About 10 per cent of women have inverted nipples. Mothers often cite inverted nipples as a reason to abandon breastfeeding. However the reality is that such mothers could still breastfeed; Babies feed on areolas, not nipples. Inverted nipples can however, make latching more problematic. The areola of women with inverted nipples tends to be very firm. If this breast tissue doesn’t flex when baby attempts to latch, the baby can find it difficult to get a large enough mouthful to latch properly. How can mothers overcome this dilemma? After enduring much heartache, Brianna, a mother of two, finally found the solution.


“Breastfeeding the first time around was a one of the toughest things I had ever experienced. My son was born early and experienced some complications. He was not breathing well and his blood oxygen saturation level (meaning how well oxygen was being absorbed into his blood) was low. Due to these complications I was not able to nurse him right after delivery and had to wait several hours until the doctor and nurses were able to get his levels up. 

Once I was able to nurse I found out that, because of the way my nipples were inverted, my son would have difficulty latching on. It was important that I get some nutrients into him some way, so the nurse gave me a medical-grade breast pump. I syringed the breast milk from the bottle into my son’s mouth each feeding for the first few days after his birth. Then the process began of working on latching and sucking. 

I started going to lactation meetings with the hospital’s lactation nurse. Every three to four hours I pumped my milk, syringe-fed my baby, and then cleaned the necessary parts of the pump. At this point I was at my wits end. I felt helpless, I felt defeated, and mostly I felt like a failure. I would put my son down in his crib and go to my room and cry. It was a constant struggle every feeding, but I knew I couldn't give up. It is so important for a baby to get at least 6 months of breastfeeding to build up their immune system. It is a huge bonding experience for a mother to be able to provide for her infant. Also, I had chosen to stay at home after my son was born so money was tight; I really needed to save the money that would have otherwise been spent on formula. 

It wasn't until between month 3 and 4 when I finally felt like my baby and I were a team working together to meet his needs. I was finally able to get him to latch! I did this using a nipple shield. I felt such a rewarding feeling knowing that we were finally able to enjoy the times of feeding. There were some other struggles along the way, but none as hard as those first few months. 


I applaud any woman who chooses to breastfeed and sticks with it. We are faced with many walls to hurdle over and much temptation to give in to formula. Whether it be the distracted baby who is more interested in what’s going on around them then nursing (this usually happens between 4 and 5 months) or the difficulty of scheduling outings between feeding time, because there isn't much support in the public for nursing mothers. To those of you new mothers who are thinking about nursing and aren't sure - go for it! You will never regret trying. There are ways to make it work whether it be support and advice from other nursing mothers/ family members, the support group La Lecha, reading material (I like "New Mother's Guide to Breastfeeding" put out by the American Academy of Pediatrics) or a combination of all three. 

This second time around I went into breastfeeding my daughter feeling like a PRO! With all of my gained experience and the wisdom of what to expect we have breezed through many of the obstacles that can trip up a breastfeeding mother. Good Luck breastfeeding moms and keep up the good work!”



Get your own Bingo Card here.

Email me with your story.

When it comes to challenging early childhood behaviour, every parent, whether they care to admit it, has received their fair share. From excessive crying and head-banging, to toddler tantrums, preschool nightmares and everything in between. This timeline showcases the normal, yet challenging, behaviour your child may exhibit from birth till they start school. The timeline will enable you to better understand your child’s thinking and why he acts the way he does at certain times. By consulting this timeline you will be able to handle his difficult periods much better as you will know what will happen before it does.

1 Month Old:

• Crying: Crying in an infant does not have the same meaning as it does in an older child. Imagine for a moment what life might be like if your baby never cried. You would have no way of knowing that he was hungry, ill or in pain, or simply needing a hug. All babies cry, and there is always a reason for it. You may not believe it now, but there will come a time when you will be able to recognise the difference between his cries and be able to respond quickly and, as a result, he will gradually cry less. 
• Excessive crying: In medical terms, excessive crying is defined as “continuous crying lasting more than three hours in 24 hours” (Laurent 2009). As many as one in four babies, from newborn to three months of age, display this level of crying (Johnson 2005; Fredregill 2004). The following can be helpful: cuddling, motion, white noise (e.g. washing machine, hairdryer, television tuned into a static-filled channel, detuned radio), going for a drive, comfort sucking, massage, swaddling, singing, talking, and reducing external stimuli. Symptoms of excessive crying usually last from three to four months.
• Colic: The period between birth and three months is one of adjustment of your baby’s immature nervous and digestive systems to life in the outside world. A smooth adjustment is harder for some babies to achieve than others. Infantile colic is a condition in which an otherwise healthy baby cries or displays symptoms of distress (cramping, moaning, etc) frequently and for extended periods, without any discernible reason. The condition typically appears within the first month of life and often disappears rather suddenly, before the baby is three to four months old, but can last up to one year. Many mothers are tempted to just forget about breastfeeding and switch to formula at this point, but that can be a major mistake. Most babies who have a food allergy are sensitive to cows’ milk, the primary ingredient in baby formula. Instead of eliminating colic, formula may actually make it worse.
• Dislike of Bathing: Some babies are terrified of having a bath. If your baby is one of them, don’t force the issue. It will unsettle him and upset you. Topping and tailing is quite sufficient until he is happy in the water. When he is ready, you can introduce small amounts of water to the bath and gradually increase the volume with each bath time. Or even better - bath with your baby.

2 Months Old:

• Demanding: At this age your baby is now too old to habituate - to shut down and shut out stimulation (see ‘Timeline of Baby and Toddler Sleep’), but she has not yet mastered the art of self-calming (West 2010). The result is that your baby will now become more demanding, particularly in late afternoon and early evening. She may cry more often, as this is her way of expressing how stressful she is finding adapting to her new environment. Your baby will want you to spend more time amusing her. She may want you to be totally absorbed in her, and only her (Rijt and Plooij 2011).

6 Weeks Old:

• Dislike of Dressing: Your baby may cry when being dressed or undressed. Hold him gently but firmly, smile at him, and make reassuring noises. The following can also help: make sure the room is warm enough; keep clothing changes to a minimum; make sure his clothes are large enough to remove with ease. If all else fails – use stealth: distract him with a toy or book.
• Peak of Crying: Perhaps surprisingly, your baby’s level of crying is not at its highest when he is a newborn. The rate of crying gradually increases from birth until a baby is around six weeks old, then subsides. This is often referred to as the developmental crying peak (Johnson 2005).
• Fretfulness: Your baby is going through a major growth spurt, which may make your baby fretful because she is hungry. If you’re breastfeeding, rest assured, you are making enough milk, it’s just time to take production up another notch by feeding more frequently. Your baby is growing and preparing your body for the additional nourishment she needs (see, ‘Timeline of a Breastfed Baby’). If you’re formula feeding, you may find your baby is looking for just a little more formula at the end of each feed.
• Over-Tired: During these early weeks it is so easy for your baby to become over-tired and over-stimulated by the vastness of life. When this happens, try a ‘white-out’: put your baby over your shoulder and face them to a white wall. This relaxes the baby and makes them sleepy.

3 Months Old:

• Refusing a bottle: If your baby has been fed exclusively from the breast until now but you want him to take a bottle (perhaps you are returning to work), he may need coaxing. Sucking milk from a teat requires a different technique to the ‘suckling’ action of breastfeeding, so practice is required. His reluctance to take a bottle from you is likely in part to be because he associates you will breastfeeding, which he prefers. Your partner, a friend, or family member may therefore have more success. Giving the bottle in the dark can also work until bottle feeding is established. Also, experiment with teats. There is a huge variety of types and shapes available. If you only need to use bottles for short periods, cup feeding rather than bottle feeding is more compatible with continued breastfeeding.

4 Months Old:

• Fear of the Bathtub: At this age, your baby is too big for a baby bath. However she may be over- whelmed by the vastness of the adult bathtub. She may fret about slipping underwater, getting soap in her eyes or even seeing and hearing the water go down the drain. If your baby finds the bathtub frightening, be patient and let her get used to it gradually. You could try filling the baby bath with water and put a few toys in; then place it inside the bathtub and put a non-slip bath mat next to it. Put your baby in the bathtub where she can play with the toys. Or alternatively, try putting a tiny amount of water in the big bath until your baby gets used to it, then add a bit more each day. If it’s summer and it’s hot, you can use a paddling pool substitute – throw in some bubblebath and a bucket of warm water and it’s just a bath in the garden.

5 Months Old:

• Moody: Some babies’ moods swing wildly at this time. One day they are all smiles, but the next they do nothing but cry. These mood swings may even occur from one moment to the next. One minute they’re shrieking with laughter, and the next they burst into tears. Sometimes, they even start to cry in the middle of laughing (Rijt and Plooij 2011).

6 Months Old:

• Biting: The primary teeth usually start to erupt during the second six months of life, and subsequently your baby will learn to bite and chew. Many babies will take the opportunity to bite on anything that comes close to their mouths. Biting is a normal part of experimental behaviour, and is usually a transient phenomenon. If your baby bites during breastfeeding, remove her from the breast, look her in the eye and say firmly, ‘No biting’. Be serious but not angry. Offer the breast again, but if she continues to bite, give her a teething toy to help reinforce its use. Soon your baby will begin to associate biting with the items you have offered.
• Jealousy: Research shows that from 6 months babies display jealousy when their mother diverts their attention to another baby. They kick and cry furiously until they have her full attention once more (Laurent 2009). While babies of this age are capable of demonstrating a whole range of emotions it is important to understand that they have no concept of good or bad behaviour and should not be punished.
• Food Refusal: Some babies are little gannets from the start, while others take a far more leisurely view of solids introduction. If she closes her mouth or turns her head away, simply put the food aside and try again another day. Apparently babies are genetically wired to be suspicious of unknown foodstuffs (to save them from poisoning themselves).
• Tooth Grinding: Tooth grinding (bruxism) occurs in up to half of normal infants, usually once the top and bottom teeth have erupted (Friedman and Saunders 2007). Tooth grinding is most frequent at night. Fortunately, it is a habit that wanes with time, and it will not damage your baby’s teeth.
• Crying: It’s normal for a baby to have bouts of more persistent crying before a particular developmental stage. It may be connected to major changes in the baby’s brain and nervous system when a new developmental challenge is met (Johnson 2005). Around now your baby is learning to sit unsupportive and to begin eating solid foods – major developmental milestones.

7 Months Old:

• 'Inappropriate' Sleep Associations: Babies often develop sleep associations, or ‘props’ to help them fall asleep. For example, if your baby always falls asleep while feeding, while listening to background music, or while his back is being rubbed, he might expect those conditions to be present each time he falls asleep. Other potentially-problematic sleep associations include, excessive rocking, needing to be driven in the car to fall asleep, and falling asleep with the television on. A baby with inappropriate sleep associations may awaken seven to eight times a night. The situation is made worse at this age, because now your baby takes longer to reach deep sleep than he did as a newborn (Skula 2012). 
• Separation Anxiety: Your baby may become less relaxed around strangers. Where previously he may have happily smiled at anyone and go to them for a cuddle, now he may be more reluctant, and soon you are likely to be his firm favourite to the point where he becomes anxious and upset if you even leave the room. This ‘separation anxiety’ is an important stage in your baby’s development. The reason for this behaviour is that your baby does not yet fully understand that things that disappear from sight continue to exist. If Daddy goes out of sight, your baby may be unsure whether he still exists or whether he is gone for good. Separation anxiety is a primeval response to ensure babies don’t get left behind by their parents. So your baby isn’t being manipulative; she’s genuinely anxious and will need to be reassured and cuddled.
• Dislike of Hair Washing: By now your baby will be sitting up in the adult bath (maybe propped by a seat) and any dislike of bathing is likely to have diminished. However most babies still dislike having their hair washed. Wearing a plastic visor is a good way of keeping shampoos out of your baby's eyes (sun shields work well). You can also try drawing a line across his forehead with petroleum jelly to stop shampoo running down into his eyes. Alternatively, he may be less distressed if you hold him in your lap while hair washing, and use a flannel to wet and rinse rather than pouring water over his head. If your baby is still distressed, it may be best to keep hair washing separate from bath time; if he associates the two he may start to fuss about taking baths as well. 

8 Months Old:

• Thumb-Sucking: Thumb-sucking means different things in babies than in older children. For babies, it is a comforter that your child needs at special times. He sucks when he is tired, bored or frustrated. Thumb-sucking by itself is not a sign of unhappiness, maladjustment or lack of love. If your child gives up thumb-sucking by six years of age, as usually happens, there is very little chance of the displacement of permanent teeth (Spock 2004).
• Masturbation: When you remove your baby’s nappy you may discover that he starts playing with his penis. It is completely normal for boys and girls to touch their genitals. Just as babies discover their hands and feet, they also discover their genitals around now, and if handling them feels good, they will do it again. If your child masturbates in public, try to distract him rather than scolding or showing disapproval.
• Anxiety and Fright: Your baby may start to worry about things that never bothered him before. Typically, it may be the sound of the vacuum cleaner, or the sight of an animal, for example. This is due to your baby being more aware of his surroundings.

9 Months Old:

• Stranger Anxiety: Your nine-month-old baby is suspicious not only of the doctor; anything new or unfamiliar makes him anxious, even a new hat on his mother or his father’s clean-shaven face if he is used to seeing his father with a beard. This behaviour is called stranger anxiety. By nine months, the thinking part of your baby’s brain – the outer layer or cortex – is much more functional. One result is that your baby now has better memory skills. He clearly recognises the difference between what is familiar and what is strange and he has the ability to understand that strange things may be dangerous. Many adults don’t have the sense to leave a small child alone while he sizes them up. They rush up to him, full of talk and enthusiasm. As a result it takes him longer to work up his courage to be friendly. By 12 to 15 months, stranger anxiety will ease.
• Head Banging: While head-banging in older children may be a sign of emotional disturbance, in a baby it is often a rhythmical comfort habit and your baby may find both the sensation and the sound it makes soothing. Unsurprisingly, the behaviour is most likely to occur when the child is tired, sleepy or frustrated. Approximately a quarter of babies will go through this phase (Smith 2009; Welford 1990; Spock 2004). Boys are three times more likely to do it than girls (Baby Centre 2013). Head banging will usually stop without any intervention before baby reaches four years old. Occasionally, head-banging can be caused by pain or discomfort, such as earache.
• Grumpiness: Your baby wants to crawl, but can’t. Consequently, he may for a few weeks become incredibly grumpy every time you put him down.

10 Months Old:

• Repetitive Behaviour: Your baby will become fascinated with certain movements (such as turning around in a circle) and want to carry them out again and again. The reason your baby does this is due to the way his developing brain is functioning at this stage. “An activity must be repeated many times to firm up neural networks for proficiency” (Masi 2001).
• Hair-Pulling: Occasionally, an infant gets into the habit of stroking and tugging on strands of their own hair. The result can be unattractive bald spots and worry for the parents. The best explanation for his behaviour is that it is just a habit, not a sign of emotional or physical disturbance. The best treatment is to cut the hair short so that there is nothing for the baby to get hold of. By the time the hair grows back, the habit is usually gone. (Note that, in older children, compulsive hair-pulling is more likely to be a sign of anxiety or psychological tension, so professional consultation makes sense).

11 Months Old:

• Peak of Separation Anxiety: The distress of separation anxiety peaks at the end of the first year. This stage can be tricky for close family and friends, who may feel rejected by your baby’s sudden refusal to go to them. Your baby’s transition from immobility (sitting) to mobility (crawling or walking) makes her extra ‘clingy’. It is common for a baby to become clingy to the main carer – usually the mother – and refuse to be looked after by the other. She craves touch: skin to skin contact in your arms, at your breasts, in your bed. She extracts whatever physical contact she can get from you.
• Resisting Sleep: At the moment your baby is all about movement. She’s crawling, probably pulling to a stand and cruising, perhaps even walking. To understand the impact of these advancements, imagine learning how to fly. You’d be amazed at your new ability – and you’d want to spend every waking moment practicing, exploring and soaring! Every time your baby hits a new milestone, it feels to her like she’s learned how to fly, and it will be awfully hard for her to feel like slowing down. Consequently she won’t be as tempted to do so when it’s time to sleep.
• Over-Reliance on Pacifier: If your baby has a pacifier (dummy), you may wish to think about beginning to wean her off it around now, or at least reducing its use if it’s become a very frequent daytime habit. Medically speaking, pacifier use is discouraged after the age of one – mainly for the sake of your baby’s speech and language skills, which are, in fact, already in the making well before her first birthday (for more information on pacifiers, see my article, 'Dummies and Social Class').

12 Months Old:

• Waking Too Early: The fact is that most babies are notoriously early risers and their interpretation of what is ‘morning’ is likely to be a good few hours shy of yours. The chances are that your baby has had all the sleep they need and, unlike you, they are bright eyed and raring to go!
• Standing and Playing at Meals: This may be quite a problem even before the age of a year. It comes about because your baby is less ravenous for food and more interested in all kinds of new activities. You may notice that your baby climbs and plays when he’s partly satisfied, not when he’s really hungry. Be realistic. Forcing your toddler to remain at the table until everyone has finished will seem like an eternity to him, and it’s not surprising he gets bored and fractious. Instead, insist that he remains seated when eating, but whenever he loses interest in the food, assume he’s had enough, let him down from the chair and take away the food.

13 Months Old:

• Ignoring Other Children: Don’t worry, your child is not being unfriendly, she just hasn’t reached the stage in her social development where she is able to play with other children. Instead, she prefers to play alongside them in what is known as parallel play. And while she might have looked as though she was ignoring them, rest assured she was taking everything in, and in a year or so she will be playing with the best of them.

14 Months Old:

• Casting: As he moves into his second year he will start to understand that he is an individual, separate from you. This is a profound change to his thinking, and the uncertainties and confusions it can conjure up will prompt him to test your boundaries. You’ll probably observe your child throwing objects out of his pram or cot – a behaviour called casting. If, for example, he throws a cup of milk to the floor and you tell him off, he may do it again with one eye on you to see what happens. This isn’t your toddler being naughty – he is simply learning about cause and effect, actions, and reactions. He is experimenting.
• Not Sharing: As he begins to define himself as separate and individual, then he is bound to be strongly possessive of his toys. It requires the next step in development for him to understand that it is safe to share things. There is no point in trying to teach your toddler to share; he simply isn’t ready. To share, a child has to understand that something belongs to him – that he can give it away and expect to get it back. That your toddler won’t share has nothing to do with how generous a person he will become when he is older.

15 Months:

• Defiance: Toddlers this age are not being bratty when they test limits. They’re learning cause and effect: “If I do this, then Dad does that”. If your child drops her sippy cup on the floor during dinner, and you get mad – that’s fascinating (to her). Watch her do it again, and again – looking right at you as she does, to see if she can re-create the experience (because it’s so interesting). Have you ever thought you might lose your mind because you’ve already told your toddler for the 18 billionth time not to put her sticky hands on the walls or furniture, and there she goes again? It’s not just that she wants to push your buttons – though it is certainly mesmerizing to her when you get angry, and your strong reaction (positive or negative) will often serve to reinforce her behaviour, whether you realize it or not. She’s also probably doing the behaviour, in her mind, with some slight variation on the last time she tried: maybe this time it’s just her left hand that touches the wall, or this time it’s chocolate on her hands instead of banana. If it’s different to her, she’ll test it out – to see what happens. Cause and effect (Waldburger and Spivack 2009).
• Reluctance with Diaper Changing: However much you sing to her and jolly her along, your toddler will probably hate having her diaper changed by this age as she wants to be up and off, and will not be happy about being pinioned to the changing mat.
• Hitting: Toddlers hit when they are frustrated, to get attention, or simply to see what happens. It is common behaviour. 68% of toddlers are still hitting by their second birthday (Green 2006).

16 Months:

• Refusing Food: Toddlers eat when they are hungry and are not governed by our artificial adult mealtimes. If you continue to offer your toddler healthy meals and snacks and he turns his nose up at them, don’t despair. Being picky about what they eat and reluctant to try new foods is a perfectly normal part of your toddler’s development. There is even a special name for it – it is called neophobia, or fear of the new. This extremely common toddler response evolved many thousands of years ago as part of a young child’s basic survival mechanism. By being suspicious of new foods, an increasingly mobile toddler is less likely to accidentally eat anything poisonous or harmful to them. Keep giving your toddler a range of foods at each meal that includes a mixture of familiar and unfamiliar items. Avoid the temptation to coax your him to eat. He may seize the opportunity to do battle with you if you show him that you are concerned about his eating. It may help to bear in mind that “it takes a toddler sixty-eight days to starve” (Lewis 2009).
• Kicking Off In Restaurants: Your toddler is now too old to be sufficiently entertained by a spoon balancing on a cup, yet he is too young to wait for prolonged periods. This can make dining out a tense experience. To avoid crabbiness which may lead to noisy scenes, it is wise to ensure that your child is comfortable before you sit down to eat – not over-tired or starving hungry (give a banana or similar beforehand). Also bring a bag of interesting un-breakable, un-noisy toys for him to play with. Crayons and paper are ideal.
• Fear of Noises: It is normal for toddlers of this age to be frightened of a great variety of noises, even such common ones as household appliances. This does not mean that your child is hypersensitive or emotionally disturbed, and the phenomenon in any case is usually very short lived.
• Traumatic Teeth-Brushing: If brushing your toddler’s teeth has become a twice-daily nightmare, rest assured, this is very typical behaviour. Dentists recommend that you brush your child’s teeth and don’t let them have total control over their own toothbrushing until at least school age (Nicholls 2009). However your toddler can’t understand why his teeth must be cleaned and resents having it done. He is too young to know about tooth decay, so your best bet is to turn the whole teeth-brushing process into a game. I used to pretend my daughter’s mouth was a house, and we’d make sure we cleaned the bedrooms, and the kitchen, and the living room.

17 Months:

• Shyness: At this age, many toddlers are still very attached to their main carer and your child may continue to be wary of strangers. Some children are shy by nature. Common types of shy behaviour include disliking new experiences, reluctance to join in social gatherings, and unwillingness to look at or talk to new people. By withdrawing temporarily, your child can gain a sense of control. As they observe and the gain some experience within the social situation that is frightening them, their shyness wanes. A good way of dealing with it is by preparing your child for any situation she’s likely to find difficult, perhaps with a story. In most cases, time and patience is all that is needed. Don’t force her to speak to strangers in shops, or even unfamiliar relatives.
• Fears: Along with your toddler’s growing understanding may come seemingly irrational fears. These may be of the dark, spiders, of her bath, or even of your perfectly harmless next-door-neighbour. Try to be sympathetic while, if possible, showing that you are not afraid of what is frightening her. Your toddler can’t rationalise her emotions, but with your support she will grow in confidence and maturity and these normal and common childhood fears will fade away naturally.
• Comfort Objects: Your child may be attached to an object such as a blanket or special toy as a consolation when you’re not around. Nearly all children have some form of comfort that they control (Stoppard 2008). Very often comfort objects are ones that children suck or stroke to simulate the effect of being stroked or being comforted.

18 Months:

• Clinginess: Around this age, many children who have been happy explorers develop a new, heightened clinginess. They can imagine being apart from their parents and the image is frightening. This period of anxious clinging usually fades away sometime around age two and a half, as children learn that separations are always followed by reunions.
• Attention-seeking: Your toddler craves your attention and while she would far rather have your positive attention, for instance playing, chatting and cuddling, if she doesn’t get this, she will go out of her way to get any attention at all, even if she has to make you cross to get a response. This can be hard to deal with but don’t worry – you haven’t produced a superbrat. She just needs a little more time to manage her emotions.
• Regressing: Your child is still a baby in many ways and will frequently revert to babyish behaviour, for example, using baby-talk, especially if she is unwell or unsettled. This is entirely normal behaviour, so let her be a baby when she needs to be.
• Frustration: As your toddler grows up her desire to do things far outstrips her ability to do them, and so she becomes frustrated. By this age her spirit of adventure is in excess of her balance, mobility, and coordination. Make your home as child-proof as possible to accommodate her developing abilities.

19 Months:

• Selective Hearing: Ignoring parental requests starts early: you ask your toddler to pick up her toys because it’s time for bed, and she acts as if she’s never heard you – or giggles and laughs and runs the other way. Alternatively, she may look away from you or even close her eyes. In effect, she’s saying “I’m not listening to you, and if I can’t see you, then I can’t hear you either”. For a toddler, ignoring you is actually developmentally normal; she’s practising a bit of autonomy with the person she loves the most (lucky you!)
• Refusal to Get Dressed: Staying still, even for a few minutes, is difficult for your inquisitive toddler. Also around now, she is gradually beginning to notice the colours and type of clothing you put on her, and she might develop preferences. Clothes that seem similar to those worn by mom or dad might seem particularly attractive. The feel of a garment will also be important to her – whether, for example, it is soft or itchy, tight or stretchy. If she takes a dislike to a garment, it may be because it doesn’t fit properly and is therefore uncomfortable to wear; but of course, she doesn’t have the vocabulary to explain this.
• Repeating “No”: This age is the beginning of the process called individuation, when your toddler begins to become a person in her own right. The honeymoon with you is over, at least partly, because to become her own person she needs to push back against your control. Your toddler is approaching the terrible twos. In fact, in Italy the terrible twos are known as 'fase del no', which roughly translated means the 'phase of saying no'. Be aware that your toddler’s saying “No” is also a way of telling you that she wants to do things for herself. If, for instance, she says “No” when you ruin the bathroom tap, it may be because she wanted to turn the tap on, not that she doesn’t want her hands washed.

20 Months:

• Continued Fear of Hair Washing: Unlike dogs, who will generally just cower sadly under the shower head, a toddler who has not grown out of their babyhood fear of having their hair washed will be more of a challenge (due to their ability to pole vault over the side and get out). Therefore, use a jug instead of a shower head and try this tip: Stick pictures or glowing stars high on your bathroom wall or ceiling to encourage your child to tip back his head for hair rinsing. It will also provide distraction from the job in hand.
• Dawdling: Instead of walking right along, your toddler wanders across the pavement and climbs the front steps of every house he passes on the way. The more you call to him, the more he lingers. Your toddler doesn’t have a behavioural problem; his natural instincts say to him, “Look at that pavement to explore! Look at those stairs!” So when you’re planning to go somewhere, it’s wise to build in some dawdling time.
• Impatience: Your toddler may start to find it difficult not being the centre of attention. For example, you might be mid-conversation with someone else when your toddler decides he wants to talk to you. At this age your toddler will find it nigh impossible to wait his turn, and may even try grabbing your face and forcing you to break off your conversation to focus solely on him. Young toddlers are almost incapable of waiting; their mental development literally cannot factor in that anything else could take your attention.

23 Months:

• Sleep Problems: Some toddlers resist going to bed with all their considerable might. If your child is one of them, it is important to try to discover why this might be happening. There are several possible reasons: he is not used to going to sleep on his own; his routine has been disrupted; he needs a later bedtime; he thinks he is being left out; he is thirsty. Keeping a sleep diary for two weeks can be very helpful. Record your toddler’s sleep patterns – day and night – for this period and note events like amount of time spent playing or cuddling at sleep time. This will give a picture of what is really happening, rather than what you perceive to be happening.

24 Months:

• Picky Eater: You may notice your child’s appetite dropping around the time of her second birthday, when her growth rate falls. Your previously happy eater may become more picky about food, especially if she is testing your boundaries, but remember that she won’t starve and try to stay calm if she refuses food. It can help to have a quiet time immediately before mealtimes. It’s hard to get an excited child to calm down enough to eat properly.
• Self-centredness: Most toddlers of this age have tunnel vision, which focuses only on their own needs and happiness. When your child is playing and wants a particular toy, it is unlikely that she will ask politely for it when ‘smash and grab’ is more effective. Your child is in the preoperational stage and can see things only from her own point of view. She’s self-centred though not necessarily selfish. If her father is unhappy, she may bring over her favourite stuffed animal to try to comfort him (after all, it works for her).
• Tantrums: Frequently, the power and confusion of her emotions – the tension between needing you and discovering the lure of independence – can become too much for your toddler, and this can result in a tantrum. “Most two-year-olds have at least one tantrum per week” (Cooper 2011). Some sources maintain that one in five two-year-olds is estimated to have two tantrums a day, with the average tantrum lasting 11 minutes (Beswick 2009; Einon 2004). You might consider calling the tantrum behaviour by a special name – ‘the nasties’, for instance, or ‘the stormies’. You can talk to your child in advance how to recognise when ‘the stormies’ are coming, and how to beat them. This put you and your child on the same side, and gives them a sense of control. It can sometimes even divert a potential display of anger into a fit of giggles. For information on what to do when your toddler has a tantrum – in public, see here).
• Breath-Holding: Your toddler may work herself up into such a state of fury and distress that she stops breathing. Your child cannot hurt herself by holding her breath. This is because long before she can do herself any harm through oxygen deprivation, she will lose consciousness – and the moment she does, she will start breathing again. Thankfully, most children grow out of these episodes before they reach school age. A few children have a far rarer condition called reflex anoxic seizures, which is where a breath-holding episode results in convulsion and if this happens, you should seek medical advice.
• Nightmares: Nightmares are very common in young children and at this age your toddler may not have the words to explain how she is feeling. Nightmares usually occur toward the end of a sleep period. Having a nightmare is a horrible experience for an adult – but at least when you wake you know it’s a dream. How much more distressing it must be for a young child, who is hardly aware of the difference between imagination or reality. Reassure your toddler that you will always come if she needs you and try to get to her as quickly as possible if she has a bad dream. Avoid scary stories or high-action videos before bed, and keep her bedtime routine as calm as possible. When your child wakes after having a nightmare, make a point of turning the pillow over to turn the nightmare away.
• Talking to Herself: Your child’s verbal abilities will likely take off like a rocket during this age range, and suddenly she’ll be talking up a storm (most toddlers have about fifty words by 24 months). Children tend to practice language when they’re least distracted, which often occurs in their cots or beds. Instead of running to join in the conversation, try to allow your child alone time in which to practice (and enjoy) her new words.
• Fear of the Hairdresser: The first haircut is often an exciting occasion, at least for the parent, but your toddler may howl in protest. Keep haircutting simple and avoid high-maintenance styles. You can prepare your child by playing ‘hairdressers’ – let her brush your hair and then tell her it’s your turn to brush hers. There’s no need to visit the hairdresser if your child really hates going there – opt for a mobile hairdresser who will come to your home, or cut her hair yourself. Although shorter styles are easier to keep clean and presentable, there is little point in subjecting your little one to frequent haircuts if she finds it traumatic.

30 Months:

• Fear of the Toilet: Some children are afraid to sit on the toilet, which obviously makes toilet training well nigh impossible. This fear may arise from a number of cases – maybe the association with a severe pain when passing a particularly hard stool or fear of being sucked into the toilet when it is flushed and being washed out to see down a big pipe. Other children refuse to sit on the toilet purely out of attention-seeking, toddler stubbornness. Alternatively, your toddler may be one of the ones who contently urinates in the toilet but will only pass stools in his diaper. Doing a poop in a diaper is a very different feeling from doing one in the relatively open expanse of the potty or toilet, and the sensation of almost losing part of themselves can make a toddler very fearful. As a result, many toddlers will request a diaper when they need to poop. So here’s how to deal with it: When he asks for a diaper, put it on in the bathroom, so that he passes stools in that room. The next step is to encourage him to sit on the toilet with the diaper on. Later still, he can sit on the toilet with the diaper on but undone, and finally, sit him on the toilet with the diaper stretched over the seat.
• Clinginess: Although he will need less holding than when he was a young baby, he will often ask to be carried like he used to when he’s generally tired and cranky. He’s likely to be clingy when he feels pain or discomfort, when a tooth is coming through, or if he is feeling off colour. Your child’s second molars (the largest, most troublesome ones) will erupt around now, bringing clinginess to it’s peak.
• Night Terrors: Night terrors occur during non-REM sleep (when your child is coming out of deep sleep) and usually within two hours of falling asleep. They are different to nightmares as your child might appear to wake but won’t know where he is or who you are and may scream, shout and behave strangely. He is not properly awake and is unlikely to remember it in the morning. These episodes rarely last more than half an hour and all you can do is be there as a reassuring presence until he falls back to sleep. Night terrors won’t harm your toddler, although it is important to prevent him injuring himself if he is flailing or running around, but if they are happening frequently, or your child seems under stress, see your doctor. Your child is more likely to experience night terrors if you had them as a child or if you had a partial-arousal sleep disorder such as sleepwalking (West 2010).
• Night Playing: Some toddlers awake in the night and appear happy, alert and ready to play. If this describes your toddler it may be that your child is no longer tired because he is getting sufficient sleep at other times. You can tweek his daytime naps to address this. Also keep your toddler’s access to rewarding and stimulating nighttime activities to an absolute minimum; put toys and books away in boxes, on high shelves out of sight. When he wakes at 3am, your child will be less inclined to think it’s playtime.
• Biting: Perhaps unsurprisingly, biting is most common just after the child’s second birthday. Children at this age can’t express their feelings in words, so their frustration or desire to dominate comes out in primitive ways, like biting. Also, it takes small children some time to realise that other children feel the same way as they do and that they too can be hurt. Most parents of biters worry a lot, imagining that their sweet child may grow up to be a cruel adult. But biting is usually temporary behaviour that even the gentlest of children engage in. It usually stops by the third birthday or a little after. By that time, the child has learned to use words to express his desires or vent his frustrations.
• Whining: Young mammals of many species whine for attention and nurturance (think of puppies). So whining is natural and universal, but it’s still annoying. The wheedling, nagging ever-increasing high-pitched tone is unmistakable and such behaviour can easily become habitual. Your child wants to do more and more for himself, but he becomes easily frustrated and often decides – rightly so – that you can help him out. Make sure you don’t use a whining voice when asking your child to do things. Many parents are unaware that they nag their children in a whining voice and so you need to lead by example. You may have already realised that many children whine at only one parent. A firm, unemotional, “use your words, I don’t listen to wining” is sometimes a useful response. Otherwise, distraction is often the answer, so think about learning to tap dance.
• Stuttering: Almost every young child goes through a period when talking is an effort and the words sometimes don’t come out right; he may repeat words or hesitate then rush ahead too fast. This is part of normal speech development. Why is stuttering so common between two and three? This is the age when your child works very hard at talking. When he was younger, he used short sentences that he didn’t need to think about: “See the car”. “Want to go out”. When he gets past two, he tries to make up longer sentences to express new ideas. He may start a sentence three or four times, only to break off in the middle because he can’t find the right words. Telling your child to ‘slow down’ or asking him to repeat himself often just increases his self-consciousness, making the stuttering worse. Instead, try to respond to what your child is saying rather than how he says it. Train yourself to speak in a relaxed, unpressured way and help others in the family to do the same. Seek medical advice if the stuttering hasn’t shown signs of improving after four to six months.
• Hyperactivity: Many parents worry that their toddler may be showing early signs of ADHD, however fear not. Toddlers are highly curious and adventurous by nature. Being into everything is their way of exploring the world. They want to know what happens when they swing from the curtain, or open the washing-machine door. It is normal for toddlers to be active all day, especially if they have recently abandoned their daytime nap (See, “Timeline of Baby and Toddler Sleep”).
• Refusal to get dressed: For your toddler, the process of getting dressed can feel very restrictive. They are being forced to stand still and then have their body manipulated into clothing. In addition, they may feel unhappy with what they are being made to wear, all of which goes against your toddler’s desire for greater independence and can lead to anger and frustration on their part and yours.
• Dislike of Car Seat: A car really is like a prison to your toddler. Not only are they stuck in a confined space – they are also strapped into a seat with very little room for manoeuvre. This doesn’t sit well with a newly independent toddler, who may start protesting at the very prospect of going in their car seat, getting things off to a stressful start before the journey has even begun.
• Curiosity About Genitals: While your toddler is becoming toilet trained, they will naturally become more aware of their genitals. Toddlers notice very quickly that boys and girls are different, and they often like to undress to show each other their bodies, to watch each other go potty and to play together in the bath. Penises, being more conspicuous than vaginas, are particularly fascinating. Boys often like to look at or touch each other’s penises, and girls may be intrigued by them too. At this age, the interest shown in other children’s bodies is mostly due to simple curiosity reinforced by a fascination with toilet functions, and this exploratory play is usually full of laughter.

Three Years:

• Favouritism Towards One Parent: Sometimes a child around this age can get along with either parent alone, but when the other one comes on the scene she flies into a rage. It may be partly jealousy, but at an age  when she’s sensitive about being bossed around and trying to do a little bossing herself, she may just feel outnumbered when she has to take on two important people at once.
• Food Jag: Around this age you may find that your child gets stuck on one particular food and wants to eat it at every meal. For example, he may go for a week eating only yogurt and fruit, then suddenly go right off yogurt and start eating nothing but cheese and mashed potato. This is called a “food jag” and if you go along with it, your child will probably quickly get bored. As long as the food is nutritious and the jag doesn’t last too long, there’s nothing to worry about.
• After-Dinner High Jinks: It is rather irksome to hear the cry of “Hungry! More food!” ten minutes after you’ve scraped a large plate of shepherd’s pie into the food bin and finished washing up 27 pans. It’s nigh on impossible to stop the words, “Well, you should have eaten your dinner then!” tripping off your bitter and twister tongue, as though you have morphed into your own mother. This is an inevitable part of living with a fussy preschooler. You can keep dinner to one side, covered with clingfilm or a plate cover. You can then answer their cries of hunger with, “well, aren’t you lucky? I’ve kept your dinner for you!” and present them with their previously spurned meal (Nicholls 2009).
• Prolonging Bedtime Routine: This is your preschooler’s reincarnated version of “Inappropriate Sleep Associations” from when she was 7 months old. She may develop rituals associated with bedtime. These are fine in themselves – but they can develop a momentum of their own almost without you realising it. What starts as a reasonable request to give teddy a kiss goodnight can gradually extend to demands for you to kiss every single soft toy on the toy shelves. To combat these delaying tactics, offer choices in the bedtime routine; so when you do need to set limits when leaving the doom, your child will feel like she’s had some control. Ask her which pyjamas she’d like to wear, allow her to pick out which story she’d like, and be sure to ask whether she’d like one more sip of water or whether she needs to use the toilet. You can end with something like, “How many kisses would you like before bed- three or four?” (not twenty-five).
• Renewed Separation Anxiety: Even at this age, your child will still have fears about loosing you. When she was younger, she worried about loosing sight of you; now, she is fearful that you will not come back. This renewed separation anxiety is perpetuated when your child is taking leaps forward in her development or handling a major transition. For children who have not attended any type of day care prior to preschool, separation from parents can be truly anxiety provoking. “Some children – about one in seven – have brains that are biologically programmed to respond to changes with anxiety” (Spock 2004). A good way to reassure your child is to go step by step through what is going to happen when you leave her.
• Night-Time Fears: Fears of the dark, or of bedtime, can develop in your child around now, even if they have previously been happy about both. Perhaps your child has seen a vivid TV program, or read a book that has sparked off her imagination. These fears can be very real to a child at nighttime, even though during the day she can probably convince herself that she has nothing to worry about. Nighttime fears can often be ‘cured’ by helping your child to gain control over them. If she’s frightened about monsters, for example, read some funny stories that will ‘demystify’ them.
• Fear of Animals: All children no matter how carefully they are brought up, are frightened by something (Spock 2004); this is a normal element of the developmental process. It’s not hard to understand why. Fears occur when your child’s understanding of an object or even is too poorly developed. Fear of animals is particularly common. It may begin around 2 years old, and reach a peak at age 3 (Green 2006).
• Pretend Friends: Your child has a vivid imagination. By this age, her imagination has become so intense that sometimes there is a blur between real and pretend. This is the peak age for pretend friends – a sign of a normal, healthy imagination. 65 percent of preschoolers befriend imaginary companions, and nearly one-third continue to play with them through to age 7 (Margo 2010). Eldest and only children are most likely to have imaginary friends. Typically, girls choose younger imaginary friends and boys choose older macho friends (Margo 2010). Interestingly, imaginary friends fill three primary roles: companion, confidante, and often, scapegoat.
• Leaving Food: Until the age of four or five your child will prefer to eat frequently throughout the day. Her stomach still can’t cope with three adult-sized meals a day, so she is not ready to adopt an adult eating pattern. She may want to eat between 3 and 14 times a day, but the typical range is five to seven times (Stoppard 2008).
• Anxiety Regarding Sex Differences: Children get mixed up and anxious about the natural differences between boys and girls. If a boy around the age of three sees a girl undressed, it may strike him as odd that she doesn’t have a penis as he does. He’s apt to say, “Where is her wee-wee?” If he doesn’t receive a satisfactory answer right away, he may jump to the conclusion that some accident has happened to her. Next comes the anxious thought, “That might happen to me too”. The same misunderstanding may worry the little girl when she realizes that boys are made differently. First she asks, “What’s that?”Then she anxiously wants to know, “Why don’t I have one? What happened to it?” That’s the way a three-year-old’s mind works. Children may be so upset that they’re afraid to question their parents.
• Repeatedly Asking Why: From the age of three, or sometimes earlier, most children ask “Why” a lot. In time, your child will understand that “Why” tacked onto a word or sentence doesn’t always make sense. Answer questions like “Why is hot?” but ignore “Why door?” unless you can figure out what she means.
• Lack of Tactfulness: Young children are admirable for their honesty, but unfortunately, being honest isn’t always socially acceptable. Your child can cause you considerable embarrassment through her complete lack of inhibition and self-restraint; for instance, by loudly making observations that would be far better left unsaid. She may think nothing of saying, “You’re fat” or “Your hair is funny”. Your child is not being deliberately rude at this age, she is simply being inquisitive and trying to make sense of her world, as well as demonstrating her powers of observation. Don’t respond by embarrassing your toddler. Loudly telling her, in front of everyone, that what she has done is rude or impolite will give your toddler a mixed message  - if you care so much about the feelings of other people, why don’t you care about hers?
• Swearing: The average age for a child to begin swearing is three years old (Jay 2013). Children of this age who use bad language may be parroting something they’ve heard, picking up on the strength of the adult vehemence behind it rather than having any understanding of what they’re saying. Children learn so much by copying that if they see someone (it may not even be their parent) hurt their finger and say “Shit”, they think that when you hurt yourself you’re supposed to say “Shit”. Ages 3 and 4 are rife for this behaviour, as your child is expanding their vocabulary quickly.

Four Years Old:

• Bed-Wetting: Most 3-5 year olds wet the bed; one in four still do aged 4-6 years, but half of these will have stopped by 6-8 years (Einon 2004).
• Negativism: Stubbornness, selfishness, and disobedience are all characteristics of negativism. To some extent, all precshoolers are negativistic. They seem to delight in doing the opposite of what is asked. However, it’s not all bad; public tantrums become very rare between the ages of 4 and 6 as children develop social awareness, so would usually be too embarrassed to start shouting in public.
• Nightmares: 39% of four year olds have nightmares at least once every two weeks (Green 2006).
• Argumentative: During the fourth year, your child will become argumentative, and may be selfish, rough or impatient, especially with younger children or brothers and sisters (Stoppard 2008).
• Sibling Rivalry: At this age, relationships with siblings can be turbulent. Your child is old enough to be a nuisance to older siblings and can be selfish, rough and impatient with younger siblings. Quarrels and physical fights over toys are common and there will be complaints about fairness (To find out how different age gaps effect sibling rivalry, read: ‘What No One Tells You About Child Spacing’).
• Lying: Your child has now reached the stage in his psychological development where he can distinguish fantasy from reality. Consequently, he is now capable of ‘telling lies’. Most children will lie if they find a situation sufficiently threatening. There are four types of lying. Exploratory Lying is done simply to see your response. For example, telling you that he didn’t like his dinner even though he ate it all. Bragging is another type of lying. It usually takes the form of a greatly exaggerated story and is done to boost the child’s self-confidence. For instance, saying that he has received many expensive birthday presents or that he lives in a huge house. Make-Believe Lies mix reality and fantasy and they serve to add excitement to everyday experiences. For example, your child may have a vivid imaginary world consisting or fairies and invisible friends. Finally, Cover-Up Lies aim to deliberately mislead. Children tell cover-up lies to avoid being punished. “Children whose parents use moral principles to explain to their children why lying is wrong effectively reduce the frequency of lying” (Stoppard 2008).
• Sexual Exploration: Adults tend to classify some aspects of normal development (such as games of “show”) as prurient. They are quite normal stages of development, and it is only adult interference that leads to exaggerations of sexual play.
• Stealing: At this age your child may be so attracted to an object – a toy, coins left on the table, or candy – that he takes it when he hopes no one is looking. Sometimes he will do it in such a way that his theft will be discovered. Neither is a sign of a deep-rooted problem. Rather it is the normal result of overwhelming desire unchecked by social inhibitions. Although he seems to have grasped the idea of “mine” and “yours”, what he really sees is that something is currently in someone’s possession. He thinks that, by taking it, it becomes his. Don’t punish the act, but don’t ignore it. Tell your child clearly and calmly that it is unacceptable and insist that the object be returned.
• Tantrums: They still occur at this age. However, by age four or five, most children are down to the rare tantrum, maybe one or two a week (Spock 2004).
• Potty Talk: Around this age, your child may go through a phase of revelling in bathroom words. They cheerfully insult each other with expressions like, “You great big poop” and “I’ll flush you down the toilet” and think they are very witty and bold. They may also announce to an entire restaurant that they need a poo, and then talk loudly about it afterwards. This is normal development, and it usually passes quickly.

