citizen
Username: Crabbyappleton
Post Number: 755
Registered: 1-2004
| | Posted on Friday, August 4, 2006 - 5:48 pm: |
|
YES! That's the gist of my meaning...they need to be supported by society!!!!! But they are not. You can tell that just by reading some of the posts above.
I mean, for goodness sake, feeding a child formula is not as if you've put a cigarette in the kid's mouth!
|
SO Ref
Citizen
Username: So_refugee
Post Number: 2050
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Friday, August 4, 2006 - 8:16 pm: |
|
 |
Nashira
Citizen
Username: Nashira
Post Number: 74
Registered: 7-2006
| | Posted on Friday, August 4, 2006 - 9:45 pm: |
|
Ffof,
I agree with you and was in a similar situation. I had twins born a month early. One had a very hard time latching on and the other did not seem to even want to nurse at first. My baby who could not latch on lost 10% of their body weight in the first three days of life and I had to use a bottle. I pumped for a full month, which was not fun. At two weeks of age, one of my twins started to nurse successfully, but I could not seem to nurse one and pump enough for the other. I pumped until they reached their due date, but I could not pump any longer.
The same as with you, my twins are two of the healthiest, most robust children you will meet. They both do well in school and are very athletic. They are just as healthy, if nothealthier than many of their friends. I was given grief by some people over how come I did not continue to nurse the one that could latch. With twins, it just did not feel right to me to do that. I know I made the best decision for both me and my children and, in knowing that, I was able to not let other people make me feel guilty about it. |
juju's petals
Citizen
Username: Jujus_petals
Post Number: 314
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Friday, August 4, 2006 - 11:06 pm: |
|
I still think susan made an excellent point. We should separate the fundamental, scientifically-proven advantages of breastmilk over formula from whether or not mothers did or did not make a choice to breasfeed their children.
If you did not breastfeed for whatever reason and you or your partner fed your child formula instead of formula, that is not relevant to whether or not human breastmilk is a superior food for human babies. Furthermore, just because your exclusively formula-fed child (or you) turned out okay or even became the healthiest most vibrant person you ever met does not mean that formula is as good as breastmilk. It just doesn't demonstrate anything other than that individual is probably healthy. Would breastmilk have made a difference? We don't know. At the same time, the nutritional superiority of breastmilk does not mean that breasfeed babies never get ear infections or end up in the hospital. More nonsense.
But, that assumes this is strictly a nutritional debate, which is never seems to be. And, I personally regret that. Especially if my emphatic language makes other mothers feel bad. Seriously, I'm sorry you may feel bad but, darn it, the fact that breastmilk is better is simply the truth. This isn't about good or bad mommies but should be about good or bad medical science.
I should add, I had two children who flat out refused to even suck on a bottle, much less a pacifier, and we tried. Frankly, if they had I might have gotten a bit of a break from time to time that would have helped me be a better mom. How's that for a lack of choice?
Uh, no telling what would have been in the bottle at that desparate moment.
|
crabby
Citizen
Username: Crabbyappleton
Post Number: 756
Registered: 1-2004
| | Posted on Friday, August 4, 2006 - 11:55 pm: |
|
I'm not saying that formula is better OR breastmilk is better. But I do know that Formula is not a cigarette. So lactivists, take heed.
Also, when is breastmilk NOT good? When a mother can't deliver it.
Really ladies, just feed your children bottle or boob. It's about the ONLY time you CAN control what goes into their mouths.
|
sac
Supporter
Username: Sac
Post Number: 3655
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, August 5, 2006 - 8:12 am: |
|
My reasons for breastfeeding were highly selfish. I just didn't want to mess with bottles, sterilizing, having to fully wake up at night, etc. and I didn't really want to spend all that money on formula. Also, and only those who have actually nursed a baby can know what I'm talking about, it was an amazing physical feeling, coupled with such a relaxing, loving time together. (Of course, the latter "relaxing, loving time together" was no different from a bottle feeding.) So, I was glad that the nutritional evidence indicated that it was the right choice to make WHEN possible to make that choice and I was glad that I had struggled through the difficulties I had, especially with the first child, during those first few weeks.
In reality, those of the "militant" crowd are often just mothers who have had similar experiences to mine and realize that, more often than not, there are some struggles at the beginning and want other mothers to try to get through those struggles without giving up in order to enjoy the result. However, they don't appreciate that there are some people who just cannot get past that stage because the barriers are too great and they end up turning them (and many of the rest of us) off with the rhetoric in that attempt.
Don't get me wrong - my kids consumed a fair amount of formula along the way, especially after I went back to work when they were a few months old, but they still nursed at bedtime (or occasionally in the middle of the night) until they were well past a year old.
Nursing my babies (even or maybe especially in the middle of the night) is one of my most precious memories of the time when my children were babies and I sometimes wish that there was a way that I could do it again ... but then I remember some of the other "features" of being the parent of an infant and am content to just nurture the memory.
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page