Refreshing talk today with HV's regarding BFing

[Blah11]

I actually dont blame the NHS entirely (I work for it)...I blame the government.

Recommending a type of formula in certain circumstances is not promoting it. I prescribe medications. So if I prescribe a certain laxative such as senna rather than lactulose...its not because Im promoting senna, its because I think it works better than lactulose. The OP mentioned a circumstance where a HV said a certain milk (think it was aptamil comfort) would better for a baby struggling on another milk but couldnt tell the mum. If she told the mum, its not out of promotion but in the child's best interest!!!!!!!

senna and lactulose isnt a brandname though so no, not the same. thats why you dont get calpol on prescription, just a generic paracetemol suspension.

 

[MrsPOP]

I actually dont blame the NHS entirely (I work for it)...I blame the government.

Recommending a type of formula in certain circumstances is not promoting it. I prescribe medications. So if I prescribe a certain laxative such as senna rather than lactulose...its not because Im promoting senna, its because I think it works better than lactulose. The OP mentioned a circumstance where a HV said a certain milk (think it was aptamil comfort) would better for a baby struggling on another milk but couldnt tell the mum. If she told the mum, its not out of promotion but in the child's best interest!!!!!!!

senna and lactulose isnt a brandname though so no, not the same. thats why you dont get calpol on prescription, just a generic paracetemol suspension.

You can actually, its an option when you prescribe. You can prescribe most branded medications

Oh you misunderstand my point I wasnt talking about promoting brandnames with regards to formula by comparing tobut *types*. So recommending a...staydown milk instead of a regular milk can be in a child's best interest. Or a Soy based milk rather than regular milk, or hungry milk rather than regular milk. Recommending the function rather than the name is not promoting. Because they are not being recommended for profit but in the child's best interest in the opinion of the HCP.

Ok, if you dislike my laxative example...

...say I prescribe Ovranette instead of Microgynon. Both have Ethiniyestradiol 30mcg and Levonorgestrel 150mcgs. Ovranette is produced by Wyeth and Microgynon is produced by Bayer Schering. They are both the same product but produced by different drug companies. I do not get any profit from them but I have my preference in prescriptions be it because I either think it is more effective or it is better tolerated...as most medical professionals have preferences from their experience and practice. My preference is Ovranette. I have taken both myself and had less side effects on it than Microgynon. But Microgynon is cheaper so that tends to be the one most professionals prescribe. I'd rather prescribe in the patient's best interest than think about the cost or promoting a certain drug company.

 

[leighbaby]

I actually dont blame the NHS entirely (I work for it)...I blame the government.

Recommending a type of formula in certain circumstances is not promoting it. I prescribe medications. So if I prescribe a certain laxative such as senna rather than lactulose...its not because Im promoting senna, its because I think it works better than lactulose. The OP mentioned a circumstance where a HV said a certain milk (think it was aptamil comfort) would better for a baby struggling on another milk but couldnt tell the mum. If she told the mum, its not out of promotion but in the child's best interest!!!!!!!

senna and lactulose isnt a brandname though so no, not the same. thats why you dont get calpol on prescription, just a generic paracetemol suspension.

You can actually, its an option when you prescribe. You can prescribe most branded medications

Oh you misunderstand my point I wasnt talking about promoting brandnames with regards to formula by comparing tobut *types*. So recommending a...staydown milk instead of a regular milk can be in a child's best interest. Or a Soy based milk rather than regular milk, or hungry milk rather than regular milk. Recommending the function rather than the name is not promoting. Because they are not being recommended for profit but in the child's best interest in the opinion of the HCP.

Ok, if you dislike my laxative example...

...say I prescribe Ovranette instead of Microgynon. Both have Ethiniyestradiol 30mcg and Levonorgestrel 150mcgs. Ovranette is produced by Wyeth and Microgynon is produced by Bayer Schering. They are both the same product but produced by different drug companies. I do not get any profit from them but I have my preference in prescriptions be it because I either think it is more effective or it is better tolerated...as most medical professionals have preferences from their experience and practice. My preference is Ovranette. I have taken both myself and had less side effects on it than Microgynon. But Microgynon is cheaper so that tends to be the one most professionals prescribe. I'd rather prescribe in the patient's best interest than think about the cost or promoting a certain drug company.

OT, but if Ovranette and Microgynon have the same active ingredients....why do they have different side effects on the same person? The other ingredients should be negligable in their effect, shouldn't they?