Five Years Old:

• Nail Biting: Sometimes nail-biting is a sign of tenseness, sometimes it’s just a habit that means nothing in particular. Nail-biting is more common in highly-strung children who are inclined to worry a lot and it runs in families (Spock 2004). Your school-aged child will soon be motivated to stop nail-biting when they sense disapproval from peers or want nicer-looking nails.
• Fear of the Dark: A child’s fear of the dark usually peaks around now, then disappears by the child’s seventh birthday (Green 2006).
• Other Fears: By this age, your child will probably have more concrete, down-to-earn fears, like bodily harm, falling, thunder, lightening, storms (especially at night) and that her mother will not return home or be home when she gets there.

The act of wet nursing is as old as time itself. Yet surprisingly La Leache League are against it. They cite infection risk, miss-matched milk composition and psychological maladjustment as justification for their stance (LLL 2010). On the other hand, Unicef (2009) and the National Childbirth Trust (2011) fully support wet nursing.

If pro-breastfeeding organisations can’t agree on whether wet nursing is acceptable, it is hardly surprising that society is torn on the topic. It seems that feeding another woman’s baby is the last parenting taboo. This week’s triumphant mom hadn’t planned on wet nursing, until her niece decided to take matters into her own hands...


“Here in the US, although breastfeeding knowledge is taking the new moms by storm, it seems people who had kids 20+ years ago are still in the dark. When I had my daughter, I lived with my aunt, uncle, and cousin. Breastfeeding was something I had failed at with my son, so I was determined to nurse my daughter. If I could get over 1 month, I'd be happy.

Formula pushing

Even before I left the hospital, I was told I had to supplement her with formula. I must have waited too long to feed Kye, and every time I put her to my breast it only frustrated her, which frustrated me even more. It felt like she didn’t know how to suckle. With a screaming baby, I pushed the call nurse button. Since I was determined to continue feeding her the way God intended, I opted for a syringe to administer the supplements. However I didn't know that when supplementing, that there's a limit to how much you're supposed to allow your baby to have - I simply got her belly full enough for us to rest. Come next meal time, I successfully nursed her then supplemented. This scenario happened a few times in the early months, but we never became dependent on formula.

Early introduction of solids

As I learned more, I became purposed in my heart to allow my little girl to self-wean. My family intervened and gave her apple juice and baby food at 4 months– without asking me. My daughter wasn't starving. She hadn't lost weight. Kye just wasn't chubby like my aunt and uncle remembered their babies being. Just because they gave their boys food at 3 months and “they were just fine”. Every time I opposed them, I was met with the antagonizing "why?!" not the "Oh, I've never heard of that. Can you tell me more about it? Do you really believe that's best? Ok, you're her mom."

Of course, once she had tasted food, I couldn't go back - so I fed her purees until she wouldn't eat them anymore. At this point, I started with the Baby Led Weaning I'd heard so much about - giving big, soft, easy to chew and swallow chunks of food to her. She was 7 months old. It worked fabulously!

'Clingy' baby

By this point my daughter was what you could describe as ‘very clingy’ (after all, she was breastfed AND she hardly saw others) plus very stranger aware. So, even people at church were coming down on me about how "often" I held her. They also commented that she'd never be independent. Nursing on demand, for comfort as well as nutrition, to get her to sleep, and after she woke up meant I held her a lot - especially since she could often take an hour or two to nurse.

In the past I had transferred my son from my bed to his crib starting when he turned one. At first, I had planned on doing this with my daughter. Yet the more I learned, the more my mind changed. She can leave my bed/room when she wants.

Pressure to wean

When my aunt began asking me when I wanted to wean her from my breast, I replied, "When she wants to." Her reply: "But she'll never want to." My family has a history of not wanting to listen to me when I diverge from their thoughts on what is best/right, so why open my mouth and invite scepticism and comments on top of what I was already dealing with? I didn't have the scientific proof in front of me. I couldn't have convinced her without showing her things on my computer. Every time the topic of weaning my daughter came up (by the end, it didn't even have to be MY daughter being talked about!), I was ridiculed in some way for wanting to nurse Kye past a year. My aunt pressured me for an age limit. Off the top of my head, I said 5. I then changed it to three when the entire family was in the kitchen and it was brought up. When my aunt finally researched extended bfing, she started saying I could be thrown in jail for nursing her in public after the age of two.

It felt like I was constantly under attack. Not once did any of them ask me in a way that showed they truly wanted to know my reasoning. If I held her too much, not enough, nursed her too long or too often, didn't give her enough solids, didn't give her the right kind of solids, gave a truthful answer to a breastfeeding or cosleeping question (such as when I planned to stop), I got blasted with opinions. Not facts. Not studies. Just opinions. Ignorant ones at that. (I don't mean this as an insult; they are truly not informed about any of the benefits.)

A chance to escape

One day, my bestie (who happens to be my sister's ex) called me up and asked me if I could move in with him, his roommate (who left with no notice just before I got here), and my 2 year old niece. I started planning right away. I got a car (an itty-bitty car - about twice the size of a Mini Coop), and had barely (!) learned how to drive it before making the trip halfway across the country to become my niece's acting mom. My 9 month old daughter didn't exactly appreciate the lack of closeness or the near constant feeling of the carseat. We were on limited time. Mountains. Snow. Semis! The wind tried more than once to take control of my car or sweep us off the road or into another car! I was white-knuckled the entire time. I stopped often to nurse her (these sessions could still last up to an hour and a half) and tried to make it as easy as possible for us both.

We finally arrived while my bestie was at work and his dad was babysitting my niece. Seeing my niece for the first time in months was great! The girls started getting acquainted. I nursed Kye to sleep that night. My best friend and I had a nice reunion the next morning.

"Can I nurse too?"

My niece, Ivry, when she saw how I fed Kye, started wanting to nurse as well. Keep in mind, she was only breastfed a short while before her mom switched to formula. Since she showed interest, even after being told no three times, I called her mom, who lives in Virginia. She said she had no problem with it. Once that was done, I asked her dad (my best friend & roommate). "You sure her mom doesn't care?" he asked. Once he was assured, I had the green light.

At first, Ivry would pretend to nurse. She didn't know how to latch or that in order to get milk, she'd have to suckle. It took months of me being a pillow and toy before she ever got the hang of it! Then one night, she did, and got a real good taste of "bobo milk." She loved it!

I wish I could say she consistently remembered how it worked after that, but sometimes she went right back to her pillow and toy version of getting bobo. However, when she nursed properly, she was almost a natural. I had to teach her that gentleness was key - Ivry has a tendency to be rough.

Tandem wet nursing

Once Kye learned to share her bobos, things got along pretty smoothly. The girls nursed together (in fact, the only time Ivry was nice to Kye for months after we moved in was after a nursing session), laughed and giggled during their bobo time, and gave each other nice touches (pats on heads, arms, shoulders, backs, legs).

Nursing isn't just about bonding between mom and baby. The girls have bonded much quicker due to nursing together from the same source. And my bond with my niece has solidified faster since my return into her life because of it.

Instead of nursing every day, now, Ivry just nurses when the mood strikes her and I'm up for it as well. Mostly, it's at the same time Kye's nursing to sleep before bed, so there are many times I tell her not tonight. It doesn't stop her from asking the next time.

Her dad still thinks it's strange, and I was also uncomfortable with the newness of the situation at first. But now I'm so glad we embarked on this journey. Ivry's no less independent for the bobo feedings she gets. She's still rough and tumble; a girlish tomboy. Her development hasn't been hindered or slowed or thwarted in any way.

All three of us girls have a bond that, otherwise, would have been impossible. If it weren’t for nursing, Kye and Ivry might still be fighting like cats and dogs. Ivry may still think of me as someone who can only be trusted because she has to be while Daddy's not home. Instead, the cousins act like sisters and Ivry has allowed me into her inner heart.

No one outside of our mismatched family knows what I'm doing, and I bet Ivry's mom (one of my many sisters) has forgotten about it. However, that makes it all the more special to me - it's a secret of sorts that only the people in our house share.”


Get your own Bingo Card here.

Email me with your story.

It’s a sad day when you reach Part Three in a series exposing the popular preoccupation with berating breastfeeding. Yet instinct and experience tell me this won’t stop at a trilogy.

If the previous instalments (Part One and Part Two) made you reach the end of your tether, you’ll need to find a lot more tether for this one. Much of the ‘advice’ in the following books smells like the diaper of a formula fed baby. It is parent-centric and resentful of babies. It teaches parents how to ‘train’ their babies to become acceptable, or at least, less of an inconvenience. Hold your breath, we're going in.


Baby and Child: Your Questions Answered.
Carol Cooper


We’ll start the ball rolling with a tame beast; but a beast nonetheless. This book’s greatest sin lies in its misinformation. Rather than having obvious in-your-face contempt for breastfeeding, the book undermines more subtly by force-feeding the reader with incorrect advice. Much of this advice has the potential to completely sabotage a mother’s breastfeeding efforts. The book commences with the chapter: “Feeding Your New baby”. It begins:

“In general, breastfeeding is better, but, as it’s your baby, you must decide which you want to do. Before you commit yourself, there are many points to consider” (page 32).

Tentative start.

Then we are presented with a basic table detailing the advantages of breast and formula feeding. The usual textbook points are made for breastfeeding - antibodies, cheapness, nicer smelling poops, all the usual jazz. However it’s the list of advantages to formula feeding that has me cropping my eyebrow like James Bond. Check these out! Under “Your’s Baby’s Health”, the list of advantages to formula are listed as:

“Your baby’s supply of milk is not affected by your physical health, nutrition or anxieties”.
(Yet neither is breast milk, for the most part).

“She is less likely to be underfed”.
(Codswallop. A formula feeding mother can easily under-feed her baby when she does not measure the powder properly – for instance, she may add too much water or too little powder).

Image from page 44.

“Whilst breast milk is superior in many ways, formula milk is higher in iron and vitamin K”.
(This is based on the assumption that the more of a vitamin a product contains, the more nutritious it must be; however in fact, breast milk has a perfect blend of vitamins at an ideal concentration for human babies).

“If you are vegetarian, your baby might be less likely to develop a vitamin B12 deficiency”.
(A vegetarian or vegan mother does not need to take any special dietary precautions; she simply needs to follow the same diet as any other new mother).

Okay, that's the apparent advantages of formula to baby's health. Now the advantages for mom's health:

“It does not expose your breasts in public places”
(What does this have to do with ‘health?’)

“Milk will not leak from your breasts and stain your clothes”
(Again, what does this have to do with ‘health’??)

“Your nipples will not become sore or cracked”
(Neither do those of most breastfeeding mothers!)

That's it for mom. Then the book presents a FAQ-style section which basically reads as a catalogue of bitch slaps to breastfeeding. Notable examples include:

“Q: If I have large breasts, could my baby suffocate?

A: It’s possible for large breasts to block your baby’s nostrils, making it difficult for her to feed and breathe at the same time. You can press the breast down just above the areola to give her nostrils more space” (page 33)

This is great advice ...if you want blocked ducts and mastitis.

“Q: If I breastfeed my baby, will my breasts sag later?

A: Breastfeeding may have some effect” (page 33).

(I call a big steaming pile of formula-fed-baby’s crap on this one!)

Image from page 188.

“Q: Can I exercise when breastfeeding?

A: Very vigorous exercise is not recommended; It is said to increase the lactic acid content of the breast milk” (page 39).

(A mother would need to exercise to maximum 100% intensity for her breastmilk to contain a measurable quantity of lactic acid. Besides, there are no known harmful effects to a baby exposed to lactic acid. Next!)

“Q: Is it a good idea to give a bottle of formula as well as breast milk?

A: It can be a good idea to offer a bottle in the early evening when breast milk supply is likely to be low” (page 41).

(It’s true that breast milk supply tends to be lower in the evening – for this very reason your breasts need all the stimulation they can get. Giving your baby a bottle will deter him from suckling at the breast, thus reducing your supply further. It’s exactly like giving your baby a McFlurry then wondering why they won’t eat the fruit bag. In fact, from a nutritional viewpoint it's exactly like that).

“Q: I feel guilty about bottlefeeding.

A: Formula milk is almost as good nutritionally as breast milk” (page 45).

(Yes and Jimmy Savile is almost as child-friendly as Mr Tumble. What? Too soon?)

“Q: Should I start using a pacifier to comfort my baby?

A: Pacifiers are more useful before the age of six weeks”.

(You read that correctly – encouraging pacifier use without mentioning the risks to breastfeeding – tut tut, slapped legs all round). Can we move onto something a little more hardcore now? Gurgle.com step up!


Feeding: Solved, from Breastfeeding to First Foods. 
Gurgle.com

Woah, this book mentions breastfeeding on the cover. It must be an authority on the subject! Before we look at the contents, let me introduce the author. Gurgle.com is a British pregnancy and parenting website owned by high-street parenting store Mothercare (Mothercare is not Code-compliant by the way). Gurgle.com hosts regular online webchats with parenting ‘experts’ and celebrities. Recent webchats have included:  Tess Daly (who advocates that breastfeeding mothers use bottles at night), midwife Vicki Scott (who works for bottle manufacturer Philips Avent), Myleene Klass (who coined the phrase ‘Breastapo’), and professional beacon of breastfeeding knowledge, Dr Miriam Stoppard (who has said that babies with teeth should stop breastfeeding). This list reads like the lineup at a comedy sketch; however this is childcare advice we’re talking about; and it’s targeted at vulnerable new mothers.

The book begins with a chapter titled “Breastfeeding: the lowdown” (or should that be ‘letdown’? ho ho). The contents of this chapter are a vague as the title. First we are given the standard, ‘there-there’, pat on the back to formula feeders:

“Don’t torment yourself with guilt about it, as your baby will still receive all the nutritional benefit he needs from formula milk” (page 10).

Oh really? So why are formula fed babies at an increased risk of cot death, diabetes, ear infections, allergy, etc? If they were on an even nutritional keel with breastfed babies, they wouldn’t have these disadvantages no? Also consider who the target audience for this book is – mothers to be. The message they get from this simple sentence is: if formula fed babies receive all the nutritional benefit they need, why bother breastfeeding? What a great start to the book.

Image from page 22.

Later we are told why babies are fussy:

“Your baby may become frustrated because he is not receiving the milk he needs to fill up his tummy” (page 20).

Babies have tiny tummies, about the size of their fist, so they need to feed frequently around the clock. The ‘frustration’ the book speaks of may actually be baby’s cue to feed again, as he has processed the milk in his tiny tummy. Yet the book frames it as ‘baby not receiving the milk he needs’. This exploits the common fear amongst new mothers, that their breastmilk is insufficient; a fear promulgated by a bottle feeding culture which prioritises measurement of intake. The fact however, is that most of babies' frustration has nothing to do with hunger. Wanting to feed is not the main reason babies cry (Spock 2004). Discomfort, boredom, and the massive shock to their sensory system that is NEW LIFE ITSELF – are more likely causes. Everything is new to babies: imagine landing on a planet where nothing, not even air or shapes or colours, is like anything you’ve experienced before. Imagine you’ve never felt anything on your skin or digested food – you'd cry too! Especially at the end of the day. Babies cry. This is a fact of life.

Speaking of facts, you won’t find many amongst the pages of this book. Nuggets of fiction dressed as fact include:

“When your breasts feel emptier, it’s time to change breasts” (page 23).

Page 51.

Given the bottle-centric origins of this book, this sentence is hardly surprising. However breasts are not bottles; they do not get ‘empty’. Even when a woman’s breasts ‘feel empty’ - they are not. It is the baby who should decide when to switch breasts, by latching off and being disinterested. Furthermore, at around 6 weeks a woman’s breasts will naturally start to feel emptier relative to the fullness hereto experienced. This is normal. Her body has regulated to meet her baby’s demand. However if the woman in question were to read this book, she would get the impression that her breasts were ‘empty’ and she would panic. This ignorance is what leads many women to quit breastfeeding around the 6 week mark.

Another area of breastfeeding that is commonly shrouded in ignorance is the dilemma of which breast to feed from first. The book answers this conundrum:

“Start feeding your baby from the breast you last fed on; This means each breast will receive the right amount of stimulation to ensure good milk supply” (page 23).

Page 101.

This technique is called “block feeding” and is only recommended for women with over-supply. Block feeding slows milk production, and if adopted by women of average milk supply (that’ll be most women then), it can seriously reduce their production. So this book is actively sabotaging mothers, and it even cites “enhancing good milk supply” to justify its advice. Bitch please!

Another of the book’s strategies of sabotage is to frame breastfeeding as shameful, particularly when done in public. It recommends that:

“A shawl or big scarf can help protect your modesty if you are planning on feeding in public” (page 23).

The assumption is that nursing mothers must hide. No other approach is suggested. More assumptions are made on the topic of introducing bottles:

“Introducing your baby to a bottle, if you are breastfeeding, is actually a good idea” (page 32).

Again, the issue here is what is left unsaid. The book fails to mention the potentially detrimental risk of nipple confusion and reduced supply.

Speaking of reducing supply, if you want a free ticket to breastfeeding failure, why not force your baby to adopt a feeding routine:

“Babies love routines and they’re good for parents too” (page 72).

At this point you may be thinking that introducing a routine to a 6 month old breastfed baby would be fine, as by that point breastfeeding has been established, milk supply has regulated, solids are being introduced, and baby might even be sleeping through the night. Well you’d be right. A routine at 6 months isn’t necessarily going to spell curtains for your breastfeeding relationship, but this book advocates adopting a routine much sooner than that:

“Here is a routine suitable from three weeks” (page 72).

*Three weeks*! You heard me soldier. Your little squaddy has only been out of the womb for 3 weeks, but God Dammit he better fall inline. Take a gander at your instructions:


Gina Ford would be proud.

However needing to get your baby on a strict schedule from the get go is nothing more than a pavlovian myth, and doing so may be dangerous, because her body is not developmentally ready to wait several hours between feeds or sleep periods. It helps to clarify the issue if you think about the learning process that your baby has to go through. In the womb, she was fed more or less constantly; once born she has to learn to accept that there will be times when she feels full, and times when she is empty. This is a big, scary change for her.

If you’ve followed the book’s advice so far, your life probably looks something like this: You see your baby's every whimper as a signal of your dwindling milk supply; you feel your breasts and they feel 'empty'; you block feed and wonder why your baby’s diaper output is going down; you hide under an burqa in public; you introduce a bottle because for some arbitrary reason it's "a good idea"; and finally you shoehorn your baby into a scheduled routine. After all this, you’re left wondering what’s the point, as “your baby will still receive all the nutritional benefit he needs from formula milk”. You’re hanging on by a thread; so you turn the page and begin the chapter on bottle feeding, where you find the final shunt:

Page 55.

“Formula milk has been rigorously designed to ensure that it supplies the best possible combination of vitamins and other nutrients” (page 50).

Yup. You read it correctly. “The best possible combination of vitamins and other nutrients”. The *best*. I admit, in all my years of academic research, this is a new one to me. As breastfeeding is the normal way to feed your baby, this book is actually elevating formula above breastfeeding, accompanied by a lovely photo of a formula feeding mother kissing her baby on the forehead whilst she administers the breastmilk substitute. The book even has the cheek to advise mothers to:

“Ask your health visitor or GP for advice as they probably have a favourite brand that they can recommend” (page 54).

Oh I bet they do; considering how relentlessly formula companies market to health professionals; and this marketing is completely unregulated, even less so than other print media (see here). So directing formula feeding mothers to ask their health professional for their favourite brand is likely to subject them to yet more marketing, rather than an accurate medical analysis of the different formulas available.

Image from page 61.

The next chapter in the book looks at “Common Feeding Problems”. I was pleasantly surprised to see tongue tie being given it’s very own section with three entire pages devoted to the condition. However my pleasant-surprise turned into WTF-surprise, and then to fuck-this-surprise, when I read the closing paragraph:

“Babies rarely need treatment for tongue tie as they tend to adapt” (page 99).

This basically feeds into the misconception held my many misinformed health professionals, that releasing a tongue-tie is medically unnecessary, thus denying mothers and babies of the treatment that could save their breastfeeding relationship.

Another medical inaccuracy that sabotages mothers is the belief that lactose intolerance is incompatible with breastfeeding. On page 163 the book orders that:

“Babies with lactose intolerance will need to be taken off breast or formula milk straight away and given a special low-lactose formula that is only available on prescription from a doctor”.

What the book fails to mention is that there are in fact, two different kinds of lactose intolerance: primary lactose intolerance and secondary lactose intolerance. The first kind is extremely rare and requires cessation of breast or formula feeding. The second kind is the most common and does not require that a mother stop breastfeeding (she will however have to stop using standard formula if she is bottle feeding). Why does the book focus on the rarest kind which requires mothers to quit breastfeeding yet neglects to mention the kind which enables the mother to continue breastfeeding? After all, the most likely scenario is that if a baby is lactose intolerant, it has the most common form of the condition which is fully compatible with continued breastfeeding. The plot thickens...

After rolling my eyes out of their sockets I turn to the next chapter, which is titled, “Starting Solids”. In this chapter we see Miriam Stoppard’s influence wafting around each page like a fart trapped in a conference room. Basically the chapter coaches mothers on how to mis-read their baby’s signals. Growth spurts are not acknowledged; instead they are used as ‘evidence’ that breast milk alone is not satisfying the baby and so they need solid food:

“There are a few simple indicators that your baby might be ready for solids. For example, if she doesn’t appear satisfied by her milk feeds, perhaps waking in the night when she didn’t used to, this can indicate that she is ready to move on” (page 104).

Page 125.

Suggesting that milk alone does not satisfy babies prays on a weak point in the mechanics of breastfeeding – the fact that you cannot gauge how much your baby is consuming. This isn’t normally a problem in those parts of the world where there are no scales and no doctors; the mother simply assumes the baby is receiving plenty if the child acts contented and looks well and this works well in the vast majority of cases. However we live in a society fixated on measurement and quantifiable results. Combine this with society’s fetish for chubby babies and it becomes clear why premature introduction of solids is so common.

According to the book, another sign that your baby wants their immature guts violated is:

“Your baby will probably give you signs that she is ready for solids; for example, a loss of interest in or complete refusal to breastfeed” (page 107).

In reality, refusing the breast for a prolonged period (known as a ‘nursing strike’) is more commonly caused by teething discomfort, and introducing solids is likely to aggravate the baby’s condition further.

Yet it seems this book will say anything to reduce babies' access to the breast. Take for example, the section titled, “Why does my baby wake in the night?” It maintains that:

“Many babies find it hard to settle themselves back to sleep and get into the habit of nodding off while having that last breastfeed at night” (page 144).

There is no mention of formula-fed babies falling asleep while having their last feed of the night. In fact, falling asleep after a formula feed has the added negative of bottle rot, which is a syndrome characterized by severe decay of the baby’s teeth (if you’ve got a tough stomach, Google ‘baby bottle teeth’). But of course, this is not mentioned in the book, because we’re only bashing breastfeeding here, silly!

A final fist in the face of breastfeeding, occurs in the last chapter, “Helping your child avoid weight problems”. The text asserts that:

“Avoid grazing if you are breastfeeding. Grazing is when a baby feeds at frequent intervals rather than at set times. A baby who grazes could become a toddler or child who comfort eats” (page 201).

Has this book ever heard of growth spurts?? Cluster feeding, or ‘grazing’ as the book calls it, is an essential survival mechanism. It is designed to stimulate the mother’s breasts to produce more milk. ‘Grazing’ usually occurs at night, which makes it particularly irritating to parent-centric mommies and daddies. Fortunately for them, a wide range of ‘Sleep Training’ books are available to put a stop to the all-night milk buffet. Oh, here comes one of them now!


Sweet Dreams 
Arna Skula 2012

The title, ‘Sweet Dreams’ suggests tenderness and contentment. However, there’s certainly nothing sweet about this book, particularly its attitude towards babies (aka irritating, inconvenient little tyrants!)

The back cover lists all the highly coveted accomplishments the book promises:

“Correct your baby’s sleep timings and rhythms”
(i.e. babies’ are to be ‘corrected’),

“Teach your baby to fall asleep alone, day and night”
(i.e. teach them that no one gives a fuck about their needs),

“Use the specially designed charts to see what’s normal at any age”
(i.e. babies are robots who can all be programmed to adhere to an arbitrary norm).

But where does breastfeeding come into this? Although the book focuses on babies’ sleep (or rather, how parents can force their babies to sleep more, sleep quietly, and sleep when it’s convenient), sleep is not an isolated part of a baby’s life – instead it is intertwined with factors like development, personality, and nutrition. The book sees nutrition as yet another factor you can manipulate. However manipulating nature, as any failed breastfeeder will tell you (whether you want to know about it about it or not), almost always ends in tears.

So how does the book go about manipulating breastfeeding? First things first, it maintains that under no circumstance should you co-sleep:

“It’s important to get your baby used to the idea of sleeping in a place that belongs to him, in his own little ‘nest’” (page 17).

Still want to co-sleep? Naughty you.

“You’ll do anything you can to sleep a little longer, even just for a few minutes. You may, therefore, choose to stay in bed to feed (particularly if you are breastfeeding), which can result in your baby spending much of the early morning on the breast and it will be very unclear to him when the day begins” (page 82).

From page 73.

So, firstly the book wants to deprive your baby of the family bed; Next up, it wants to deprive him of night feeds:

“In general, when it comes to improving or changing a child’s sleep, it helps if someone other than the primary carer (usually the mother) takes care of the child for the first few nights” (page 22).

But Daddy hasn’t got boobs. How will baby feed?

“A breastfed baby has no more need for night-time feeds than a bottlefed baby. The reason that breastfed babies wake up more often at night probably has nothing to do with nutrition, but rather with the routines and habits involved in breastfeeding. It is quite likely that it’s mothers’ own insecurity that is responsible for the higher rate of night-time feeding among breastfed babies” (page 38).

This is dangerous advice. Firstly, it is dangerous because all young babies need night feeds, regardless of feeding method; this is a survival mechanism consequential from having a tiny stomach. Secondly, it is dangerous because the hormones responsible for maintaining milk production are more susceptible to stimulation at night; lack of nocturnal stimulation breaks the milk supply chain. Thirdly, it makes me want to bitchslap the author, which is very dangerous (for her) indeed.


Later on in the book, the author makes a suggestion. Check out this tip:

“Try to skip the midnight feed every now and then and see how long your baby can stay asleep without it” (page 90).

Manipulating a baby’s nutritional needs is not an experiment. It’s not like having a snag in your stockings and waiting to see how long you can get away with it. Babies are vulnerable and wholly-dependant. When their needs are left unmet for a period of time, they freak out and are too young to comprehend that they are being ‘trained’. Furthermore, growth hormone levels are much higher during sleep. Thus, the saying, ‘he seemed to grow an inch overnight’. Growth hormones also stimulate hunger. Waking to feed frequently is the baby’s way of making sure he has enough fuel to do the growing.

Yet not content with merely skipping one feed, the book later suggests going cold turkey and giving up night feeds altogether (I can hear mastitis calling!)

Image from page 62.

“Babies are usually strong-willed and determined. If your baby is like this, stopping night feeds completely may be an easier undertaking than reducing them little by little” (page 104).

Yet if babies could voice an opinion, they would say, “Nonesense! I’m not ready to handle life on my own, not yet”. And they are right. Eventually babies do learn other ways of comforting themselves and dealing with discomfort. But for now, they are learning about trust and security while feeding at the breast.

Following on from the anti-cosleeping, anti-night-feeding instructions, the book then goes on to order distance between mother and baby:

“If your child sleeps in your room, you should sleep in the living room (or another room). Sleeping in the same room as your child means your presence can easily wake him (even if you are quiet, it is not noise but your presence that is disturbing). If your baby is still breastfeeding, try not to hold him the same way you do when breastfeeding as you put him to bed or when you take him in your arms at night. Hold him facing away from you, or against your shoulder” (page 23).

Later in the book, parents are reminded:

“Don’t make eye contact or talk to your baby. Be as reserved as possible” (page 61).

“Babies are born with the ability to fall asleep on their own, or ‘self-soothe’ as it is sometimes called” (page 73).

This is simply untrue and ignores basic biological fact. For safety’s sake, babies are born hard-wired to awaken, which means that if anything threatens their well-being (such as SIDS) they wake up more easily than adults do. Training babies to sleep too deeply, for too long, too young is not in the best interests of the baby’s development and well-being. Yet the book maintains:

“It’s realistic to expect that, at around two months of age, your baby’s night-time sleep will last about eight hours” (page 82).

Two months! Sadly, that is not a typo, this is an actual deadline, but try saying that to a young baby with an empty tummy!

At two months, most mothers understandably feel they do virtually nothing but feed the baby. Books such as this one, with their fantasy 8 hour stretches, undermine mothers’ confidence. In fact, anthropology shows that prolonged night feeding is actually the norm in most human societies outside Western cultures. Playing tricks to lesson night feeding in the early months only serves to lessen your milk supply, so that baby fails to thrive.

Picture the scene: new parents read this book; then suddenly one night, their newborn baby finds himself moved from his parents’ bed into a dark, silent room on his own (against SIDS guidelines of course). He cries from hunger (and probably fear). When a parent arrives, he cannot see them; his body is held away from them. They don’t talk to him. They won’t feed him. They won’t even look at him. He’s too scared to sleep and no one will reassure him. Does this sound like a recipe for ‘sweet’ dreams? (the title of this book). The fact is that very few newborn babies have the ability to self-soothe. There are no bad habits at this age; your baby legitimately needs your help to fall back to sleep. One of the best gifts you can give your child is to grow up feeling that bedtime is a happy, peaceful, stress-free time to look forward to every night.

The imagery of a parent reluctantly holding their baby at arms-length suggests two people at odds with each other. Indeed the book frames the topic of sleep as a battle of wills – Baby vs Parents; and the ultimate looser must be the baby, whom is shoehorned into the parents’ desired lifestyle. However being a parent isn’t about adapting your baby to suit yourself; rather, it’s about adapting yourself to suit your baby. This book has conveniently forgotten this fundamental facet of parenting, and instead wages war on babies. Take this example from page 91:

“A baby’s self-image starts to develop right from birth. Your baby perceives himself at first as part of you, his mother. Like most babies, your baby then learns to distinguish himself from you without you being aware of the process. Your baby slowly starts to perceive that he is one individual and you are another” (page 91).

So far, big wow. Nothing controversial there. But then comes this left hook:

“However it can take some time for babies who spend a lot of time with their mothers to make this distinction. If your baby goes for a long time before understanding it, he may start to act selfishly towards you, as if you are supposed to do exactly what he wants. To help your baby learn this lesson, the most important thing is to get others involved in his care” (page 91)

Then we have this gem:

“If your baby cries the whole time you are away, it won’t hurt. It’s important not to let behaviour like this faze you. It’s nothing serious and doesn’t merit any particular response” (page 93).

IN YOUR FACE Stay At Home Moms! (and dads). F-YOU attachment parenting! UP YOURS child development! – is basically what the book is saying. It’s arguing that babies are essentially little bastards that will take the piss given half the chance:

“Your baby has to realise that he isn’t in charge of everything and that the world doesn’t revolve around him” (page 126).

News Flash! Babies are innately selfish. They have to go through a prolonged period of being dependent on others to achieve the kind of emotional security that is the foundation of later independence. Babies are not ready to move on to the next stage until the needs of this stage are fulfilled. They don’t have the developmental abilities to be independent at this age. This is normal, healthy, self-protective behaviour. However this author gives normal behaviour the finger:

“It’s easier to teach a baby these things before three or four months of age. Around three or four months of age, you will start to notice your baby protesting about certain things more systematically than others. He will start to have an opinion about who puts him to bed and who does various other things for him” (page 93).

“With his burgeoning new skills, your baby now starts to grope towards an answer to the question of who is in charge in your household” (page 104).

Pages 56-57

Sadly, these views are typical of Cry It Out fans; but is baby’s crying really about defiance? Or do baby’s cries express real human needs? The CIO club insists that babies cry at night because they want their mother’s attention, not because they need it. In order for the CIO method to pass muster with caring parents it has to downgrade real needs into mere wants. However, in young babies, needs and wants are pretty much the same thing. And in older babies, wanting to be held could still be viewed as a need – an emotional need for comfort. More worryingly, medical problems can be missed because a baby is left to CIO. The bottom line is that, babies cry to communicate, not manipulate. Yet this book maintains that babies are very much manipulators, and for the large part, breastfeeding is to blame:

“She knows that only Mommy has milk and so she obviously wants her. Of course, she will just be pushing the boundaries here and needs to learn that although she might prefer one parent over the other to do a particular thing for her, that doesn’t mean that you will always be able to grant such wishes. You need to calmly stand your ground” (page 103).

The misguided resentfulness continues:

“Around four months of age, babies often start waking up more frequently and feeding more at night. At six or seven months of age, this tendency becomes even more noticeable. Those babies who wake up to feed start to explore how far they can push things or, as they might say, “How often will they allow me to feed?” or “Well, if I can feed once, could I maybe feed three times? Why not try?” (page 38).

Reading this you might begin to think of babies are manipulative little demons. How dare they seek human contact and sustenance. They’re taking the piss! Can’t we just shut them in a shoebox for the night?

However if you’ve got any compassion and an elementary knowledge of child development, you would know that the baby in question is experiencing a growth spurt (which typically occurs at 4 months then again around 6 months – the exact periods cited). Baby is not trying to manipulate you, instil control over you, or pwn you in any way. Babies of this age are governed by survival instinct. Furthermore, reducing night breastfeeds is actually counter-productive to sleep, as naturally occurring chemicals in breast milk that are linked to sleepiness, called nucleotides, reach their highest concentration at night.

Yet the book won’t quit. Two pages later, it’s still droning on:

“Babies who want to feed frequently and in small amounts tend to want to sleep frequently and in small amounts. Bringing more order to a baby’s feeding schedule will often have a positive effect on her sleeping rhythms” (page 40).

Like a Breastfeeding Vs Formula Feeding internet thread, the book is still fruitlessly labouring on this point, many pages later:

“For newborns, feeding and sleeping are connected, which is why there is a link between regular feeding times and regular sleeping times. A baby who, for example, drinks quite often but never takes very much at a time is also likely to want to sleep frequently but never for very long. If your baby is like this, you may want to lengthen the naps she takes, and it’s easiest to do so by lengthening the time between feeds” (page 77).

So the book is advising that you lengthen the period between feeds, whether your baby is ready or not. It does so again here:

“You can expect your newborn to be able to go three or four hours between feeds. Your baby will stop night-time feeds earlier if you work slowly and deliberately, to lengthen one of her periods of sleep” (page 78).

A book shouldn’t tell you when your baby needs to be fed. We eat when we’re hungry, why should we make our babies wait until it’s ‘time’ to feed? Scheduling feedings too rigidly, too young is risky. One of the most common causes of 'failure to thrive' syndrome is failure to listen to and respond to baby’s feeding cues. Yet the book cites that sleep-training should occur from birth(!), and even babies who weigh as little as 6lbs are suitable candidates! Using a Q&A format, the book introduces us to a poor, knackered factional mother who, like every new mom, is suffering from a distinct lack of Zs:

“Q: My son is a month old. I’ve been told I should breastfeed him whenever he wants, and he wants to frequently. He is almost constantly on my breast in the evenings and all the way up to 2am when he finally falls asleep” (page 80).

All sounds perfectly normal to me. A mother’s supply slightly diminishes in the evening, whilst prolactin levels increase, making evenings the ideal time for frequent nursing (biologically speaking, if not socially). So what advice does the author give to this bewildered new mother?

“A: The first thing I think you should look at is your breastfeeding routine. You said that you have been told to ‘breastfeed whenever he wants’. In fact, you should breastfeed him whenever he needs but sometimes it can be a little hard to work out when a baby needs to feed. The risk is that your baby will start to get fed every time he cries, or almost every time – and he may be crying for many reasons other than hunger. He could also start using you as a pacifier.

It isn’t ideal to have a baby constantly on the breast in the evenings as you describe. Enforce some minimum time that you will hold him – say, an hour to begin with – between feeds. With some babies breastfeeding sessions run together, so that the baby starts spending a long time drinking. If this is the case with your baby, you will have to ration the time that he is allowed to drink. 

You say he always falls asleep while breastfeeding. You need to train him to fall asleep on his own. Your baby dozes a lot in the evenings while breastfeeding, and though this is cozy now it is not ideal in the long run. Try to create at least some basic routine for breastfeeding: irregular feeding often leads to irregular sleeping! Let his father look after him in the evenings, even if your baby complains about this – the two of them will be able to work it out.

This advice may seem a little at odds with what you have been told, but hopefully it’s not too confusing” (pages 80-81).

I’m loving the last sentence. It’s almost as if the author knows she’s talking bollocks, so has to excuse herself.

Let me get one thing straight: breastfeeding is nature’s plan for comforting babies and helping them fall asleep. That's why breast milk contains a sleep-inducing protein that helps lull a baby into dreamland.

Just in case your eyes haven’t yet popped out of their sockets in a manner resembling the dude from Beetlejuice, the book continues:

“If your baby has trouble holding out until her next feed, she may find it easier if someone other than her mother tends to her in between. This is especially true for breastfed babies” (page 78).

However, as I’m sure you’re aware (you read this blog after all) when breastfeeding, it is important that the breasts get regular stimulation, particularly during the newborn period when the mother’s milk supply is being established. That’s why babies cluster feed. Another reason, as I mentioned before, is that babies’ tiny stomachs can only hold small quantities, they empty fast and need refilling frequently, whatever their feeding method, but especially when breastfed. However the book is willing to ignore this important physiological fact and seek to ‘train’ babies like they’re competing for Crufts. So what other fact about babies’ bodies is it willing to ignore?

How about babies’ sucking techniques:

“Some parents worry that if a very young baby gets a pacifier, it might promote a bad sucking style and lead to breastfeeding problems. Usually, these worries are unfounded. There are many, many examples of babies whose technique for latching on to the breast actually improves after they start to use a pacifier” (page 48).

Refusing to acknowledge the risk of nipple confusion is a common sentiment amongst health professionals. It’s therefore unsurprising that the author of this book calls herself a ‘clinical nurse specialist’. Contrary to the author’s stance, there is no reason to believe that a babies’ latch should improve after offering a pacifier, and every reason to believe that it would deteriorate. A pacifier is a silicone replica of a bottle teat. It’s understandable that the author would champion pacifiers, given the goal of this book – to get babies to be quiet and stop disturbing their parents. However the author’s advice has the unspoken side-effect of sabotaging breastfeeding. It’s worth mentioning that the photos which accompany this advice show a *newborn* baby crying, then being plugged with a pacifier. The text also refers to “very young” babies.

Image from page 48.

Later in the book, the pro-pacifier agenda is pushed again:

“If he is breastfeeding, he will start to regard your breast as a pacifier. Being seen as a pacifier is not an appealing fate over the long term” (page 85).

If you think about it, all parents - whether breast feeders or formula feeders, female or male – are pacifiers. It’s a parent’s job, particularly when their children are in babyhood, to pacify their children. This is no bad thing. Soothing and comforting an infant strengthens the bond between parent and child. So even if a nursing mother were used as a pacifier by her baby, this is a positive process of attachment, not the fate worse than hell that this author assumes. Breastfeeding is not just about food – it’s also warmth, closeness, reassurance, comfort, healing, love… a fact the author of this book is unprepared to acknowledge. This is particularly evident in the author’s response to the next mother's Q&A:

“Q: We’re doing the controlled crying technique and have found that my daughter’s naps have improved a lot. We lay her down and sit with her. However the process takes longer if just I sit with her; then she tosses and turns and cries more” (Page 109)

The reply begins with:

“A: Like most babies, and particularly breastfed ones, your baby makes more demands of her mother” (page 109).

It is not explained exactly why a baby seeking comfort from its mother is a bad thing. It appears the author has a major thong-wedgie over attachment parenting. So, when you turn the page and read that the next parent seeking advice is a mother whom co-sleeps and feeds on demand, you can hear the pantie-elastic snap:

“Q: Our son is eight months old and sleeping in our bed. He breastfeeds whenever he wants, which is quite often. It would be okay if he fell asleep in between feeds, but instead he’s always on the move. He’s taken over almost the whole bed. We thought this might be a good time to try and improve the sleep situation. Can you give us some advice?” (page 112).

Can she!! But of course! The author is more than happy to oblige with the advice. I can’t promise much of it will be sane:

“A: When dealing with very active and headstrong babies, gentleness often fails. When dealing with a determined baby, you have to be very determined yourself and give simple, clear, messages. Don’t let your son see you until you breastfeed him in the morning (outside the bedroom). Then, after his morning feed, he needs to stay awake for 2.5 hours before taking a nap. He needs to go outside to play once a day after one of his naps. I would not breastfeed him just before sleep. You say goodnight to him and Daddy, and leave the house at 7.30pm” (page 112-113).

More advice includes:

“As you yourselves realise, breastfeeding plays a big role in your current problems. Your baby is now too old to learn to breastfeed just once during the night, so you will have to discontinue all night feeds. It is easier for a baby to learn to stop breastfeeding completely at night than to learn to feed just once or twice” (page 120)

“Keep in mind that you’re not giving your son to a stranger, but to his father, and getting through the night together, without breast milk, will strengthen the attachment between the two of them. It’s best if you can stay somewhere else for two or three nights while this adjustment is taking place” (page 121).

“Father should sit by the door in the bedroom and act as if he neither hears nor sees what his son is doing or asking for” (page 131).

Next, we’re treated to a follow-up letter written by the same mother, and you can’t help but feel great sorrow for her poor baby:

“Thank you for your very precise advice. We’re a week into the new approach now. There were very loud protests the first evening our son was alone with his father and he didn’t want to back down, but his father put in his headphones to listen to music, and sat calmly. On the second evening there was some improvement. Since then he has made progress every evening, until last night when he screamed again for half an hour but then slept through the whole night” (page 114).

As you read that, you can almost hear the poor child’s spirit being crushed. This baby is still young – so young in fact, that it has spent more time in the womb than it has yet to spend in the world. His cry is a form of communication. When his father does not respond to his cries, it lets the baby know that his communication is not important. How soul-destroying.

Despite describing what is basically child neglect, the book encourages the parents to continue, and even to detach further by suggesting that the father go out of sight. Also, it’s not explained why the baby must play outside after a particular nap or why he needs to stay awake for a set time period. Nor is it explained what the parents should do if their baby begins dozing off before that time period is up (match sticks under the eye lids perhaps?) Also precisely why the mother must leave the house remains a mystery, presumably it’s to appease the author’s fetish with distancing mother and child. Think of it as de-attachment parenting.

Other information the book leaves unsaid includes information on the dangers of formula-use. For example, page 52 helpfully states:

“Sleep problems can arise in a baby who has repeated ear infections”.

However the text fails to mention that formula-use increases the risk of babies getting repeated ear infections. This information would indeed be helpful, but it is omitted because such information would undermine the book’s whole 'formula feeding equals better sleep' agenda.

If this wasn’t concerning enough, in the “Starting Solids” section, the book then hints that mothers should introduce solids earlier than recommendations maintain:

“The current recommendation is that babies should be given only milk until the age of six months, but it’s important to be flexible to meet your baby’s needs” (page 104).

Sadly, this isn’t the only dodgy weaning-related advice. In the same section, the book recommends that:

“When adding a third solid feed to your baby’s diet, make this in the afternoon if you are breastfeeding and in the morning if you are bottlefeeding. The reason for the difference is that it will help keep your milk production if your baby gets only breast milk in the mornings. You will have a lot of milk when you wake up and can readily put your baby to your breast for the first two morning feeds” (page 104).

This is nonsensical. A mother’s breastmilk supply is naturally low in the evenings, so this is the time of day when she needs more breast stimulation, not less. By giving more solids at this time of day rather than earlier, the baby will be get full and so suckle at the breast less causing a drop in milk supply. There is no reason for the arbitrary distinction between breastfed and formulafed babies with regards to how solids should be introduced.

Yet this book is full of arbitrary advice, which is given, paradoxly, under the premise of making life easier for parents. However when you read the advice, you discover that a lot of it is illogical and unduly complex; not to mention heartless. For instance, a glaring consequence of not being child-led is that the author has to devise elaborate instructions on when, how, and where, to feed:

“Morning feeds can be confusing for babies. If you have recently stopped feeding your baby at night, it is important that you feed her outside her bedroom in the morning. If you feed your baby in her bedroom in the morning and she drops off to sleep afterwards, she might think of it as a night-time feed” (page 106).

From page 105.