 

[Blah11]

well no, i dont think saying a comfort milk would be better is an issue either. I mean saying 'dont use SMA, go onto aptimal'.

i know nothing about the pill so will just have to agree with you there lol.

i did find this on the NHS site though
https://www.nhs.uk/Planners/birthtofive/Pages/different-infant-formula.aspx

IDK, it bugs me when pregnant people don't research anything whilst pregnant. If I was 100% sure I was going to formula feed, I'd research it before the baby was here, just like I did with breastfeeding, labour, everything else.

 

[leighbaby]

well no, i dont think saying a comfort milk would be better is an issue either. I mean saying 'dont use SMA, go onto aptimal'.

i know nothing about the pill so will just have to agree with you there lol.

i did find this on the NHS site though
https://www.nhs.uk/Planners/birthtofive/Pages/different-infant-formula.aspx

IDK, it bugs me when pregnant people don't research anything whilst pregnant. If I was 100% sure I was going to formula feed, I'd research it before the baby was here, just like I did with breastfeeding, labour, everything else.

Hmmm, you mean taking responsibility?

 

[aliss]

You guys give a bit too much credit to the 'average' population, you'd be surprised how uncommon that common sense is. That's why even many knowledgeable women still push for more simple/basic/accessible information - to benefit everyone, no matter who they are.

 

[leighbaby]

You guys give a bit too much credit to the 'average' population, you'd be surprised how uncommon that common sense is. That's why even many knowledgeable women still push for more simple/basic/accessible information - to benefit everyone, no matter who they are.

Tbf, you're probably right. I work with kids and i cannot believe how the kids must *dumb* down after leaving school. Kids are so smart and spot on, but so many adults I meet are the complete opposite!!

 

[MrsPOP]

I actually dont blame the NHS entirely (I work for it)...I blame the government.

Recommending a type of formula in certain circumstances is not promoting it. I prescribe medications. So if I prescribe a certain laxative such as senna rather than lactulose...its not because Im promoting senna, its because I think it works better than lactulose. The OP mentioned a circumstance where a HV said a certain milk (think it was aptamil comfort) would better for a baby struggling on another milk but couldnt tell the mum. If she told the mum, its not out of promotion but in the child's best interest!!!!!!!

senna and lactulose isnt a brandname though so no, not the same. thats why you dont get calpol on prescription, just a generic paracetemol suspension.

You can actually, its an option when you prescribe. You can prescribe most branded medications

Oh you misunderstand my point I wasnt talking about promoting brandnames with regards to formula by comparing tobut *types*. So recommending a...staydown milk instead of a regular milk can be in a child's best interest. Or a Soy based milk rather than regular milk, or hungry milk rather than regular milk. Recommending the function rather than the name is not promoting. Because they are not being recommended for profit but in the child's best interest in the opinion of the HCP.

Ok, if you dislike my laxative example...

...say I prescribe Ovranette instead of Microgynon. Both have Ethiniyestradiol 30mcg and Levonorgestrel 150mcgs. Ovranette is produced by Wyeth and Microgynon is produced by Bayer Schering. They are both the same product but produced by different drug companies. I do not get any profit from them but I have my preference in prescriptions be it because I either think it is more effective or it is better tolerated...as most medical professionals have preferences from their experience and practice. My preference is Ovranette. I have taken both myself and had less side effects on it than Microgynon. But Microgynon is cheaper so that tends to be the one most professionals prescribe. I'd rather prescribe in the patient's best interest than think about the cost or promoting a certain drug company.

OT, but if Ovranette and Microgynon have the same active ingredients....why do they have different side effects on the same person? The other ingredients should be negligable in their effect, shouldn't they?

Lol I know which is why I questioned my GP when she used that reason to prescribe it She said it had a 'cleaner profile'. All I know is personally i had less greasy hair and headaches on Ovranette. Probably nowt to do with it but I preferred it personally *shrugs* Makes no odds really, most women get microgynon because its cheaper.

 

[wishingonastar]

The arguement about what is easier is completely pointless. We know BF is harder. But dont FF deserve to be treated with the respect BF mothers are treated in general and have access to simple information about their choice of feeding method? Not promotion....INFORMATION!!!!!

Why should FF be treated like a dirty little secret? As a mum who desperately wanted to BF and couldnt, it makes me feel even worse than I already do to have to face what could be interpreted as judgement from the Health Service that failed me in BF support.

Jeez, walk a mile in my shoes or others who went through BF hell before you say I shouldnt be allowed advice and support in feeding my child.

Honestly, outwith the medical community there is often very little respect for BFers. People comment that it is pointless to try, not worth the bother, stare when people feed, comment, snigger and so on. It is certainly not regarded as a good thing by huge parts of the community. This is not all one sided.