When it comes to separation anxiety (which generally occurs around 9 months) the book handles it the same way it handles every other developmental milestone: with a sledgehammer of not-giving-a-fuck:

“Separation anxiety can start to disturb a baby’s night-time sleep. In such cases, your baby will start to cry in his sleep as if he is scared. We don’t know why a baby starts to do this, but a likely explanation is that he is dreaming about what he experienced during the day or other things that are on his mind. You need to be sure not to do too much for your baby when this happens. Always start by waiting for a moment to see whether your baby stops crying on his own. He needs someone nearby, but no more than that. He doesn’t need to be rocked, given something to drink or any other extra service” (page 117).

The next developmental milestone (learning to stand) is approached by all the delicacy of a monster truck:

“When your baby is put to bed for the night, he may stand up straight away, showing off his new skill. Sometimes it will work to hold your baby down for a moment to get him to fall asleep” (page 118).

No, you haven’t just read an excerpt from A Child Called It. This is real parenting advice, given in a parenting manual - and this book was published in 2012. In a nutshell, this book essentially teaches parents how to break their baby’s will. Gah, it's time to move onto another book. From rough-handling to a rough guide, next up it's...


The Rough Guide to Babies & Toddlers 
Kaz Cooke

Before I start explaining why this book should be turned into pulp, I’d like to point out that it has sporadic moments of genuine humour. For instance:

“Get an electric breastpump. The machine will make a noise (sort of a cross between a sucking noise and a vibrator, from memory, but that can’t be right – you’d sound like a porn movie)” (page 80).

Ho ho. If you opened the book at that point, you’d be laughing. However as you turn the pages, the sound of laughter swiftly turns into the sound of tutting, intakes of breath and sighing; with the expression on your face resembling a cat’s backside. It’s no surprise that the author is a fan of Gina Ford (she recommends Ford’s books on page 127).

At the start, the book wastes no time in setting the scene for what is to come:

“Although this book is pro-kid, it is also very much on the side of parents and carers” (page 4)

No shit.

Take this piece of advice for example:

“It’s always best to let sleeping babies lie” (page 37).

Best for who? The parents? – certainly. The baby? – not so much, particularly when the baby is very young. A newborn can be so exhausted by the transition from womb to world, that they sleep through their body’s signals to feed. Not only is this dangerous to the newborn, but it is risky to the mother’s milk supply. Yet the book reiterates the same instructions later on:

The inside cover.

“If the baby’s asleep, they probably want to be. Certainly never wake a sleeping baby at 2am for their usual feed” (page 131).

If starving your baby isn’t your thing, the book offers the following reassuring advice: put your head in the sand and get someone else to starve them.

“Sleeping through can be encouraged by having a non-lactating person go in to the baby to try to settle them without a feed” (page 133).

Building on this stance, the book suggests adopting a feeding schedule right from the start:

“Your aim would be to feed the baby every three to four hours during the day and when they wake and cry during the night – unless they wake every hour or two, in which case they may just need a rock back to sleep” (page 63).

Wrap baby like fish & chips. No skin to skin here. p169.

It’s a fact that demand feeding is the most natural and successful approach to breastfeeding, particularly when it is adopted during the night. Yet demand feeding is not suggested at any point in this 564-page doorstop of a book. Why? My guess is that it is because demand feeding is inconvenient to parents, and particularly to formula feeding parents. This isn’t simply a textbook case of omitting information, the book actually critizises and ridicules demand feeding:

“Although breastfeeding as often as you like in the first weeks will help you build up a constant, replenishing supply of milk, it will leave you a zombie if you wake up every couple of hours to feed the baby. Try to give a complete feed at intervals of three to four hours rather than get the baby used to snacking or top-ups every two hours... Try not to feed every two hours as a regular habit. Be aware that you can get yourself into a vicious circle of feeding your baby little bits too often: you’ll need to gradually extend the time between breastfeeds. I finally worked out my baby wanted a feed pretty much exactly every four hours – which is the case for most babies” (page 63).

In fact, when your baby reaches the ripe old age of 9 months (positively geriatric!) the book believes he should only have 3 breastfeeds per 24 hour period! (page 158).

If this wasn’t bad enough, the book goes from shit to shittier with extra shit, when it prescribes an arbitrary time limit for breastfeeds:

“Eventually you’ll probably be feeding only seven to ten minutes on each breast” (page 64).

Presumably many babies have yet to receive this memo; either that or they are deviant little sods.

“Eighty to ninety percent of milk volume goes in in the first four minutes on each breast” (page 69).

How the heck did she figure this one out? This sentence implies that if your baby feeds for longer than four minutes(!), they are doing so unnecessarily. The book fails to cite where the statistic originates from, presumably it comes from that hefty, over-cited peer-reviewed journal they call Fantasy Statistics. That’ll be the same source that the following came from:

“Anecdotal evidence suggests that older moms, especially those over 40, may have difficulty with supplying enough milk. At this age the reproductive system is winding down and the body produces fewer eggs, so it makes sense” (page 70).

No, it doesn’t ‘make sense’ at all. The book seems fond of anecdotal evidence, but I’ll stick with fact: Lactation is not reliant on a functioning reproductive system. Infertile adoptive mothers can breastfeed. Post-menopausal grandmothers can even breastfeed. Lactation and fertility are not linked in the way the book maintains.

More anecdotal evidence abound when the book broaches the topic of breastfeeding twins:

“If you don’t want to do it, here’s official permission: you don’t have to. Anecdotal evidence suggests moms with twins usually give up in the first couple of months or get the hang of it and go on to feed for a year or more” (page 83)

Geee thanks for your official permission. I’m not sure what mother would abandon breastfeeding based on permission given in an amature childcare book. Perhaps the type of mother who gives the following reason:

“Basically I needed to have my body back” (page 90).

This mother sounds dim. She is going from using her breasts to feed her baby, to using her hands (still her body, I’m sure you’ll agree) to feed her baby. She would probably follow this advice on so-called ‘fast weaning’:

“If you have to wean immediately or relatively quickly (over four of five days) for any reason you may spend a couple of days with rock-hard bosoms. Wear a one-size-too small sports bra to ‘bind’ them” (page 87).

...and get a one-stop ticket to Mastitisville! Breast binding can cause breast damage, blocked ducts, infection, interference with breathing and is very painful. It was mainly practiced in the 1940s and has no place in a modern childcare manual. Endurance of breast binding is just one of a catalogue of burdens this book associates with breastfeeding. Another includes the commonly-quoted suggestion favoured by diet police:

“Eat as well and heartily as you can, particularly if you’re breastfeeding. Special breastfeeding or ‘women’s vitamins’ are probably a good idea” (page 48).

Yeah that's a good idea - if you’re Donald Trump. However for those people who don’t have money to burn, vitamin supplements are unnecessary. This is even true for mothers who are eating for three during tandem nursing, or while breastfeeding during pregnancy! The same goes for flushing your kidneys with water every second minute:

“You need to drink a lot during the day if breastfeeding” (page 65).

So, living perched on the toilet because you’ve drank so much water is good; but farting a lot? Apparently, this is very bad:

“For lunch in hospital they served cabbage and I chose not to eat it because I’d been told that it caused problems with gas in babies: mine was the only baby in the ward not screaming during the night and I had a midwife ask me what on earth I had done to have the only angelic baby on the ward. When I told her she was amazed. I found the following to cause problems: coleslaw, broccoli, onion, cherries, kidney beans, spicy food” (page 76).

So if you have farty-pants, your baby will have a farty-diaper and be very upset. This assumption bares no credence to medical or anatomical fact. Rather, gas is produced when bacteria in the intestine interact with the intestinal fiber. Neither gas or fiber can pass into the bloodstream, or into your breastmilk, even when your stomach is gassy. So fart all you like. Hell, go ahead and fart the hospital down. There’s no need to burden your diet with restrictions.

From page 56.

On the topic of unnecessary burdens, remember the mammoth list of ‘necessary breastfeeding equipment’ suggested by a book in Part Two of this series? Well that list doesn’t even hold a candle to the following one. Aside from the usual breast pads, nursing bras, breast pump, and those ‘women’s vitamins’ I mentioned earlier, this book lists the following as ‘essential’ breastfeeding kit:

• “A spare top and bra and spare breast pads in your bag at all times in case you leak those big, tell-tale wet circles on your front.
• Pillows to help you support your baby and your back.
• Hot wheat-filled fabric packs (many are designed for microwave heating) to help the milk come in (or use cold to stop your breasts becoming engorged)” (page 66)

Bottles are a 'necessity'.

Did you hear that people? You simply ‘need’ a wheat filled sack, or else you had better hang up that nursing bra and slump off to the formula isle.

Along with your wheat filled sack, other equipment you will need include one of those over-priced, cumbersome, eyesore rocking chairs:

“Choose a rocking chair or armchair as your breastfeeding HQ. Next to the baby’s bed is perfect, especially for middle of the night feeds” (page 65).

If the thought of arching over a baby in a cold armchair in the middle of the night doesn’t get you questioning your breastfeeding commitment, perhaps the next argument will get the ball rolling. It includes a list of ‘possible drawbacks to breastfeeding’; the most notable of which is:

“You get short-term memory loss, extreme fatigue and other symptoms such as putting the car keys in the toaster” (page 58).

And this doesn’t happen to formula feeding mothers? In fact, studies show that formula feeding parents have less sleep and their sleep is of poorer quality; therefore they are more prone to fatigue (see here). This book's laughable presentation of fiction is followed up by an even more absurd list (the book has a fetish for lists) titled: “A Wish List For Easy Breastfeeding”. The list includes “as much rest as possible”, “a healthy diet”, “lots of fluids- but not coffee, tea or gin”, and the pier de resistance:

“Luck: you need to be one of the people who can breastfeed” (page 73).

The book doesn’t mention that only 2% of women can’t breastfeed; instead it leaves the threat of being ‘unlucky’ lingering arbitrarily in the air, like that fart in the conference room I was telling you about. Maybe you’ll fall victim, maybe you won’t. Even if you’re aware of the 2% statistic, the book then gives you a list of scenarios which will prevent you from being successful at breastfeeding (I feel like Santa Fucking Clause reading all these damn lists):

“Some reasons why it might not be a good idea for you to breastfeed”. 

The list is longer than is medically or sanely necessary, and speaks for itself:


Wait. At least it doesn’t suggest that you shouldn’t breastfeeding in public.

“It’s possibly best for everyone in the first few weeks if you leave a crowded room so that you can concentrate fully on breastfeeding” (page 64).

Oh.

“If you’re out and need to feed your baby, go to a large mall or department store and use their ladies’ or mothers’ room” (page 66).

Okay, okay, we get the point. Our baps are well and truly banished to the broom cupboard.

It’s worthy to note that there is no list titled: “Some reasons why it might not be a good idea for you to formula feed”. Perhaps this is because the publisher set a word limit for this book. Nonetheless, the book finds space to squeeze in some sob stories from failed breastfeeders:

From page 60.

It reads like The Alpha Parent Facebook Page after an onslaught of DFF trolls, rather than a parenting manual. After dismissing the notion that a mother should try to breastfeed, the book then expands on its defeatist “breastfeeding is no big deal” mantra:

“The first month or so will always be hardest. Expect some hurdles and know that you’ll usually be able to get over them. If you can’t, there’s the bottle, so don’t panic” (page 62).

Dangling a bottle like a carrot on a string in front of struggling mothers; who else does that? Ahhh yes, multi-billion dollar corporations – the masters of breastfeeding sabotage. Whilst this book doesn’t quite measure up to the insidiousness of formula companies, it’s clear the author gets her inspiration (and possibly her Carribbean holidays) from them. For instance, a fact of life is that perseverance is key to breastfeeding, yet this book bends over backwards to deter perseverance:

“The problem with perseverance is that when you’re in the middle of a difficult time, every hour seems to drag and every feed can bring new tension and anticipation of pain and trouble” (page 71).

How optimistic! What a glowing appraisal of breastfeeding! It’s a good job this book has a “Getting Help with Breastfeeding Section”. Shame it lists various sources of support then proceeds to critique them in a needlessly unforgiving manner. Check out its description of La Leche League for example:

“The La Leche League is an international charity aiming to help moms breastfeed, with mother-to-mother support and encouragement, and to vigorously promote breastfeeding. While its campaigning function has undoubtedly helped to make strides in international policy, if you’re not convinced of your personal growth through breastfeeding then its helpline may not be the best for you” (page 78).

No more is said about the folks at LLL. We are simply left with the feeling that we ought not to phone them because we don’t fit the vague prerequisite of ‘being convinced by our personal growth’, whatever that means. Perhaps it’s the book’s way of saying, ‘if you’re not truly dedicated to breastfeeding, don’t phone LLL’, in which case this advice should be applied to every helpline.

And thus ends the breastfeeding section of the book. Good riddance. The next chapter is called “Bottles”, although it only looks at formula feeding.

From page 95.

The chapter begins with the following opener:

“If you decide to bottlefeed, for whatever good reason, it’s important not to feel guilty about it” (page 95).

Well if the mother wasn’t feeling guilty about it, she probably is now. Good job author lady!

Then the book debunks a few pro-breastfeeding studies, spouts a couple of sob stories, the usual jazz. An orchestra of violins play in unison. Then the author chirps:

“Many breastfed children have allergies and asthma, and many bottlefed kids are absolutely brilliant” (page 96).

Yeah and many babies who are exposed to daily second-hand smoke aren’t huffing and puffing around their baby gyms. Still doesn’t make it right. Imagine, if you will, how bad the breastfed children’s allergies would have been if their body had endured the additional onslaught of formula.

It will come as no surprise that this book has a selective approach to communicating information on formula. It’s very hot on presenting the so-called positives, but shy on the risks. For instance, the ‘anti-SIDS checklist’ (page 40) has no mention that formula-feeding increases the risk of SIDS. Not a sausage.

The ‘Bottles’ chapter has a big phat list (YES! a LISSSSSST! Can you believe it!) entitled: “Good points about bottlefeeding” (page 96). When reading it, you find yourself waiting for an almighty punchline, but it never comes, because this, my friends, is intended to look like a factual list. Highlights include:

“The kid always gets the same thing (breast milk on the other hand, varies in quality and taste according to a mum’s health and diet).”

A carton of formula. From page 192.

This is true. Formula fed kids get the same meal – at every meal. The book implies that this is a good thing. Can you imagine any other context in which we would feed our children the same, bland, artificial concoction at every single meal - morning, noon and night, for months on end? We wouldn’t even do this to dogs. At least Pedigree Chum comes in a range of flavours. A breastfed baby, on the other hand, enjoys tastes as varied as our own, thus making them less fussy as they grow older. Anyway, back to this so-called list of positives to bottlefeeding:

“Someone else can feed the baby and enjoy the loving bond and eye contact”.

Yup, because you can’t have eye contact with a baby unless you’re holding a rubber teat in its mouth – go figure!

“Your body is now your own again”.

This is the same scenario for the breastfeeding mother. The only difference is that she uses her breasts to feed her baby, whilst a bottlefeeding mother uses her hands to feed her baby. Either way, you need to sit and feed the baby. Sorry to break that to you. Life’s a bitch.

Then we have this monstrosity of a paragraph:

“Many people who fear a lack of bonding when forced to give up breastfeeding are thrilled to find that, in the absence of stress and the faff about faulty breastfeeding, bottlefeeding is a tender time that can be spent quietly enjoying the moment, free from pain or worry” (page 97).

.... until of course, your formula fed baby regurgitates their entire meal on your favourite black jeans, followed by screaming for an hour with colic, before passing a steaming, nutty, repugnant formula poop. Kinda spoils the moment.

Notice the words used in this short paragraph. In just one sentence, breastfeeding is associated with the words: stress, faff, and faulty; whereas bottlefeeding is associated with: tender, enjoyment, pain-free, worry-free. Going by this paragraph, it sounds like the author fell down Alice’s rabbit hole and is viewing the world in reverse.

To build upon the view of breastfeeding as faulty, the book quotes a mother simply referred to as ‘Amy’:

“I didn’t have enough milk for my premmie baby and I was under a lot of pressure from health-care workers for him to put on weight. After realizing that he wasn’t thriving at 12 weeks I tried a bottle on him and he looked at me with absolute marvel that I had finally given him a decent meal” (page 97).

How was Amy sure that she did not have enough milk? What techniques did Amy try to stimulate her supply? What support did she seek? Was her baby in otherwise good health? We will never know the answers to these questions. The book doesn’t say. It is statistically likely that Amy could have successfully breastfed her baby, and as a premature baby, he needed her brastmilk even moreso.

Another poor sod with a premature baby tells her tale of woe:

“My firstborn was a premmie and couldn’t suck. My milk didn’t even come in” (page 103)

Still, I’m sure these mothers will be pacified by the following list (a list you say?) titled, “Things you get from bottlefeeding as much as from breastfeeding”. It’s a relatively short list. Let’s look at each item in turn:

“The baby enjoys the sucking reflex”.

True. However a baby at the breast can engage in non-nutritive sucking (i.e. enjoy the sucking reflex without having to consume milk). A bottlefed baby, on the other hand, gets a mouthful of milk with each suck on the teat, consequently overfeeding themselves, stretching their stomachs, when all they wanted was comfort.

“Bonding with your baby”.

Yes you can bond while formula feeding - sans the naturally-occurring bonding hormones experienced by mother and baby via breastfeeding. When a baby breastfeeds, because of the release of oxytocin, he learns to associate his mother with all kinds of extra good feelings.

“The feeling that you’re sustaining your baby”.

Well no, you aren’t sustaining your baby, are you? – Similac, Cow & Gate and friends are. You're just the delivery guy.

“The knowledge that you’re doing your best for your baby and making sure they’re as healthy as possible”.

Lie detector going through the roof with this one!

The book even manages to make formula companies look angelic, by turning their profit-hungry motivation into some kind of drive for scientific advancement:

“The important thing to know is that there are plenty of people who make squerzillions of dollars out of formula, the upside of which is that they have a lot of employees working for their companies trying to make the best formula and get it as nutritionally close to breast milk as they can, with some extras such as iron supplements” (page 98).

The amount of money formula companies’ put into research and development is dwarfed by the money they pump into their marketing budget (persuading parents to feed their precious offspring sub-standard crap from cans takes a lot of sophisticated coercion). Consequently, parents pick up the bill for this hyper-marketing through the inflated prices of formula. Does the book mention this? That’s a rhetorical question, obviously.

As for the ‘extras’, I concede, there is certainly a lot of extra crap in formula that you won’t find in breastmilk – again, this is for marketing rather than nutritional purposes. Each formula company tries to pwn the rest by adding more and more fictional pixie-dust to the cauldron. Whereas every ingredient in breast milk was created by nature to serve a purpose. Does the book mention this? Again, rhetorical.

Parents are directed to a specific formula company for 'more info', on page 107.

In appears that, in an effort to lick the wounds of Defensive Formula Feeders, the book kneels at their crotch, painting a euphoric image of bottlefeeding, which at times, is nothing short of pure fantasy. Take this assertion from page 99 for example:

“Babies on properly prepared formula are never too fat”.

Whatevs. You can follow WHO preparation guidelines to the latter and still overfeed your kid with a bottle. As I said above, babies like to comfort suck, but they cannot do so at a bottle without receiving a constant waterfall of milk into their stomach. Whereas at the breast they can regulate their suckling so that no milk is released if they wish. Not to mention the imbalance of proteins in formula programmes a baby's body for excessive weight gain. In fact, overfeeding and hyper-protein content are some of the reasons that formula fed babies have been observed to sleep longer. They’re all sluggish and bloated from rich Christmas-banquet-sized meals, as illustrated by this comment:

Illustration from page 160.

“I found my baby slept better through the night as the formula is thicker and fills tummies better” (page 104).

Read: it forms a curd in the baby’s stomach. Nice. This curd sloshes about for hours in your baby’s tummy, stretching it, producing pain and wind. Consequently, and not unlike the average person after Christmas lunch, baby has to sleep off the effects. He’s too uncomfortable to do anything else.

This inclination towards rest is met with hoots and hollars from formula fed parents, who revel in their liberated evenings.

“The more pressure I put on myself to breastfeed the worse I felt, and in the end I put my babies on formula and never looked back” (page 106).

You go sista!! Nevermind about the risk of allergies, gut problems, infections, cancer and SIDS. As long as you have your precious pee-pees. Speaking of sleep, it’s time for another ‘sleep training’ guide...


The Sensational Baby Sleep Plan
Alison Scott-Wright

The only thing ‘sensational’ about this book is how it ever got to print. A typical Amazon review tells all:

“The whole attitude and atmosphere to this book made me feel uncomfortable and as a new mother who is exclusively breastfeeding, it was thoroughly depressing and made me quite upset.”

And another:

“As a breastfeeding mother who looked to this book for help I cried when reading this.”

What’s all the fuss about? Let’s take a look. Firstly, the author, Alison (who has no qualifications medically or otherwise) sets the scene for her ‘down-to-earth’ sleeping plan. She uses vague terms such as ‘perfect baby’ and ‘proper family unit’ to undermine government guidelines:

“I am fully aware that the existing government guidelines on feeding and babycare are set out to promote your baby’s health and wellbeing, but they are not always easy either to implement or to stick to. In an ideal world, we would all exclusively breastfeed, not work, stay at home, raise the perfect baby, have a ‘proper’ family unit, masses of help and support, and never be stressed or overtired. As this is not the case for most of us, my plan, although sometimes ‘bending the rules’ a little, is a down-to-earth and sympathetic approach designed to meet the needs of both parents and baby” (page 2).

So she acknowledges that government guidelines exist to promote babies’ health and wellbeing, and then proceeds to say she will be discarding them because they are inconvenient to parents. So far, nothing ground-braking; Gina Ford has been doing this for years. Then Alison regurgitates another tired-old clique:

“My method is always baby-led and mother-focused, working on the basis that if the mother wasn’t happy then baby wouldn’t be happy either, and vice versa” (page 2).

‘Happy mom - happy baby’ the mating call of the lazy-parent. It is often sung by those who put their own needs first, and want to justify it. Case in point:

“In my view it is better to adopt an approach that can be adapted to your lifestyle than to restrict yourself to a method that you may find difficult to maintain” (page 24).

News flash: fuck your lifestyle. Babies take a steaming big dump on your lifestyle the moment they are born till approximately eighteen years of age. A parent who believes she can shoehorn her baby into her existing lifestyle will soon be shoehorning herself into a straightjacket. Yet somehow the ‘happy mom – happy baby’ comfort blankie continues to be a popular fantasy of many. Take the following paragraph for example, which screams “SABOTAGE” in big Disneyland flashing neon lights. Here, a mother speaks of her experience of being advised by Alison:

“My baby was not gaining weight, I was really struggling with breastfeeding and my baby never slept. Alison came round and after much discussion we gave Margot her first bottle of formula. She sucked it down in 1 minute and then fell asleep for 3 hours. It was a beautiful sunny day – the first time I had noticed in 3 weeks. I had a feeling of complete relief and physically felt my shoulders loosen as the tension flooded out of me. I realised that formula feeding was not ‘evil’ and bad, and that, as Alison had said, ‘a happy mom makes a happy baby’. Margot and I have never looked back...Breast is best, but not for everyone!” (page 24).

Sad indeed is the fact that this mother had her breastfeeding relationship sabotaged by a self-appointed sleep guru with no training in baby-care or anything else. At a time when the mother needed to work on her supply more than ever, formula was given to reduce it further (top ups are also recommended by Alison as an ironic ‘cure’ for supply problems on page 88). This mother obviously set out to breastfeed, yet was manipulated while she was at her most vulnerable, by someone disguising themselves as support. Sadly, when a mother is feeling exhausted, it is easy for a person with an anti-breastfeeding agenda to exploit the mother’s urge for rest.

Another example of covert sabotage, p38.

Most pro-formula sentiment rests on the empty promise of rest, so it is no surprise that this book rejects demand-feeding:

“The decision of when to feed has to come from the parent and not the baby. Demand feeding is often unmanageable, as parents cannot take charge of their days but are controlled by the demands of the baby” (page 8).

Even newborns, fresh from the womb apparently should have their hunger cues ignored:

“I advise using my plan from Day 1, or at least starting as early as possible” (page 5).

“Most babies are born nocturnal and it is very important to re-train them within the first few weeks of life” (page 66).

Re-train is an interesting choice of phrase. Babies are not performing circus seals. They are born hard-wired for survival. Re-training them means forcing them to go against their natural biorhythms. These physical, emotional and cognitive cycles are central to your baby’s optimum development, however they have one snag – they tend to be inconvenient to parents, who have different biorhythms. Why are babies’ biorhythms so different from adults? Answer: because babies need to sleep this way. Rather than temporarily alter your adult biorhythms to accommodate your baby’s, Alison suggests forcing these alterations upon your immature and vulnerable newborn. For example:

“Persevere with feeds during the day to ensure that your baby takes enough milk to help him get through the night” (page 64).

Eradicating night feeds during the early months with lead to a botched supply, as I mentioned earlier.

Another part of Alison’s re-training process includes giving your baby a bath every day:

“Always introduce an end-of-day bath and bedtime routine as soon as it is possible to do so” (page 117).

Bathing your baby every day, particularly a young baby, will leave them vulnerable to developing eczema and other dermatological problems. This is because bathing washes away the skin’s naturally protective oils. The risk is exacerbated further when any products are used. Yet many parents are fixated with baths as an integral part of the bedtime routine because they have been influenced by companies such as Johnson & Johnson and by health professionals (who have also been marketed to by Johnson & Johnson).

Next, Alison gives your baby a deadline for sleeping through:

“It has become plain to me that young babies are, on the whole, capable of sleeping through the night by around eight weeks of age” (page 10).

Poor little mites. So that means that by 8 weeks, your baby should have zero night feeds. The book features a letter from a mother whose 10 week old baby failed to receive this memo:

“We have been putting our baby to bed around 7pm since Week 1. He is now ten weeks old and still cries for 10-15 minutes before going to sleep, but then he does sleep all through the night. Is this normal and is there anything we can do?” (page 79).

In Alison's reply, she dismisses the baby’s evident distress:

“Really there is no such thing as ‘normal’ – all babies are individuals and will display different behaviour patterns. Although he cries, your baby does eventually go to sleep and then sleeps through the night. This indicates that there is little wrong and I would suggest that it is just his way of winding down as he prepares to sleep. It is fairly common behaviour and nothing to worry about. I would advise little or no intervention to try to stop him crying as this may only disturb him, thus prolonging the time it takes him to go to sleep” (page 80).

This baby’s basic biological cues were not being listened to, and his needs were not being met. So he had given up on trying to connect with his caregivers. Alison repeats the same advice to a different parent later in the book:

“It may seem harsh just to put him into bed while he is so upset, but it is often the best thing to do” (page 91).

Alison maintains that you should follow this cruel isolation approach, even when your baby is in unfamiliar surroundings:

“If your baby sleeps in his own room at home you might feel worried about disturbing his sleep at night while staying in a hotel, for instance. There is little you can do in these circumstances except position the cot in the corner of the room as far away as possible from your bed. You may even be able to put the cot behind a screen, chest of drawers or wardrobe so that your baby cannot see you” (page 92).

Aside from having to sleep alone, your baby is not permitted to feed at inconvenient times, and certainly not to cluster feed:

“A healthy newborn baby should be able to feed well at the breast and then last for a couple of hours between feeds” (page 35).

This load of bollocks would win Oscars. However movie babies aside, the fact is that healthy newborn babies cluster feed, particularly during one of their many growth spurts. It’s nature’s way of boosting breastmilk production. Yet Alison refuses to acknowledge the existence of growth spurts in this Q&A session:

“Q: I often find that my baby is unable to wait for his next feed. What shall I do?

A: If you are breastfeeding this can be quite common in the first couple of weeks and if you need to offer an extra top-up feed or so during the day just ‘go with the flow’ as this phase should soon pass. However if your baby seems unable to take enough milk at each feed and is therefore consistently unable to fall into the 3-hour feeding plan, then something is wrong and I would advise you to read pages 54-9 on troubleshooting feed problems” (page 103).

Errrrr HELLO! Growth spurts!

No baby, particularly a breastfeed one, should be sleeping through the night by 8 weeks, yet Alison even applies this unnatural standard to sick babies:

“Even if your baby has been unwell throughout the day and hasn’t taken much feed, it should not be necessary for you to re-introduce a feed during the night” (page 93).

This is tantamount to starvation, not to mention ignoring a sick baby’s increased need for fluids.

Once you’ve starved your ill baby according to Alison’s exacting instructions, whatever you do – don’t comfort him for too long!

“During the night, if your baby develops a slight temperature and  appears too hot, give him a dose of Paracetamol and remove a layer or two of bedding or clothing. Do remember that your own body heat will increase his temperature if you hold him closely for too long while trying to comfort him” (page 93).

No cluster feeds, check! No night feeds, check! No long cuddles, check! So when do I need to start this training? Allison maintains that your baby must follow her sleep plan, starting from the get go:

“In the first few days after birth, leave your baby to sleep and feed him only when he wakes during the night” (page 33).

This is a newborn we’re talking about! (tiny stomach). This is your freshly lactating boobs we’re talking about (building supply). It is extremely important that your breasts get night time stimulation, particularly during your baby’s first few weeks (see, ‘Timeline of a Breastfed Baby’). When you feed during the night, prolactin levels surge to ten times the amount they would during a day feed – this is really good news for your milk supply. The higher the prolactin levels, the more milk you make. New mothers should see night feedings as opportunities to boost their supply – and seize them!

Yet in Alison’s plan, demand feeds are forbidden. In fact, Alison seems to have a warped view of demand feeding, as she equates it with toddler tantrums:

“This is a prime example of where my suggestions go against the accepted guidelines, as I do not believe that ‘demand feeding’ is beneficial to either mother or baby. I fail to understand why parents are encouraged to respond to ‘demand’ from a baby in the first few months whereas a ‘demand’ from a toddler is then deemed to be unacceptable behaviour” (page 8).

“Surely it is you, the parent, who needs to be the one to put the boundaries in place, rather than your baby?” (page 9).

What a conundrum. Contrast the above sentence with the following sentence, found later in the book:

“Your decision of whether to breast or bottle feed may be influenced by jealousy from a demanding toddler who is upset with a new baby” (page 25).

Verrrrrry interesting. So babies, who are governed solely by primitive survival instincts, should not call the shots, but toddlers should? Isn’t it a tad unhealthy to let a toddler dictate how their baby sibling is fed?

I have a ‘radical’ suggestion; instead of framing sleeping and feeding decisions as a Child Vs Parents battle of the wills, how about viewing it as a team effort; whereby parents help their child to feed and sleep better (i.e. attachment parenting), rather than forcing him to. Alison disagrees. Apparently attachment parenting, demand feeding and SIDS guidelines have produced generations of babies who can’t sleep:

“I believe that sleep problems in babies are escalating due to a number of factors:

• The advice that babies should sleep in the parents’ bedroom for at least the first six months.
• Babies are now placed on their backs to sleep. However, many babies struggle to relax and settle in this unnatural position.
• It is becoming increasingly understood and accepted that many women are now having babies later in life. These older mums often experience higher levels of anxiety and are less likely to be able to leave their babies to settle to sleep without feeling the need to check on them constantly” (page 18).

Woah, generalise some? Actually, studies have shown that younger mothers tend to me more anxious than their older counter-parts (Corderoy 2012).

Want to know what I think has caused the rise in ‘sleep problems’? Trashy detachment parenting books like this one. There’s a direct correlation between an increase in baby-taming ‘gurus’ flooding the market with their hyper-scheduled sleep and feeding routines, and the increase in ‘sleep problems.’ Why? Because such ‘experts’ have framed perfectly normal infant behaviour as a ‘problem’. You see, the definition of what constitutes a problem depends very much on our expectations. If we expect babies to act as babies, we won’t perceive their natural behaviour as problematic.

Books like this one have a subjective perception of what they think it means to be a ‘normal’ baby. The trouble is that this perception is often based on an out-dated model, stemming from a time when most babies were artificially fed, slept prone, and slept in isolation.

SIDS guidelines are certainly not contributing to a so-called influx of infant sleep problems and Alison’s dismissal of the guidelines is tantamount to negligence. ‘Back-to-Sleep’ campaigns have been the biggest breakthrough in lowering the risk of SIDS. In most countries, back sleeping has lowered the risk of SIDS by around fifty percent. Fact.

Regarding said guidelines, Alison maintains:

“I believe it is up to each individual parent and carer to access the advice and information provided and to be aware, as I am, of the guidelines given” (page 80).

Sounds good, but then Alison goes on to say:

“I recently read a very interesting book called ‘The Cot Death Cover-up’ which disproves most of the common risk factors associated with cot death today. It is well worth spending some time to read the author’s proven theories” (page 80).

The book in question, published fifteen years ago, is written by a man called Mr Sprott. He was ignored in his native New Zealand, and so tried his theories out on the British market, and was ignored there too. Basically he argued that cot death has only one single cause – toxic gases created by mattresses. Period. Needless to say, all the major SIDS organisations and Government agencies have discredited his ‘theory’. Nonetheless, Alison uses it to defend her sleep plan.

The plan is very dangerous where SIDS is concerned, as it contravenes several of the most important preventative guidelines. For instance:

“My suggestion is to put your baby in his own room within the first few weeks” (page 76).

“It may seem harsh to be putting your baby to bed on his own from the very early days, but within a short space of time he will come to accept it” (page 77).

Here’s the scoop: closeness, not separateness, is the normal psychological and emotional state for babies. When a baby wakes up alone in a dark, quiet room – behind bars – a sort of ‘What’s wrong with this picture?’ anxious thought process goes on and cortisol levels rise. Persistently high cortisol levels have been linked with the development of learning difficulties and depression (Sears 2009).

Aside from these mental disabilities, how about giving your baby a nice big dose of death? As well as putting your baby to sleep in a room alone from birth, Alison also advises that you put your baby to sleep on his stomach. She cites ‘flathead syndrome’ as a reason not to follow anti-SIDS guidelines which recommend that you place your baby on their back to sleep. This makes zero sense. Would you rather your baby have a minor and temporary cosmetic condition, or like, be dead?

Of course, the chapter wouldn’t be complete without a glowing fantasy appraisal from a fictional mother:

“Elsa sort of slept through the night from about eight weeks. However, she was on her back and thrashed around in her sleep and was very hard to settle, and she still always seemed so tired. She was diagnosed with reflux and we started a course of reflux medication which helped ease her discomfort, but she was still so restless and uncomfortable during the night. After consulting Alison we put Elisa on her tummy to sleep. Bingo – what a difference! It was amazing to watch her in sleep – I could tell she was so much more comfortable and totally at rest. We never looked back from that moment and it was tummy all the way” (page 83).

This mother was playing a dangerous game of roulette with her baby’s life, and Alison wants you to do the same with your baby. However the facts speak for themselves: babies lying on their backs are less likely to become overheated because back-sleeping leaves the internal organs exposed so that they can radiate heat more easily than when on the tummy (Sears 2009). Also when sleeping facedown, a baby can press his head into a soft surface and suffocate.

Despite her lack of qualifications, Alison fancies herself not only as baby-trainer-come-paediatric-consultant, but also a nutritionist:

“An important part of successful breastfeeding is making sure that you have a healthy balanced diet with plenty of fluids” (page 38).

A ‘healthy balanced diet’ (purposely vague term) is not a necessary prerequisite to successful breastfeeding. Here, Alison is simply placing an unnecessary burden on breastfeeding mothers. Not many mothers (read: humans) can manage to maintain a balanced diet (5 a day, strict adherence to the food pyramid, all that lark), nor should they be anal about it, particularly in the postnatal period. Yet Alison continues:

“What you should eat while breastfeeding remains a completely individual choice and I usually advise continuing with the same balanced diet that you ate throughout your pregnancy” (page 39).

This, quite frankly, is balls. The diet of a breastfeeding mother definitely does not need to be as restrictive as a pregnant mother’s diet. As we’re on the topic of food, cue one of the most abused breastfeeding myths of all time:

“Certain foods can have a negative effect on some babies and can cause them to be unsettled, have bouts of crying, become very ‘windy’ and have explosive stools, or even vomit. If possible, try to monitor your diet in relation to your baby’s behaviour” (page 39).

The above paragraph is 100% true – if it were written about formula. However in reference to breastmilk it is mere slander. Yes people, Alison is slandering your breasts! In her eyes, your norks are temperamentally-minded toxic waste dispensers. The funny thing (and by that I mean, totally unfunny) is that the foods Alison lists as being risky, are some of the most bland-ass foods in existence: “pasta, tomatoes, and salad” (page 40). And don’t get her started on alcohol!

“Alcohol (especially champagne) should be avoided, as the bubbles almost seem to transfer into the breast milk – result: one very bloated and windy baby!)” (page 40).

This is a sad attempt to downgrade breast milk (Alison says it will give you a windy baby) to the same level as formula (science says it will give you a windy baby).

“If you do happen to have more than one or two drinks, then it is advisable to express your breast milk before you go to bed and discard it, as it will contain a high level of toxins from the alcohol” (page 40).

This is another unnecessary burden. The alcohol will dissipate from your milk at the same rate as it leaves your blood. Contrary to misinformed belief, alcohol does not stagnate in your breasts.

On the medication front, even tame medications such as antibiotics, when mixed with breast milk, are, according to Alison, given a toxicity that would put kryptonite to shame:

“Although many health professionals and doctors advise that it is safe to take antibiotics while breastfeeding, I am not so sure as I have observed a link between the onset of digestive issues in some breastfed babies and their mums taking certain antibiotics. My advice is to read the antibiotic information leaflet and if it lists heart-burn or gastric discomfort as side-effects in the patient, then you can assume that this might cause similar problems in the baby. I would suggest that you ‘pump and dump’ while taking the medication, feeding your baby either stored breast milk and/or formula and resuming breastfeeding once you have finished taking the course of tablets. I will be completely honest here: it may be that your baby will not re-accept the breast after getting used to a bottle for a number of days and you may then have to give up breastfeeding” (page 48).

So let me get this straight. Alison wants you to risk losing your breastfeeding relationship so that you can pump to avoid a non-existent risk. It appears she has seriously miscalculated her readers’ dedication to breastfeeding.

On the topic of unnecessary burdens, Alison creates pointless dichotomies in an effort to put distance between parent and baby. For a start, she argues that feeding and cuddling should never go together:

“All babies learn by association. It is therefore important from Day 1 that your baby learns the right associations and how to differentiate between night and day, feeding and cuddling, playing and sleeping” (page 6).

Then she presents an intricately detailed, three page long, 29 step process to achieving a suitable latch (Yes, 29 steps you must follow each time you latch your baby!) I’m not going to use up bandwidth going through each in turn; suffice to say the usual suspects are paraded: pillow propping, water guzzling, snack setting-up, neck supporting, tummy supporting, shoulder supporting, TV remote locating (yes really), and legs placed at 90 degree angle (get your protractors out ladies!) After this gymnastics lesson, we have the following vague step:

“Try to make sure you are feeling as calm and relaxed as possible – though with sore nipples, the thought of anyone coming near your boobs, let alone getting baby latched on, can make it impossible to feel relaxed!”

How helpful.

At this point I came to the conclusion that Allison must be getting paid-per-word for her book, and so dragged this list on for as long as her keyboard would allow. Take for example:

“Step #25: Although you need to concentrate on how your baby is feeding and it is tempting to want to gaze adoringly at him all the time, be careful not to look down continually as it can cause you to get a really stiff neck” (page 43).

Yes, that’s why we see mothers with neck braces lining the corridors of baby groups. Surely this ‘advice’ has no place on a list of how to achieve a sufficient latch, as it is equally applicable to formula feeding mothers (and anyone who likes holding babies – grannies of the world beware!)

Before she moves onto the ‘Expressing breast milk’ section of the book, Alison dishes out some more breastfeeding tips (oh joy!)

“Begin each feed by offering the breast that you fed from last at the previous feed” (page 44).

This is called block feeding, and as I mentioned above, it’s only recommended for mothers who have over-supply. Block feeding when you don’t have oversupply can needlessly reduce your supply; as can this:

“If your baby is simply not interested, or is too sleepy to feed, put him down” (page 44).

And this:

“If you do just miss the odd feed here and there and don’t pump instead, it really should be OK” (page 49).

And this (Cry It Out fans, here’s something for you):

“Each night try to set a target time in your mind that you aim to reach before feeding your baby. For instance, if he has been waking for his first feed anywhere between 11 and 11.30pm for the last three nights, then set your target time as maybe 11.45pm or midnight and keep trying to lengthen the time before you give him a feed” (page 108).

Why does CIO persistently pop up in parenting books like this? One reason is because it appears to ‘work’, at least for some babies. If no one comes to comfort them, some babies do eventually cry themselves to sleep. However a baby who cries furiously before falling asleep will sleep in a state of hormonal havoc. Crying releases stress hormones into the baby’s circulation. Furthermore, listening to baby cry also releases stress hormones in the mother that will prevent her from sleeping soundly. As a result, you have a dyad of anxious insomniacs. To enable the mother to maintain her resolve in the face of her baby’s distress, Alison has created a ‘crying scale’. 1 is the merest whimper and 10 is a ‘full on scream’.


“When your baby reaches around 7 on the scale, this is the time he will probably need attention. Amazingly, though, a baby may reach this level of cry but, by the time you have got up, used the bathroom or gone downstairs to get a bottle, he may already have gone back to sleep” (page 110).

From page 176.

Yeah, just take your sweet leisurely time about it and hope that your baby shuts up. And if he doesn’t shut up, remember:

“Don’t panic, persevere for as long as you feel comfortable and if you want to offer a bottle of either expressed milk or formula instead to give yourself a break, then do so – there is no need to feel guilty!” (page 44).

Moms, how about listening to the biological cues of your body when your baby cries, rather than to advisors such as Alison, who tell you to turn a deaf ear. Fascinating biological changes take place in your body in response to your infant’s cry. Upon hearing your baby cry, the blood flow to your breasts increases, accompanied by a biological urge to ‘pick up and feed’. Go-go gadget breasts! The act of breastfeeding itself causes a surge in oxytocin, brings feelings of relaxation and pleasure, a pleasant release from the tension built up by the baby’s cry. These biological happenings explain why it’s easy for Alison to advise leaving your baby to cry – she is not biologically connected to your baby.

Anyway, if you have any supply left by this stage, you might want to try expressing it; and even if you don’t, Alison will push you into doing so, in her section devoted to the topic:

“If you have chosen exclusively to use breast milk for your baby, then it is advisable to try and get to grips with expressing some milk at least once or twice a day. This milk can then be used to replace one breastfeed during the night” (page 45).

Whatever for Alison? Why is it ‘advisable’ for a mother to replace a breastfeed at a time when her breasts need the most stimulation? (i.e. at night when supply is naturally low, and receptive hormone levels naturally high). Also, what about the fact that a breast pump cannot extract as much milk as a baby?

“You may be told that a breast pump is not as efficient as your baby and that pumping will have a detrimental effect on your milk production, but I do not believe this to be the case” (page 45).

In the absence of Alison citing any studies or sources, would you choose to reject La Leche League and trust her on this one? Not if the next gem is anything to go by:

“Introduce your baby to a bottle in the first couple of weeks which will help to avoid rejection of the bottle at a later stage” (page 45).

... and may cause your baby to reject the breast altogether! Far more advisable to wait until at least 4 weeks when breastfeeding will be more established. Six weeks – even better.

Hey, have you noticed, we’ve had a page where Alison hasn’t mentioned the F-word. One whole page!! Cause for celebration! But before you hang out the bunting...

“Some moms find expressing relatively easy and can pump off 90ml in 10 minutes or so, while others can take half an hour just to get 20ml. If you find that you don’t like or don’t get on with pumping but still want to substitute a couple of feeds, then obviously you can use formula” (page 46).

And obviously Alison, you can fuck off. Using formula is not an ‘obvious’ go-to when a mother cannot express. Donor milk is an option, or juggling life choices so that expressing is not necessary. Formula is (or should be) a last resort.

However, as last resorts go, apparently formula is the holy grail; so much so that Alison devotes not one, not two, but six (six!) whole pages of information on how to give up breastfeeding! Then she moves swiftly onto the formula feeding chapter, the introduction of which reads...

“It is a shame in today’s society that formula-feeding, when used in preference to breastfeeding, is almost frowned-upon – to the point of making some women feel that they are ‘bad mothers’ if they choose it rather than breastfeeding” (page 59).

(Imagine an orchestra of violins playing the tune from Titanic as you read that). Alison continues:

“Since its introduction, formula has continued to improve in quality and most types even contain lipids and pro-biotics, making them as similar to breast milk as ever before” (page 60).

Sure, about as similar as a hole in a tree - and my asshole. Listen up people: your breastmilk is nutritionally balanced and has the exact combination of water, carbohydrates, protein, fats, vitamins, minerals, enzymes and antibodies your baby needs. What's more, there are hormones and other growth factors in your milk that make important contributions to your baby's growth and development. Your breastmilk is constantly changing in its composition throughout the day and throughout the course of lactation to meet the changing needs of your growing child. Formula has none of these attributes. None.

Next, we are given an insight into the inner workings of Alison’s brain (an Aladdin's Cave of propaganda) as she ponders aloud:

“I often wonder if human breast milk is the ‘natural’ food it is always claimed to be these days. If you stop to consider the ‘unnatural’ methods used in the production of the foods we eat –genetic modification, over-cultivation, pest control and animal management – how can we be sure that our breast milk remains ‘pure’ and unaffected” (page 60).

What this paragraph is doing in the formula-feeding chapter is anyone’s guess. I’m presuming it’s to lick the wounds of the guilt-ridden formula feeding mother. In any case, can’t Alison see the irony of citing genetic modification, over-cultivation, pest control and animal management in this chapter? These are all mechanisms directly involved in the creation of formula. We’re not talking somewhere far down the chain like with breastfeeding, where a nursing mother who once drank some bottled water from Wales that a sheep shat in before it was purified. Rather, these mechanisms are part of the formula manufacturing chain itself. Breastfeeding is the best way to keep babies' exposure to such toxic contaminants as low as possible as they appear to be filtered out by the mothers' body (Gray and Jamieson 2011). If Alison is suggesting that breast milk is not as ‘natural’ or ‘pure’ as people claim, what superior alternative is she suggesting? (There is none). But she doesn’t stop there.

“A recent article in The Times suggests that much of the recent research promoting breastfeeding over formula is actually flawed. The article highlights the fact that statistics cannot truly prove that breastfed children have higher IQs than those fed on formula, as there are too many other contributing factors that are not taken into account. The main fact is that the majority of babies who are fed with breast milk are known to be born to parents in the middle to upper classes and their children will probably enjoy a higher standard of education. So although the majority of breastfed babies may prove to have better outcomes in life, this could easily be due to factors that were not taken into account when the statistics were compiled” (page 60).

Yawn. This is not a groundbreaking critique of breastfeeding studies. This sort of drivel has been spouted by DFFs since the internet took its first breath in the 90s; but okay I’ll bite. Firstly, this paragraph focuses on only one type of breastfeeding study – those concerned with IQ, yet the paragraph begins, “Much of the recent research promoting breastfeeding over formula is actually flawed” suggesting pro-breastfeeding studies *in general* are flawed. This is a grossly broad allegation which Alison fails to provide any rationale or evidence for. Secondly, I reiterate: what is this information doing in a chapter about formula feeding?? Thirdly, every major study on breastfeeding and IQ does account for socio-economic factors such as parents education, occupation and income and still finds breastfed babies to come out on top (I'll come back to this later). Finally, a gene has been ear-marked as responsible for the rise in IQ amongst breastfed babies. This gene (FADS2 if you’re interested) is triggered when, and only when, the baby is breastfed. A gene interacts with the components of breastmilk to preserve a baby’s true cognitive potential. So whilst I don’t deny that breastfeeding mothers are generally more intelligent [*preens*], this alone, is not why their babies tend to have higher intelligence than their formula-guzzling peers. There is a physiological root.

Now that we’ve got that cleared up, let’s move onto Alison’s next assault on fact:

“A mom who has chosen to bottlefeed from the start will build up a bond with her baby the same as any mother who breastfeeds” (page 60).

Yeah sure - sans the intense hormonal bond and codependency that binds the breastfeeding mother to her nursling. Lacking these elements, a bottlefeeding mother cannot bond on the same level. This is a physiological fact. Noticing the frailty of her argument, Alison adds the following in an attempt to buff it up:

“Also, in my experience it can sometimes be easier to build a bond through being able to maintain eye contact while holding your baby in a bottlefeeding position” (page 61).

A breastfeeding pair are tummy to tummy, skin to skin, a perfect alignment which lends itself to prolonged eye contact.

Sadly, the assault on fact isn’t confined to breastfeeding, Alison dishes out a toxic smorgasbord of formula feeding falsehoods:

“There are new guidelines in place with regard to making up feeds, as there is some concern that, once opened, a box of milk powder is then not sterile and should be added to hot water to kill any bacteria” (page 62).

Almost correct; but when we’re taking about the safety of babies, ‘almost’ just isn’t good enough. In reality, formula powder is not sterile, even when the box is sealed (by law it has to state this on said box). Alison’s comment suggests that powder from a freshly opened box would be sterile if used straight away, and this is simply not true. But wait, it gets worse:

“I have found the easiest and most practical way – which is still, in my opinion, safe – is to prepare and store bottles ahead of time” (page 63).

She then gives a 7-step procedure for making up bottles in bulk and then storing them in the fridge.

“I suggest that you have enough bottles that you need only wash, steralise and prepare them once a day” (page 63).

These instructions will no doubt appeal to those mothers who chose formula feeding because it taps into to their lazy inclinations; however the detriment to their babies could prove fatal.

Speaking of laziness, many mothers choose to wean their babies onto solids earlier than the 6 month World Health Organisation guideline in the hope that their babies will sleep longer and thus stop being irritating in the night. Alison feeds this false hope by giving the go-ahead on early weaning:

Notice the bottom paragraph.

“Q: My baby is 4 months old and from nine weeks old he has been sleeping through the night without waking or feeding. Suddenly he has started to wake at night at around 2am and is sucking his hand as if hungry. Should I offer him a feed?

A: Babies can be unpredictable and, despite having been settled in a routine for several weeks, their habits can for some strange reason suddenly change” (page 111).

Yeah, it’s called a growth spurt. In fact, one occurs at 4 months. Anyway, you were saying?

“...We may never discover what causes these changes, but in this case it could be due to the fact that your baby is hungry and not being sustained through milk alone” (page 111).

*headdesk*

I'm getting tired and stressed out reading this shit. But wait, Alison says this will effect my supply:

“The extent of hormonal changes occurring in your body during lactation means it can be an extremely emotional time. When you put your baby to the breast oxytocin and prolactin encourage milk production. However, if you are feeling stressed, overtired, anxious, or tense, the production of these hormones can become suppressed” (page 33).

What new parent doesn’t get stressed, overtired, anxious or tense? These are integral emotions of new parenthood, particularly during the newborn phase. Every parent will feel them at some point, so does that mean that every parent will have supply issues? That’s the conclusion Alison wants you to make. And what’s her solution? Well, it may have formula written all over it:

“Understanding this emotional cycle may help you to continue breastfeeding successfully by knowing when to take a break, whether perhaps to supplement a feed with formula, and when to get some much-needed rest” (page 33).

Diamond. Get a break by using a more inconvenient time-consuming feeding method. Go figure!

But it gets worse, much worse:

“During the first few days after birth it may be difficult for you as a new mother to believe that your breasts will produce sufficient nourishment for your baby. They may still be soft and unchanged, and you may not see any evidence of colostrums production. Today’s guidelines do not advocate giving any milk supplements to your baby during this early stage, but I suggest that each new mother and baby should be treated as the individuals that they are and each situation assessed accordingly. If you feel that your baby is hungry, unsettled and crying even after having what you assume to be a substantial feed at the breast, don’t be afraid to offer a supplemental feed if you feel you need to do so” (page 35).

Babies cry for many reasons (as illustrated here), most of the time it has nothing to do with hunger. Yet here we see the seed planted that a woman’s breasts are inefficient at the job of breastfeeding. Next Alison, waters the seed, giving a not-so-subtle nudge to formula:

“Do remember that if you are struggling with your breastfeeding, feeling under pressure and are beginning to dread each feed, there is always another option. You have the right to choose and try out another method without being made to feel guilty” (page 35).

Then she puts some fertilizer on the seed:

“Milk insufficiency is the most common reason for mothers to decide to give up breastfeeding” (page 35).

Alison missed a vital word here: milk insufficiency is the most common reason *cited* for mothers to decide to give up breastfeeding. Most women are led to think they have insufficient milk by insidious agenda-pushing idiots like Alison. Take, for example, this worrisome advice:

“Become ‘breast aware’. Before feeding, feel your breasts; then do it again after the feed. This can help give you some confidence that your baby has had a good feed, as your breasts will feel softer and less heavy after feeding than they did before you started” (page 43).

A mother’s breasts begin to feel permanently soft and even ‘empty’ at around week 6. This coincides with a drop in pumped amounts. To the novice breastfeeder, these appear to be signs that her milk is drying up, and it is this fear that Alison is exploiting. However feeling soft and empty is actually the normal physiological state for lactating breasts. At the same time, a mother may stop leaking or may stop feeling let-down (or feel it less). This means that her body has figured out how much milk is being removed from the breast and is no longer making too much. Her breasts have regulated and are now in perfect harmony with her baby.

However Alison omits this vital information. Rather, once the seed of doubt has been planted, and tended to, Alison administers the final push towards formula:

“Other common problems with which many breastfeeding mothers struggle are: an inability to achieve a good position or latch; becoming so overtired that the quantity and/or quality of their breast milk are affected; being given poor advice on breastfeeding schedule; the suggestion to feed on demand; or a digestive problem, such as reflux, from which the baby may be suffering” (page 36).

Not once is it mentioned that all these problems can be resolved. Also notice the comedy moment: “being given poor advice on breastfeeding schedule”. Yup, it appears Alison is even citing herself as a prime source of breastfeeding anguish. Notice also the reference to reflux. Yes Alison has a thing or two to say about this topic:

“We all know the saying ‘breast is best’, but actually I believe this is not always the case for some babies with reflux. I have read and understood all the theories supporting this statement, and on the whole it may be true, but through my work I have been unable to ignore the fact that sometimes breast is *not* best when dealing with this condition. I do understand that many mothers have a strongly emotional and deeply rooted desire to breastfeed and feel devastated and inadequate if unable to do so or if faced with the prospect of having to give up. There are many different opinions on whether breastfeeding actually makes the symptoms of reflux easier for the baby to deal with, or whether breast milk can aggravate the symptoms” (page 221).

There’s a reason why reflux is less common in breastfed babies. No actually, I lie -  there’re several reasons. Firstly, non-nutritive sucking (which can occur during breastfeeding but not bottle-feeding) reduces irritation and speeds gastric emptying. Secondly, the breastfed baby’s tongue motion triggers peristaltic waves along the gastrointestinal tract, these muscular contractions help the milk and food travel down into the stomach. Thirdly, breastmilk leaves the stomach much faster (so there’s less time for it to back up into the esophagus). Fourthly, breast milk is nature’s antacid, containing enzymes which neutralize stomach acid. In fact, breastfed babies with reflux have been shown to have shorter and fewer reflux episodes and less severe reflux at night than formula-fed babies (Heacock 1992).

*Aaaaand breathe*

But aside from reflux, poor positioning, poor latch, being overtired, poor quantity, poor quality, poor support aside – aside from these things, breastfeeding is best, yeah? Well, nope. Alison still has one more scenario in which breast is not best - the catch-all category of women; the least likely, yet commonly cited, Miss Malfunctioning Mammaries:

“There are mothers who are physiologically unable to breastfeed or genuinely unable to produce sufficient milk for their babies, and these mothers will be able to substitute formula for breast milk to feed and nurture their babies” (page 36).

Check out the idealised, Hallmark-style language associated with formula-use at the end of that sorry paragraph. Not once is it mentioned that the percentage of women who physically can’t breastfeeding is 2%, probably because if you can persuade yourself that your breasts are faulty, you are on the road to guilt-free formula feeding.

One thing even Goofy could logically deduce so far is – Allison does not want you to exclusively breastfeed. Her plan is incompatible with exclusive breastfeeding (EBF) because EBF requires you to listen to nature, whereas Alison’s plan requires you to deny nature. However approach this presents a problem for Alison: many mothers want to exclusively breastfeed because they want their babies to develop optimally; so how can Alison persuade these mothers to give up their EBF dreams? Simple. Just downplay ALL the benefits of exclusive breastfeeding. Check out this double-page spread; It lists the advantages for 4 different feeding methods (exclusive breastfeeding, pumping and breastfeeding, combination feeding, and exclusive formula feeding):

Pages 26 and 27.

Notice how combination feeding is said to have ALL the benefits of exclusive breastfeeding (Google ‘the virgin gut’ to understand why this is tush). So why bother exclusively breastfeeding if apparently your baby will get all the same benefits from combination feeding (and have the added perk of getting someone else to do the feeds?) – is exactly what Alison wants you to ask yourself. Also notice how the list of benefits to combined feeding focuses heavily on the assumption that babies are not satisfied without being topped-up with formula; that a mother can never truly supply enough milk for her baby. (It all sounds very Clare Byam-Cook to me; How did the human race ever survive sans formula?)

Notice also at the bottom of the page, it says, “There are some very real advantages to formula feeding”. Fancy a laugh? Let’s turn the page and take look at each in turn:

• Advantage #1: “It is easier to monitor milk intake and see how much your baby drinks”.

To reassure yourself that your breastfed baby is ingesting enough, just check their diapers; it’s not rocket science. Many bottle feeders mistakenly believe that by using a bottle, they can easily measure how much their baby has consumed. This is actually not true. Bottle-fed babies more often regurgitate some quantity of a feed. Short of putting a dip-stick into their puke, there is no way of knowing exactly how much has been brought back up. Also, the increased metabolic workload for the baby, lower digestibility of nutrients, and increased waste inherent in formula, make measuring the benefit of each feed – impossible.

• Advantage #2: “Formula gives longer and more lasting satisfaction to a baby”.

Sure, if you equate satisfaction with being a beached whale. Would you like to eat the equivalent of a seven-course Christmas dinner for every meal? Young babies (less than 6 months) have an immature digestive system. Their gastrointestinal tract does not produce digestive enzymes as a child or adult does. Babies can digest breastmilk more easily than infant formula because breastmilk contains enzymes (amylase and lipase) that aid digestion. So whilst a formula-fed baby may feel fuller longer, he is more likely to have more ‘pain in the gut’ from wind and allergies.

• Advantage #3: “Babies with lactose-intolerance can be fed lactose-free formula”.

The same babies could also be fed breastmilk, as the most common type of lactose intolerance is compatible with breastfeeding.

• Advantage #4: “Babies with either cows-milk protein intolerance and/or multiple food allergies can be fed with hypoallergenic formulas designed specifically for babies with these problems”

Ditto above. Breastmilk is best for these babies.

• Advantage #5: “Some babies who suffer from reflux respond better to specially designed anti-reflux formulas than to breast milk”.

Breast milk is the ideal food for reflux babies as it neutralises the acid in their tiny tummies.

• Advantage #6: “Siblings can be more involved and ‘help’ at feed times, hopefully initiating more interaction and acceptance of the baby”.

Siblings can help and interact with a breastfed baby in many ways, as can Dad, Grandad, Florrie the next-door neighbour, your cousin Pete, and the cat. Wielding a bottle does not equate to bonding.

• Advantage #7: “More freedom for the mother, avoiding the feeling that you are only being used as a ‘feeding machine’”.

And there’s me thinking that formula feeding mothers fed their babies too, or do they just leave them to starve? Surely bottle-feeding is more ‘machine’-like than breastfeeding, as it has the mother wielding a man-made device.

• Advantage #8: “Your partner can have much more involvement with feeding your baby from the start”.

Ahhh, but if you’re breastfeeding, you have a prime justification for delegating diaper duty to him (and bath duty, and cuddle duty, and whatever other ‘involvement’ will enrich his relationship). Why the fixation on feeding? (See, ‘The Laziness Conundrum’).

• Advantage #9: “Less physical or emotional strain than on a mother who is breastfeeding”.

Not true. Emotionally, a formula feeding parent is more likely to feel understandable guilt and unresolved turmoil as a direct consequence of formula feeding. Physically, she can get back ache from lugging all those bottles around.

• Advantage #10: “More freedom with your choice of clothes as you do not need easy access to your breast at all times!”

Yes more fashion freedom – if you like your Ralph Lauren marinated in formula spit up.

• Advantage #11: “Fewer dietary restrictions and demands on the mother”.

Perhaps this means formula feeding mothers have worse diets because they don’t feel they need to eat healthily. Point: everyone should eat healthy, breastfeeding or not.

• Advantage #12: “It is safe for you to take antibiotics or other medication as these will not transfer into your baby through your milk”.

Most medications are safe to use whilst breastfeeding, and for those that aren’t, there is almost always an alternative to switch to.

• Advantage #13: “No interference from sore or leaking breasts when resuming sexual relations”.

Sure, if your bedsheets are more important than your baby’s nutrition...

Well that’s the entirety of Alison’s list of formula feeding pros. Notice that Alison gives 7 advantages to exclusive breastfeeding and 13 advantages to exclusive formula feeding! Alison swiftly follows this biased collection of lists with the following paragraph, which I read half-way then balked:

“Every woman’s breastfeeding experience will be different from the next and while some will cope with ease, others will never feel comfortable with breastfeeding and won’t particularly enjoy it. There is a very good book by Clare Byam-Cook called...”

Nooooooooooo! (imagine me leaping through the air in slow motion grabbing the book from your hands). This paragraph reads like the old boys’ network of breastfeeding saboteurs. Clare Byam-Cook has as much faith in your ability to produce sufficient breastmilk as I have in Charlie Sheen becoming the next Pope. Avoid! Clare Byam-Cook believes that the breasts of many mothers are innately broken (see here). As Clare and Alison are on the same page when it comes to undermining breastfeeding, it is with fake shock that I balked at this recommendation. Alison describes Clare’s book, “What to Expect When Breastfeeding...And What If You Can’t?” as:

“in my view, the best and most comprehensive guide on the subject” (page 29).

Which roughly translates into – it’s a pile of crap, the pages of which shouldn’t even be used to wipe the ass of your ex husband.

It shouldn’t come as much of a surprise (not even enough to lift a gnat’s eyebrow) that Alison is very much against co-sleeping. This is because co-sleeping requires the parent to share their sleeping quarters with the inconvenient produce of their loins. This, as Alison tells us, is simply not conductive to the success of her sleep plan:

“When giving night feeds try to resist temptation to take your baby into bed with you to feed him. It is far better to sit in a chair and carry out the feed with minimum fuss” (page 104).

Minimum fuss? Dragging your ass out of bed, going into the other room, dragging your baby’s ass out of bed, then sitting on a chair, freezing your respective assess off as you sit upright for up to an hour - this does not seem like minimum fuss to me. Yet Alison persists:

“If you are breastfeeding you will have more success using my plan if you follow this advice rather than feeding your baby while lying in bed” (page 104).

Why single out breastfeeding mothers? Call me a cynic, but the focus on nursing mothers is a probably because co-sleeping perfectly lends itself to breastfeeding, thus making the whole feeding process more efficient, speedy and enjoyable; but facilitating breastfeeding is not what Alison’s about. She continues:

“I also advise that very early on you begin to offer at least one of the night feeds from a bottle” (page 104).

“I advise using the bottle for the bedtime feed at 7pm. I have found this to work fairly well for a number of reasons:

•It can provide a busy working dad with the opportunity to have some contact and be involved with baby before bed” (page 105).

I’m going to sound like a Vtech product by repeating myself in monotone again and again but: there. are. other. ways. to. bond. with. a. baby.

•“After a long, tiring day, your breast milk supply may be diminishing and may not be enough to sustain your baby throughout the night” (page 105).

A double whammy here. Firstly, Alison dissuades nursing mothers from giving their breasts the stimulation they need during the evening – when they need it most. Secondly, she tugs on the nerve in every nursing mother’s brain that worries whether she is producing enough.

•“Babies are also very often tired after a long day and may not have enough energy to take a full feed from the breast” (page 105).

If you don’t bottle-feed for yourself, stop being selfish and bottle-feed for your baby! The poor soul is knackered. Makes you wonder how we aren’t an extinct species.

•“It is usually quicker to give a bottlefeed, therefore giving you more free time each evening” (page 105).

I was wondering how long it would take to switch back to “babies are inconvenient” mode.

•“It gives you an opportunity to see how much milk your baby has had and therefore to be confident that he should not require another feed till morning” (page 105).

...or freak you out if he has only taken 2oz.

If your baby still insists on feeding through the night, it’s time to step the deprivation up a gear. Alison instructs you to water down your baby’s bottle-feeds to trick the little blighter into disinterest:

“Q: My baby is eight weeks old and is still waking at around 3am and expecting a feed. What shall I do?

A: Some babies may need a little more training to do without the last feed completely. The contents of a bottle can be gradually diluted and the volume reduced to reduce your baby’s reliance on nourishment during the night. If you are feeding with expressed breast milk, it can be diluted by adding cooled boiled water, and if using formula you can begin to reduce the number of scoops you add to the usual amount of water” (page 104).

The book includes a chart instructing exactly how to dilute your baby’s feeds. If you’re exclusively breastfeeding, there’s a chart instructing you to reduce your baby’s time on the breast:


The advice is repeated on page 140:

“By 8 weeks old your baby should be showing signs that he really doesn't need a feed during the night. If he is still waking in the early hours and looking for his feed, this might be the time to think about watering it down”.

It is just as dangerous to dilute your baby’s feed too much as it is to make it too concentrated. Too little powder will reduce the baby’s ability to gain weight properly and make him hungry. It also makes the formula even more nutritionally imbalanced. Furthermore, if done regularly, diluting formula puts the baby at risk of water intoxication (overdosing on water is difficult to do as a child or adult, but actually relatively easy for a baby), fluoride overdose (most tap water contains fluoride) and sodium overdose (some tap water contains high levels of sodium and babies are particularly sensitive to its effects).

So, once your baby starts sleeping through, thus dropping that night feed, presumably that means the breastfeeding mother can stop using the bottle? Not on your nelly!

“When your baby is sleeping through the night without requiring a night feed, chose one of the daytime feeds to replace with the bottle, thus keeping at least one bottlefeed in place during each day to ensure your baby’s prolonged acceptance. It is entirely up to you which feed you chose” (page 105).

So I’ve left my newborn to cry for hours, deprived him of comfort when he’s upset, forced him to take a bottle, and starved him through the night. How else can I bully my baby into subservience?

Well once you’ve starved your baby through the night, it’s time to get cracking on starving him through the daytime. He’ll be wanting your attention then too, and we can’t be having that:

“After around eight weeks your baby should have responded well to the plan, be sleeping through the night and no longer needing a night feed. Once he has consistently slept through for around 12 hours each night for at least two weeks, you can gradually start to reduce the number of daytime feeds” (page 115).

Okay reduce daytime feeds – check. I think my baby’s spirit is almost broken, but I want to make doubly sure. How do I accomplish this?

From page 178.

“Whatever sleep aid your baby has been used to settling with will now be removed and you will put him into his cot, say your goodnight phrase, leave the room and close the door behind you. More likely your baby will start to cry and may even be at full pitch before you can get through the door, but summon all your resolve, ignore him, carry on out of the door and close it behind you” (page 172).

I can’t leave my baby to cry, can I? What if he’s ill, or hurt?

“If you allow your baby to use his cry as a method of drawing you in, it will end up with your baby dictating his own terms and being in control instead of you!” (page 193).

Neglecting an 8 week old to the point where they cry themselves to sleep (sans blankie or whatever shred of comfort they have left) is one thing, but what about a 12 month old – those little sods are mobile! To address this dilemma, Alison suggests physically restraining your 12 month old into submission:

“Your baby will be more mobile and will be able to stand up in his cot, so you will need to put him back down firmly into his sleep position” (page 183).

Alison then describes a scene she observed via video camera, in which she believes proves that babies are tyrants:

“I have witnessed many babies of this age group [12 months] via a video camera that I put in their room during the sleep-training process and it is fascinating to see how their reactions change as the training progresses. To start with they may be continually standing up and even shaking the bars of the cot with utter frustration, shouting at the tops of their voices, but after a while they run out of steam and can only manage a sitting position, from which they eventually give up and lie down to sleep” (page 183).

This scene can be described in many ways, heart braking and desperate for sure, ‘fascinating’ it is not. I’ve never burnt a book in my life (and I’m a law graduate, so believe me, I’ve come close), but this book has taken a steaming dump on my love of literacy. It is only deserving of lining my cat’s litter tray. Alison’s ‘work’ is yet another variation on the tired old theme: “Just let them cry it out”. This tough love for babies is like training a pet. Babies like the video-taped one described may eventually give up crying and go to sleep, but they lose their trust in their parents to meet their nighttime needs. They disengage from external stimuli and retreat to a lonely internal world.

And with that thought, I condemn this book to ash.


The Ultimate Baby and Toddler Q&A 
Hollie Smith 2012


Ahhhh Netmums, the cosy nemesis to Mumsnet (only not as articulated nor as widely quoted in newspapers). This book attempts to be a massive collection of questions and answers covering a comprehensive range of baby and toddler topics. There is some genuinely sound advice in parts; the book is big on skin to skin for example, and it recommends La Leche League. However other parts are utter tripe. Ironically, it is because the book contains an uneasy mix of good and bad advice that makes it even more insidious. The good tends to mask the bad, which sets a perfect trap for unsuspecting parents.

Our first introduction to breastfeeding is in a chapter titled, “Is breastfeeding supposed to be this difficult?” Here we find the inaccuracies begin:

“If you’ve hit a rough patch but you’re determined to feed your baby for the optimum six months that’s officially recommended, or beyond, then your best bet is to seek as much help as you can in finding a solution, and battle on” (page 55).

Page 55.

Six months is certainly not the optimum length of time for breastfeeding, and no medical organisation (Government or otherwise) suggests this. The 6 month assumption plays into the myth that, there’s no nutritional value to breastfeeding after 6 months. The sentence should read: “feed your baby exclusively for six months, and then continue until your child is the optimum age of 2, or beyond, as recommended”. If the book is going to cite ‘recommendations’, it can at least state the facts correctly. There is, after all, a massive difference between 6 months and two years.

The book continues, predictably, by covering the well-chartered topic of guilt:

“If, on the other hand, difficulties with breastfeeding are making you truly miserable; or are causing problems for other members of the family; you should certainly consider alternatives. Either way, it’s not something you need to feel guilty about” (page 55).

If you’re going to give up breastfeeding because other members of the family have beef about it, then you, my friend, are a pussy; and guilt seems quite an appropriate emotional response in the circumstances.

“As a health visitor I absolutely support breastfeeding, but not at the expense of what’s best for those involved; and bottle-feeding with love is just as good” (page 56).

Ahhhh I knew I should have suspected one of those weasels sniffing about. Never trust a health visitor. At least not until you’ve sought several second opinions. Let’s quickly tackle this sentence in its component parts:

“As a health visitor I absolutely support breastfeeding...”

Firstly, being a health visitor does not necessarily equate with supporting breastfeeding. Secondly this is a classic introduction to a sentence which is about to undermine breastfeeding. It’s like Hugh Hefner saying, “I’m not a dirty old perv but...”

“...but not at the expense of what’s best for those involved;”

The two main players here – the mother and the baby – each have interests on the line. Breastfeeding is certainly best for both of these parties - biologically speaking. However when the nutritional interests of the baby collide with the practical interests of the mother, it makes logical sense that, life-threatening scenarios aside, the baby’s interests should trump the mother’s. The baby is the person whose voice is the quietest both literally and metaphorically and who has the least control over the situation. Not to mention the moral and practical fact that the parent produced the child, and is thus responsible for safeguarding it’s welfare (bizarrely this appears to be a radical concept in modern society).

“bottle-feeding with love is just as good” (page 56).

Bottle-feeding is not ‘just as good’, whether ‘with love’ or otherwise. Even formula companies publicly recognise this. Furthermore, even if the bottle contains expressed breast milk, some of the protective effects of direct nursing are lost.

Next, the book elaborates:

“It’s not just about what’s best for your baby, it’s about what’s best for you and your mental health. You may also need to take into account your partner’s feelings and the needs of the rest of your family” (page 58).

Again, I remind you that the baby has no voice. If his own mother isn’t going to safeguard his best interests, then who is? Consider also, whose interest is most fundamental - the mother’s desire for comfort and convenience or the baby’s need to be protected from lifelong health risks? Arguably, the mother’s desire for comfort and convenience is a ‘secondary interest’ and the baby’s need to be protected from lifelong health risks is a ‘primary interest’. It stands to reason that a secondary interest should be sacrificed to promote a primary interest. Yes, that means a certain element of martyrhood, but what are parents if not martyrs in some respect?

Needless to say, the book’s perspective on breastfeeding is pessimistic and defeatist:

“If you decide to drop breastfeeding, you should do so without regret. The ‘breast is best’ lobby is a powerful one. While for some women breastfeeding can be an empowering and life-enriching experience, for others the physical, emotional or social challenges can seem less of a dream and more of a nightmare” (page 59).

Here’s a secret – you don’t have to enjoy it. We parents have to endure many things we don’t necessarily enjoy: sleepless nights, early mornings, dirty diapers, toddler tantrums, Build A Bear parties, the list is endless. Man up.

And while you’re at it, stop perpetuating propaganda such as this tired old cliché:

“At the end of the day, we all want what’s best for our kids, and the best gift any baby can receive is a contented mum” (page 59).

This parent-centric stance is simplistic, not to mention egotistical and narrow-minded. What a baby would regard as ‘the best gift’ is entirely subjective (due to babies having no voice as I mentioned earlier), and subjectivism has little place in important medical issues. I’ll say it again, ‘happy mom – happy baby’ is simplistic, egotistical and narrow-minded. Right on cue, a mother matching this description chimes in with her experience:

“Breastfeeding was a nightmare for me. I was scared to suggest bottle-feeding, as the midwives seemed dismissive of it. Finally, one suggested a combination of breast, expressing and formula, but it made me feel my whole life revolved around feeding! After six weeks, we went fully on to formula. Finally, I knew my baby was getting the food she needed – Jenny from Stockport, mum to Laila, two” (page 59).

Another mother from the simplistic, egotistical and narrow-minded club shares her experience:

“My whole life revolved around expressing and I felt like a cow. Looking back, I wish I’d given him formula sooner. – Irma from Oldham, mum to Damir, four, and Aydin, two” (page 62).

And another:

“At three months, for some reason, my son stopped wanting any breast and switched permanently to the bottle. I felt very un-needed. However, he’s now a very healthy little man of ten months. I believe it doesn’t matter whether your baby breastfeeds or bottle-feeds – as long as he feeds. – Anne-Marie from Royston, mum to Thomas, ten months” (page 63).

Notice how she blames her son for switching to the bottle, like he leapt out of his crib one day and decided to boil the kettle and prepare his own formula. It appears blaming the baby is commonplace. Here’s another mother doing so:

“Thankfully, she went for the bottle straight away, no problems. At six months she switched herself exclusively to bottles, mainly all formula by then. – Anna from Newton Abbot, mum to Issac, three, and Milly, two” (page 139).

So she made all the bottles up herself did she?

Then, for good measure, there’s yet another tale of woe:

“I breastfed for a few months then got hospitalised with mastitis and found feeding from then on very stressful, so finally moved to formula. Jessica is certainly none the worse for it. – Debbie from Croespenmaen, mum to Jessica, five, and Ethan, two months” (page 60).

And another FFS!

“I made a good start with breastfeeding but by day four I wasn’t producing enough milk and so I swapped to bottles and formula. With an older child and a toddler too, it’s been more practical for me to formula feed. I’m glad I gave it a shot, though. – Nicola from Bournemouth, mum to Toby, six, Anise, sixteen months, and Lukas, three months” (page 60).

What this mother doesn’t say, is how she knew she was producing insufficient milk. Consequently, this tale is of no help to anyone, yet perpetuates the ubiquitous myth that a significant amount of women have ‘broken boobs’.

And, just in case you didn’t notice a theme developing, here’s another tale of breastfeeding woe:

“I was basically a milk cow: express for thirty minutes, feed for thirty minutes, wash up and steralise everything, twenty minutes for a wee and a cuppa, then start all over again. At six months, my daughter got a snotty cold and decided bottles were easier. A happy, relaxed mum is more important than the method of milk delivery. If you need to stop breastfeeding due to pain/stress/sanity, then do. – Anna from Newton Abbot, mum to Isaac, three, and Milly, two” (page 60).

Looks like this mother has fallen into the common trap of downplaying the importance of breastfeeding in order to make herself feel better for quitting. Contrary to what she spouts, breastfeeding is much, much more than merely a ‘method of delivery’, as any exclusively pumping mother will tell you. By dismissing the qualities of breastfeeding, this mother, (and all those who apply this strategy), are undermining breastfeeding mothers who battle on in the face of adversity. After all, if breastfeeding were simply a ‘method of delivery’ how foolish it would be to battle through stress, mastitis, cluster feeds, thrush et al when apparently bottle-feeding is just as good. It makes breastfeeding mothers look like quacks.

The book continues to present an imbalanced collection of breastfeeding stories, tipping the scales with yet another tale of woe:

“Jake was my first baby and I intended to breastfeed. Unfortunately, I wasn’t shown how to feed him correctly and he didn’t latch on right. I kept trying, but Jake kept screaming, so we gave formula and he became a calm, contented baby. – Rachel from Staines, mum to Jake, five, Kyla, four, and Abigail, five months” (page 61).

Here’s an idea, how about seeking help rather than waiting for it to come to you? How about doing some research before giving birth? Finding your local breastfeeding group? Phoning a helpline?

This mother didn’t bother to tap into any of these support sources, and this book doesn’t bother to mention them. Instead, it prefers to print tale after tale of woe with no indication that these problems can be resolved. Here’s a curiously vague tale:

“With my daughter, it took four days and a lot of tears from both me and her before the midwife realised I wasn’t producing anything at all” (page 62).

So the mother switched to formula at 4 days... when her milk was due to come in. Imagine, if you will, Homer Simpson proclaiming: "Doh!" But the book doesn’t mention this important biological fact. The mother then adds:

“A fed baby is a happy baby” (page 62).

Imagine Nelson's "haaa-haaaa!" at this point. A fed baby is a happy baby, where do they get this crap? Sounds like text lifted straight from a Cow & Gate can, then regurgitated by deluded mothers the world over. A fed baby is not necessarily a happy baby, particularly when they have colic, an ear infection and reflux caused by consuming formula; oh and especially when they’re dead from SIDS. Just sayin'.

Another case of lazyitis can be found later on page 85:

“My son just would not suck, and I ended up bottle-feeding with formula from day two. I did give expressing a try when my milk came, but it just took too long. – Emma from Banbury, mum to Nathaniel, four months” (page 85).

One thing that pokes you in the eye like a 10 month old’s finger, is the blatantly imbalanced portrayals of breastfeeding experience in this book. It is so obviously tipped in favour of giving up. This defeatist attitude pretty much continues throughout the entire book.

Take the next example for instance, it demonstrates how mothers often declare they ‘had no choice’ when in fact, they couldn’t be bothered to pursue other options; In the chapter titled, “Is it OK to give him a dummy?” one mother declares:

“Breastfeeding was so painful, there’s no way I was going to let him comfort suck on me. So we had no choice but to try a dummy. I was worried that he’d develop nipple confusion but he never had a problem switching between the two. – Helena from York, mum to William, six months” (page 75).

To shun the risk of nipple confusion further:

“I gave Isabella a dummy as she needed the extra comfort. She still has it now, but she’s also still breastfed, so it hasn’t caused any problems there. People can be really snobbish about dummies. They carry a real stigma for some reason – I suppose there’s the suggestion that you should be doing more to comfort your child. – Leanne from Bath, mum to Isabella, fourteen months” (page 75).

Who would suggest such a thing? *chortle*

Page 77.

Predictably, yet more tales of woe abound in the chapter titled, “How do I know I’m feeding her enough?”:

“I breastfed my eldest daughter and she seemed to want to feed constantly. By week nine I’d had enough. I didn’t feel it was worth it because I couldn’t be the mummy I wanted to be, as all I was doing was sleeping or feeding. So I gradually weaned her off me and on to the bottle. It was the best decision I made as my energy came back and I could begin enjoying my baby. I weaned my second baby on the bottle at ten weeks too. – Stephanie from Rochdale, mum to Emily, four, and Lily, two” (page 82).

It’s all about you isn’t it?

Tales of woe such as these create a culture of failure which serves three purposes. For pregnant mothers who have not decided how they will feed, it turns them off the idea of breastfeeding. For breastfeeding mothers, the carefree dismissal of breastfeeding undermines their efforts. And for formula feeding mothers, it plays into their denial and soothes their guilt. In other words, stories like these serve no positive purpose.

Furthermore, what is left unsaid is as important as what is said. Take this tale of woe for example:

“I’m too scared to try just breastfeeding on its own as I don’t think I have enough milk. – Helen from Bristol, mum to Max, six weeks” (page 82).

The book makes no effort to reassure readers that it is highly unlikely they will not have sufficient milk. It just leaves the fear hanging in the air like that stale fart I spoke of earlier.

A: When hell freezes over! Muhahahaha!

Up to this point, the book has established itself as parent-centric, aiming to appeal to those parents wanting maximum convenience at minimum effort with baby’s needs as an afterthought. This theme continues into the sleep chapter titled, “When will he sleep through?”:

“It’s a good idea to start encouraging your baby to self-settle as early as possible, because what you’re aiming for is for him to get himself back to sleep when he wakes in the night, rather than waking you and demanding your services” (page 129).

So the book champions ‘self-settling’ on one hand, yet on the other hand advocates using formula to feed your baby to sleep:

“Lots of breastfeeding mums wonder if a bottle of formula given last thing at night will help. It’s true that formula isn’t digested as easily as breast milk and is likely to leave a baby feeling fuller for longer. If you’re truly exhausted, it may be worth trying” (page 129).

What new parent isn’t ‘truly exhausted’? Still, it would seem that bottles are the answer to everything:

“I think it’s a good idea for all babies – even those that are exclusively breastfed – to be happy about taking a bottle. For that reason, I’ve always advised breastfeeding mums to offer supplementary drinks of water in a bottle from quite an early stage” (page 136).

Apparently, this is an ‘expert’ talking. God help us all. She continues:

“Mixing bottle and breastfeeding can work very well, in spite of the common view that it’s a ‘slippery slope’ that will soon bring about a complete end to breastfeeding. Just be aware that introducing a bottle can be harder the longer you put it off” (page 136).

But what if your baby won’t take the bottle, because understandably, he prefers a warm, soft breast with a human attached. In that case, the book suggests starving your baby into submission:

“There’s always the ‘cold turkey’ approach based on the theory that your baby will have to accept a bottle if she becomes hungry enough. Be warned though, they can hold out for a long time: you may find that your nerves desert you” (page 137).

...and damage your baby’s trust in your ability to fulfil his basic needs, whilst you develop mastitis or a breast abscess. Nice.

But why is it so important to introduce a bottle, even if you are exclusively breastfeeding? Answer: So Daddy can bond with baby of course! Duuuuh! If Daddy is denied the opportunity to place a plastic teat in his baby’s mouth, he may get resentful, your marriage will fall apart and he will run away with the Wallmart checkout lady. Or something:

“I’ve been trying to get my baby to move to bottles for a few weeks now but she’s so stubborn – she just doesn’t want to know. I end up giving in and feeding her myself. My husband is desperate to feed her himself. I think he feels he’s reliant on me always having to take over and it’s getting in the way of their bonding. He does do everything else he can – baths, massage and play, but that feed before bed is such a special time and I wish he could get some of that. We’ve taken a break over the last week as she was getting very worked up and we are hoping to have another go next week. – Sarah from Darlington, mum to Jack, three, and Beth, four months” (page 138).

This baby clearly doesn’t want the bottle, yet her parents are ignoring her wishes because of some warped view that a bottle is necessary to paternal bonding. In the book I wrote a big “Oh FFS!” next to this (and as a rebel, I shall return it to the library like that).

Another example of a parent resenting their baby’s natural preference can be found on the next page (I know what you’re thinking - this book sure is balanced!):

“My son was no problem and would go from boob to bottle and breast milk to formula with no fuss. With my daughter it’s been a different story as she would not take a bottle or formula, which meant having to carry on breastfeeding far longer than I really wanted to! I am pro-breastfeeding but think that new mums should be advised to give a baby a bottle-feed regularly and fairly early on so they get used to it. – Michelle from Hitchin, mum to Ed, two, and Evie, eleven months” (page 139).

Michelle, despite your claim to the contrary, you’re clearly not ‘pro-breastfeeding’ as if you were, you wouldn’t want potentially sabotaging advice pushed onto new mothers. Speaking of which, let’s move on to the chapter about weaning.

Page 182.

Weaning, in this book, refers to the UK interpretation of the word, meaning ‘introducing solids’. The chapter begins:

“If you have a big baby who no longer seems content with just milk feeds, or has taken to waking up in the night where she’s previously been sleeping through, or is sitting on your lap at mealtimes and trying to take stuff off your plate, then maybe it’s time to consider weaning – even if she isn’t yet six months old” (page 183).

Let’s go through each of the book’s signals to weaning readiness, and look at what the causes are:

“baby no longer seems content with just milk feeds”

Cause: growth spurt.

“waking up in the night where she’s previously been sleeping through”

Cause: growth spurt.

“sitting on your lap at mealtimes and trying to take stuff off your plate”

Cause: being a baby.

None of the above require you to introduce solids to your baby shy of the World Health Organisation guideline of 6 months. Yet according to this book, the WHO don’t know shit:

“There’s no clear evidence that introducing solid food somewhere between four and six months – as opposed to waiting for six months – could be harmful” (page 184).

With hundreds of studies about gut readiness under their belts, good parents tend to err on the side of caution. Waiting until 6 months to introduce solids will not damage your baby, however introducing solids prematurely is certainly linked with health damage. Why are some parents impatient at introducing solids? Why are they willing to risk their baby’s health? Answer: because they (foolishly) believe that introducing solids will make their baby sleep more/cry less and otherwise be less demanding. This is the lazyitis epidemic again. Books like this one, know what such parents want to hear, and are more than willing to supply it. ‘Give formula, it’s fine. Give solids early, it’s fine. Really. There’s no need to feel guilty.’ This dangerous writing puts a smile on parents' faces and dollars in the authors' pockets but the casualties are the babies. Case in point:

“Even these high-risk infants are no better off if their exposure to potential allergens is delayed until after six months, rather than if you make a start somewhere between four and six months” (page 185).

Basically, the book is harking back to the 1980s age of weaning, and in the process, pissing on thirty years of scientific research.

“Don’t assume if you breastfeed and/or delay weaning that it will definitely protect against allergies developing” (page 185).

Well DUH! Not smoking doesn’t guarantee that you won’t die of lung cancer, but it’s a bloody good place to start!

Page 216.

Staying with the lazy angle, the book has a chapter titled, “Is it OK to start sleep training?” Geeee can you guess what the answer is? A big fat hell yeah:

“Rather than giving him that feed, or whatever else he’s looking for when he wakes in the night, or when you put him down for the evening and he won’t settle, you make sure he knows it is not available – and that he needs to go to sleep, instead. And as a general rule, the sooner you try it the easier it’s likely to be” (page 217).

No age limit is given. If fact, parents are advised to night train as soon as possible, which can be dangerous for young babies or babies that are unwell. Speaking of being a danger to babies, Dorothy Einon, the author of the next book we are going to look at, comes pretty high on the list...


Dorothy Einon’s Complete Book of Childcare and Development
Dorothy Einon 2004


Somebody’s been taking back-handers from formula companies. Or so you’d think if you read this book. The book begins, naturally, with the topic of birth, which is a perfect opportunity for the author to say:

“The odd bottle of formula is not the end of the world (or of breastfeeding)” (page 13).

What an optimistic start to the book. At least we know from the outset where the book stands on the issue of exclusive breastfeeding (i.e. it’s unimportant).

Indeed, breastfeeding itself, is belittled:

“Breasts are a convenient means of delivering food. They do not deliver love” (page 13).

This statement is factually inaccurate on a physiological and also pragmatic level. Oxytocin, the hormonal of love, is delivered through breastmilk. Therefore love is, in fact, delivered through breastfeeding. Furthermore, breastfeeding, unlike formula feeding, is more than merely ‘a means of delivering food’. Aside from the hormonal transaction between mother and child, breastfeeding is also a means of delivering immunological support, optimum nutrition, and also provides nature’s protective measure against ear infections and jaw misalignment (the auction of suckling at the breast facilitates oral development which has a positive knock-on effect for speech development!) Phew.

Page 20. Notice the bold caption 'Better health?'

None of these attributes are mentioned in the “Breast or bottle?” chapter, which tilts in favour of bottle feeding. The introduction to the chapter reads:

“Always remember: a breast is just a breast. How you deliver milk to your baby is a very minor part of parenthood” (page 20).

Actually, feeding is central to babyhood. It is a baby’s prime source of pleasure and comfort, and essential for their growth. Indisputably, it is central to your baby’s ability to thrive; they spend most of their time doing it, and it is central to their survival and well-being. Therefore if you have a baby, feeding is not only a major part of parenthood, arguably it is the most important part of parenting an infant. Start as you mean to go on people.

The text continues:

“If you cannot breastfeed your baby, for whatever reason, this should not make you depressed. No-one ever tells you that you should not breastfeed, but the advantages of breastfeeding are often overstated. Here we will look at some of the claims in detail” (page 20).

Oh goodie. Lets.

“Breast milk is designed for rearing human babies, cow’s milk for rearing calves’, goes the argument. Formula is cows’ milk that has been modified to make it more like human milk. It is not perfect, but fairly good – if bottles are made up as directed, formula provides your baby with all the nutrients she needs to grow. It does not change throughout the feed, as breast milk does, not does it adjust as the child grows, but whether this is necessary is not certain” (page 20).

So the author claims that formula is ‘fairly good’ at mimicking breast milk (Fact: it’s not; see here). Even if this were true, what parent would choose ‘fairly good’ for their infant’s nutrition? Not good, just ‘fairly good’. If you’re willing to downgrade to ‘fairly good’ for your baby’s nutrition, what other areas of parenting are you willing to cut corners on? Nappy changing perhaps?

“Babies are happy in wet nappies” (page 13).

Soooo anyway, back to the analysis of breastfeeding health claims:

“There is less sodium in breast milk – while this is better for the kidneys, bottlefed babies are no more likely to suffer from kidney disease” (page 20).

Breastmilk has a low renal solute. Renal solute load represents the amount of waste products excreted by the kidneys, per liter of milk consumed. The major determinants of renal solute load are dietary protein and electrolytes such as sodium, potassium and chloride. Breastmilk has a low renal solute load compared to formula. In non-nerd language this basically means by breastfeeding your baby there is less work for his developing kidneys, compared to the load if he was formula fed. Yet Dorothy seems to think that putting a baby’s kidney’s under strain is all fine and dandy.

“Breastfeeding is claimed to protect against gastroenteritis, cot death and cancer, and to promote better cholesterol metabolism and intelligence. This is difficult to prove or disprove because, in most cases, studies do not compare like with like. Mothers who bottlefeed are more likely to be poor, to live in substandard housing, to be teenagers, smokers, drinkers, drug takers, and to have fewer years of education. On average their children are more likely to suffer from disease, but whether this is a direct result of being fed by the bottle rather than the breast or because of other reasons is unclear” (page 21).

Most major studies account for these variables and still show formula feeding to be substandard. Next!

“We cannot even say for certain that the immunity comes directly from the breast milk. The immunity breast milk passes on to the baby would far outweigh all the advantages of bottle-feeding if we lived in a less sterile environment. However, today bottle-feeding is completely safe as our modern homes are clean of germs. When our immunity is rarely challenged by attack, the advantages of breast over bottle become less obvious” (page 21).

When babies are born their immune systems are very immature; this means they are susceptible to many different illnesses and allergies regardless of how sterile their environment is. Breast milk contains a variety of immunological, antimicrobial and anti-inflammatory agents that protect against infection. Approximately 80% of the cells in breast milk are microphages, cells that kill bacteria, fungi and viruses. Furthermore, the pH balance of breastmilk differs to that of infant formula. The pH of breastmilk aids the growth of friendly microbes (probiotics), specifically lactobacilus bifidus, which prevent the growth of more harmful organisms (see, 'The Virgin Gut: A Note for Parents'). Also, unlike formula, breast milk is sterile (it has no germs). It does not need to be stored and it does not become contaminated by polluted water or dirty bottles, which can lead to infant diarrhea.

The next issue the author wants to tackle on her whistle-stop tour of breastfeeding health claims is – the topic that presses the tetchy button of many formula feeders – bonding!

From page 21.

“It is true that bottle-feeding can be carried out by others, or that by propping the bottle on a cushion you can feed a baby without even picking her up. But that does not mean that mothers do not bond as they bottle-feed. Breastfeeding mothers do not always gaze lovingly into their baby’s eyes as she suckles. For many of them breastfeeding is a time to catch up on reading or talking to an older child. While it is hard to change a nappy, or spoon feed, or jiggle a bottle teat into the mouth while having a conversation, it is perfectly possible to slip the nipple in the mouth while doing so. There is no evidence that the breast is the seat of love, and we can safely ignore all claims that it is” (page 21).

I’ve got no idea what “the seat of love” rhetoric actually means. More importantly, this paragraph fails to mention the hormonal exchange between mother and child which occurs during nursing, nor the codependence of nursing mother and her child, nor the inevitable skin to skin contact of breastfeeding; all of which contribute to the enhanced bonding experience that the breastfeeding dyad enjoys above the formula feeding dyad.

The book even alludes to the fact that breastfeeding mothers enjoy enhanced bonds with their babies (the book refers to this as ‘closer emotional ties’), yet of course, shrouds this in negativity:

“While mothers may develop closer emotional ties to their breastfed babies, fathers may lose out. They may feel less excluded from this close relationship in the early weeks if the baby is given at least an occasional bottle” (page 21).

This assumes that the bond a mother develops with her breastfed baby acts to the detriment of the father. It suggests that the baby only has so much love to go around, and the breastfeeding mother has swiped it all for herself. Nonsense. Fathers are not Oliver Twists, with quivering bottom lip and cap in hand, pleading, “can I have some more (love) please”. And if your husband is like this, do consider an exchange.

From page 24.

However, like an offended mother on Facebook, the author won’t drop the issue. Many pages later, she’s still talking about poor daddies:

“Most surveys suggest that mothers still do far more of the day-to-day caring for the children than fathers. Part of the problem arises because men cannot breastfeed a baby. Most babies are comforted by the breast, and because men do not have this ‘comfort object’ they are less able to quieten crying babies” (page 139).

Did you hear that ladies, your bloke is incompetent because you breastfeed! It doesn’t occur to him to cuddle, rock, or talk to the baby.

Like the other books featured in this article, this one sticks to the patronising approach of giving formula feeding parents ‘permission’ not to feel guilty:

“Never feel guilty about giving your baby a bottle. Regard the bottle as a liberating tool” (page 46).

Why would a formula feeding parent feel ‘guilty’? Answer: Because they’ve put their own wants above their baby’s needs. Telling parents to regard bottles as a ‘liberating tool’ simply feeds this selfish rhetoric.

From page 46.

The book then awkwardly attempts to readdress the focus by suggesting that feeding is not an important part of parenting:

“Never feel that you have failed if you need to introduce a bottle. Parenting has very little to do with feeding the baby’s body, and everything to do with feeding the child’s mind, social development and his long-term emotional stability” (page 46).

...all of which are linked to his health, which is directly linked to his nutrition. As I mentioned above, a baby spends most of its time feeding and sleeping. If you fuck up at one of these, you’ve fucked up at 50% of parenting a baby, and no, you don’t get a rosette for that.

Thus far, all evidence suggests that this book doesn’t hold breastfeeding in high esteem. So at this point, any wise mother would close the book and seek breastfeeding support elsewhere. However if you want your breastfeeding journey sabotaged, the next chapter, “How to breast-feed” delivers the goods. So-called ‘expert’ advice includes:

“Introduce more, shorter feeds” (page 22).

“Start by giving 5-10 minutes on each breast” (page 23).

...and deprive your baby of the rich hindmilk he needs to thrive. In reality, you should let your baby decide how long he wants to feed on each breast. If he’s taking his sweet time and you’re impatient, you can check he’s still feeding by looking for cues such as rhythmic sucking and swallowing, baby’s cheeks staying rounded when sucking, and wiggling ears.

More twaddle passed off as fact includes:

“What you drink, he drinks” (page 23).

No Sherlock. When you down a shot of vodka, baby is not downing the equivalent. Very little alcohol enters breast milk.

“Supply might be low at night so you may need to supplement with formula” (page 25).

Babies tend to be fussier at night (over-stimulation and tiredness mostly), consequently many mothers falsely believe their baby is fussy because they are not receiving sufficient milk, which leads the mother (as per the instructions in this book) to supplement with formula, which results in their supply truly diminishing. Thus, inaccurate information such as this becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

“It’s easier to wean your baby off the breast before his first birthday” (page 46).

What use is this info? It implies that all mothers should wean their babies shy of World Health Organisation guidelines so they don’t end up with teens forcefully latching themselves onto the breast.

Also in the “How to breast-feed” chapter, there’s a list of reasons “when not to breast-feed”. It’s like a list of excuses for the uncommitted mother looking for a get-out clause. The list includes such myths as:

“Don’t breastfeed if you have a serious illness, such as heart of kidney disease, or a serious infection, such as HIV/AIDS or TB” (page 23).

“Don’t breastfeed if you are seriously underweight” (page 23).

“Breastfeeding mothers may be more susceptible to depression. You may wish to take this into account if you are prone to serious depression and/or have previously suffered from postnatal depression” (page 23).

This last point on the list is particularly ironic. In fact, Formula feeding makes a woman more prone to depression than her breastfeeding peers. This is partly due to the fact that formula feeding mothers miss out on those loved-up breastfeeding hormones as well as the relaxation that said hormones provide. Breastfeeding is a biological imperative. By not breastfeeding, a woman is sending her body the message that her baby has died. Is it any wonder that hormone levels crash and depression is more likely (Ystrom 2012).

The fact that a formula feeding mother is at greater risk of developing depression is omitted from the next chapter titled “How to bottle-feed”, along with a lot of other important facts. It seems, when deciding how to feed babies, the author of this book does not want mothers to make an informed choice. The bottle-feeding chapter begins in very large font:

“Bottle-fed babies are happy and healthy, as are their parents. Bottle-feeding is essential if you need to return to work early, and it provides a unique opportunity for mother and father to share the feeding of their child” (page 24).

This bizarrely random intro is a contradiction in terms. Take the first sentence for example, “Bottle-fed babies are happy and healthy, as are their parents”. This is the opposite of what she said earlier in the book:

“In practice bottle-fed babies tend to be more susceptible to colic, wind, and being sick” (page 20).

So the accuracy changes from page to page!

Re: “Bottle-feeding is essential if you need to return to work early”, this is obviously a false exaggeration; bearing in mind that, throughout the book, the term ‘bottle-feeding’ is used to mean ‘formula feeding’. There is no need for employed mothers to formula feed, instead, they can pump at various points during their working day or use donor milk.

More inaccuracies are littered throughout the book. The ‘Sleep’ chapter is a prime example:

“Some babies sleep through the night by the time they are one month old” (page 36).

Yeah, sick, lethargic babies.

What if your (perfectly normal) baby doesn’t sleep through by this deadline? You can guess what’s coming!

“If he thinks by crying he can get you back to sit with him and stroke his hair why would he fail to cry? If he always goes to bed unwillingly he is best ignored. Check once and leave. If he carries on protesting, you have a choice. You can tough it out now, or live by his demands. His protests will fade, he will probably – reluctantly – accept the situation a few days later, and be firmly settled into the regime by the end of next week. Until then use earplugs, play some music, close all the doors, be firm and say “No, no and no!” – as often as necessary” (page 59).

This author has as much compassion and sensitivity as Simon Cowel's shrunken trousers. Rather than equip parents with the tools to help their babies to sleep, she parrots the tired old Cry It Out regime. CIO by the way, is just another way of saying, ‘ignore your baby’. Parents who swear by this technique stick their head in the sand and go la, la, la, I’m not listening!’ (or use earplugs).

The ‘Establishing a Routine’ chapter is similarly misguided:

“Babies are flexible. You can mould them. There is no point in giving in to every feeding demand if this causes you to resent that you never have a moment to yourself” (page 40).

I highlighted the importance of demand feeding above. Suffice to say that if a mother resents her baby’s feeding cues, she’s going to have a tough time with toddlerhood, tweenhood and the teenage years. ‘Having a moment to yourself’ is a luxury of the childless.

But fear not; by Week 5:

“your baby should be starting to sleep through into the early hours before waking for his one and only night feed” (page 133).

I don’t know many babies who’ve received this memo. Perhaps the reason Dorothy believes babies should survive off only one single night feed at the tender age of 5 weeks is because she is passionate about making sure that babies get at least some formula. Exclusive breastfeeding is therefore rejected:

“Statistics suggest that the majority of mothers give up breastfeeding around Week 7. Although there are many different reasons for this, I believe that it is in part due to the guidelines that suggest it is best for your baby if you exclusively breastfeed for six months. Rather than feeling under so much pressure, mothers should be encouraged to take a more relaxed approach to feeding. If they received support in introducing a supplementary feed as necessary – as my feeding guide suggests – I believe many would continue breastfeeding for longer. Surely if a baby receives at least some breast milk each day it is better than none at all? If you have reached this point and you want to give up breastfeeding, see Chapter 2, pages 49-54 for advice on how best to achieve this” (page 138).

So, according to Dorothy, in order to breastfeed for longer, mothers must introduce formula - despite the fact that formula supplementation has been proven to decrease breastfeeding duration. The mind boggles. In fact, I have a sneaking suspicion that we're being fed gibberish. This suspicion carries on with this next book...


What Not to Expect When You’re Expecting
Zoe Williams

The author Zoe Williams should be familiar if you are faithful to this blog. You may recall her previous work titled “Bring It On Baby” which I reviewed in Part One. In fact, at the time of writing, it nabbed the coveted number one slot for most anti-breastfeeding book. Hurrah!

Well now Williams has written another ‘parentcraft’ book, and she has surpassed herself with this one: ‘What Not to Expect When You’re Expecting’. The title of this book is as plagiarised as its contents. In this work, Williams regurgitates most of her previous drivel, and unfortunately expands on it. Indeed, sizable chunks of it are lifted directly from her previous book. So let’s take a gander at her latest offering.

Williams has devoted a whole chapter to breastfeeding, titled: “Is Breast Best?” (woah inventive title! That sure as hell hasn’t been done before). Here, like before, she criticizes what she calls “the breastfeeding lobby”. She describes them as:

“inexplicably powerful: more powerful than the tobacco lobby” (page 82).

Yup, an invention of Williams’ imagination is apparently more powerful than billion dollar corporations. Even if we were to humour Williams and concede that a brestapo does exist (perhaps in the guise of public health messages touting the benefits of breastfeeding), there is no way such an organisation could ever trump the financial klout of industry. Yet Williams disagrees – and she has *proof*:

“Witness, in my lifetime, in my adult lifetime, it has become unacceptable to smoke in a pub, yet acceptable to breastfeed” (page 82).

Darn. I thought she might have attempted to come up with something more substantial. But no, she's suggesting that being in the vicinity of a breastfeeding mother is as abhorrent as being in the vicinity of people smoking. This deranged view of the world is echoed a few pages later with Williams' ‘slightly’ exaggerated description of breastfeeding in public:

“I ripped all my clothes off as if in a strip join frequented by early man” (page 85).

This scene, which occurs on a busy high-street, is the stuff of mediocre sitcoms, not of reality. Yet she proceeds to describe squiring herself in the eye with her own breastmilk, whilst standing in the street, as if it is a popular sport.

Another gem which is copy and pasted from her previous book involves Williams’ dismay at her inability to get what she deems a suitable, viewer-friendly photo of her baby nursing:

“If anyone can come up with a way to get a picture of a breastfeeding baby without getting a great big breast in the way, then I will find a way to give that person a Nobel prize” (page 86).

Here, Williams is confusing herself. The photo she actually wants to take is that of a baby sans breastfeeding. When a baby is breastfeeding, a breast is commonly part of the deal. Needless to say, Williams didn’t breastfeed for long:

“They were both weaned off breast milk by their half-birthdays” (page 88).

Fair enough. 6 months is still pretty good going. I have no beef with this. What I do have beef with however, is Williams’ excuses:

“One child had gone off breast milk, and would crane around the room looking for more interesting things” (page 88).

An inquisitive child does not a nursing strike make. Anyhoo, her other child apparently...

“wasn’t sleeping well, which I put down to the fact that breast milk only fills you up for about 36 minutes, indeed, from a sanitation perspective is useless, is essentially water that tastes of booze and garlic” (page 88).

Are you getting the feeling that Willaims’ doesn’t know much about breastfeeding, that she could do with reading ‘Timeline of a Breastfed Baby’, that she needs a ruddy good bitchslap from the WHO? (The World Health Organisation, not the English rock band formed in 1964 by Roger Daltrey). The transparency of Williams’ vitriol towards breastfeeding becomes glaring when she declares Atlantic magazine’s much over-cited “The Case Against Breastfeeding” to be a credible source (page 88). What then follows is one of the most pessimistic, defeatist views of breastfeeding ever to burn holes in my retina:

“For plenty of people, and I mean loads, I mean at least half of anybody I know who’s ever had a child, breastfeeding does not work that well. Some of them couldn’t get enough milk going, and actually never managed to; some had nipples that were too big, or a baby with a too-small mouth, or tongue-tie, or a baby that just didn’t feed, got jaundice from not feeding, had to go back to hospital and by the time it came out, was bottle-accomplished but no longer knew how to do it the old-fashioned way. Some had appendicitis and had to go into hospital when her baby was 14 days old, hadn’t had time to express; the baby was on formula for a week and then didn’t want to switch back (formula looks nicer; it would surprise me in no way if it didn’t also taste nicer). Some people get post-natal depression and had to stop breastfeeding to take Prozac, some other people got an infection in their c-section scar and had to take antibiotics that weren’t milk-friendly” (page 88-89).

This reads like a Defensive Formula Feeder’s bedside journal, rather than a childcare guide. At no point does Williams even hint at the fact that each of these obstacles - each and every one of them - can be overcome. Then she presents us with the most laughable excuse:

“Some other people were incredibly tired, and needed a break” (page 89).

Irony explosion!! So washing, steralising and preparing bottles gives tired mothers a break? Psyche! Yet the excuses keep coming:

From the back cover ...seriously.

“Some people just find it incredibly painful. One friend went to a breastfeeding workshop where a mother said it hurt so much, she was setting her alarm to go off 40 minutes before the baby woke up, just so she could neck enough analgesics and have time for them to take effect before she started” (page 89).

Great advice... if you want to appear on the government's Child Services register.

Williams’ negligent indifference to parenting penetrates into many other pages. For instance, she declares that she started giving one of her children solid food at four months:

“because I had a stringent friend and she told me to” (page 87)

...despite her appreciating that the recommendation was six months. She justifies her decision by framing it as a good one and belittling the scientific evidence:

“Paediatricians try to balance the protective qualities of breastmilk against the fact that four-month-old babies need more nutrients. They found that breastfeeding babies exclusively beyond four months was not stunting them. It’s not a brilliant reason for eschewing solid food, though is it? ‘You’re fine – you can survive on breastmilk’. I could probably survive on Slim-Fast, but I don’t want to” (page 96).

What a can of worms! First she claims it’s a “fact” that four month olds need more than breastmilk; then she neglects to acknowledge exactly why paediatricians recommend not introducing solids until 6 months (triggering allergies being a prime motivator); then she likens breast milk to Slim-Fast: a cows-milk-based chemical formula not unlike - wait for it - infant formula (the irony!)

Williams finishes the chapter with one of the most toe-curling, piss-boiling, dismissals of breastfeeding studies I have seen in print. She begins:

“In fact, the case for breastfeeding is not that strong, and it has passed so seamlessly into the book of What’s Best for Baby that it’s often very lazily put” (page 90).

What is this dogma that Williams speaks of?

“The evidence is mild: the statistics showing less asthma, less eczema, less obesity, fewer ear infections: these haven’t been adjusted for social class and environment” (page 92).

Clearly Williams’ is banking on her readership’s ignorance when she writes this drivel. A simple Pubmed search brings up numerous scientific peer-reviewed studies where the results are adjusted for social class and environment (and other confounders) and STILL declare breastfeeding to be the better choice. Here are just a few:

• Beaudry, 1995, Relation between infant feeding and infections during the first six months of life.
• Nafstad et al, 1996, Breastfeeding, maternal smoking and lower respiratory tract infections.
• Scariati et al, 1997, A longitudinal analysis of infant morbidity and the extent of breastfeeding in the United States.
• Quinn  et al, 2001, The effect of breastfeeding on child development at 5 years. 
• Williams et al, 2001, Stereoacuity at age 3.5 y in children born full-term is associated with prenatal and postnatal dietary factors.
• Richards et al, 2002, Long-term effects of breast-feeding in a national birth cohort: educational attainment and midlife cognitive function.
• Oddy et al, 2003, Breast feeding and cognitive development in childhood.
• Karlson, 2004, Do breast-feeding and other reproductive factors influence future risk of rheumatoid arthritis? 
• Arenz. 2004, Breast-feeding and childhood obesity.
• Martin et al, 2004, Does breast-feeding in infancy lower blood pressure in childhood? 
• Victora et al, 2005, Breastfeeding and school achievement in Brazilian adolescents.
• Sørensen  et al, 2005, Breastfeeding and risk of schizophrenia.
• Vohr et al, 2006, Beneficial effects of breast milk in the neonatal intensive care unit on the developmental outcome of extremely low birth weight infants at 18 months of age.
• Taveras, 2006, To what extent is the protective effect of breastfeeding on future overweight explained by decreased maternal feeding restriction?
• Mayer-Davis et al, 2006, Breast-feeding and risk for childhood obesity.
• Scholtens, 2008, Do differences in childhood diet explain the reduced overweight risk in breastfed children?
• Alati et al, 2009, Early weaning and alcohol disorders in offspring. 
• Griffiths, 2009, Effects of infant feeding practice on weight gain from birth to 3 years. 
• Ogbuanu, 2009, Effect of breastfeeding duration on lung function at age 10 years.
• De Onis  et al, 2009, WHO growth standards for infants and young children.
• Tarrant et al, 2010, Breast-feeding and childhood hospitalizations for infections. 
• Pisacane et al, 2010, Breastfeeding and risk for fever after immunization. 
• Veena et al, 2011, Glucose tolerance and insulin resistance in Indian children: relationship to infant feeding pattern.
• McCrory and Layte, 2011, The effect of breastfeeding on children's educational test scores at nine years of age. 
• Evelein et al, 2011, The association between breastfeeding and the cardiovascular system in early childhood. 
• Oddy et al, 2011, Breastfeeding and early child development.
• Fisk et al, 2011, Breastfeeding and reported morbidity during infancy.
• Whitehouse et al, 2011, Duration of breast feeding and language ability in middle childhood.
• Van Rossem, 2011, Is the association of breastfeeding with child obesity explained by infant weight change? 
• Tozzi et al, 2012, Effect of duration of breastfeeding on neuropsychological development at 10 to 12 years of age in a cohort of healthy children.
• Tharner et al, 2012, Breastfeeding and its relation to maternal sensitivity and infant attachment.
• Jedrychowski, 2012, Effect of exclusive breastfeeding on the development of children's cognitive function. 

(You might want to bookmark that list for next time a formula feeder chants the immortal phrase "correlation is not causation!")

Not content with denouncing breastfeeding studies, Williams then turns to subtle racism:

“In its aftermath, breastfeeding makes your tits look like bananas in a Waitrose bag, and dead right, while you’re doing it, it interferes with sex. I have just taken a look at my left breast. If I had one ounce, seriously, 28 grams less restraint, I would take a picture of it and post it on the internet. I don’t want to whine, so I’m not going to describe it in detail; let’s just say that if I found myself in the Amazon, and I wanted to join one of their world-famous ladies’ archery tribes, ain’t nobody be asking me to cut anything off” (page 93).

This is obviously a cryptic attempt at a joke. I’m not such which is more amusing – the fact she expects us to laugh at ethnic tribes or the fact that she uses the sentence, “I don’t want to whine”. If Williams adhered to her own claim, the contents of this book wouldn’t fill a postage stamp.

So after ridiculing tribes women, Williams’ then turns to the WHO (not the rock band):

“My sister said breastfeeding was a tacit World Health Organisation strategy to bring down the global population, since you can’t get pregnant while you’re nursing. Although actually you can, but never mind that. I thought, bollocks: it’s just a pub argument, amplified to the level of policy, where the less evidence you’ve got, the nosier you are” (page 94).

Williams’ is referring to lactational amenorrhoea. In case you don’t know what that means, she provides a ‘helpful’ definition:

“Breastfeeding provides prolonged lactational amenorrhoea. Which means you don’t get your periods back while you’re doing it. That’s it. This is not about existing babies – this is about contraception. My sister was right. We’re being fed this line for the sake of a population curve in places where they have no access to contraceptives!” (page 96).

Oooooh the conspiracy! But wait – before you call the FBI - Williams is missing the point. Lactational amenorrhoea has many benefits, even for rich Western women. These include protection against anaemia and reduction in the risk of developing various cancers including breast and ovarian cancer. These facts are no doubt enough to make Williams choke on her Tampax.

She then goes on to describe a memory, in which her eldest child had an accident resulting in a hospital stay. Williams had a baby at the time, whom she took home and left with her mother:

“And the nurse goes, ‘we do support breastfeeding mothers you, know. You can bring the baby back in – we do support you in your breastfeeding’. I’m not having a rant about the nurse, it just seemed so strange. All your thoughts are on your eldest child, who could have seriously injured himself, and they’re still on about the nutritional superiority of sodding breastmilk! Which they have totally overstated in the first place!” (page 98).

So a medical professional trying to support and accommodate Williams makes Williams throw her toys down in paddy. This is about as coherent as her closing remarks:

“If you breastfeed you’re a bit of a twat - like a fool who believed the headmistress when she said you had to wear a bobble hat, and now you’re making everyone else look bad, and you’re also standing there in a bobble hat” (page 99).

Sisters! You’re letting the side down by breastfeeding! You make the rest of us look like dicks! Show some solidarity!


Each of the books I have looked at here have several things in common: a love of low-touch, high-control parenting, a hatred for breastfeeding, and disdain for babies who dare to encroach on parental well-being. Babies are seen as calculated oppressors and the vaccine against their disease of manipulation is to break their will by installing a regimented routine, preferably from birth.

Why do books like this exist? Answer: They sell! Books that promise an easy plan to an effortless parenthood sell quickly, so greedy bastards keep writing them, and I end up needing dentures from chronic teeth grinding.

Know of a book which needs to be ripped a new asshole? Email me.

Milk sharing is a persistent taboo in Western society. It’s a paradox of parenting: we gladly give cows’ milk to our infants, yet get queasy at the thought of donor human milk. Why is this?

Trust could be an issue - some diseases can be transmitted via bodily fluids. But more often than not, mothers cite bonding as a core factor in their unease. When breast milk is shared, there is arguably a biological and physiological bond between the donor mother and the recipient baby. The donor is quite literally, giving of herself for the health and well-being of a child she did not even birth, herself. Much of modern society is not yet ready to accept the importance this natural exchange. The idea of accepting another's bodily fluid is offensive.

How can a mother come to terms with such conflicting emotions while ultimately choosing to give their baby the natural start in life they deserve? Here is Joyln's story.

“After my water broke at 41 weeks, I wasn't having consistent contractions. I had planned an entirely natural birth. After enduring over 24 hours of natural labor I ended up having a c-section due to my baby's poor positioning in the womb. As elated as I was at the birth of my daughter following a long, painful struggle with infertility (I have PCOS) and miscarriage, I was devastated over her birth. I ended up with moderate post-partum depression, no doubt triggered by the birth trauma and subsequent infections and health problems directly related to the C-section.

Blood blisters

In the midst of my drawn out recovery, we had problems breastfeeding from the start. I noticed my nipples were becoming increasingly sore, and by the 2nd day they had blood blisters. I asked for help at the hospital, only to be given vague tips about her latch (they told me it looked fine) and directed me to put lanolin on my nipples. I did so, but it didn't help.

Sinking into depression

I came home from the hospital on day 4, and by that time I was a mess. My baby had gotten to the point where she would only latch on for a few seconds and then just cry and cry. I cried right along with her. My husband was very supportive. He would listen to me cry, and stay up with Brynna at night and gave her the supplements of donor milk while I pumped. He painstakingly fed Brynna through a syringe to give my sore nipples a break.

Unsupportive friends

My friends however, were not so supportive. They told me that formula wasn't a big deal and that I should consider it instead of going through all the trouble to nurse. I was so emotionally torn from the C-section, breastfeeding was my last hope of fulfilling my original dreams for my baby. I felt like it was the one thing I had left since I had failed at the completely natural birth I so desperately longed for.

Tongue-tie

One of my very best friends (also my unofficial doula) suspected a tongue tie, so I promptly scheduled an emergency appointment with a lactation consultant. That was the first thing I asked about, and after putting a finger in her mouth for a few seconds, that lactation consultant told me she didn't have a tie. She gave me some positioning tips (football hold, which did help somewhat) and a nipple shield (which also helped albeit temporarily). At that point my baby had lost 13% of her birth weight, so I was willing to try anything – anything except formula.

After about a week, I noticed my daughter was still losing weight and wasn't wetting enough diapers. I decided to seek out a 2nd opinion about her tongue tie, as my friend and I still had suspicions that she had one. This next lactation consultant asked me a few questions, and on questioning she was convinced that it was my PCOS causing the low milk supply. I tried to steer the discussion to tongue tie and the symptoms I was having (pretty much every symptom of posterior tongue tie), but she would barely listen. I persisted enough that she finally checked out her tongue, and she told me that my baby had a "slight" tie but that it didn't need revision. She then told me to buy a pump and supplement her nursing sessions with pumped milk or formula.

At that point we left. I was livid. I was determined not to give formula, and I knew something wasn't right. My instincts were screaming at me that the LCs were wrong. I ended up messaging my friend's midwife who gave me tips on how to bring up my milk supply. She told me to stop using the shield, as it was likely the culprit of my low milk supply (in addition to the poor milk transfer from my daughter's tie - NOT the PCOS as the last LC had told me.)

Using donated breast milk

My friend was so kind and generous to donate her own pumped milk while I was working hard to bring my supply back up. Donor milk really was the biggest gift I could have ever received for my daughter. It was such a blessing. There are gut issues in my family (yeast overgrowth, leaky gut syndrome, allergies, and intolerances) so I was very determined not to give formula due to this, along with the virgin gut theory. It was a little scary asking for milk from my friend because I don't particularly like inconveniencing anyone, but as she was there for me during my most difficult and vulnerable times (my difficult labor and C-section, and resulting postpartum issues), I really couldn't think of anyone better to ask. I trust her with my life and my baby's. Using her milk changed our relationship in that it brought us closer, and I feel that her and my baby have a special bond now as well.

The fact that it was another mom's milk didn't bother me at all. I was determined to stay away from formula, and it was the next best thing to my own milk. With donor milk there are safety issues that need to be considered, as human diseases can be transmitted through breast milk, but if a mom is open and up front about what medications she's on, illnesses, etc, I don't see a problem. There are also ways to heat treat milk at home. Of course, this also destroys beneficial enzymes and immune factors present in the milk, but it is another option, and it's always better than formula.

The snip

Whilst I got busy with the donor milk and building my supply, the midwife gave me contact information for a local doctor who clips tongue ties. I immediately made an appointment for my daughter to get clipped. She was 4 weeks old. The doctor was very hesitant that my supply would return, as so much time had passed already, and it may have been too late to save my supply. I was saddened at these words, but I was willing to try my hardest to make breastfeeding work. The doctor also questioned whether my daughter really had a posterior tongue tie as well, but thankfully she decided it was best to clip it anyway since I had all of the symptoms. As my daughter's tongue was clipped, it sprung loose like a rubber band - it was under a lot of tension. After that, it was clear there had been a posterior tongue tie present.


After we clipped her tie, her latch was immediately pain free, and it improved even more over the next several weeks. We also added in some craniosacral therapy to help, as my daughter's malpositioning in the womb messed up her head, neck, spine, and palate, leading to even more issues with her latch.

More issues

Just as I was starting to see the light at the end of the tunnel, nature decided to test my commitment again. My c-section scar became infected and so I was given three rounds of antibiotics to treat the infection. Consequently, both me and my daughter developed thrush and yeast infections. This occurred despite religiously taking probiotics and giving Brynna infant probiotics.


I stopped using the donor milk about a month later. My daughter is now a happy, healthy, 6-month-old exclusively breastfed baby. We still see the craniosacral therapist every few weeks, but those appointments are becoming fewer and farther between.

As for me, I am still dealing with some emotional issues from the C-section, but after seeing a therapist and with plans to attend a support group, I am on my way to being a better mom to my baby, a better wife, and a better person.

I think donor milk is a beautiful gift. In fact, I'm now able to donate to a local mom who has twins! I'm very thankful that I can pay it forward and help someone else and other babies in need.

Non-breastfeeding moms


As for moms who don't even try to breastfeed, I am saddened but unsurprised given the lack of good information and support. So many things can sabotage the nursing relationship, even so-called "professional" advice from lactation consultants. After my experience I became a lot more sympathetic to moms who try and then end up giving up, because even I almost gave up several times.

However, for moms who don't even try, I do wonder why. I think any mom wants to give her child the best, so why wouldn't they try? It makes me sad that those babies don't get the benefits of human milk. That's another reason why I advocate donor milk. It's relatively unknown and many don't know it even exists. Informal resources like ‘Eats on Feeds’ and ‘Human Milk 4 Human Babies’ are invaluable, but there are also formal milk banks available where pasteurized donor milk can be purchased. Of course, ideally I think all moms should try nursing themselves, but I do believe donor milk is the next best thing.”
Get your own Bingo Card here.

Email me with your story.

Finding genuinely liberating children's books with a strong feminist message is like finding a snowball in hell. Such books are often lost in the flames of patriarchal sameness, where females are passive, pretty and content to be relegated to supporting roles.

But fear not. My hobby as a library lurker has finally paid off! I have discovered ten more feminist children's books (ten!)

Following on from Part One and Part Two, here is an eclectic selection of lesser known stories, with some classics thrown in.

Don’t Kiss the Frog: Princess Stories With Attitude
Fiona Waters


“Once upon a time...” “and they all lived happily ever after.” These spellbinding words open and close the door to that far-off land where magic and enchantment reign – but also where boringly good behaviour is always rewarded, rose-tinted glasses are firmly in place and princesses are usually simpering nincompoops, unable to think beyond the next party frock before being married off to a prince William clone.

Yet many frogs resolutely remain frogs, despite all attempts to kiss them into human form, and in this collection of princess stories absolutely no one simpers. Rapunzel would like to cut her hair short and dye it blue, Princess Wendy turns down her frog-prince because he smells, and Princess Jane thinks she might like to be a conventional frilly-dress-marble-palace-glittery-tiara sap of a princess, but soon finds that all sparkles is not necessarily satisfying. The illustrations are richly eclectic, the prose is witty and crisp, and nothing is more delightful than a whiff of feminine anarchy.

The Paper Bag Princess
Robert Munsch

Whenever you think of feminism and children’s literature, no doubt this book is on the tip of your tongue. A gem of the 80s, The Paper Bag Princess set the standard for the influx of ‘princess parody’ books which have found their way onto Amazon ever since. It contains all the ingredients that any self-respecting fairytale spoof should – disorder, rebellion, and a naked princess wearing a paper bag. The story is perhaps not the most challenging or inventive, yet its reversal of character roles was so revolutionary at the time of publication, that The Paper Bag Princess became a feminist benchmark in children’s literature.

The story introduced several plot quirks, which have since became established conventions in feminist storytelling. Beginning with a stereotypically pretty princess who wore expensive princess clothes and wanted to marry a prince (convention 1), the story then introduces an evil opponent that turns her world upside down (convention 2), in this case a dragon destroys her castle and captures the prince. Alone, the princess ventures off to rectify the situation (convention 3). She uses her brains to overcome brawn (convention 4), and rescues the prince (convention 5). Then a twist occurs in which the princess rejects the prince after he criticises her for being dirty, and we see her gleefully skipping off into the sun set. She has rebelled against her original oppression (convention 6).

Top Jobs 
Monica Hughes

Here’s a book from the ‘Oxford Reading Tree’ collection. This range of books, loved by teachers and helicopter moms alike, features simple ‘key’ words and an emphasis on phonics. However the collection is a far cry from the bygone misogynistic days of its predecessor ‘Dick and Jane’.

In “Top Jobs” children are seen role playing various occupations alongside adults - a recipe for feminist disaster. However refreshingly, females are not relegated to caring or domestic jobs here. Instead they take on prominent roles as plumbers, vets and pilots. The boys meanwhile, “get out their pots and pans” as cooks, and empty trash cans as bin men. “It’s a top job!” one boy is photographed saying as he rifles through people’s garbage.

My Granny is a Pirate
Val McDermid and Arthur Robins

Avast ye land lubber spawn raiser! Here’s an empowering book to amuse aspiring buccaneers. Pirates are normally men; so when a woman dons buckled boots, pointed hat and phallic sword, it undoubtedly sparks feminist sentiment. The star of this book is female, and what’s more - she’s elderly, she’s ginger, she wears specs and she wields a handbag. When she’s not sipping tea in her rocking chair or knitting, you can find her capturing men and making them swab her decks and walk the plank.

The inevitable plot twist occurs when skeleton nasties start making a nuisance of themselves. Naturally, our fearless geriatric heroine lamps them with her handbag, then feeds their bones to her dog. This marriage of traditional grannyhood with rebellious adventurism will delight pirate fans and lovers of paradoxical humour alike (the same people surely?)

Three Wise Women
Mary Hoffman and Lynne Russel

Forget the Three Wise Men. Those guys are freeloading fancy-pants compared to the strong, intuitive women in this book. Like the wise men, the women followed the star which led them to baby Jesus in the stable. However unlike the wise men, the women’s gifts were more than mere bling. One woman (the elderly one) gave the gift of folklore. One woman (the young one) gave the gift of special bread. And one woman (the mother) gave the gift of her baby’s kiss. Unknowingly, these women had created a legacy. When he grew up, Jesus conducted his life via the influence of these women's gifts: he showed that bread is better when it is shared; he told wonderful stories to anyone who would listen; and he taught the world that “the greatest gift of all is love”, and if that doesn’t melt your heart, well, there’s a special seat in hell for you.

The Worst Princess
Anna Kemp and Sara Ogilvie

This delicious contemporary spin on the tragically limited job description for princesses was obviously inspired by The Paper Bag Princess (above). It even ‘borrows’ some of the plot and dialogue.

The story introduces us to a ‘lonely princess’ sat in a tower forever waiting for a prince to whisk her away. She has all the standard trappings of a princess – tiara, gown, slight physique and long plaits down to the ground. However she wears yellow sneakers (a subtle hint at the rebellious streak soon to blossom).

Finally, a prince arrives, and this is where Disney has a lot to answer for. To her dismay, the princess is taken from her stuffy stone tower to an even stuffier stone castle where the prince instructs her to “just smile a lot and twist your curls”.

Bollocks to that! She’s been stuck in a stone tower for a century and wants to have some fun. So she does what any newly emancipated woman would do – befriends a fire breathing dragon. The dragon then literally and metaphorically frees the princess from her domestic shackles by burning down the castle, and they fly off into the sunset, leaving behind a rather exacerbated ash-panted prince.

Lila and the Secret of the Rain 
David Conway and Jude Daly

At last! A book which focuses on the strength of female emotion, and instead of ridiculing it – embraces it! This tale, set in a drought-ridden Kenyan village, features a central female character - a young woman named Lila.

For months the sun burned down on her village, devastating the villagers, livestock and vegetation. Without rain the well threatens to run dry and the crops look likely to fail. Lila is so worried that she sets off to have a harsh word with the sky. She climbs the highest mountain and proceeds to tell the sky the saddest things she knows. She weeps as she does so. And after listening to her tales, the sky joins in! Lila had saved her village, using the secret of the rain. Atmospheric watercolours draped over vast landscapes add potency to this rich story of female courage and passion.

Little Red Hood
Majolaine Leray

This is essentially a petite, cheque-book sized collection of sketches that parodies the story of Little Red Riding Hood. People have been writing spoof Little Red stories for decades, so the premise of this book is hardly ground-breaking. However what sets this book apart from its peers is the dark, almost sinister, faithfulness to the terror evoked in classic fairy tales.

Indeed, traditional folklore is normally watered-down to make it more palatable for the modern, sensitive youngsters of today - but not in this book. Here, Leray uses the powerful medium of juvenile scribbles and similarly childlike handwriting to guide the reader through a harrowing tale in which two opponents face-off: the Big Bad Wolf, and Little Red Riding Hood. The story ends in the death of one of them. In fact, there’s so much bloodshed in this book you’d be forgiven for mistaking it for a tampax pamphlet.

The story begins by introducing us to the much taller, much pointier, aggressor wolf who is clearly on The Fast Diet (TM). Skinny and ravenously starving, he captures a tiny red-cloaked preschool girl. “What’s to eat?” she asks innocently after being informed that dinner is served. The wolf bitches back, “Some joooooosey red meat!!!!” [sic]

After going through the time-honoured stalling-ritual of commenting on the size of his teeth, ears, eyes,  etc like the smug presenter of Embarrassing Bodies, Little Red, true to this form, then comments, “You’ve got stinky breath”. The wolf is suitably offended by his social faux pas and gratefully accepts the candy that Little Red offers. Consequently (spoiler alert!) he promptly he chokes to death. Little Red then simply turns to the reader and remarks smugly, “Fool!”


Tarzanna!
Babette Cole

Here’s a pearl of a book by the deliciously witty Babette Cole, author of the ground-breaking feminist classics: Princess Smartypants; Princess Smartypants Breaks the Rules; and Long Live Princess Smartypants (each reviewed in Part One). This isn’t the first children’s Tarzanesque book to trigger my feminist radar (“Me...Jane”, reviewed in Part One, was rather good) but it is perhaps the most fun.

Rather than a female character supplementing Tarzan (as is the case in Me...Jane), this book presents Tarzan as female, even going so far as to switch the gender of the other characters too. So for instance, ‘Tarzanna’ discovers “a new kind of animal she hadn’t seen before, so she carried it off”. This animal was of course, a human explorer, here depicted as male. Tarzanna teaches him to speak animalese. He teaches her to speak English. It's a love-in.

True to the original story, the explorer then takes Tarzanna to see his country, a western urbanized city setting – which Tarzanna hates. Here, she takes pity on the miserable animals caged at the zoo and releases them. Cue all sorts of mayhem, amongst which she manages to rescue the prime minister from a criminal gang (like you do!) The story draws to a satisfying ending in which Tarzanna returns to her beloved jungle, liberated zoo animals in tow. Not only does this book give the finger to gender stereotypes, it also takes a dump on zoos and other environmental nasties. Five stars!

In general, a baby who won’t nurse, can’t nurse. As a parent, your goal is to identify why baby can’t nurse and either remedy the problem, work around the problem, and/or preserve your milk supply until the problem remedies itself (Kellymom 2011). But what if you have health professionals breathing down your neck, firing comments at you that suggest your baby is starving, that you must have postpartum depression, and that formula is necessary? You are about to read the story of how one mother unlocked the secret as to why her baby was refusing to nurse, all whilst under a torrent of bullying from health professionals and family members.


“My son was born by ‘emergency’ caesarean after induction at 42 weeks, I say ‘emergency’ as I have since discovered the reason was rather dubious (I was at full dilation and pushing, they said my son was in distress - apgar of 9 indicates he wasn't) but I digress. In recovery I was helped to give him his first breastfeed, well the midwife held him and put my boob in his mouth as I couldn't hold him as I was shaking so much with the after-effects of all the drugs that had been pumped into me.

Here is a photo of our first feed in recovery (and the only breastfeeding photo I have). Little did I know that this would be his only successful breastfeed for over a week, it brings tears to my eyes looking at it:



We then tried on our own but he failed to latch. It probably didn't help that I was anaemic during pregnancy and lost a pint of blood in surgery but wasn't given any iron tablets until I specifically asked for them.

Formula by Duress

After a while, the midwives did the heel prick to check his blood sugar. He was 0.1 under what they wanted him to be, I was guilted into giving him formula top ups. I hobbled up to the ward and kept attempting to feed him, with a whole range of midwives, nursery nurses and feeding advisors shoving my breast in his mouth, it was horrendous. The experience was so distressing for my baby that it got to the point where he would scream whenever we tried to feed.

There was however one lovely nursery nurse who seemed to understand how important BFing him was to me and she spent lots of time showing me how to hand express colostrum, then at 3 days postpartum arranged the double breast pump. By this stage the head infant feeding advisor had told me my baby would starve if I didn't give him formula, so he was getting colostrum by syringe and then cup fed formula. I spent a lot of time crying. Eventually, to get out of hospital I put him on bottles and was pumping and giving him expressed colostrum by cup.

Skin to Skin

When we got home I pumped every 2/3 hours, day and night. My baby was still so traumatized by the manhandling that occurred at hospital that whenever I tried to get him to latch he would scream. I took the decision to stop trying for a day or two and implement the biological nurturing approach. We did lots of skin to skin and a couple of times he latched on whilst we were sleeping. The first two weeks of my son's life were totally unlike how I had imagined. I didn't enjoy it at all, spent a lot of time in tears, developed ductal thrush due to the antibiotics I had to take for a postpartum infection. To be honest I felt like a complete failure. I had planned a natural birth using hypnobirthing and ended up with every stage of induction, epidural and caesarean section. To be unable to feed him on top of all this was unbearable.

Unsupportive Parents

My parents were concerned about the effect all of this was having on me. Plus my Mum had failed to breastfeed me, being told she didn't have enough milk (back in the wonderful 70s). I guess my Mum probably felt guilty that she didn't try as hard to keep me on the breast as I was for her grandson. It doesn't help that she was a midwife in the 70s when breastfeeding seems to have been seen as inferior and she was very pro formula.

Nipple Shield

It wasn't until day 10 that one of the community midwives helped us to latch with a nipple shield (It had been tried in hospital previously but it hadn't worked so I hadn't been encouraged to continue). I will be forever grateful to this midwife for her support.

Whilst the nipple shields got us breastfeeding successfully, I still had supply issues as his weight was not increasing at the appropriate rate. I pumped religiously after feeds and give it as top ups. The head infant feeding advisor informed me that my son had a slight posterior tongue tie but that it wasn't enough to cause problems feeding - REALLY?? So failure to latch resulting in failure to thrive wasn't a feeding problem?

Pro-Formula Health Visitors

In fact, my biggest problem was the health visitors! They told me that my baby was starving, that he needed to feed. In a feigned attempt to appear understanding they would say, "I know how much you want to breastfeed but how long are you going to keep doing this when he's getting so upset". These are the same professionals who had told me to stop using nipple shields as they were the cause for his failure to gain weight, despite his inability to stay latched without them; the same professionals who kept suggesting that I had postnatal depression because I was upset every time they weighed him and gave me a telling off; the same professionals who told me to give him formula. However by this point he wasn't getting any formula, because I had found sites like The Alpha Parent and other sources of advice designed to encourage breastfeeding rather than meet the Healthcare professionals need for the figures to match the graph.

I put my foot down at this point and demanded a referral. Finally, when my son was 8 weeks old, the HVs reluctantly agreed to let the paediatric dentist assess him.

The Snip

The dentist was horrified when I told him of our experience and angry that the decision had been taken for him not to address the problem. He agreed there was a slight posterior tongue tie and snipped it there and then. Within 2 days my son was feeding without the nipple shield, it was fantastic! He gained 1/2lb in a week rather than the 1 or 2 ounces he had been gaining previously.

However due to the horrendous start we had to breastfeeding I still had to battle low supply. I took fenugreek, ate lots of oats, kept myself hydrated, continued pumping after feeds, anything I could do to nourish my son myself. It was very hard work but I couldn't give up, he deserved the best.

The Effect of Pregnancy on Nursing

When he started solids I stopped pumping so I could spend more time with him. This must have triggered ovulation because after a little oops I fell pregnant. I managed to keep breastfeeding going until I was 5 months pregnant but when my milk turned to colostrum (which occurs around the 5 month mark) he began to self-wean. He stopped breastfeeding a lot sooner than I would have liked but once the baby is born I will see if he wants to feed again and if not he'll get breastmilk in a cup or on his cereal. I am thankfully having a HBAC (Home Birth After Caesarean) so I don't have to go anywhere near the people who screwed up my first few weeks of motherhood!

I am proud that I managed to persevere but angry at the lack of support given when things don't go smoothly. Without them, the community midwife and the internet my son would probably have been a formula fed baby. The thing with breastfeeding is you assume it will come naturally to you both. Antenatal classes generally skirt around the issue of problems that can occur.”



UPDATE:

“Cassandra Ann has arrived!

Breastfeeding has been a lot better this time. I immediately asked for the midwife to check for tongue tie - they confirmed she had one. This time instead of a posterior tongue tie, we had a classic tt with heart shaped tongue which was a lot easier to get diagnosed and it also had less of an effect on feeding (although it was excruciating after the first day, with bleeding nipples etc) I chased up her referral and it was snipped at day 4. Being better informed has really helped our breastfeeding relationship get off to a more positive start! My supply is great, milk came in at day 3 as opposed to day 4/5, she sleeps way better and I feel so much happier.”





Get your own Bingo Card here.

Email me with your story.

Did you know that if you follow the standard, “What I need for my baby” list for the next 21 years, then your child could cost you over $200,000 (that’s $9,500 per year, or $800 per month), even without being privately educated. The marketing clout of the baby industry has got a lot to answer for.

The reality is that most of the items we are told we should buy for our babies are unnecessary. This timeline will expose the common (and not-so-common) culprits. If you’re new to starting a family, it will hopefully give you the advantage that many second-time parents enjoy.


Pregnancy:

Maternity clothes: There’s no reason why you cannot wear your normal clothes instead of purchasing ‘maternity wear’ often at inflated prices. Items such as wrap-around dresses, smock tops, tunic tops, dresses and long tops made from stretchy material or anything with an elasticated waistband can be staple items throughout your pregnancy. Trousers can be left undone under baggy tops, and clothes with lycra content can be very accommodating. You can alter waistbands by hand or buy a cheap waistband extender to insert in between zips. Additionally try inserting contrasting thin triangular panels into the sides of existing tops for a kitsch bespoke look. Or use a nice piece of material that fits comfortably around your waist to create a bandeau. This will enable you to wear your normal tops right through pregnancy. You can also raid your partner’s wardrobe for T-shirts, shirts and sweaters. Chose clothes that you can layer – your pregnancy will go through three seasons, and it’s very expensive to buy separate clothes for each one. Ponchos are great for the winter.

Anti-stretch mark cream: The vast majority of women will develop stretch marks on their breasts during pregnancy (see, 'Timeline of Breast Changes in Pregnancy'). These are caused by the collagen beneath the skin tearing as it stretches to accommodate your enlarging body. There are numerous anti-stretch mark creams on the market, but despite what the manufacturers would have us believe, no cream applied to the surface of your skin can have much effect on what is happening to the deeper layers of collagen that lie well below the surface (Regan 2005).

Any of These Books: Not all parenting books are created equal, some actually sabotage the health of mothers and babies.

Car Seatbelt Extender: Pointless. Just put the lap part of your seatbelt below your bump and make sure the other part sits between your breasts.

Home Doppler: In many cases, these cause more stress for expectant mothers than relief. It can be difficult at times to find the fetus' heart rate since the fetus moves around a lot. Also, the fetal heart rate normally has some variation to it, so I've seen mothers get very concerned when the heart rate is higher or lower than they've seen before.

Prenatal MP3 Player: Just sing. Your baby is comforted more by the sound of your voice than by any other sound.

Wooden Massage Tool: Human hands are better, particularly when attached to a hunk.

Calming Spritzer Spray: Use a cold flannel instead.

Wallpaper: When the nesting instinct kicks in and you find yourself dangling off the top of a stepladder like a mad woman, stay clear of wallpaper. Instead decorate the nursery walls with paint. Children’s tastes develop and it’s easier to repaint a room rather than repaper it. Also, children can’t resist tearing off unglued wallpaper. Select wipe-clean brands on paint.

Designer Hospital Gown: It’s a lot like your wedding dress: you’ll only wear it once, for a few hours, and by the end of the day it’ll just get covered in bodily fluids.


Month 1:

Infacol, Colief or Gripe Water: There’s no scientific evidence that any of these work (Smith 2009).

Outfits: Expensive flouncy outfits should be left to the relatives and friends to buy: they’re a hassle for babies at this age, who throw up on them anyway. Your baby’s initial couple of months will consist largely of feeding, sleeping, and being held. From a clothing standpoint, this translates to one thing – babygros! Comfort is key. Babygros are also kinder on baby’s round pot belly than trousers and tops, especially in these early days before his tummy button has healed. You can’t use babygros that are too small, because they cramp baby’s toes, but you can use ones that are a little bit big, so go for 0-3 months rather than newborn size. Also don’t stockpile small disposable diapers – you will soon need to go up a size.

T-shirts: Bodysuits are better than tshirts as the latter tend to ride up exposing little tummies to the cold.

Pyjamas: Baby pyjamas comprising of a top and pants are not needed during the first year. Just dress baby in a sleepsuit night and day to save you expense and inconvenience.

Socks: If you buy babygros with feet, you won’t need to worry about socks that are always falling off.

Booties: They may be cute, but booties are generally a nuisance because they tend to fall off and get lost all the time. Also like shoes, they are too firm and restrict movement. A baby needs to wiggle, feel, and even suck her toes.

Scratch Mitts: They fall off (Is there an echo in here?)

Bibs: Two kinds of bibs are to be avoided – those without plastic backs, and those with tie fastenings. The latter are a safety risk.

Burp Cloths: Most are too thin. Use cloth diapers instead.

Snowsuits: These quilted all-in-ones look cosy but are impractical – as soon as you’ve struggled to put them on, sod’s law says that your baby’s diaper will need changing and you’ll have to take the whole thing off again! It’s also easy for babies to overheat in these, especially if you’re going in and out of stores, restaurants, and the car. Since newborns don’t tend to go running around in the snow, blankets are more versatile at keeping them warm, given these can be easily removed when you go indoors.

Bedding: Buy a lightweight sleeping bag instead. They are safe for newborns from 7lbs and they never get kicked off when your baby moves in his sleep. They also allow you to spirit up a bed anywhere.

Change bag: Specially designed change bags are usually very expensive (between £60 and £100 in most baby outlets) and you find that you end up using your handbag for most things anyway, simply because you don’t want to carry such a cumbersome, ugly-looking bag around with you all the time; not to mention the risk of such an expensive item becoming stained with poop.  Reasonably spacious pockets (particularly if you are breastfeeding) will suffice for a newborn diaper, a spare sleepsuit, and a few wipes in a plastic bag. Alternatively, use a rucksack or roomy tote.

Change Mat: A lightweight, wipe-clean changing mat is useful but you can get by with nothing more than a towel.

Changing Unit: Another piece of butt-related kit that you don’t need. Instead, buy a chest of drawers. It will cost at least a third less. Simply tack in some wood around the edges so that the mat doesn’t slip. You can remove it when you no longer need the station. Or if you’re up to it, changing on the floor is ideal – all you need is a change mat/towel.

Starter Sets: Bundled products typically for bathing or childproofing are poor value because you probably won’t want or need half the stuff.

Diaper Stacker: Diaper stackers are designed to be convenient and stylish holders in which to store your diapers, but in reality they are irritating at worst, and needless at best. The time it takes to load the stacker (which will need to be done regularly) and then retrieve a diaper each time, makes them a big, stylish inconvenience.

Brand Disposable Diapers: If you’re going down the disposables route, try supermarket own-brand diapers which are surprisingly good quality and significantly kinder of your wallet (often 50% cheaper!) Supermarkets are always running special offers, so if you don’t mind switching and changing brands, that’s another way of saving money.

Diaper Disposal System: These glorified garbage cans, sometimes called “Diaper Wrappers”, use so many different plastic bags to try and disguise the smell of dirty diapers that they must be bad for the environment. Just chuck your baby’s dirty disposable diapers in the normal bin.

Baby Wipes: Although disposable wipes can be handy when you’re not at home, they dry out easily and the supposedly stay shut sticky lids don’t tend to. In any event, you don’t need wipes, especially at this young age. “You shouldn’t use wipes until your baby is at least six weeks old as they will remove the natural oils from her skin and leave it dry and uncomfortable” (Stoppard 2008). Despite what Johnson & Johnson tell you, it’s much better to clean the delicate skin of newborn babies with cotton wool and warm water; and it’s environmentally friendly too.

Wipe-Warmers: The reviews on Amazon say it all: “the wipe loses its temperature so quickly and becomes almost cold when it reaches the baby if baby is not just inches away from the wipes warmer.” This is a product devised by a marketing department to solve a problem that doesn't exist. More worryingly, wipe warmers breed bacteria and can cause infections, particularly for little girls.

Baby Bath: These are bulky and are useful for a couple of months only. Meanwhile, the basin (cover the taps with a towel) or a large washing-up bowl are good alternatives. You can also bath with your baby if you have someone else to help. In the early weeks your baby won’t need a bath at all and you can ‘top and tail’ her.

Bath Stand: Designed to save you from kneeling bath-side but the effort involved in lifting a heavy baby bath full of water on and off is almost as challenging to your back muscles.

Bath Thermometer: Just use your elbow.

Top and Tail Bowl: You don’t need a special bowl for the cotton wool – any clean plastic one will do fine.

Baby Towel: So-called baby towels are made of disappointingly thin terry towelling so lack absorbency and cosiness and tend to be so small that your baby will need a bigger towel within a few months. A soft family towel will do a better job.

Baby Bath Robe: You know those cute little short robes that tie around their waist? You. Will. Never. Use. These.

Baby Nail Scissors: Using baby nail scissors can be a tricky task. Instead, use your fingers or even teeth, after first softening your baby’s nails in the bath.

Baby Toiletries: They may smell nice, but these aren’t necessary for small babies, and certainly aren’t recommended for those with dry or very sensitive skin. Consider that our skin absorbs approximately 60 per cent of everything it comes into contact with and that a baby’s skin is around six times thinner and five times more sensitive than adults (Cattanach 2007). Some baby bath products contain chemicals like Parabens and SLS (Sodium Lauryl Sulfate). Plain water is all you need.

Baby Perfume: *sigh* Yes this really exists.

Baby Shampoo: Unless your baby’s hair is particularly abundant, you can wash it using just warm water for the first few months.

Baby Oil: Giving your newborn a massage provides a wealth of tender moments for both of you. There is no need to buy ‘baby oil’ marketed for this purpose. Olive oil works just as well, and is 100% natural. It’s also a great moisturiser.

Baby Talcum Powder: This should be avoided because it has no benefits for your baby’s skin. In fact, the granules in the powder can irritate a baby’s skin, especially when they work their way into the moist folds. It is also a potent irritant if it gets inside the body (Cooper 2011). It is irritating to the lungs and can cause significant problems if inhaled (Spock 2004). It can also increase your baby’s risk of developing cancer, particularly if your baby is a girl (Wade 2012). Talcum can spread from the genital area right up into the peritoneum via the fallopian tubes. It may also create chronic inflammation around the ovaries and long-term pain and other symptoms.

Toys: The fear that our babies will go ‘unstimulated’ has done wonders for sales of ludicrously expensive ‘toy’ and ‘learning’ products. However despite what most toy companies would have you believe, toys are superfluous in the first few weeks. Your baby will be ‘stimulated’ by life.

Mobile: A crib mobile may look nice and promise to lull your baby to sleep, however nearly all of them are more stimulating than soothing, which means that they may have the adverse effect of keeping your baby awake. Also, mobiles have an average-shelf life of just a few months, as they must be removed for safety reasons as soon as your baby can sit up.

Crib-Side Music Box/Light Show: Like the mobile, these tend to be more stimulating than soothing.

Womb Bear: These expensive ‘gadgets’ are bears that are designed to sound like a mother’s womb and are supposed to help baby settle to sleep. However SIDS guidelines recommend that you do not put soft toys into a young baby’s sleeping space due to the risk of suffocation.

Swaddling Blankets: If you want to try swaddling, any thin blanket, large muslin, or even an adult’s jumper will do.

Moses Basket/Bassinet: Your baby will have outgrown a moses basket by three months. Besides, they are expensive, cumbersome, hard to store and difficult to clean. Instead, use the carrycrib attachment from your pram, or a travel crib, or even a drawer (I’m being serious).

Cradle: Although they look pretty, swinging cradles are expensive and have such limited space, like moses baskets, that you will only use one for a couple of months at most. Also, with cradles, when the startle reflex happens, it then rocks the basket and wakes your baby up. Double fail.

Hammocks: They last a little longer than a moses basket or cradle, but this won’t save you money as you’ll need a crib anyway – just a bit later. Also when your baby moves to a proper crib or crib-bed, you could be in for a rough time if they’re used to the hammocks movement to rock them to sleep. Note also there have been rumours of suffocation hazards associated with the use of hammocks.

Crib Duvet: These are not suitable for babies under 12 months, due to the risk of suffocation. Use a sleeping bag instead.

Crib Bumper: These soft, padded panels that tie onto cribs stop the free flow of fresh air, increase the temperature around your baby, which may lead to him becoming overheated; and also, babies can also get their heads wedged underneath.

Crib: Although most parents buy cribs (cots), they aren’t a necessary purchase. Cosleeping is a valid option. It can save money and space as well as enhance parent-child attachment and a host of other stuff, see here. If however you decide you still want to buy a crib, opt for a crib-bed as it will last longer and ease the transition to a ‘proper’ bed.

Warm Mist Humidifiers: These are a fire hazard. Not to mention the fact that they encourage bacteria and mould to grow in the warm, wet environment they create.

Nursery Decoration: Some parents revel in creating a fully-themed and coordinated nursery. However your baby really doesn’t care whether there’s Winnie the Pooh, Humphrey the Elephant or Pope Benedict adorning the wall. Also, baby girls with blue walls in their nursery aren’t likely to be psychologically damaged by the experience.

Nursery Storage: You will need somewhere to store your baby’s things although it need not be specific nursery furniture – any wardrobe and drawers will do.

Infant Sleep Positioner: These sponge positioners are used to ensure a baby sleeps in one position with limited movement. Ironically, Infant sleep positioners are designed to help babies sleep safer, however in reality, the devices have been associated with suffocation deaths

Crib Canopy: Unnecessary and a potential SIDS risk.

Traditional Pram: These are often much more expensive (at least $300) and only suitable for small babies. Once they reach at least six months old and can support themselves upright, they’ll be happier sitting in a stroller. If you think you could manage solely with a sling for the first few months, you could skip the pram phase altogether, and buy only a cheaper, lightweight stroller later on. If slings don’t appeal, you can purchase a stroller, suitable for a newborn, for around $100 and it will last till preschool! The best places to find a bargain stroller are NCT sales, second-hand children’s stores, charity stores, eBay and Gumtree.

Stroller Parasol: Don’t bother with parasols, it’s impossible to keep your baby in the shade using them. You can either buy a cheap sun shade that looks like a giant mosquito net, or clothes-peg a muslin or similar material to the hood of your stroller to keep baby out of the sun.

Car Seat Footmuff: Unless you’ll be using the car seat on a pram chassis a lot, a blanket will do just fine.

Auto Carrycots: These are bassinets with special attachments that fix onto the back seat of your car. They do pass bare minimum safety standards but fared poorly in recent tests compared to upright infant carriers. Best avoided.

Baby Viewing Mirror: Designed to be positioned on the car’s back seat head rest so you can view your baby. Don’t bother. It’s safer to keep your eyes on the road.

Baby on Board Sign: I still can’t fathom the point of these other than to smugly advertise your fertility. A recent study has shown that these signs actually cause ‘one in 20 road accidents’ (The Telegraph 2012).

Disposable Breast Pads: These can be scratchy and uncomfortable. They’re also a false economy because you’ll get through loads. Instead, buy a pack of re-usable, washable pads. They’re softer against your skin and tend to be more absorbent.

Bottle Brushes: If you’re bottle-feeding, buy normal washing-up brushes or a new toothbrush, rather than expensive bottle brushes.

Bottle Warmer: You don’t need a bottle warmer. If your baby won’t accept room temperature milk just use hot water and a large container to warm the milk. Most cafes are happy to supply these.

Insulated Bottle Holder: As above.

Newborn Size Baby Bottles: Too small within weeks.

Disposable Bottles: Single-use bottles take up a lot of luggage space and aren’t eco-friendly. Also, some babies won’t accept a disposable bottle teat.

Hands-Free-Bottles: These curious contraptions are designed so that the baby feeds himself. He sucks on a teat attached to a flexible straw that leads into a bottle. Hands-free-bottles are completely unnecessary, arguably cruel, and can lead to over-feeding. Also, the long thin straw tubing is very hard to sterilise, posing an infection risk.

Formula Powder Dispenser: There is no need to purchase a specially designed powder dispenser. You can just as easily measure out formula into a sterilised, small, plastic, sealed container.

Dishwasher Basket: These are designed to keep bottles and teats from falling off the shelf of your dishwasher but are completely unnecessary.

Bottle Drying Racks: What’s wrong with a normal dish rack?

Formula: It goes without saying, breast milk is nutritionally tailored to your baby's exacting needs. And it's free.

Nursing Bras: If you’re breastfeeding you’ll need nursing bras with the exception of one kind – those with zip-up cups. They may sound like a good idea, but if you try to do one up one-handed, and catch your boob in the zip, you’ll feel quite differently about them.

Nursing Chair: Many first-timers buy a ‘rocking-feeding’ glider chair and footstool, but they are completely unnecessary, extremely expensive, and not very practical. These chairs quickly become redundant when mothers discover that there is not enough room on either side to fit their ever-growing baby comfortably into a good breastfeeding position.

Nursing Pillow: Regular pillows are more than sufficient, they are also more versatile.

Forehead Thermometer Strip: You hold these in place on your baby’s forehead until a reading comes up. They are not terribly accurate and hard to use if a baby is wriggling around. Use a plastic digital thermometer instead (never glass).


Month 2:

Sling: You’ll probably been feeling brave enough to venture out of the house now if you haven’t already. A sling is the perfect portable baby item! But you don’t need to purchase one (they can be on the depressing side of expensive). Instead you can make one yourself from a crib sheet or a piece of fabric, measuring about 1 x 2 m (3 x 6 ft). Drape the fabric over one shoulder, ideally your left, and tie the ends together with a strong knot at the opposite hip. Rotate the sling so that the knot is at your back. Then gently ease your baby into the pouch made at the front by the rest of the material. Make sure that she is held securely against your chest and cannot fall out.

Toys: There’s still no need to purchase toys. As your baby develops her world becomes an increasingly interesting place and too many over-complicated toys just become a distraction to learning rather than an aid. In our culture we tend to over-stimulate babies with a plethora of unnecessary toys leading to sensory overload. This consequently lowers concentration skills.

Breast Pump: After breastfeeding is established (when your baby is around 6 weeks), you may wish to occasionally express your milk using a breast pump. You can hire a pump from your local health visitor or NCT group. Alternatively, hand expression can often be more effective at expressing milk, and it’s free! A Unicef video detailing hand expression technique can be found here. If you feel you must buy a breast pump, don’t waste money on a manual one. The electric ones are more expensive for sure – but they work.

Nasal Drops: Babies of this age are notorious for getting stuffy noses. A drop of breast milk up the nose will soothe your baby - it acts as a decongestant.

Month 3:


Movement/Breathing Monitors: At three months your baby’s risk of SIDS reaches its peak (although it’s still a very rare condition). For peace of mind you may be tempted to purchase a movement/breathing monitor. These have a sensor pad that sits under the mattress and detects movement when your baby breathes. An alarm is sounded if movement is not sensed after a certain period, usually 20 seconds. There is no evidence to show that such devices offer reassurance. In fact, they may only serve to increase parents’ worries because of the many inevitable false alarms (Holland 2004). Bear in mind that breathing monitors do not prevent SIDS. The Foundation for the Study of Infant Deaths says that it is far better to know and practice preventative methods for dealing with SIDS than to rely on electronic monitors.

Toys: Commercial toys are still unnecessary. Young babies can be kept entertained by safe, everyday household items.  Your young baby will be fascinated by the crinkling sound and texture of something as simple as a sealed packet of potato chips.

Baby Swing: A baby swing can soothe your baby, however a cloth sling does the same thing, and is miles cheaper, not to mention portable; and you can even make your own!

Month 4:

Baby Nest: Your baby may be able to hold their head steady now, although she may not be able to sit unsupported yet. A baby nest (giant ring in which baby can be propped) can be useful, but you can easily make one yourself using strategically placed pillows. A breastfeeding pillow is ideal for this purpose.

Jeans: Your baby is probably getting out and about more now, so you may find yourself longing to dress him in a ‘proper’ outfit. However, there is no point in buying hard-wearing trousers like jeans yet. They are unnecessary before your baby can crawl. In fact, don’t bother buying trousers at all. Chose shorts instead. He’ll grow out of trousers within months, if not weeks.

Bath Toys: Your baby will make their move to the ‘big bath’ around now, and manufacturers are all too happy to market intricate bath toys at you. However, empty shampoo bottles, sponges, plastic bowls, a small plastic watering can, and a kitchen sieve are just as, if not more, effective. You can also use toys that are not designed specifically for the bath, such as a plastic tea set, rattle, stacking cups, balls, etc.

Bath Toy Tidy: These are liable to crash to the floor when the suction cups fail.

Bumbo: This is a plastic seat which helps (read: forces) your baby to sit upright. It has been known to cause skull fractures when babies tip themselves out. Plastic baby seats such as Bumbos are not the best equipment for crying babies: your baby will be happier and more secure in a cloth sling, and you get to have both arms free, with less strain on your shoulders.

Baby Rice: Around now well-meaning relatives and incompetent health professionals will suggest spoon-feeding your baby to some 'baby rice', or as I prefer to call it, wallpaper paste. Don't do it. Your baby is simply not ready. Don't even think about putting it into your baby's bottle either.

Month 5:

Door Bouncer: Now that your baby can hold their head up steady, you may be tempted to purchase a baby doorway bouncer. Don’t. The Association of Paediatric Chartered Physiotherapists do not recommend them as they encourage babies to bounce on their tiptoes and arch their back unnaturally.

Shopping Kart Seat Covers: Just give the seat a wipe and stop being so precious.

Toys: There’s a pattern developing here right? Forget about Whoozits, Lamaze and Baby Einstein, what babies really love is everyday objects. Your keys will always be your baby’s favourite. “In a room full of toys, your baby will gravitate towards anything that isn’t an official plaything – from pot plants to mobile phones, remote controls to hairbrushes. Baby toy manufacturers often market their products as educational, so it’s easy to fall into the trap of buying them. But don’t” (Lewis 2009). The kitchen is a good source of interesting playthings for your child; wooden spoons, spatulas, small pans and lids, colanders and sieves, funnels, a set of measuring spoons, plastic cups, ice cube trays, or egg carton.

Month 6:

Sterilizer: This is a controversial one. Some paediatricians suggest that if you are bottle-feeding your baby, you can stop and sterilizing at 6 months (Laurent 2009; Cooper 2011; Einon 2004; Atkins 2009). Some even suggest it’s acceptable to skip the sterilizer right from baby’s birth and simply use a dishwasher (Lewis 2009). Whereas others maintain that, “it is a good idea to continue sterilizing until your baby is a year old” (Stoppard 2008; Smith 2012). It’s your call. Personally, I believe the 6 month mark is an acceptable point at which to stop sterilizing. At this age your baby starts to use his fingers to feed himself so sterilization seems futile. Whether you decide to ditch the sterilizer now or not, it remains very important to continue to thoroughly clean milk-feeding equipment well to reduce the risk of gastroenteritis. There is no need to buy a sterilizer at any point as you can just sterilize your baby’s bottles by boiling them in a pan.

Follow-on Formula: As I explained in my post, '15 Tricks of Formula Companies', so-called ‘follow-on milk’ is marketed by formula companies to circumvent legislation banning the advertising of infant formula. European parliamentarians have questioned the scientific basis for follow-on milks, calling them 'extremely dubious.'  In World Health Assembly Resolution has described them as ‘not necessary.' Companies push follow-on milks with the claim that it provides the extra iron older infants need. Iron is of course important for infants, but it is risky to add too much to milk. Follow-on milks can also legally contain higher amounts of sucrose, glucose and other non-milk sugars, and when bottle-fed can increase the risk of dental caries and other problems in older babies. Breastfeeding is most suited to babies. However if you are formula feeding, stick to infant formula until your baby is 1 year old.

Baby Monitor: If you’ve been following SIDS guidelines, your baby would have slept in the same room as you for at least 6 months. Now you may wish to move her into her own room. Even still, a baby monitor is not essential because most parents develop finely tuned hearing when it comes to hearing their baby cry – unless you have a very big house. A baby’s cry can measure up to 115 decibels, louder than a truck (Cattanach 2007).

Mobile: When your baby learns to sit up (usually around this age) remove any mobiles from above her crib to prevent her getting entangled with it.

Baby Food Recipe Books: There’s no need to line the pockets of Annabel Karmel and friends. Instead, the internet has a wealth of free recipe ideas for each stage of your baby’s development. A Google search will take seconds. You can also take inspiration from the combination of food used in baby jars.

Baby Food Jars and Packets: Just no. Read here.

Baby Food Processor: These expensive gadgets can steam your baby's food and puree it all in one machine. But really, if you’re going down the pureed route, a normal food processor or blender is all you need. You’ll only be pureeing for a shortish period. Better still, try baby-led weaning from the start.

Freezer Pots: You don’t need special freezer pots in which to store your homemade food. Instead, purchase a standard $1 ice cube tray and fill it with baby-sized portions, then you can defrost just the amount you need, when required.

Baby Spoons: There’s no reason you can’t use normal tea spoons to feed your baby, rather than plastic. Or even better, let him use his hands.

Baby Porridge: Special baby porridges and breakfast cereals are unnecessary. It’s much more economical to use adult cereals and porridge such as Weetabix. However, do scan the ingredients list for extra sugar and salt.

Baby Rice: Even now, at six months, baby rice continues to be nutritionally void and completely unnecessary. In fact, a third of baby rice on sale in the UK has been found to contain so much inorganic arsenic, a human carcinogen, that it would be illegal in some countries (The Independent, 2006). This is because rice soaks up arsenic from the soil more readily than other grains do. 

Bowls That Stick Down: (they don’t).

‘Portable’ Highchair with Tray: These are plastic seats with a harness and small tray that strap onto a standard chair. They tend to be quite garish and I’ve put those little inverted commas around ‘portable’ as they’re bulky and therefore unsuitable for anything other than car travel. They also have quite a few nooks and crannies for food to gather in.

Reclining High Chair: You really don’t need this.

Fabric Dining Chair Harness: These loop around or over the chair back with a fabric T to hold your baby in place. They can get dirty and don’t add any height so don’t help your baby to reach the table.

Clamp on Seat/Table Seat: These are fabric seats suspended from a metal ring that clamps to the table. They are hard to fit securely and are difficult to keep clean.

High Chair with Integral Toy Tidy: Unnecessary and another place for food thrown/dropped off the highchair to gather.

High Chair Toys: Toys that attach to high chairs with suction may seem a great idea, but if your baby pulls hard, they can come off suddenly and whack him in the face (see, ‘Bowls That Stick Down’). Place an ice cube on your baby’s high chair tray. He can push it around and watch it melt while you prepare dinner. Be sure to keep a watchful eye to prevent choking.

Month 8:

Shoes: Your baby still doesn’t need to wear shoes yet. Even when he starts walking, he won’t need them until he has been walking steadily and independently for several weeks (Laurent 2009). Indoors, your baby’s feet stay cool just the way his hands do, so he isn’t uncomfortable barefoot. Going barefoot as much as possible indoors will help strengthen his arches and leg muscles, and makes it easier for him to spread his toes, which will give him optimum support, especially on a slippery floor. Some manufacturers market cruising or pre-walking shoes, which are made of soft, flexible materials. They cost the same as regular shoes and are not necessary. Even after your baby is standing and walking, there’s real value in leaving him barefoot most of the time when conditions are suitable.

Walker: Although okay in small doses, baby walkers actually get in the way of learning to walk since all your baby has to do is thrash her legs without balance. The Association of Paediatric Chartered Physiotherapists warns against them as they encourage babies to walk in an unnatural tiptoe position and their use reduces the time babies spend on the floor practising body control in the natural developmental way. Also, the use of baby walkers is actively discouraged by safety groups such as the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents and the Child Protection Trust because they can cause accidents. In fact, baby walkers have been banned in many countries, including Canada, because they are potentially dangerous for babies.

Sit-in Activity Centre: With these, baby sits in a fabric seat surrounded by a ring featuring assorted toys and activities. Like walkers, activity centres are okay in small doses, however they are bulky, unattractive, expensive and only useful for a short window of time. By all means borrow one if you have space.

Baby Einstein DVDs: Instead, try reading, singing, talking and playing with your baby. Oh, go on.

Ball Pool: Your baby is sitting steadily now, so a ball pool might seem like a fun idea. These are usually inflatable, and take up a lot of space. Instead of purchasing one, just fill your regular bath with balls.

Month 11:

Baby Knee Pads: These are really useful, for those of you who insist on tiling your floor with upended glass shards. But for the rest of us, avoid. Apart from looking naff, they hinder the natural movement of your baby’s legs.

Playpen: Now that your baby is probably crawling or creeping, you may be tempted to purchase a playpen. However think about whether the imprisonment of a baby in a pen may affect their development. Such captivity can cramp your child’s spirit and desire to explore. They are also expensive and take up a lot of space and the time when they are useful can be very limited. If you insist on using a playpen, I recommend using a travel crib instead. They work just as well and because they’re multi-functional, offer significantly better value for money.

Hob Guards: These are designed to prevent your inquisitive toddler from reaching up and touching cooker knobs or grabbing pan handles. Ironically hob guards can however, get hot enough to cause burns themselves. I’m not a big fan and favour keeping baby away from the cooker instead.

Corner Cushions: In line with their baby’s emerging mobility, many parents buy a plentiful supply of corner cushions for furniture. These are only really necessary if your baby is particularly clumsy and/or you have furniture with very sharp corners at toddler head level.

Blind Cord Winder: These are designed to prevent risk of strangulation from blind cords. You can manage without by just tying cords out of reach.

Radiator Guards: With most central heating systems you can turn the temperature down so that the radiators remain effective but not so hot that burns could occur (this also helps the environment).

Activity Table: Your baby is pulling himself up to a standing position now, so wouldn’t it be nice to pull himself up to a child-safe, primary-coloured activity table? Well, yes it is – for all of fifteen minutes; until he gets board of the static, limited set of toys available on the table. Then your large, bulky plastic eyesore sits in the corner of the room gathering dust or becoming a dumping place for laundry. Much better to turn a large storage box over to create a table and put interesting items on it. Then you can freely rotate the items.

12 Months:

Blankets and Pillows: Even though children older than 12 months are no longer at risk for SIDS, they’re so active when they sleep that they kick off blankets during the night, and then find them difficult to rearrange. Hang onto that sleeping bag.

Electronic Toys: By the time your baby reaches his first birthday, electronic toys will be heavily marketed. However research has shown that these toys don’t actually have any educational value and can’t teach cognitive skills (Cattanach 2007; Beswick 2009). Instead, they just encourage a child to practice them, just the same as the box the toy came in will. They have limited scope, do not encourage imagination or creative thought processes and generally involve your toddler responding to a scenario constructed by someone else. For instance, electronic books which teach your child phonetics in a foreign or ‘electronic’ accent don’t really lend themselves to letting your kiddo smear it with food and then drop it down the toilet! Banging two pan lids together is far better than pushing buttons to create noises produced by hidden electronic parts.

Training Cup: By the age of one year, it’s recommended you stop using baby bottles and move onto training or ‘sippy’ cups. In reality, many babies struggle to adapt to these. More worryingly, they have been linked to injury risk. For instance, sippy cups were involved in more than a quarter of all injuries to two-year-olds in 2010 (American Academy of Pediatrics 2011). Just move straight onto a normal cup.

Toddler Reigns: These will restrict and annoy your budding athlete. They also have a very short lifespan so are not good value for money.

Pacifier: If your baby has had a pacifier up till now, it’s time to say goodbye. Pacifier-use until a baby is one year old has been linked to a decrease in the risk of cot death (Fleming 1999), however pacifiers used into toddlerhood and beyond have been linked to speech delay and tooth misalignment (Hebling 2008).

Toddler Formula: So-called toddler formula does not offer any advantage compared to regular cow's milk. In fact,  the 'enriched' vitamins and minerals in these products result in an uncontrolled increase in the supply of some nutrients whereas other vitamins and minerals are included in lower amounts than in cow milk (Federal Institute for Risk Assessment 2011).

18 Months:

Toddler Bikini: Why expose your little girl’s mid-drift to the elements? Is there any particular reason why you want her to look like a mini-woman?

Toddler Swimming Trunks: Boys get cold too! A wetsuit-style all in one gives you more material for your money and is much more comfortable for your little swimmer.

Potty Training Pants: This is the earliest it is recommended that you begin potty training (unless you’re going down the elimination communication route, which is a whole different ball game). Potty training pants (essentially diapers that are easier to pull up and down) are unnecessary and can actually impede your toddler’s learning process. Instead, switch from diapers to regular underwear. Take frequent toilet trips and be prepared for a few accidents. Your toddler will progress much faster as their learning will be facilitated by the sensation of being damp or soiled.

Musical Potty: Just no. Ditto for potties with flashing lights and potties designed to resemble royal thrones. Do you want your toddler to become accustomed to all these bells and whistles every time they have a dump?


2 Years:

Puzzles: Having mastered the necessary manual dexterity, your toddler will now enjoy constructing puzzles. Rather than purchase commercially designed puzzles, it’s better to create your own. This will enable you to personalise the puzzle to appeal to your toddler’s interests. Find an engaging, colourful picture of something your toddler likes – his favourite animal, vehicle, or food, for instance. (Magazines are rich sources for large photographs). Then glue the picture onto a sheet of cardboard (the cover of a cereal box is fine). Cut the picture into four large sections. Now help your toddler rearrange the pieces to put the picture back together again.

Branded Car Shade: Now that your brand-aware toddler has favourite cartoon characters, you may find yourself in Halfords eyeing up a Winnie the Pooh car shade to replace your non-branded one. Whilst this will please your toddler (for all of 2 minutes), these car shades can be quite difficult to see through, leading to unnecessary safety risks for drivers.

Booster Pad: These are either plastic or inflatable and are really just glorified cushions allowing toddlers who no longer need trapping in better access to the table. They’re not suitable for younger babies given the lack of harness so they have a very short lifespan. Just use a regular cushion if you must.

Art Easel: Your aspiring artist may be a dab hand with a crayon by now, but don’t feel you need to go all Art Attack and buy an easel. They are quite bulky and although they often fold up they still need to go away somewhere. That somewhere is already full to the brim with everything else you and your children own. Instead, get some rolls of wallpaper and let your toddler draw/paint on the other side. This is cheaper, more portable, and provides much more room for their masterpieces.

Eating/Painting Suit: These are waterproof plastic clothing (usually a smock) worn over your child’s regular clothes to protect them. They’re great until it comes to taking one off when it’s covered in spilt food. This can lead to more mess than if you hadn’t bothered in the first place. They also tend to irritate and over-heat the poor child wearing it.

3 Years:

Pillows: Toddlers and young children don’t actually need pillows and indeed back care experts would argue it is healthier to delay introducing one for as long as possible.

Junior Bed: Smaller and lower to the ground, but a waste of money considering the short time it will be used. They aren’t great value given the fact that you’ll also have to buy a single bed later on anyway. Also, a junior bed can’t be used by visiting guests (unless your friends are leprechauns). Instead, just invest in a normal single bed. If you’re worried about your toddler falling out of a higher bed, you can fit a bed rail to prevent this.

Colouring Books: These start to make an appearance in many preschooler’s toy boxes around now. However they only serve to stifle creativity by having your child colour in a predetermined picture. Blank sheets of paper are much efficient at nurturing creativity.

Time-Out Pad: These gadgets with flashing lights and sounds inform your naughty preschooler when he has served the time for his crime. They’re uber expensive when an egg-timer, cellphone alarm or heaven forfend – a parent, can do the same job.

Trunki Ride-On Suitcase: By now your preschooler will have developed some gross-motor dexterity, so when vacation time rolls around, you might be tempted to pack his gear into a Trunki. Don’t. You’ll be constantly apologising as your kid crashes into the heels of other people at the crowded airport, then because it’s solid, you’ll be unable to squeeze it into the overhead locker on the plane, that’s if it passes the hand-luggage size limits, which it doesn’t on many airlines.

Branded Dress-Up Outfits: There really is no need to make your child look like a clone of every other preschool cosplayer. Instead, have fun with your child creating your own outfits with different fabrics or if you’re feeling lazy, let her raid your wardrobe.

It’s a catch-22 situation. You discover that you have been incorrectly positioning your baby, and have learned how to correct it, but now it’s too painful to nurse. Your nipples are red raw and their wounds have turned into scaly crusty scabs. Every time your baby latches on, he rips the scabs off, acquiring a side-order of blood to accompany his meal.

After being neglected by hospital staff, this week’s triumphant mom found herself in this dire state. Her nipple sores were so severe that they penetrated through several layers of skin, yet with nature dictating that her newborn would feed frequently, how could she get through this with her breastfeeding relationship (and nipples) intact?

“I intended to give birth to my son at home. He was about 2 weeks past his 'due date' and my pregnancy had been comfortable. When labor arrived, it was long - very long, and after three days we went to the hospital when I was given an epidural and pitocin. This was exactly what I was trying to avoid by birthing at home and I struggled with mixed feelings failure, guilt, and even relief.

Unsuccessful latch

Once he was born I tried to latch on my son but he was not very alert.  He was taken away to have standard tests, etc with my husband accompanying. I was left alone and felt very, very alone.

hen everyone returned to the recovery room, we tried nursing again. It hurt. I knew from an antenatal breastfeeding class that nursing "shouldn't hurt" so I asked the midwife. She disagreed and said that it should hurt. There were no lactation consultants on staff that night and I would have to wait until the next morning to see someone.  In the meantime my son’s bad latch caused huge sores on both nipples meaning that each breastfeeding session got progressively more painful and by morning I was in tears.

Sugar water

When she saw my condition, the hospital lactation consultant was concerned and helped me to get a better latch by experimenting with positions. Everything worked while she was there and fell apart again when she left. That night at around 3:00AM, I heard my baby son sob for the first time, even though he had just eaten. We called the night midwife, who arrived with sugar water in a bottle and told me that I wasn’t making enough milk and would have to supplement. Those were not encouraging words at 3:00AM.

Non-consensual separation

During my stay at the hospital, if I fell asleep and my son was in the baby cot next to my bed, the staff would take him to the nursery so I "I could rest." I told them not to do this, but they did it frequently because "I looked so tired." So I slept with him in my arms so no one could steal him again. They scolded me for that, too.


However, I was determined to make breastfeeding work.  I did not have the birth of my choice. I wasn’t prepared to let "them" take this away from me, too. I'm not sure who I qualified as "them", maybe it was the midwife, maybe the hospital, maybe the whole damn world.

So I let my son nurse and latch on for hours. It was a bad latch and hurt terribly, but I was determined. By the time we left the hospital, my sores went through many layers of skin causing each latch to make me scream internally.

Free of the hospital but not free of the pain

At home, everyone (friends, mom, mother-in-law - who all breastfed) seemed unconcerned about my nipple sores saying that breastfeeding does hurt. So, I suffered with my husband holding my hand as I cringed and shrieked at each feeding, tears rolling down my checks. My son had blood in his spit-up due to my scabs ripping open during each feeding. By this stage, my nipples were 80% scabs.

After three weeks, we called the La Leche League and a leader came to our house. She worked with me for three hours to get his latch right and offered a much-needed shoulder to cry on. Finally, someone understood what I was going through and cared enough to help. She recommended that I go to another lactation consultant to get the help I so desperately needed.

The new lactation consultant actually gasped when she saw my condition. She suggested that I pump a little before my feedings to soften the nipple so that my son could latch on properly. I still had very deep sores and she advised me to see a doctor because it looked like the skin was infected and I had a plugged duct. 

Mastitis

A couple of days later, I felt like I had been hit by a truck. I had the chills and did not even have the muscle strength to pick up my own son. I had mastitis.  I would get mastitis three times in the space of one month.


When my son was two months old, I was finally able to attend a La Leche League meeting. He still had bad latch issues so I brought a hand pump just in case I had to hand express some milk. He was asleep when we got to the meeting and woke up screaming for milk. I tried to get him to latch and like many times before we had latch issues and my oversupply was spraying him all over his face. I went over to the side of the room for privacy and a La Leche League member came to help. She suggested that I look into using nipple shields, which (unknown to me at the time) are controversial because they can diminish supply.

Liberation

I bought the nipple shields and we used them for two months. I also kept pumping to keep my supply up. I had literally a freezer full of milk and donated it to some local mommies through my midwife. I was pretty frustrated with having to wash the nipple shields and I guess my son was too, because at four months old he grabbed the nipple shield off my breast, threw it behind his back and went in for mama milk straight from the breast.

My son is now three and a half and we continue to nurse. We aren't weirdo hippies because I breastfeed a preschooler, we are actually quite conventional. I think both my husband and myself were taken aback by the importance of breastfeeding for every stage of infancy, toddlerhood, and beyond. I nurse in public proudly because I feel that it is one of my great accomplishments.  Breastfeeding is the purest joy and such a wonderful tool for toddlers that I cannot fathom why anyone would wean early. I am so glad that we fought through the early very hard months of breastfeeding to be where we are today.

It is my hope that new mothers would not have to suffer like I did. I believe this can be accomplished with more staffing of lactation consultants in hospitals and educating the labor and delivery nurses in the basics of human lactation.”
Get your own Bingo Card here.

Email me with your story.

Exclusive pumping provides the worst of both breast and formula feeding. Like breastfeeding, it is hard work, the mother’s breasts are constantly ‘in demand’ and the weight of responsibility is squarely on mom’s shoulders; And like formula feeding, bottles still need to be steralized. Yet paradoxically, exclusive pumping also offers the best of both worlds – baby is getting mother’s milk, yet mother does not need to be on location.

One thing is certain, the extra time and commitment involved in exclusive pumping raises a host of unique issues. When her newborn had trouble latching, this mother turned to exclusive pumping. However, trouble was lurking around the corner. Was this a decision she would live to regret?


“It all started after a hard 42-hour induction for pre-eclampsia at 38 weeks.  Our daughter and first born Zoë came into this world screaming and the nurses demanded that I put her to the breast immediately.  Baby and I were both exhausted and we couldn't get her to latch, so we decided to take a nap and start fresh.  After a couple hours, we were awake and ready to go.  The nurse came in to ‘help’, took one look at my small breasts, grabbed them, shoved my nipple into Zoë's mouth, and proceeded to tell me how difficult it was going to be for me being small breasted.  I started to wonder, "Can I really do this?"

Time-restraints

After 24 hours, we moved over to the post-partum wing of the hospital.  A nurse came in to tell me our daughter was severely jaundiced and needed to be under the bili-lights.  She made sure to stress that I was not to take her from under the lights for more than 10 minutes at a time.  I was devastated. It was taking at least 10 minutes to get our daughter to latch at this point.  The nurse seemed indifferent to my distress. The next day another nurse came in to check on our progress, said we were doing great, and after 5 days in the hospital we were sent home.

The WIC were very supportive of my want to breastfeed by pumping and provided a hospital grade pump, but wouldn’t provide suggestions as to why I was in so much pain while breastfeeding.  Everyone kept telling me, “get through the first 6 weeks and it gets easier”. Week 1, it'll get easier.  Week 2, it'll get easier... and so on.  We got to week 6, it was not getting easier.  My nipples were cracked and bleeding.  Every latch resulted in stabbing, toe curling, tear triggering pain.  I resented every cry my new baby made. I didn't want to hold her or be near her for fear that she would be hungry.  I was engorged, swollen, and sore.  I wanted to give up.  I saw all the doctors available to me and cried about my experience; they said, "keep at it."  I wanted my baby to have breastmilk, but just couldn't breastfeed any longer.  I made the decision to start pumping.

Exclusive-pumping

Pumping was easy and painless, but time consuming.  Every 2-3 hours, day and night.  The routine was endless. Pump, fridge, reheat, feed, washing parts.  I was exhausted and my supply was dwindling.  Every single day was a struggle to provide what our big eater was needing between 35-45oz depending on the day.  I bought some fenugreek and prayed it would help us and sure enough it did! My supply doubled and I was finally able to put some away in the freezer for a rainy day.

We then battled clogged ducts and 2 cases of mastitis, but carried on.  I wanted my daughter have every ounce of liquid gold I could provide. The mastitis was horrible!  The first time I did not even know I had it until it was too late.  I felt like I had the flu with the chills, shivers, headache, and fever.  Along with that I had a strong, throbbing, and stabbing pain in one of my breasts. I couldn't just rest and sleep like an ordinary sick person, but had to pump frequently; the very thing that was causing me the most agonizing pain.  I stayed in bed for days only sitting up to pump or care for baby.

Drop in supply

We made it to 7 months and the fenugreek stopped working.  I tried power pumping, increasing my fluid intake, upping the frequency and length of my pumps per day, oatmeal, you name it.  To make matters worse, the WIC emailed me saying that they needed me to return the pump. I thought that this was the end and was beside myself. I decided to give latching once last try.  It worked!  Zoë's latch was pure perfection.  She ate greedily at my breasts and coo'ed noises of delight. I thought this was a fluke but she latched again to her tummy's content, and again, and again...  I was able to stop pumping that day and we never turned back.


I feel defeated when a mother decides not to breastfeed without having tried.  Breastfeeding has provided me with this bond that I could never explain to someone who hasn't experienced it.  My daughter still enjoys being near my breasts and even still makes the suckle face as she falls asleep.  I’m a very strong advocate that any new mom should just try.  I feel the idea that breastfeeding provides comfort and joy for both baby and mother has been lost.  You can talk to someone all day about the benefits of breastfeeding, but it comes down to them.”
Get your own Bingo Card here.

Email me with your story.

Employment shouldn't spell curtains for nursing mothers. Not only is breastfeeding best for mother and baby, it is also in the employer's best interest. Employers who accommodate breastfeeding retain experienced employees; have a reduction in sick time taken by both moms and dads for children's illnesses; and enjoy lower health care and insurance costs. Win-Win!

Yet despite these incentives, the marriage of work and lactation is a rocky road for many. In 2009, the Society for Human Resource Management reported that only 25 percent of companies had lactation programs or made special accommodations for breastfeeding (SHRM 2009). Furthermore, these employers do not specify whether this means there is a private room in which to pump on-site, professional lactation support, subsidies for breast-pump purchases, or whether the “lactation program” consists of no more than allowing employees to pump in their own offices.

To make matters worse, many mothers encounter pressure from coworkers and supervisors not to take breaks to express breast milk, and existing breaks often do not allow sufficient time for expression (Rojjanasrirat 2004). What’s more, small businesses (fewer than 100 employees) are the least likely to have lactation programs, and whether the workplace is large or small, infants are generally not allowed to be there.

So how does this pan out for working moms? Meet Chantie. Forced to return to employment, having to navigate erratic pumping facilities and a bullying boss, then being stopped by customs officials for travelling with a breast milk ‘bomb’ – it’s all in a day’s work...


“One of my first pregnancy memories was sheer confusion at the information and disinformation. I expected the birth experience would be the hard part, but the "feeding" portion was much more stressful. I received so much unsolicited advice.

Not-so-subtle formula-pushing

At the hospital, they did a nursing consult for me to see if I was doing something wrong. I was told that my technique was fine, but that sometimes it takes time for the milk to come in. The shift nurse told me that I wasn't getting any sleep since my baby was hungry. She was telling me that if I would give her a bottle that I would get more than an hour of sleep.


After we went home, we were back and forth to the pediatrician as my daughter just was not regaining her birth weight. I was sent home with a directive to start supplementing with formula. I was very disappointed with this turn. It came with a lot of unsolicited advice on how I should just stop breast feeding and switch to formula, how it was easier, etc. I did the research on a lot of the homeopathic treatments that were aimed at increasing my supply with minimal success.

Back to work

I was able to stay at home with my daughter until she was three months old. Then, being back at the office translated to pumping for me. Work had a mother's room with a refrigerator for the pumping moms, so that made it easier.  The room had 7 stations, and only pumping moms had the code for the door.  5 of the stations had a commercial pump, and each mom could buy the piston attachment kit to use them. I worked hard at pumping and feeding to give my daughter the best start possible. 


Over the course of the year, I travelled to other office campuses on day trips, and made use of their pumping rooms. For one campus, there were no pumps in the room, so I brought along my own. On one trip home, the TSA (Transportation Security Administration) officer could not understand WHY I had breast milk with me but no baby. I tried to explain that my baby was at home, and that I was travelling for business. I was simply bringing home the milk for her later usage that I had pumped on the trip. After more than 20 minutes of questions and the bomb test for each bottle of milk, I finally asked for a female supervisor. I did make it thru security eventually, but it was just beyond me why he had such a hard time understand why I had milk with me along with a breast pump.

Troublesome boss

However my boss, who had her daughter a day after me, was the one that caused the most stress. I had returned to work and was there for about a month before she came back. I know that she was breastfeeding, but she would still book meetings over my scheduled pumping times.

Also, despite us negotiating no travel for a year, at around 9-10 months, my boss tried to bully me into a 3 week business trip to Europe. I turned it down and made it the year point.

My daughter is incredibly healthy and happy, and I think her good start has a lot to do with that. To me, my body makes milk and it includes everything that she needs. It's kind of like you can buy fast food and it's food, but it's a lower quality than if you made the same items yourself. While I acknowledge that formula has a place, I just do not think that it is as good as what my body made for her. I try to limit our diet to limited processed food, organic, etc. That just really isn't the case with formula, at least it sure doesn't look like it when you look at the ingredients.

My best advise...do your research, listen to your heart, and do what you think is right. Breast feeding was a lot of work, but it was totally worth it as it was an unrepeatable bonding experience for my daughter and I.”

Get your own Bingo Card here.

Email me with your story.

Inside your mouth, there is a small fold of tissue which runs between your upper lip and gum (you can feel it with your tongue). This is called the maxillary labial frenum.  Most people have no significant frenum attachment, but sometimes this frenum attaches further down the gum, or runs between the front teeth and attaches behind them, causing restricted movement of the upper lip.  A baby with this condition may find it difficult to latch to the breast effectively. Once latched, his upper lip may be tucked inwards, resulting in a shallow latch causing pain for mom and insufficient milk intake for baby.

You are about to read the story of one such baby, Tom. He had an upper labial tie, and it was left undiagnosed until he was 20 months old! Yet he has never received a drop of formula. How did his mother assure this? Read on.


“Breastfeeding is definitely an emotive subject for me. I tried so hard to be successful.

Tough from Day 1

I couldn't get a good latch from the start. My son Tom was born 3 weeks early and weighed just under 6lb – he was tiny! He would never take enough breast into this mouth. We tried nipple shields yet I still ended up with huge cracks. I dreaded every feed and would be crying with the pain while he fed, which was never for less than 45 mins.


It’s hard to describe or compare the pain, it’s a bit like labour pain; like running a cheese grater over my breasts. It was a sharp, stabbing pain that didn’t stop. I dreaded feeding times. In between feedings my nipples would scab over a little and then it would start all over again! When the water hit my nipples in the shower it was really painful.

Patronising health professionals

I then saw numerous nurses, doctors, midwives, lactation consultants (travelling over 1500km one way! - 3 return trips). Everyone looked for tongue tie and high palate but not an upper labial tie. Many of the health professionals said that my nipple cracks were among the worst they had ever seen (I still have scars around the nipple 2 years later!)

The doctor I saw for my 6 week check up the hard work I’d been doing to breastfeed and said “you need a break too; it is ok to give him formula, even just one bottle a day – at night”. Undermining and not very helpful.

Mastitis

It wasn’t long before my badly cracked nipples led to mastitis. It started with a blocked duct which was a hard, aching lump. I massaged it for a few days and thought it had gone, but then my breast got a red warm area on it. Fortunately I promptly saw a Breast Surgeon who caught it early and prescribed Flucloxacillin.

We then started waking up near midnight to the sound of Tom (at 3 weeks old) vomiting and choking on the most vomit I’ve ever seen from such a tiny baby. It covered the entire inside of the bassinet and was a horrible yellowy colour. I figured out it was due to the just started Flucloxacillin.

But the fun and games were only just starting. I then got a staph infection in the nipple. Add to that vasospasm, 4 courses of antibiotics, topical antibiotic ointments and creams to be applied 3 times a day, then when that did not work to get rid of the staph - a long term course of antibiotics for 6 weeks. Thrush was always suspected but the lab results didn’t show it – we still treated my baby and myself for it anyway.

Pumping to the rescue!

To heal the cracks that had been there for weeks I was advised to pump to "rest my nipples" (Tom was 3 weeks old). Due to the staph the MASSIVE cracks never healed and I never could latch him on without extreme pain. So I only “breastfed” till he was 3 weeks old, and then pumped exclusively.

When I started pumping my nipples were still painful. It took a while sorting out the right size of breast shield/flange. The nurse gave me really large ones, as that is what they said my size was, but I was doing 40min long pumping sessions and it was taking forever to get the milk out. Plus the cracks were not healing and it may have even made them worse, since I had to have the pump on the highest setting! Here’s a photo of my "Strawberry milk". The cracks on my nipples would, every now and then, open up and bleed. Strawberry milk was the result. The milk in this photo had settled and separated. Of course I still fed it to Tom (even though my husband was hesitant) - I would never waste milk!



I later stitched to the standard size that comes with the pump and it was much better for getting the milk; I was able to use the pump at half the setting I was before which was better for the pain.

Pumping was relentless. I pumped 7/8 times a day whilst I persisted trying to latch Tom. I was glued to the pump for a total of 4 hours a day. I pumped in airport terminals, on planes, in moving vehicles, shopping centre breastfeeding rooms amongst other places. I definitely looked a sight, that’s for sure! I had a pumping bustier and a handsfree pump - the tiny Medela Freestyle. So I could walk around the house and get stuff done while pumping (although unfortunately, not eat - for some reason I always felt nauseated if I considered eating while pumping!) My family called me a cow.

I kept everything documented. Every ml that I pumped was recorded and the times, plus times and mls he ate. What I stored, when the stored milk was used I recorded it all!



This photo shows me finger feeding my breastmilk to Tom when he was 3 weeks old. We did this method of feeding for 2 months. It’s hard work, but the best method to use to avoid nipple confusion.





My routine looked like this: Tom would finger feed, taking 45 mins. Then I would settle him to sleep. Then I would have to be attached to the pump for 40 mins or so, then clean, pack and store the milk and parts – about at extra 10 to 15 mins. Plus all the recording milk amounts and working out his needs and what I needed to pump.


It was really stressful thinking about my supply in the early days! I was always worrying about Tom crying or needing me while I was hooked up to the pump. It was not too bad when he was little (he fit on my chest in between the shields or in my lap!) – but as he got older and bigger and could move around it got harder. Plus I couldn’t hold him as easily while attached to the pump. I used to get up in the morning (set my alarm) before I knew Tom would be awake, just so I could get in a peaceful/non stressful pumping session. The sessions that I had to do while he was awake were the worst/most stressful!

Unsupportive husband

My husband could see how hard it was on me and would say “You need a break – just put him on formula”. My parents and friends often said the same thing. It pissed me off! My husband already has 2 children from a previous relationship, who were both formula fed and his attitude/rationale was that they’re fine so formula is just another normal option to choose. It felt like he didn’t have the faith in me to feed Tom the way I was meant to. It actually strengthened my resolve to not turn to formula. I needed something to go my way (that I could succeed in) after Toms disappointing, traumatising birth.

However I admit, it was very tempting to take the easy route! Although I never bought a full can of formula – I bought a box of stick packs, about 6 feeds worth. Maybe I did that knowing that if I did have to resort to formula I didn’t want it to be permanent! Having formula in the house hindered me in that – I would think about how easy it would be to not be in any pain, not be feeding for 40mins/1hr per feed. I even got it out and sat it on the bench. I came SO close to making up a bottle!

But it also helped having it there because once I’d resisted using it once, it got easier and easier to keep resisting.

Nursing my sister's baby

When Tom was 10 months old I had tried breastfeeding my sister’s 4 month old daughter. It was completely pain free!! It felt different to ANY time I had ever breastfed Tom. It felt really nice and I could feel the milk being drawn out by her. This sent alarm bells ringing in my head.


I had for a while suspected Tom had an upper labial tie as his frenulum is quite large. When he was around 20 months and his 2 front top teeth had come through – he had a gap between them. We took him to a paediatric dentist, I had recently learnt of, who uses laser surgery. He confirmed my suspicions of the tie. I finally felt vindicated! It wasn’t me! And it SHOULD have been picked up by all of these people who examined me and him!

Despite all this - my gorgeous boy has never had a drop of formula pass his lips. There were times I wanted to give up and I still have the unopened formula in my pantry to prove it. But my wish to provide only the best for him has outweighed everything else.

Breastfeeding has cost me a lot more money than formula feeding ever would. But I'm so proud to say he's only ever had my breastmilk. I've even been able donate some of my freezer stash to a friend who could not pump the amounts I could.



This journey has been the Hardest experience I've ever had, but definitely the most rewarding! I wish more women would see pumping as an option if they “cannot” breastfeed. It was not easy and did come with its own set of challenges, problems and worries. Such as; the pump sometimes causing pain, bleeding cracks leading to “strawberry milk”, constantly worrying about supply (as we know pumps are not as effective as a baby for long term feeding), packing and storing milk, freezer space, using the milk before it went past use by date, planning days, outings and travel around pumping and keeping breastmilk cold, creating and maintaining a daily record of times pumped and amounts at each pump session and amount ingested my Tom at each feed (a LOT of paperwork!), and amounts wasted (warmed up for a feed but not drunk :(


I am extremely proud of myself and the effort I put into providing only the best for my son; that even in my darkest times I never “gave in” and went for the easy option of giving him formula. It still amazes me that he has NEVER had any formula.

Breastfeeding is the normal and best thing for babies. There are so many health and emotional benefits – I think many of which are yet to be discovered. Why would you want to put a man made, nutritionally inferior replacement into your baby, when the real thing is so readily available?

Mothers who don't try

Mothers who don’t even try: I think they are majorly uneducated and uninformed. It disgusts me! They obviously think that formula is as good as breastmilk! It annoys me that people wouldn’t educate themselves about something this important! Then of course bub doesn’t tolerate this or that formula or gets terribly constipated or sick from the formula. Not to mention that the bub gets sick a lot more often!

Then there are the women who say “I tried to breastfeed, but it didn’t work, etc, etc”. They piss me off just as much! It devalues my entire journey when they say that. I’ve NEVER personally met someone who had as many breastfeeding obstacles (blood in breastmilk – cause not detected, undiagnosed upper labial tie in baby, vasospasm/Reynaud’s phenomenon with tricolour nipple colour change, extremely deep nipple cracks, persistent long term staph infection in cracks, possible nipple thrush, blocked ducts, mastitis, 2 regular courses of antibiotics then 1 long term 6 week course, exclusively pumping, supply worries) as me, but I made it work! Surely most other people can too!”


Get your own Bingo Card here.

Email me with your story.

Human milk is the most natural and physiologic substance that a baby can ingest. If a baby shows allergic sensitivities related to breastfeeding, it is usually a foreign protein that has piggybacked into mother's milk, and not the milk itself.

Yet many mothers (and more worryingly, health professionals) believe that if a baby has an allergy the only remedy is to switch to hypoallergenic formula. This is grossly untrue. In such circumstances, mothers do not need to reach for the bottle - they just need to take a break from eating or drinking things containing the offending protein for a while. Allergy is certainly no reason to wean - it simply requires an investment of effort from the mother. And every baby is worth that, right?

This mother thinks so. When her baby became seriously ill it was discovered that he had multiple allergies, requiring a complete overhaul of his mom's diet! Could she deal with this whilst also battling recurring mastitis, aggressive oversupply, and a return to employment?

“I will say that my biggest regret from my whole birth experience was allowing visitors so soon. I had originally planned on waiting at least until we got to the recovery room to see visitors, but my fiance's parents came strolling in about an hour after I gave birth when I wasn't even dressed yet. They were so excited to see the baby that they didn't even notice me, but my fiance eventually saw how uncomfortable I was and shooed them away. They visited a few more times during our short stay at the hospital and my parents came to see us as well. This was really hard on me, as I was trying desperately to get my baby to nurse and people kept coming to visit, wanting to hold the baby.

My son's name is Theodore aka Teddy. We call him by the nickname 'Bear'. My little Bear and I had trouble breastfeeding from the start. He wouldn't latch in the hospital despite my receiving help from three different nurses and two lactation consultants.

Nipple Shield

After 24 hours he still hadn't fed and when they came in to weigh him I broke down and cried. My inlaws of course, were around to witness my distress, which made me feel even more uncomfortable. The lactation consultant asked if I wanted to try a nipple shield, but warned me that they often lead to low supply and could be difficult to wean babies off of. I was desperate at that point so I agreed to try one.

Although he did much better with the shield, I had a love/hate relationship with it. I loved it because it allowed me to breastfeed my son, but I hated what a pain in the ass that thing was. It constantly leaked milk out of it (mostly thanks to my oversupply) and I felt like all I did all day was wash them. Eventually I bought about ten and just kept them in a bowl next to me so that I could easily grab them during the night.

The lactation consultant was still worried that he wasn't getting enough, so during each feeding we used a syringe/tube system to give him a little extra expressed breast milk while he was latched on. They were also worried about the shield leading to supply issues, so they had me pumping after every feeding round the clock.


Bear nursed every 2 hours for about 45 minutes at a time, so pumping alongside was exhausting. I hated pumping (and still do). I dreaded every night because I knew I wasn't going to be able to get more than 30 minutes of sleep at a time and even that was pushing it. I also felt very trapped. It's one thing to be nursing a newborn all day, but to then spend the tiny amount of free time that you do have attached to a pump can be incredibly frustrating.

After I left the hospital the lactation consultant continued to check in with me. I kept saying that I thought I was making plenty of milk despite using the shield, but she assured me that I needed to keep pumping after nursing sessions if I wanted to sustain my supply.

Recurring Mastitis

When Bear was 4 days old I started to feel like I was coming down with the flu. I had a fever, chills, and was completely miserable. My mom, who had been staying with us, asked me if I had any red marks on my boobs. I went to the bathroom to check and, sure enough, both breasts were streaked with red. I had mastitis on both sides. After that I went down to only pumping twice a day after feedings. I was also determined to wean Bear off using the nipple shield.

Weaning off the shield was no walk in the park. I tried every day for 8 weeks with no luck. I was beginning to fear we would never get rid of that stupid thing. I think part of it was because my breasts were so big at the time and Bear just couldn't stay latched without it. He would always end up frustrated and start crying, which then made me cry too.

Finally on Thanksgiving I decided to try nursing without the shield before Bear got too hungry. It took a few tries, but I was finally able to get him to latch and he went a whole feeding without the shield! That was kind if the turning point for us. I knew he could do it without the shield, so I was determined to continue without it. From that point on we never looked back. My breasts became slightly more manageable, but I was already dealing with a huge oversupply. Every time I nursed Bear he would pull of screaming the second I had a letdown. I ended up having to unlatch him during every let down, catch my milk in a towel, and re-latch him. I also turned to block feeding.


Having an oversupply was so insanely frustrating for me. When Bear was a couple months old I kept reading about women who were saying that they were finally enjoying and even loving breastfeeding, which was not even close to what I was experiencing. I felt horrible that something that was so soothing for most babies was so frustrating and clearly unenjoyable for him.

That went on for 4 months and during that time I got mastitis three more times. Luckily by that point I could tell fairly easily when it was coming on and I would put in a call to my doctor for a refill on antibiotics.

At this point I just knew that pumping so often wasn't necessary (and that it was actually doing more harm than good), so I cut out all night time pumping and gradually reduced my sessions to twice a day.

Sick Baby

At around 2 months Bear was becoming increasingly fussy and gassy. He also had very loose, dark green, mucousy stools, eczema, and seemed to be permanently congested and wheezy. After speaking with the pediatrician about milk intolerances and all of its symptoms I cut all dairy out of my diet. Bear became so much better within just a day. About a month later though he still seemed to be having tummy issues. I did some research and found that half of all babies who are sensitive to dairy are also sensitive to soy. I cut soy out and once again, Bear improved tremendously. This was another big adjustment for me. If you've ever read a label you know that soy and soy derivatives are in everything!

When Bear was 4 months old, we were still struggling. He was a very fussy baby and never slept well. Getting 2 straight hours of sleep at night was a miracle. We would walk/rock/bounce him back to sleep and the second we laid him down he would wake up again. He was also still having a hard time nursing without pulling off and crying. I explained this to his doctor at one of his appointments and he said it sounded like it might be reflux. He prescribed us Zantac, which made absolutely no difference. The next medicine we were told to try was Prevacid. It seemed to help slightly, but after about a month on it I stopped giving it to him and saw no change, so we discarded it.

During this time, I was a mess. Despite huge efforts and help on my fiance's part, I felt very exhausted, alone, and anxious. Looking back I think I definitely suffered from a little postpartum anxiety. Every evening I was overcome with intense feelings of anxiety about the night ahead of me. At the time I didn't know how to put my emotions into words, so I never told anyone.

Allergy Tests

At 6 months Bear was still having eczema flair-ups and tummy troubles now and then, so my pediatrician wanted him to be allergy tested since he was already having issues with dairy and soy that I ate. During our appointment with the allergist I felt like we were completely undermined. The doctor performed a skin prick test on him and determined he was only allergic to egg. He told us that I should just reintroduce dairy and soy and that his eczema wasn't bad enough to be a big deal. I left feeling very unsure. My gut instinct was that the doctor was wrong, so I continued to experiment with different foods and documented how they affected Bear.

After a while I think a lot of my friends and family started to think I was being overly cautious and exaggerating his symptoms. There was even a time when I began to second guess myself and thought that it might just be all in my head. By this point I pretty much survived on almond milk, pasta, and different nuts/trail mixes.


When Bear turned 9 months I gave him a tiny bit of hummus to taste. He ate it and immediately became red and blotchy and began coughing and gagging. I called my pediatrician who referred us to a different allergist. During his appointment they did another skin prick test followed by a blood test. The results came back to show that Bear was highly allergic to milk, egg, wheat, nuts, and sesame. I was upset but also felt relieved - we finally had some answers to all of the issues we were experiencing!

However having to cut the remaining foods was pretty overwhelming. I had to stop eating so many of the things that were main staples of my diet. I switched to coconut milk and hemp milk and the rest of my diet is now mostly meat/fish, fruit, veggies, and rice, corn, and potato-based foods. When I cook I used lots of olive and coconut oil.

His first allergy bracelet!

Cooking can be somewhat of a challenge. The hardest part is just coming up with a variety of tasty dishes that will keep me full. Now that I'm back at work full-time I have to admit that lots of nights are just canned soup or a salad. I'm trying to get better about it because I want to continue breastfeeding for a while, so I need the calories if I'm going to keep my supply up. I have started drinking a rice-based protein drink every morning, which helps keep me pretty full.

If you had told me a year ago that I would be eating a dairy/wheat/egg/nut/sesame/soy-free diet I never would have believed you. I'm a total food person. I used to live for dining out, food festivals, and cheese tasting. My favorite foods ranged from home-made macaroni and cheese to panna cotta. Dairy was always my weakness- goat cheese, fresh mozzarella - I loved it all. Cutting it out of my diet was definitely an adjustment, but seeing the almost immediate change it made in Bear was so worth it.

Donating Milk

I will say that the one good thing about having an oversupply was that I always had a freezer full of milk. Unfortunately after finding out about Bear's egg allergy all of that milk became useless to me. So not only did I spend all of those months dealing with an oversupply - now I didn't even have anything to show for it and all that time I spent pumping! I had no clue what to do with the milk and it felt so wrong to just dump it all out.

Then I came across a donation site on Facebook and was shocked to see how many women were actually searching for breast milk for their little ones. Some just wanted it for the nutritional factor, while others needed it for medical reasons. I ended up finding a mom in my area who was searching for breast milk for her baby girl that was dairy-free. Being able to supply her with something that her baby needed and seeing how grateful she was was an incredible feeling. While dealing with an oversupply wasn't easy, I was able to see that it can be just as frustrating (if not more) to be on the other end of it and not have enough milk for your child. Donating milk helped me deal with my oversupply emotionally, though it was still very frustrating most of the time.


I considered quitting breastfeeding and using a hypoallergenic formula many times, but could never bring myself to do it. A lot of people are surprised to hear that I continued breastfeeding after finding out about Bear's allergies, but to me it actually became more important. Studies have shown that breastfeeding can actually help kids with allergies in the long run and I want to give him every shot I can at growing out of them.

"Never quit on a bad day" was a saying that went through my head often. After surviving reflux, an oversupply, and mastitis multiple times I was still determined to get to that point everyone talks about when breastfeeding becomes easy and enjoyable.

Bear is now 11 months old and I am breastfeeding him on a dairy, egg, wheat, nut, and sesame-free diet. It's not easy, but I have become fairly used to it. I had originally planned on quitting at 1 year, but since he would need either whole milk or formula until he turns 2, I have decided to keep breastfeeding as long as we are both enjoying it and my supply cooperates despite my being back at work full-time.

I'm pumping a lot less these days, but I do have a small stash saved up that I plan to donate again in the next couple of weeks.

Everyone Should Try Breastfeeding

I think everyone (aside from those who can't for medical reasons) should give breastfeeding a try. With all of the info out there about all of the benefits I just don't see why you wouldn't. I'm not going to judge someone who tries it and decides that it's not for them, but to flat out refuse to even give it a shot just seems silly. Perhaps it's my science background, but I've always felt like my body was equipped to feed my baby for a reason.

If any other breastfeeding moms out there are struggling, I just want to say that I understand how you feel and you are amazing. Breastfeeding may be "natural", but for me it was anything but easy. I'm so happy I was able to stick with it and I hope you are able to do the same. It's such a selfless thing to do and I don't think there is enough support out there for us. I still believe that every mom should be sent home from the hospital with an assistant and personal cheerleader. And a trophy. Of course a trophy."
Get your own Bingo Card here.

Email me with your breastfeeding story.

Severe projectile vomiting in young babies can be the sign of a gut disorder called Pyloric Stenosis. This is where the tube connecting the baby’s stomach to their gut grows rapidly thicker until it becomes so thick that the stomach can no longer empty properly. The condition is often accompanied by constant hunger, belching, and colic. If left untreated it can lead to severe dehydration.

It is not known exactly what causes Pyloric Stenosis, and distinguishing it from reflux or gastroenteritis is hard for the novice parent. So when Rebecca, a first time mother, discovered her breastfed baby was suddenly vomiting, she was confused. When does spitting up move from a laundry problem to a medical one? When does spitting up mean something serious?


“I guess I always knew that I would breastfeed to the point where I didn't go to any antenatal classes, I just thought 'well how hard can it be'? After a long and difficult labour that ended up in a theatre-forceps delivery I embarked upon one of the most challenging but rewarding periods of my life.

Shy on support

In the recovery room there I was: I couldn't feel my legs, my baby daughter Lizzie was neatly wrapped up in my arms and I was flooded with the feeling of relief that I finally had her safe. I tried latch her on but she wasn't interested and soon fell asleep. Nobody seemed to have the time to sit with me. Nobody went through expressing or suggested spoon or finger feeding to try and get her interested. 

It was many hours later when Lizzie suckled for the first time, I had to try all sorts of tactics to get her feeding such as bathing to wake her up, feeding lying down, football hold, cross cradle hold... finally she and did it.

Once my milk came in it was hard for me to tell at first if Lizzie was getting enough milk. I was so engorged that I didn't think my breasts were being drained at all. They were constantly full to the point where my nipples were flat and Lizzie couldn't latch. Thankfully on the first weigh-in she had gained weight - not lost - gained. I was relieved. Everything seemed to be going well.

The vomiting begins

Lizzie piled on the weight until week 3 when she suddenly started vomiting. At first it was tame and could have been passed off as wind but then it quickly got progressively worse until she was regurgitating  whole feeds. I don't mean a 'happy spitter', I mean projectile vomit and loads of it. We had a major laundry issue to say the least. I kept asking family members if it was normal for a baby to be sick this much and the replies that came back were, "yes babes are sick don't worry". But I did worry. I thought breastfed babies were not this sick surely? 


One evening I phoned my mother and begged her to tell me not to worry and sought her reassurance that this was all normal. She said she couldn't give me this reassurance and suggested I take Lizzie to get weighed. So I took Lizzie to the clinic where they weighed her - she had lost weight! Half a pound! The health visitor arranged an immediate appointment at the local hospital.

At the hospital, the first doctor we saw tried to fob us off, saying that Lizzie was not being winded correctly. I knew this was not the case. Fortunately the infant feeding specialist saw us next. She agreed that it did not seem like a feeding/winding issue and put the doctor's theory to bed. 

Lizzie was then put on a drip and was not allowed anymore food. I co-slept with her in hospital that night and kept her close to me as much as I could. The next day Lizzie was sent for an ultrasound scan. As part of the scan, the doctors wanted to give Lizzie a bottle of dioralite. I refused the bottle so we cup fed instead. She vomited it all back up as predicted. The doctors then told me they had found the reason for her vomiting: she had Pyloric Stenosis.

Pyloric stenosis is when the passage between the stomach and small bowel (pylorus) becomes narrower. The passage is made up of muscle, which seems to become thicker than usual, closing up the inside of the passage. This stops milk or food passing into the bowel to be digested. The milk sloshes in the stomach often curdling before the baby is sick.



The thickened pyloric muscle can be felt, especially during feeding, as a small, hard lump on the right side of the baby’s stomach. The muscles around the stomach can sometimes be seen straining, moving from left to right as they try to push milk through the pylorus.

Lizzie was retained in hospital for a week whilst she had to undergo an operation under general anaesthetic to correct her stomach. There were no alternatives to the operation. Left untreated, Lizzie would soon become seriously dehydrated. 

The day of the op came and we pushed her down with a nurse to the theatre. Lizzie was asleep so we gave her a kiss and then we went for a walk. Although it was vile to see my babe being taken away like that, we were both relieved that it would finally be over.


I expressed my milk around the clock to keep up my supply. I had never done this before. It was daunting. No one offered support. 

Luckily I managed to keep my milk supply up (with a ruddy huge stash of expressed milk to show for my efforts!) Lizzie was able to get straight back to breastfeeding while she recovered from her operation. Within a few weeks she got back up to the weight centile that she was on previously. Phew.

Whether a mother breastfeeds or formula-feeds is an intimately private decision. It's her body - her choice, and no one should apply pressure upon her choice, right? I disagree.

Choice is overrated

A major flaw of contemporary society is that we tend to put choice on a pedestal. You can never be made worse off by having options, because you can always turn them down right? In a culture where our conception of choice is so tied up with virtues of dignity and independence, the reluctance to deny someone the right to choose can be so strong that it overrides concern for the well-being of babies, the wider society and even the chooser herself.

For instance, it is impossible to predict with absolute certainty what specific harm formula feeding will inflict upon your specific baby. The risks associated with formula use (gut problems, allergies, diabetes, ear infections, etc) are difficult to quantify. Formula feeding is an uncertain gamble. Thaler and Sustein (2009) argue that uncertain risk diminishes the value of choice:

“When people have a hard time predicting how their choices will end up affecting their lives, they have less to gain by numerous options and perhaps even by choosing for themselves”.

Currently parents have the right to choose formula or breastmilk. However when the risks of a parental act are substantive yet indiscernible, it may pay to adjust parental rights to protect infant well-being. In fact the law is already starting to do this:

Parents have Responsibilities not Rights

Over the last few decades the law has made a subtle yet symbolic shift in the way it views parenting. Once parents had ‘parental rights’, now they have ‘parental responsibilities’. The child is no longer a chattel for parents to do with as they wish.

Modern law readily overrides the wishes of parents in a range of contexts, from medical care to health and safety. The courts will authorise action where it is in the best interest of the child and ultimately, the state can intervene and substitute its own decision in place of the parent. In this context, a law restricting formula to a prescription-only basis would not seem far-fetched. It would cater to the same welfare principle as other well-established laws.

We need a Cultural Makeover

Legal change drives societal change. Currently, there are undeniably a lot of mothers who have decided not to breastfeed or to quit breastfeeding for purely social or cultural reasons (see The Infant Feeding Survey 2010 for evidence of this). If we support their decision without question, then we are perpetuating the social and cultural attitudes that got them there in the first place.

For example, formula is commonly framed as a go-to ‘solution’ when breastfeeding problems arise (as they invariably do). Our pro-bottle culture views formula as an instant fixer, and because most mothers bottle feed, this fixer is seen as the normal route to take. If breastfeeding threatens to trespass on a mother’s well-being, even temporarily, formula is there at the ready, always available and culturally approved. How can a tired and overwhelmed new mother resist?

Well, one of the best ways to resist temptations is to avoid them in the first place, but this works only up to a point. We can put that cake back in the fridge rather than leaving it in plain sight on the counter to tantalize us, for example, but we can’t completely escape. If we’re bound and determined to go for seconds (or more), the only way to resist giving in is to be bound by a power beyond ourselves. The same goes for formula. We can resist the temptation to purchase a tub during pregnancy ‘just in case’, but when our baby arrives, and is screaming at 3am, it would only take a short trip to the store to sabotage breastfeeding. In the free market, formula is always available, like a proverbial carrot on a string. And most of the time, mothers are too exhausted, too stressed, and too ignorant to resist its allure. In this sense, contemporary society’s choice-worship reflects a certain naivety about the effects that context has upon choice. So what can we do about the insidious and undermining temptation of formula?

Solution #1: Formula on prescription

For the minority of women who genuinely can’t breastfeed (those with insufficient glandular tissue, those on incompatible life-saving medication, those that have had mastectomies for example), we could provide a safety net: formula on prescription. This would actually be far more sympathetic and equitable than the present state of affairs. Currently women who cannot breastfeed, through no fault of their own, still have to purchase formula at inflated prices. They are essentially being made to pay for their misfortune. “Formula has amongst the highest mark-ups on the supermarket shelves” (Baby Milk Action 2010). Placing formula on prescription will protect these mothers more than our system currently affords. Formula is after all, a ‘medicine’. It was created as an answer to limited cases of pathology. It's only logical that this life-saving medicine be placed on prescription, like the insulin that diabetics need for survival.

But what about the other 98% of women who can physically breastfeed but perhaps don’t want to? They will have to pitch their case to the doctor. Their local doctor will act as gatekeeper and will evaluate the mothers on a case by case basis, choosing to award or deny a prescription as appropriate. The World Health Organisation have created a handy pamphlet which could be used to assist the doctor: 'Acceptable medical reasons for the use of breast-milk substitutes'.

But wait, there’s more: We could enhance this process by installing a mandatory ‘cooling off period’. I take my inspiration from marriage law. Many countries impose a mandatory waiting period before a couple may get divorced. Asking people to pause and think before making a decision of that magnitude seems like a sensible idea, no? Aware that people might act in a way that they will regret, legislation does not block their choices altogether but does ensure a period of sober reflection. The same can be applied to the scenario of breastfeeding cessation:

If a mother who can physically breastfeed approaches her doctor for a formula prescription, the doctor will request that the mother wait a set period of time before a decision is reached. The rationale is that in the heat of the moment, the mother may make ill-considered or improvident decision to formula feed. Psychological research backs this up: studies show that immediate stress and emotional upset can cause people to behave contrary to their own long-term interests, often with full awareness that they are doing so (Loewenstain 1996). In essence, the mother knows that reaching for the bottle of formula is the wrong course of action but is unable, at that moment in time, to translate that belief into action.

Thaler & Sunstein 2009 support my analysis. They note that mandatory cooling-off periods make best sense, and tend to be imposed, when two conditions are met:

(a)People make the relevant decisions infrequently and therefore lack a great deal of experience; and
(b)Emotions are likely to be running high.

These are circumstances in which people are essentially prone to making choices that they will regret. I believe these two factors perfectly describe the breastfeeding scenario, and my assertion is supported by evidence: “90% of mothers who stop breastfeeding in the first few days and weeks would have liked to continue” (The Guardian 2011). There is obviously a lot regret and guilt flying around. So restrict formula to prescription and Vola! Essentially we can spare mothers of guilt by policing, or even removing, their choices! Case closed.

Wait, there’s something wrong with this setup isn’t there? If you’re thinking it seems unfair, condescending and misogynistic  you’re not alone. Restricting formula to prescription raises my feminist heckles. It is akin to legislating women to use their bodies in a certain way against their will. This doesn’t sit right with me. Not to mention the difficulties with implementing and policing such a law. Then there’s an unfortunate implication to consider - this law would encourage formula companies to dishonestly cosy up to health professionals even more than they already do, to ensure their brand is the one on prescription.

Oh drat!

So back to the drawing board...

If eradicating mothers’ easy access to formula by limiting it to prescription smacks of totalitarianism and goes against your democratic spirit of choice, what is an alternative solution? After all, babies are getting sick as a consequence of formula-use which is placing an undue burden on our health care system, not to mention the damage formula-use wreaks on the environment, alongside inflicting a host of other undesirable damages on society (I outlined all the social costs of formula-use here). How can we drive up breastfeeding rates in a politically more palatable way?

Solution #2: Taxation.

Although the prescription-only route would be a practical and equitable solution for those who genuinely can’t breastfeed, it would be impractical and inequitable for everyone else. Alas, it would be excessively radical. So how about we turn to a less-radical concept, one that everyone is familiar with – taxation!

Tax the formula companies?

We all know formula companies are shy on corporate responsibility, to put it mildly! Thus I initially thought the most appealing form of taxation would be aimed at these surreptitious corporations. Legislation could be passed demanding that formula companies transfer a proportion of their profits over to the state, a kind of corporate tax. The state could then spend this money on redressing the harms brought about by formula use – the environmental decay, the burden on the health care system, and so on.

However, as appealingly retributive as this sounds, it would be unlikely to have any effect on breastfeeding rates. Babies would still be consuming formula, consequently their health would remain sub-par. A corporation tax would not increase the numbers of babies being breastfed. Hmmm...so what is the solution?

The solution is simple, and what’s even better – the solution has already been road-tested many times before and proven to be successful in a range of health-related contexts! To increase breastfeeding rates we need to take a ‘bottom-up’ approach. In other words, target the parent!

But let’s not target the parent with health promotion messages or guilt trips - those tired strategies have been failing for decades. It seems that when babies’ health is concerned, factual and emotional incentives are insufficient. Knowing that formula feeding puts their child at increased risk of asthma, allergies, gastrointestinal infections, obesity, lower IQ, SIDS, et al – does not seem to be enough to incentivise parents to breastfeed. The incentive to formula feed is stronger.

When incentives are badly aligned, it is appropriate for the state to try to fix the problem by realigning them. Soooooo...

Tax the parents!

Instead of targeting parents’ moral consciousness (their hearts), we need to target parents’ financial sensibilities (their wallets). We do this by placing a tax on formula – a “sin tax” if you will. People value cold hard money over theoretical health. The immediate utility that results from money is not the same as that which arises from health which is more remote and prospective. Thus, a tax would be more incentivising than health messages alone.

And when our goal is incentivisation, it makes sense to target parents rather than formula companies. Parents are the decision-makers. They are the gatekeepers of their baby’s destiny – whether their offspring receives formula or breast milk is the consequence of parental action. I appreciate that taxing parents is controversial. Formula companies are after all, the big guys. They are billion dollar corporations with deeper pockets from which tax could be extracted. However - and this is the important part – formula companies do not make the final decisive act. It is not the formula company which fills the bottle and administers it to the baby. If we are to embrace the pro-choice rhetoric, we must appreciate that it places the consumer as a responsible agent, at the core of the consumption-decision.

It is not the formula company which fills the bottle and administers it to the baby.

Furthermore, contrary to what some conservatives would argue, taxes are not anti-choice. Taxes would discourage formula-use without forbidding it. People can avoid paying the tax by not purchasing formula. Those people who ‘have to’ use formula are not penalised as they will get it subsidised on prescription from their doctor.

A tax on formula would also benefit society. At present, those who purchase formula do not pay the full costs that they impose on society, and the babies (the passive end-users) who stand to be harmed by formula lack any feasible way to negotiate with the purchaser to get them to clean up their acts.

A sin tax means that those who choose to formula feed will be paying for the consequences of their choice: the tax will cover the costs of their babies’ increased health care needs and the costs of repairing of the environmental damage. In essence, taxing the purchasers of formula will reduce its societal costs.

Taxation would also act as a type of state-appointed guardian ad litem: a bargaining-voice for babies, nudging their parents in a more ethical direction. Its implementation will reduce consumption of formula, incentivising mothers to breastfeed. To illustrate this point, consider tax on alcohol. Studies have found that a 10 percent increase in alcohol tax results in an average 3 to 4 percent drop in consumption. That’s quite impressive considering that the alcohol tax is generally low – only cents on the gallon for beer in some states. And the percentage decrease in consumption is usually lower than the percentage increase in tax, resulting in more tax dollars/pounds for the state! (Thaler & Sunstein 2009)

Let’s take an additional example from another health-related domain: a recent study found that smokers were actually happy when the cigarette tax was raised! Are smokers mathematically challenged? Do they have money to burn? No, they realize that a higher tax means more expensive cigarettes, and they don’t want to pay extra. So what’s going on? Well, smokers and potential smokers know they shouldn’t smoke. In both medical and financial terms, it’s a poor choice, dare I say just like formula-use! The incentives to not smoke, however, aren’t compelling enough to them. But when cigarette prices rise, the incentives to quit rise, and that’s a good thing. Likewise, when formula prices rise, the incentives to breastfeed rise. At some point, mothers decide they simply can’t afford to formula feed and go down the relactation or donor milk route. If they are pregnant, they might never formula feed.

There’s a snag though... taxes may be less restrictive than formula on prescription but they can still induce reactance if raised too high. I can see it now. A thriving black market of infant formula, men in oversized anoraks hanging on street corners with Aptamil tucked into their armpits. The threat of the black market is why it is vital that the tax be kept high enough to incentivise breastfeeding but low enough to protect from reactance. There’s an art to taxation. Too little is ineffective, while too much is counterproductive.

Taxing formula will preserve the consumerist spirit that our capitalist society seems to hold so dearly, and along with it, a prevailing sense of liberty for those who choose to bottle feed. For liberty is much greater when people are told: “You can continue your behaviour, so long as you pay for the social harm that it does” than when they are told: “You must act exactly as the government says”. Yup, taxation will leave our passive, unquestioning faith in the free market intact. It will also pacify the formula companies as they can continue marketing their products, introducing even more unnecessary variations, and then pooling their profits into more marketing to make more profits. The health of babies will continue to suffer, but hell, at least their parents have a choice and are paying for that choice, right?

Sadly, the ultimate achilles heel of taxing formula users is that whilst it may incentivise some women to breastfeed, for those who still don’t want to, they remain at the mercy of the formula companies. These multi-national corporations control the nutritional content, price and availability of formula. They manipulate and monopolise not just parents, but health professionals and the market itself. We could tax the crap out of parents but it would not address the inherent lack of corporate responsibility in formula production. So now what?

Back to the drawing board!

Solution #3: Recompense breastfeeders

What’s better than taxation? The opposite of taxation – reward! By breastfeeding, a mother is not only preserving the optimum health of her baby and herself, she is also saving money for the state and protecting the environment to boot! She is benefiting us all. It is only reasonable that she should be rewarded for this diligence. Indeed, defensive formula feeders and associated whingy-pants argue that breastfeeding is not ‘free’ contrary to some lactivist assertion. They gasp: "Breastfeeding is only free if a mother's time is worth absolutely nothing" (Noonan 2012). So I propose that breastfeeding mothers be recompensed for their commitment.

Here’s how it would work in practice:

When a baby is born the state puts money into a ‘trust fund’. Once the mother can prove she has breastfed for 6 months/1 year/designated goal, she gets the money. If she fails, the money goes to a breastfeeding charity. The mother also has the option of entering into a group financial commitment with other mothers, in which the group’s pooled money is divided among those members of the group who reach their breastfeeding goals. This enhances the group members' drive to support each other. Strengthening female solidarity would be a welcome tonic in the current ‘mommy wars’ climate, no?

Another idea I had for financial recompense for breastfeeding mothers was inspired by the scenario of teenage pregnancy (stay with me). Teenage pregnancy is a serious problem for many girls, and those who have one child, at (say) eighteen, often become pregnant again within a year or two. Several cities, including Greensboro, North Carolina, have experimented with a ‘dollar a day’ program, by which teenage girls with a baby receive a dollar for each day in which they are not pregnant (Brown, Saunders and Dick 1999). Thus far the results have been extremely promising. A dollar a day is a trivial cost to the city, even for a year or two, so the plan’s total cost is extremely low, but the small recurring payment is salient enough to encourage teenage mothers to take steps to avoid getting pregnant again. And because taxpayers end up paying a significant amount for many children born to teenagers, the costs appear to be far less than the benefits.

The same strategy can be applied to breastfeeding: a mother can receive a dollar a day for every day she breastfeeds her baby. This approach would feed into the mantra favoured by many contemporary breastfeeding advocates that ‘every feed counts’. By drawing the mother’s attention to breastfeeding as a day by day process the mother’s enthusiasm and commitment can be more easily retained.

So, why has the state never installed a recompense scheme for breastfeeding mothers? Is the lack of financial recognition of breastfeeding a sign of our patriarchal society yet again, overlooking and undervaluing women's work?

Well, yes and no. Sadly, whilst such a scheme looks good on paper, a recompense scheme would be unworkable for breastfeeding. How would mothers prove they were still breastfeeding successfully? Those who had failed would be incentivised to lie. Short of demanding stool samples from every alleged breastfed baby (a time-hungry, costly, not to mention stinky task) it would be difficult to distinguish a genuine breastfeeder from a fraud.

Therefore if disincentivization through taxation is undoable, and incentivisation through reward is undoable, perhaps focusing on motivation is not the remedy for dwindling breastfeeding rates. So what is?

Solution #4: Nationalise formula production

A final solution, and in my opinion, the most practical and equitable would be nationialising formula production.

na•tion•al•ize  [nash-uh-nl-ahyz]
*verb*
to bring under the ownership or control of a nation

Bringing formula production under the control of the state would have notable advantages. So notable in fact, to be revolutionarily! Indeed, I am confident that nationialising formula production will reduce the overall demand for formula. And here’s how:

At present, formula companies are privately owned businesses existing for the sole purpose of generating as much profit as possible. The free market gives formula companies a strong incentive to cater to (and profit from) human frailties, as well as exploiting them.

The goal of formula companies’ marketing strategy is to expose mothers to their products through as many different media as possible, influencing them on multiple levels, thus taking advantage of what psychologists call the ‘mere exposure effect’. Essentially, the more we are exposed to a particular object or idea, the more we like it! Scientific recognition of this phenomenon took hold in the 1960s, when a series of laboratory experiments demonstrated that simply exposing subjects to a familiar stimulus led them to rate it more positively than other, similar stimuli which had not been presented. In fact, so innate is this behavioural response that it applies to both the human and animal kingdoms! Essentially, the mere omnipresence of formula increases its desirability. When you compare the strong presence of formula in our culture to the weak presence of breastfeeding, it is hardly surprising that our breastfeeding rates are so pathetic. Formula saturation is not only a symptom of the problem – it is the problem.

By nationalising formula production we remove formula as an incessant white noise in our lives. You see, back when formula marketing first became a trend, it sent the message that formula was becoming increasingly accepted as a breast milk substitute. When mothers saw the supplies of multiple retailers simultaneously devoting entire isles to formula products, they naturally assumed that demand had shifted as well. Of course, the change was actually driven by the formula companies’ desire of a future shift in demand, but it still affected people’s choices. The same holds true today: the higher exposure formula receives and the greater its perceived social acceptability, the more people will buy it, which in turn increases its exposure and acceptability. It’s sneaky! This process is a self-fulfilling prophecy. Formula companies are not innocuously ‘answering demand’ as some naive people believe; rather, formula companies also create demand.

Currently we have a set of different brands competing with each other for a share of the market. They do this through whatever means necessary - pseudo-scientific claims, manipulation of health professionals, obscuring the risks of formula, harvesting mothers’ contact details, and so on. All of this occurs under one umbrella: the idealisation of formula. When a mother takes a can of formula from a store shelf, she is buying a belief first and a can of powder second.

Formula companies spending so much on advertising and promotion is one of the reasons that formula is currently so expensive. The companies plough all this money into marketing for one reason only: it works! Mike Brady Campaigns and Networking Coordinator at Baby Milk Action has remarked: “It makes me very sad when I see parents repeating the misleading claims about a brand - doing the company’s advertising job for it - particularly when this leads to parents paying out more money than they need to.”

By nationalising formula production we remove aggressive advertising to the public, as well as eliminating society’s warped idealisation of formula. After all, formula marketing provides a very biased one-sided assessment of the product. By looking only at the supposed advantages of formula, advertisements exclude material which bears on the decision whether to use the product, and which should be taken account of.

Under nationalisation there would be one generic state-owned ‘brand’ with no marketing influence. Formula packaging would be plain and contain only relevant information. Here is an example of a generic formula label that could be used under my proposed nationalisation scheme. It was created by Emergency Nutrition Network an international group of humanitarian agencies:


Break the marketing > demand > marketing chain by nationalising formula, and you will see a radical drop in demand along with better informed mothers. Mike Brady agrees:

“My view is we should treat formula for what it is: a nutritional medicine. Get rid of the polar bears and bright colours, free gifts and baby clubs, and have it available for those who need it, but without the hype.”

I believe that nationalising formula would be a viable middle ground in our unnecessarily polarized society. In the context of formula consumption, nationalisation is a form of disincentivization in that it would reduce the value of formula in the consumer’s eyes. As an added bonus, nationalisation would have the surprising effect of actually improving formula! Instead of ploughing money into enhancing the symbolic value of the brand via marketing, as is currently the case, the money will go straight to enhancing the quality of the product. Levels of pesticides in formula will be reduced (presently, profit-driven formula companies have no significant incentive to do this), and the composition and labelling of formula will also be improved.

What are your thoughts? Is nationalisation the answer? Do comment below, or debate on the Facebook group.

The Daily Mail suggested it was 'horrifying'. The BBC called it 'extreme'. Yet no health agency puts a formal upper limit on the age beyond which it is appropriate or desirable to breastfeed. With the natural spacing between children being 3 years, if we followed our biological imperative, we would all be tandem nursing! But what are the downsides?

It can be challenging to get pregnant whilst breastfeeding, and once the baby arrives, public tandem nursing can trigger embarrassment, not to mention being assaulted by your own offspring on a daily basis! All these delights are illustrated in Rebecca's triumphant story:


“Breastfeeding my first baby Lizzie threw up its own array of difficulties (you can read about that journey here). After 6 months of breastfeeding her, my periods finally returned. By this stage we were ready to try for baby #2. 

After 4 months of trying whilst fertility charting I suspected I had a luteal phase defect. This is where the lining of the mother's uterus does not grow properly each month. It can make it difficult to become or remain pregnant. The condition is common in mothers while breastfeeding. I took B vits and that same month I fell pregnant!

Nursing Through Pregnancy


I breastfed throughout the whole pregnancy although Lizzie decreased feeds because I guess my supply dropped. I found that the decrease in feeds was a harsh fact that I learnt too late; I wasn't aware that pregnancy can reduce supply and if I had known that beforehand I might not have sought to get pregnant again so soon.

I found one of the hardest factors of nursing whilst pregnant was the intense braxton hicks contractions. I started to feel them at around 17 weeks and they got worse and longer as the pregnancy went on. 

At around 38 weeks I could barely move after each feed. My stomach tensed up to the point of me being marooned on the bed for about 5 minutes. They must have done my body some good because I went on to have an awesome natural water birth at 40 wks 6 days.


The Arrival


When my son George was born they checked him for tongue tie and yes, like his sister, he also had one. I noticed he had a really thick lip tie as well, he didn't flare his lip out whilst feeding. Yet he seemed a good feeder so I decided not pursue it.

Like my daughter, George quickly developed into another two hourly around the clock feeder but he gained weight well and was settled so it didn't bother me too much. By this stage, I was used to regular feeding.

Oversupply



When my milk came in I suffered with major engorgement to the point where I called the milk bank and ended up donating the excess to them. In all I donated 10 litres of breastmilk in 6 months. Lizzie (who was now a preschooler) would ask for a feed, eye up the fullest boob and opt for the other one. I don't think she knew what to make of all this milk!

Soon after my milk came in I developed mastitis - twice which I put down to the sheer volume of milk I must of been producing to feed a baby and a preschooler simultaneously. 


The Scrum of Tandem Nursing

I remember when I was pregnant with George I thought, "Ah feeding two babies - I'll just be sitting on the sofa watching a bit of TV, relaxing with my feet up and feeding my two kids..." Oh no! My kids had other ideas! 


George would never feed for more than 5 mins tops so he would always be finished in a flash with Lizzie being the one to takes ages over a feed. George would like to have a feed then have me rock him to sleep, so he would always get impatient while he waited for Lizzie to finish, and being younger he always won. 

So I had to time everything like a military operation. Feed George first; rock George to sleep; lye George on my front (which he did not like, so he had to be sound asleep before you could get away with this); then feed Lizzie lying down with George lying on me! Then if and when Lizzie had a nap I'd dare not move in case one of them stirred. So the amount of hours I was stuck on the edge of the sofa, boob in Lizzie's mouth, George squirming on my front trying to get comfortable, then the the doorbell would ring... arrgggh! "POSTMAN DON'T YOU KNOW THERE IS A MOTHER IN HERE TRYING TO MEET TWO BABIES NEEDS - AT A CRITICAL NAP TIME!!"

Ouch!

Lizzie and George also like to mess around whilst feeding: pulling my hair, their own hair, each others noses, poking each other eyes! So rather than one of them getting hurt, or a fight breaking out, they have started to pull on my ears which is kind of painful. I have to say they take great delight in pulling one, then the other.


It wasn't all fun and games though. Once we went on a family vacation to Spain where George suddenly developed inflamed gums and at the same time my breasts became sore. I assumed this was thrush so went to see a Spanish doctor. He told me it was not thrush and that George just had a sore throat. He also told me that I should not be feeding a 15 month old baby to which I read him the riot act (aka World Health Organisation guidelines) and my parting shot was that I was 'still' feeding his preschooler sister... (two fingered salute!)


During the vacation the soreness on George’s mouth and my breasts got worse. Turns out that we had Hand, Foot and Mouth virus. OWCH! I carried on feeding my babies, but it was a hard slog. Second to the sheer pain, the hardest part was hiding my face when Lizzie fed. She would come off and cry because she knew she was hurting me. In the end I put my face into a cushion and grit my teeth. Fortunately George wasn't old enough to notice my pain and carried on feeding as usual. He was a big fan of breastfeeding gymnastics, ignorant of the fact that every move had me in agony. It took over a week of this pain before I saw an improvement.

When we got home everything seemed to be returning to normal until I started feeling really cold and shivery. My first thought was 'this is like mastitis' and sure enough one of the sores broke out into a cracked and a blocked duct! Oh no not again. Express, Express Express...

"Milk drunk!"

Now Lizzie has a feed in the morning and one at bedtime. Sometimes she has the odd feed in the day if I'm around. George feeds at the same times as Lizzie, plus few extra feeds in the night.

Breast feeding has always been important to me because I know it will give my children the best start in life on so many levels. It’s only a few years investment and such a small price to pay compared to the benefits that my children will reap for their entire lives.”


Get your own Bingo Card here.

Email me with your story.

Whilst most health professionals believe that ‘breast is best’, very few are trained in breastfeeding or lactation; fewer still have successful breastfeeding experience of their own. So it’s hardly surprising that a lot of health professionals sometimes inadvertently, sometimes even intentionally, sabotage mothers, preventing them from actualizing their breastfeeding goals. I discussed the reasons behind this phenomenon here. Suffice to say the impact on breastfeeding rates has been destructive. It seems, where health professionals are concerned, mothers in their droves are imprudently deferring to their alleged expertise. The casualties of this approach are, of course, their babies.

However what follows is the story of one woman who would now bow to the ‘professionals’. She was subjected to a group of health professionals that orchestrated not one, not two, but FIVE attempts to sabotage her breastfeeding success:


“The plan was to breastfeed. Period. I didn't know much about it - didn't read a book or really do any research, I just knew that it was what was best for baby, and selfishly speaking, it would help me shed the baby weight that much faster (in my informal and unscientific study I noticed that the women I knew that had babies and breastfeed were not only skinnier post baby, but they managed to keep the weight off 2 and 3 years down the road - I was in!) Breastfeeding was so much the plan that we didn't buy/register for bottles or any of the paraphernalia that comes along with formula feeding.

Sabotage attempt #1

My son was born on June 18th, weighing in at 6lbs13oz. He was a natural, unmedicated, vaginal birth. As soon as he was born he was in my arms and we had some wonderful skin to skin time. I tried to breastfeed immediately but did have to fight off the midwives as they wanted him to be cleaned, weighed and measured before feeding. He settled the argument by peeing on me. When I did try and nurse him, it took a moment but he was able to latch and had a seemingly decent feed.

Almost as soon as we got to the post-partum ward things shifted and the joy and elation we had experienced by having that initial feed were soon displaced. For such a little guy he was a great sleeper - in fact he would sleep longer than the three hours he was 'supposed to' and thus did not get the feedings he needed. If I tried to wake him for feedings, he would grizzle and resist.

When he was awake and hungry it felt like him and I were on two different pages. I had a good supply, and he had a good suck (trust me, we were checked by multiple nurses) but we could not make feedings work.

Sabotage attempt #2

I really had to fight to get some help. When I first asked to see the Lactation Consultant I was told that feeding was going too well to get help - despite the fact it really wasn't!

Sabotage attempt #3

Eventually I went to a breastfeeding clinic to meet with the LC. This mini seminar really surprised me as this LC told the group that after the first 24 hours, formula is the same as breastmilk and even offered tips for getting baby to take a bottle! Ugh.

Finally she came over to see me but my little boy wouldn't latch. He wasn't interested. He wasn't hungry. She told us to page her when he was hungry so she could see what we were doing and figure out why we couldn't get the latch sorted out.

Sabotage attempt #4

What was super frustrating was when he did get hungry (after going *much* longer than the nurses were comfortable with him not eating) I am struggled to get him latched - just as we have something close to success the pediatrition on call comes in for rounds and we have to un-latch him so he can be examined by the doctor - who as it happens was far too busy to wait for the feed to finish. Apparently there were too many babies born and he was running behind trying to see them all.


Before we left the hospital the LC gave us a feeding plan and instructions on what to do if we weren't able to get my little boy latched I was to express some milk into a syringe and feed him that way to help calm him. That was it. Nothing beyond that, no support for what if things still didn't work. Nothing.

At home feeding really was a struggle - things did not get better. There were times where it would take over an hour to get the baby latched - and it was a horrible hour. He would arch his back and scream because he was so hungry and I would end up crying because I didn't understand why this supposidly natural process wasn't coming naturally. It was so hard!

Finally after a feed where it took 2 hours to get the baby latched I gave up and hand expressed some milk into a bottle and we fed him that way. I felt like such a failure. The next day my husband went out to buy a pump. Although he always supported my desire to breastfeed, he struggled when we couldn't get the latch. His mantra was 'feed the baby' which is right of course, but he couldn't understand why the thought of expressing and using bottles was so hard. In his mind it was still breast milk and that was the important part, so did it matter if it was from me or a bottle? It mattered to me.

That day I hardly left my bed. I felt like such a horrible mother, like I had failed my son and that I wasn't good enough. I felt so horrible I didn't even want to see my baby. When I was staying in bed and feeling horrible my husband brought the baby over to get cuddles from me, reminding me that he still needed me. I honestly think if we hadn't been able to sort out breast feeding I would have sunk into a very deep depression.

Sabotage attempt #5

My husband called around to find some support for us. He called every number we had. The earliest appointment we could get was in two weeks! I was devastated. A few days later a public health nurse called us back, I was the one to take the call. I told the nurse what was going on, how for the last few days things had been rough, and that it was getting to the point where he would scream for 2 hours. She replied “and it took you this long to call us?” Uh no, but it did take them this long to call us back. Either way, her comments made me feel even worse than I already did - I was at the lowest I had ever been.

My friends and family really didn't understand the emotional response I was having.  I had a healthy baby and breastmilk or formula made no difference to them. One was not viewed as better than the other.


Thankfully we were able to get into see the public health nurse post partum support clinic the next day. Of course, as is Murphy's Law, my son got hungry and latched no problem. The appointment was 90mins so we were able to really talk about what was going on and how I was feeling. He did get hungry again during this appointment and finally the nurse was able to see how he would scream and we just couldn't make things work. Again, she checked my supply, his suck and told us that we just had “bad communication.” There was no reason I shouldn't be able to breastfeed him. Although meant to be positive, comments like this really hurt because it was a struggle. It wasn't easy or natural! Just because we *should* be able to make it work doesn't mean it was going well - clearly it wasn't. Thankfully - through all of this, she did give us some positioning tips and that seemed to make a world of difference.

After that appointment things improved. I felt better mentally with regard to giving bottles - my husband had the fantastic idea that if latching wasn't going well we would give him 1oz in a bottle, just to take the edge off. Once he was calmer we would try and relatch to finish the feed. It worked wonders!

After using this method for a few days we really figured out the proper positioning. It got to a point where the expressed milk wasn't required as my little boy was latching almost immediately and able to get in a full feed. Just as we were getting things sorted out with the latch I got engorged and experienced horrible pain for days as we tried to unclog the duct and deal with this new obstacle.

We win!

My son is now in the 90th percentile for weight, and feeding is going great! It wasn't easy. We needed help to make things work, and more so we needed the strength to stick to what we knew was best.

I don't understand mothers who don’t try to breastfeed. It is clearly the best both for mom and baby. Unless there is a legit medical reason not to, why wouldn't you? Having fought through the bad latch and difficult times I know that it isn't easy. It takes work and being unwilling seems selfish and lazy.”
Get your own Bingo Card here.

Email me with your story.

Whilst indulging my inner bookworm at the local city library, I unwittingly stumbled upon a book written by a man called Geert Hofstede. Hofstede is an influential Dutch researcher well-known (in the social-psychology clique at least) for his research of cross-cultural groups and organizations. He played a major role in developing a framework for assessing and differentiating national cultures. Reading his jaw-dropping, hugely under-utilised trove of research has radically deepened my understanding of why we suck at breastfeeding in our society. It triggered an epiphany of sorts. And his book wasn’t even about breastfeeding!

I have always known that our culture is hostile towards breastfeeding at worst, and apathetic at best. Who’s to blame for this? I had all the usual suspects lined up: capitalism, the patriarchy, rampant individualism, formula company greed. However maybe the net of blame is far, far broader than I ever imagined.

Hofstede’s research revealed an interesting phenomenon: each country has a gender. A country’s culture is either predominantly masculine or predominantly feminine. The United States, for example, is deemed a ‘masculine’ country whereas Norway, for example, is a 'feminine' country.

Hofstede describes culture as “the collective programming of the mind which distinguishes the members of one group from another”. Whether a country is masculine or feminine describes the effects of that country's culture on the values of its members, and how these values relate to behaviour.

Take a gander at this fairly inconspicuous-looking table. It shows a selection of countries and their respective masculinity ratings. Study it, worship it:


Notice that gender is rated on a scale of 1 to 100 with 1 being most feminine and 100 being most masculine. So the most feminine country is Sweden (with a rating of 5) and the most masculine country is Japan (rating of 95). No country is 100% masculine or feminine, rather most sway largely towards one gender.

The book that started it all.

Hofstede called this the ‘masculinity/femininity index’. It established a major research tradition in cross-cultural psychology and has also been drawn upon by researchers and consultants in many fields relating to international business and communication.

Okay, but what does this have to do with breastfeeding?

One important point that anthropologists have always made is that aspects of social life which do not seem to be related to each other, actually are related. Inspired by this belief, I cross-referenced Hofstede’s index with numerous breastfeeding studies and discovered some astonishing correlations! In a nutshell:

The masculinity/femininity of a society reflects a basic and enduring anthropological fact about that society’s approach to breastfeeding.

From my research into the gender of countries and how this impacts upon breastfeeding, five significant topics arose: Values, Family Life, Politics, The Media, and Women’s Liberation.

VALUES:

Masculine societies differ from feminine societies in their relative priority given to 'ego' versus social goals. So in a masculine society men are supposed to be assertive, tough, and focused on material success; women are supposed to be more modest, tender, and concerned with the quality of life. Conversely, in a feminine society, both men and women are supposed to be modest, tender and concerned with the quality of life. Interestingly, Hofstede found that whilst American females score as more feminine than American males, they also score as more masculine than Dutch males. This illustrates how in masculine societies, male-ness is the normative standard, coveted by both men and women.

Prenatal education in a masculine country.

The distinction between masculine and feminine societies is even found at the basic level of how a country’s inhabitants communicate with one another. In masculine countries there is a predominance of ‘report talk’ – transferring factual information – versus ‘rapport talk’ in feminine countries – using conversation to exchange feelings and establish relationships. In the field of breastfeeding, we see these respective conversational styles reflected in the way health professionals and other breastfeeding advocates counsel mothers. In masculine countries breastfeeding support relies heavily on the presentation of ‘facts’ (the benefits of breastfeeding, how breast tissue functions, the mechanics of latching, etc), whereas in feminine countries there is emphasis not only on physiological detail but also on the psychological and social realities of breastfeeding. For instance, in the most feminine country in the world – Sweden, there is a widespread network of lay groups who provide breastfeeding support and a system of more experienced mothers who volunteer to be available to provide telephone support for new mothers (Sharples 2001). Also in addition to antenatal classes, all Swedish parents (both mothers and fathers) are encouraged to attend discussion groups and other ‘parent craft’ gatherings throughout their child’s early years (Larson 2008).

Feminine societies prefer to concentrate on strengthening relationships like this, and consequently, there is a lot less emphasis on 'stuff' (aka baby products) and a lot more emphasis on time spent with the baby. Meanwhile in a masculine society, the dominant values are money, material stuff and progress. These ethnocentric values have important implications for breastfeeding. The act of breastfeeding is intertwined with relationship maintenance and altruism. It is as far removed from materialism as one can get - there is no consumption involved, no cash payoff. Thus the mechanics of breastfeeding are in direct conflict with the values of masculine societies, whilst harmonising with the values of feminine societies. We see this reflected in the day to day child-rearing rituals of the respective cultures:

In feminine societies, it is assumed that mothers will want to breastfeed. There are few baby bottle decorations or baby bottle designs on shower invitations. Co-sleeping is common. Newborns aren’t swaddled and skin to skin is established practice. Babies are fed, not on schedule, but when they want. Infant formula is used only as an exception to the rule. Is it any surprise then, that Sweden is considered the global leader in terms in implementing the Unicef Baby Friendly Initiative: an international program for improving the role of maternity services to enable mothers to breastfeed. Four years after the programme was introduced in 1993, all of the then 65 maternity centres in Sweden had been designated "baby-friendly".

And it's not just babies that benefit from living in a feminine society; when Save The Children published a report revealing the best and worst places to be a mother in 2013, the top 7 countries were all highly feminine on the Hofstede scale (Finland, Sweden, Norway, Iceland, Netherlands, Denmark and Spain respectively). In case you’re curious, the report assessed maternal well-being based on five factors: Maternal health; Under five mortality rate; Women's education; Women's income; Women's political status (Save The Children 2013).

In feminine countries, families are nurtured by the welfare state.

So what makes the United States' treatment of mothers pale in comparison to the Netherlands? One of the obvious differences between the two is the latter’s welfare system. Americans consider the Dutch tax system – which makes the Dutch welfare system possible – as almost criminal. It effectively robs the Dutch of the opportunity to fulfil the goal of becoming rich. That Dutch people have a different set of values, expressed in a willingness to pay higher taxes to maintain a welfare state, is hard for many Americans to understand. Yet caring for other people is one of the dominant values in feminine societies such as the Netherlands. Which brings us to...

FAMILY LIFE:

Feminine societies encourage both men and women to be tender and to be concerned with family relationships. Conversely, masculine societies expect only women to show these attributes. Perhaps unsurprisingly then, parenthood is more positively valued in feminine than in masculine cultures, and the well-being of children plays a more important role in parents’ ways of arranging their lives.

For example, when given the choice between higher salaries versus shorter working hours, both men and women from masculine countries preferred higher salaries. We can see how this would affect breastfeeding rates: the more hours a mother spends working, the less direct contact she has with her child to maintain supply. Similarly, the more hours a father spends working, the less direct contact he has with his family in order to support the breastfeeding relationship. In masculine societies many mothers are slaves to the office breastpump. Whereas for mothers in feminine countries, pumping is rare due to generous parental leave facilitated by a culture which prioritises family well-being.

In masculine societies the dominant ethos is that you ‘live in order to work’. In feminine societies you ‘work in order to live’. In the workplace of a feminine society, equality, solidarity, and quality of work life are stressed. Meanwhile in the workplace of a masculine society, equity, mutual competition and performance are stressed. When people feel pressured to perform and compete, they are compelled by their society to prioritise career over family life.

Whilst both men and women in masculine societies are expected to be competitive in the workplace, the same cannot be said for home life. Domestic and caring responsibilities are, on average, significantly less equally distributed in masculine societies. For instance, masculine societies are apt to downplay or neglect fathers’ roles in the facilitation of breastfeeding.  Numerous studies have highlighted the reluctance of masculine societies such as the United States, the UK and Australia to recognise the father’s role in breastfeeding support (Tohotoa et al 2009; Rempel and Rempel 2010; Sherriff et al 2011; Vaaler et al 2011; Maycock et al 2013; Allcutt 2013). The existence, or absence, of paternal support can often ‘make or break’ the success of the breastfeeding relationship.

In masculine countries ‘Family Values’ are a reference to religion and tradition. In feminine countries on the other hand, Family Values mean time with your family. With long working hours and minimal parental leave as staples of masculine society it should come as no surprise that feminine societies are much more child-centered. The freedom, care and ability to 'just be a kid' is an essential part of childhood in feminine countries. This is complemented by access to quality health care without the stress of worrying about being hit by strange bills, quality daycare, schools, and University education. In Hofstede's words: “Masculine societies have sympathy for the strong, whereas feminine societies have sympathy for the weak.”

Feminine countries protect the weak.

In feminine countries, babies are allowed to develop at their own pace; to attempt to ‘discipline’ them in matters that they cannot understand is considered a mark of parental ignorance. In fact, in 1979, the Swedish parliament passed a law forbidding corporal punishment, making Sweden the first nation in which parents were forbidden to strike their children. The law is widely known and accepted.

However in masculine countries a degree of ‘baby training’ is the norm, with sleep and feeding schedules commonly advocated by experts.  In the US for example, the belief that children - even newborns - are manipulative of their parents is quite common. Mothers must resist "giving in" to their babies' (unreasonable) "demands" for fear of spoiling them. Babies cannot be trusted to know and communicate their fundamental physiological, psychological, and developmental needs (La Leche League 2000). Beliefs such as these interfere with breastfeeding by discouraging mothers from picking up their babies and breastfeeding them whenever they root or cry. In masculine countries bottles are introduced to infants so that others can feed, pushing babies towards premature independence and facilitating the separation of mother and child. Pacifiers are also introduced so the child will not depend on mother for all his suckling needs, which in turn diminishes breastmilk supply.


THE MEDIA:

A characteristic of feminine culture is scepticism and dislike of ‘hype’. Advertising in general is exaggerative by nature, which arouses scepticism in the consumers of feminine countries. This cultural trait makes the inhabitants of feminine countries less receptive to marketing, and this is good news for breastfeeding. In fact, in Scandinavia (Denmark, Sweden and Finland - all feminine countries) follow-on milk promotion is banned. In Norway (the second most feminine country in the world) all advertising of artificial formula milk is banned completely.

In line with this scepticism, sex and violence in the media are taboo in feminine societies, whereas these acts frequently appear in the media of masculine societies. In the UK, recent campaigns have highlighted the prevalence of such media and its negative impact on breastfeeding rates (see: Ashton 2013).

Over in feminine societies, breasts are everywhere, but often in non-sexual ways. Breastfeeding in public is the norm. In fact, a mother using a hooter-hider American-style would be considered bizarre in Sweden.

Considered "gross" in masculine countries.

In masculine countries, the sight of a baby latched at its mother's breast is cause for outrage. For instance in 2006, the editors of US BabyTalk magazine received many complaints from readers after the cover of the August issue depicted a baby nursing at a bare breast. Even though the model's nipple was not shown, readers—many of them mothers—wrote that the image was "gross". In a follow-up poll, one-quarter of 4,000 readers who responded thought the cover was negative (NBC News 2006). In a 2004 survey conducted by the American Dietetic Association, only 43% of the 3,719 respondents believed women ought to have the right to breastfeed in public.

Meanwhile in 2010 in the UK, another highly masculine country, the deputy editor of leading parenting magazine Mother & Baby described breastfeeding as "creepy." Kathryn Blundell told readers that she bottlefed her child from birth because, "I wanted my body back [and] to give my boobs at least a chance to stay on my chest rather than dangling around my stomach."

Then of course, there’s the ethnocentric dictator we call Facebook. The US online social networking site described photos of breastfeeding (baby latched on, no nipple visible) as ‘indecent’ and promptly deleted them from the site while cancelling the Facebook accounts of the mothers in question. The company said it removed the photos because they violated the 'pornographic' rules in the company's terms and conditions (Moses 2007).


POLITICS:

In politics, feminine societies believe that preservation of the environment should have the highest priority, whereas masculine societies believe highest priority should go to economic growth. We see this played out in relation to formula trading. Formula consumption contributes to economic growth (in the form of generating wealth for the few) whilst causing environmental decay. Correlatively formula companies’ hold dominance in the market of masculine societies, whereas their presence in the markets of feminine societies is slim to none. In fact, the supermarkets in feminine countries offer limited stock because demand is so low.

Masculine societies value consumption and the production of goods, and the formula trade complements this paradigm nicely; whereas, breastfeeding reduces consumption and does not produce any goods. Conversely, the lesser importance placed on economic growth by feminine societies, along with their higher value placed on environmental preservation makes feminine societies a perfect fit for breastfeeding.

It is interesting to note that despite the converse priorities given to economic growth by masculine and feminine societies, the gender of a country is entirely unrelated to national wealth: there are just as many poor as there are wealthy masculine, or feminine, countries. Differing priorities do not necessarily produce disparities in wealth.


WOMEN’S LIBERATION:

When it comes to the stormy issue of ‘women’s liberation’ both feminine and masculine societies have their own idea of what it means. Feminine societies interpret women’s liberation as meaning that men and women should take equal shares both at home and at work. Masculine societies think differently. They translate women’s liberation to mean permitting women to enter positions hitherto occupied by men.

Exploiting this cultural mannerism, formula companies in masculine countries market their products as enabling the independence of mothers. Competing with men is what women’s liberation looks like through a masculine lens. Whereas in feminine countries, a ‘complementary’ approach to liberation stresses the interdependence between male and female roles.

We see this reflected in the amount of paid and unpaid parental leave for mothers and fathers sanctioned in each society. For instance, in feminine societies, employers now expect their employees to take parental leave no matter their gender.

Sweden (the most femineine country with a Hofstede rating of 5) provides working parents with an entitlement of 16 months paid leave per child at 80 percent pay, the cost being shared between employer and the state (Sternheimer  2010). To encourage dads to take a greater paternal involvement in child-rearing, 2 months out of the 16 is reserved for the "minority" parent, in practice usually the father, and some Swedish political parties on the political left are pushing for legislation to oblige families to divide the 16 months equally between both parents (forsakringskassan 2013). 80% of fathers now take a third of the total 13 months (Bennhold 2010). This is in line with the characteristic of feminine societies encouraging both men and women to be tender and to be concerned with relationships. Norway, another highly feminine country (rating 8), has similarly generous leave (Norwegian Embassy 2013).

How about feminine countries with slightly more masculine leanings? (Say, those with a 30-40 rating on the Hofstede scale). In Estonia (30 rating) mothers are entitled to 18 months of paid leave. Fathers are entitled to paid leave starting from the third month after birth (paid leave is however available to only one parent at a time). In Bulgaria (40 rating) a father can take the whole of a mother’s maternity leave and receive 100 percent salary for a full year. Interestingly Portugal (rating of 35) is the only country in the world to have mandatory paternity leave (albeit only a week in length).

In comparison, how do more strongly masculine countries operate their parental leave? Hofstede considers any country with a rating over 60 to be strongly masculine. In the UK (rating of 66), female employees are entitled to 52 weeks of partly-paid maternity (or adoption) leave, whilst fathers are only entitled to 2 weeks partly-paid paternity leave. This discrepancy between maternity and paternity leave is in line with the characteristic of masculine societies believing that predominantly only women should be tender and to be concerned with relationships. We see the same discrepancy in other masculine countries. Lebanon (rating of 65), gives mothers 7 weeks of maternity leave at full pay, whilst giving fathers only one measly day at full pay. The Philippines (rating of 64) gives mothers 60 days of leave at full pay (78 days for c-section deliveries) whilst fathers only get 7 days leave at full pay and interestingly, the father must be married to get this!

Canada is a more androgynous country with a slight masculine leaning (rating of 52). In addition to 15 weeks maternity leave, parents in Canada get 35 weeks leave which can be divided between both mother and father in any way they like.

How does this relate to breastfeeding? You’ll not be surprised to read that mothers returning to work in the first 6 weeks are less likely to breastfeed, and if they do, the period of breastfeeding is significantly shorter than other groups who returned to work between 7 to 52 weeks (Tanaka 2005). In general, the longer the parental leave, the longer the rate of breastfeeding (Berger et al 2002). This is not only true of maternity leave but also true of paternity leave. Fathers’ presence facilitates breastfeeding success (Tohotoa et al 2009; Rempel and Rempel 2010; Sherriff et al 2011; Vaaler et al 2011; Maycock et al 2013; Allcutt 2013).


So, how does your country measure up?

To see how the masculinity/femininity of a country measures up to its breastfeeding prowess, let’s look at the raw data from four countries: the UK, the US, Sweden and Norway:

United Kingdom:

At 66 on the Hofstede scale Britain is a masculine society – highly success oriented and driven. Hofstede comments:

“A key point of confusion for the foreigner lies in the apparent contradiction between the British culture of modesty and understatement which is at odds with the underlying success driven value system in the culture. Critical to understanding the British is being able to 'read between the lines'. What is said is not always what is meant. In comparison to feminine cultures such as the Scandinavian countries, people in the UK live in order to work and have a clear performance ambition.”

Breastfeeding stats: At three months, the number of mothers breastfeeding exclusively in the UK is 17% and at four months, it is 12%. Exclusive breastfeeding at six months remains at a depressing 1%. (Unicef 2010).


United States:

The United States score 62 on the Hofstede scale and is considered a “masculine” society.  Hofstede comments:

“In America behaviour in school, work, and play are based on the shared values that people should “strive to be the best they can be” and that “the winner takes all”. As a result, Americans will tend to display and talk freely about their “successes” and achievements in life, here again, another basis for hiring and promotion decisions in the workplace. Typically, Americans “live to work” so that they can earn monetary rewards and attain higher status based on how good one can be.  Conflicts are resolved at the individual level and the goal is to win.”

Breastfeeding rates: At three months, the number of mothers breastfeeding exclusively in the US is 46.2% and by six months the number drops to 25.5%. The number of US babies receiving any breastmilk at 1 year stands at 34.1% (US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 2012).


Sweden:

Sweden scores 5 on the Hofstede scale and is therefore a feminine society. Hofstede comments:

“In feminine countries it is important to keep the life/work balance and you make sure that all are included. An effective manager is supportive to his/her people, and decision making is achieved through involvement. Managers strive for consensus and people value equality, solidarity and quality in their working lives. Conflicts are resolved by compromise and negotiation and Swedes are known for their long discussions until consensus has been reached. Incentives such as free time and flexible work hours and place are favoured. The whole culture is based around 'lagom', which means something like not too much, not too little, not too noticeable, everything in moderation. Lagom ensures that everybody has enough and nobody goes without. Lagom is enforced in society by “Jante Law” which should keep people “in place” at all times. It is a fictional law and a Scandinavian concept which counsels people not to boast or try to lift themselves above others.”

Breastfeeding rates: At three months, the number of mothers breastfeeding in Sweden is 80% and by six months the number is 67% (Statistik om amning 2010).

Norway:

Norway scores 8 on the Hofstede scale and is thus the second most feminine society (after the Swedes). Hofstede comments:

“This means that the softer aspects of culture are valued and encouraged such as leveling with others, consensus, “independent” cooperation and sympathy for the underdog. Taking care of the environment is important. Trying to be better than others is neither socially nor materially rewarded. Societal solidarity in life is important; work to live and DO your best. Incentives such as free time and flexibility are favoured. Interaction through dialog and “growing insight” is valued and self development along these terms encouraged. Focus is on well-being, status is not shown. An effective manager is a supportive one, and decision making is achieved through involvement.”

Breastfeeding rates: At three months, the number of mothers breastfeeding in Norway is 87% and by six months the number is 80% (Småbarnskost 2-åringer 2009).

Your country not listed here? You can discover whether your country is masculine or feminine at Hofstede’s site HERE and compare it with your country’s breastfeeding rates on the Unicef site HERE.


Anaïs Nin, a French-born novelist, once remarked:

“We don’t see things as they are, we see them as we are”.

Nin’s sentiment perfectly captures the essence of ethnocentrism: we view human behaviour through the lens of our particular cultural experiences.

However if we adopt a cultural-relativistic perspective, we are confronted with a sobering truth: breastfeeding success is largely dependent on simply being born in the ‘right’ country.



Postscript: Apologies to Swedish border control, who will now be flooded with a barrage of crunchy American moms seeking to emigrate.

Pacifiers and nipple shields have a bad rap, and rightly so. However if used sparingly, and no earlier than 4 weeks, they can act as transitory crutches, enabling mothers to breastfeed for longer. In fact, if a mother is set on using interventions, then pacifiers and nipple shields are more compatible with breastfeeding than formula top ups.

This week’s triumphant mom found breastfeeding to be a turbulent journey. When a bad latch led to severe nipple damage, she hesitantly introduced a pacifier and nipple shield to provide temporary respite from the pain.


“My pregnancy was problem-free.  I travelled, I studied, I worked, I rested as I needed and took a pregnancy multi-vitamin.  My due date according to last menstruation (and a clockwork 28 day cycle) was February 9th.  The 12 week ultrasound said 14th February.  I did not put on any weight during my pregnancy (which given my high BMI, was never an issue) and I ‘passed’ all the tests with flying colours.  My blood pressure was never an issue, the blood glucose test came back normal, and my baby was growing normally.  I felt great and was looking forward to meeting my baby.

My due date arrived, February 9th.  I woke at my usual time in the morning, feeling ‘off’.  I suggested to my husband that he may need to be available.  He decided to go to work and tie up loose ends, then come home.  By morning tea time, I was thinking it was labour (my plug was lost, and my off feeling was now a pulling down feeling coming in waves).  I swivelled on the big ball, walked up and down the hall, and by 11am decided it was labour.


The Birth

My husband was instructed to waste no time and head home.  He was home by 12, and made lunch.  As he ate, he timed my contractions.  They were steady, 5 minutes apart and lasting 1 minute.  So by 2pm, we were at the hospital.  About 4pm, I was feeling restless and ‘over it’ (transition), and got into the bath.  By 5pm, I had birthed my baby into the water.

Emergency: Whisked to Another Hospital

A few minutes after my baby was born, the gorgeous and peaceful birth became a panic.  The midwife discovered that the unclamped cord had come away from the placenta (we later learned it had been a velamentous cord insertion).  My baby was small (2.6kg) and pale.  It was assumed there had been blood loss and with baby being small, it wouldn’t take much to cause a drama.  So we were transferred to the NICU at a different hospital (my placenta was hurriedly removed so that I could follow the ambulance).

At 7pm we were at the NICU.  Here it was determined that my baby was fine, just small, and a glucose drip was given as a precaution. The nurse said that if my baby breastfed overnight, we would be fine to go home the next day.  I was placed on the ward, and was to be called up to the NICU when needed.

Two hours after birth, my baby was given to me for the first breastfeed.  I had been waiting for this moment for what felt like a lifetime.  Baby latched without effort, and fed for as long as needed.  I was called up over night, and repeated the process. But this successful pattern of feeding was not to last.

Hospital Negligence

Unfortunately, a misguided NICU nurse turned up the glucose drip. This meant my baby did not ask for a feed.  Consequently 6 hrs passed between baby’s last feed (and subsequent increase in the drip) and my waking up realising.  At 8am, we tried to feed, without luck; the nurse poked and squeezed me, sighed and made me feel terrible. This was not what was meant to happen.

When the registrar arrived at 10am he was furious that the drip was up, and said that we would have to stay as the drip needed to be dropped down slowly, breastfeeding would increase and we could then go.  By 5pm that night, this process was complete, and we were both put on the ward for another night of observation.


My husband over-nighted with us on the ward.  Finally we were together as a family.  I fed my baby on demand, for as long as it took, and dutifully recorded wet and dirty diapers.   We were released about 10 am the next day (36 hrs post birth).

The next 6 weeks were the most difficult in my life.  Breastfeeding was the greatest challenge.
My baby seemed to be a slow feeder.  Each feed took an hour (sometimes more).  And baby fed every 2 hours.  My mother had breastfed twins, so if she could do it, I could manage one!  She told me that she had focused on breastfeeding, that she made herself comfortable and just fed.  She read while she fed, so that is what I did.

Nipple Damage

One night, in my tired state, I attempted to lay down and feed.  I had seen a friend do it.  It seemed straightforward.  But I got a bad latch which I ignored. The damage led not just to grazes, but to chunks out of my nipples.  The pain would shoot down my back as my baby fed (toe curling, tear inducing pain).  It got to the point where I would dread each feed.  The anticipation of the feed was enough to make me cry.


As the weeks went by, my baby thrived, was putting on weight, growing nicely, was alert and reasonably happy.  But breastfeeding was not a joy. Something was not right - maybe it was the latch, maybe it was just that the damage wasn’t healing...I didn’t know.

Introducing a Pacifier

At 4 weeks old, I introduced a pacifier.  I had never wanted to use a pacifier, was aware of nipple confusion and did not wish my baby to become dependent on it.  But all baby did was suck, suck, suck!  The pacifier seemed to help.  Yet still the damage to my nipples was not healing and I was at a loss.  I had gone through two tubes of Lansinoh.

Introducing a Nipple Shield

As we approached 6 weeks, I rang the Australian Breastfeeding Association helpline.  I don’t know if it helped or not, maybe it did.  But against advice - I got nipple shields. The first pair I got were too small (I had mistakenly chosen based on my baby’s mouth, not my nipples).  So I got a second pair.  I used the shields at every feed for 3 days. I even managed to feed in public (under a muslin wrap so I could attach the shield without exposing myself).  On the 3rd night I woke to feed, and latched baby on.  We fed painlessly.  It was a joy.  This is what breastfeeding was supposed to feel like.  Then I realised, I had forgotten the shield.  I was breastfeeding without the shield!


From that moment on, we never looked back.  I breastfeed my baby for four years. I breastfed through pregnancy, and tandem fed for 2 years.  I am now a doula.

I know my success came down to self -determination.  In my mind, there was no alternative.  Breastfeeding would work.  There was no reason for it not to.”


Get your own Bingo Card here.

Email me with your story.