A friend of mine was recently moved to a side room whilst waiting in A and E as they had begun BFing their baby and the NHS staff were concerned it would upset other people in the waiting room

I agree with MrsPop's post and think you've written it well. Whilst it shouldn't be promoted IMO, I do think a standard leaflet should be issued to all at say the 20 week point advising on BF and FF making it clear BFing is best route but here's what to do if its not for you/doesnt work out. HCP should be able to elaborate on the info if asked to ensure the parents are doing things safely as babies can get very poorly if FF is incorrectly done

 

[LoraLoo]

The thing is, you dont get leaflets saying 'Put your baby to sleep on its back' and then another saying 'Well, we know its not as safe, but if you want to put your baby to sleep on its front, this is how you should do it' They promote the best option, and thats the way it should be IMO.

 

[Blah11]

The thing is, you dont get leaflets saying 'Put your baby to sleep on its back' and then another saying 'Well, we know its not as safe, but if you want to put your baby to sleep on its front, this is how you should do it' They promote the best option, and thats the way it should be IMO.

well put

 

[Midnight_Fairy]

The thing is, you dont get leaflets saying 'Put your baby to sleep on its back' and then another saying 'Well, we know its not as safe, but if you want to put your baby to sleep on its front, this is how you should do it' They promote the best option, and thats the way it should be IMO.

But thats because its classed as dangerous and studies show its safer for babys to sleep on back. FF is NOT dangerous? So that's a bit different IMO.

Formula feeding IS best if it is best for parents too.

 

[summer rain]

The thing is, you dont get leaflets saying 'Put your baby to sleep on its back' and then another saying 'Well, we know its not as safe, but if you want to put your baby to sleep on its front, this is how you should do it' They promote the best option, and thats the way it should be IMO.

But thats because its classed as dangerous and studies show its safer for babys to sleep on back. FF is NOT dangerous? So that's a bit different IMO.

Formula feeding IS best if it is best for parents too.

No-one is saying FF is dangerous but statistically BF is the safest method of feeding, in various ways.

 

[Midnight_Fairy]

What I mean is studies show that back sleeping reduces SIDs whereas FF does not increase that risk?

 

[summer rain]

The arguement about what is easier is completely pointless. We know BF is harder. But dont FF deserve to be treated with the respect BF mothers are treated in general and have access to simple information about their choice of feeding method? Not promotion....INFORMATION!!!!!

Why should FF be treated like a dirty little secret? As a mum who desperately wanted to BF and couldnt, it makes me feel even worse than I already do to have to face what could be interpreted as judgement from the Health Service that failed me in BF support.

Jeez, walk a mile in my shoes or others who went through BF hell before you say I shouldnt be allowed advice and support in feeding my child.

Honestly, outwith the medical community there is often very little respect for BFers. People comment that it is pointless to try, not worth the bother, stare when people feed, comment, snigger and so on. It is certainly not regarded as a good thing by huge parts of the community. This is not all one sided.

and within the medical community as well; how many MWs and HVs, and even some GPs/hospital paediatricians recommend formula top ups for no reason whatsoever, often from day one? I was also told it was pointless to try BF with my eldest as I probably wouldn't produce enough milk-this was during pregnancy, by midwives who had no clue if I'd produce enough milk when my baby was born, or not!

 

[Snuffy]

I think information on both feeding methods should be readily available. By withholding support for FF mums, it's almost as though you are being punished for not conforming to the guidelines - and that's all they are - guidelines, not the law.

Who the hell is to tell me that I am not entitled to a bit of feeding support any more when I've had to switch to FF in the middle of the night for my child's health and nutrition when I could have it yesterday when I was trying desperately to BF?

And what is the point of withholding information on FF unless the parent asks, if they don't know to ask because they just assume that they are persona non grata as far as their healthcare professionals are concerned.

Luckily I had a supportive MW who explained to me "unofficially" the various ways to prepare a bottle that didn't involve standing there making up a fresh one each time.

And feeding groups/antenatal classes should definitely not be slagging off FF - fine, promote BF and cover FF briefly if that's the best they can offer, but putting formula across as something bad is exactly why many mums feel like failures if they can't BF, because they have been programmed to think they are providing inferior care to their babies which simply is not true.

 

[summer rain]

What I mean is studies show that back sleeping reduces SIDs whereas FF does not increase that risk?

I believe the original poster of that comment is comparing one safest scenario and its less safe alternative with another safest scenario and its less safe alternative; not saying FF causes SIDs or is anything to do with SIDs or anything like that. Its like if you used an example of car safety, it wouldn't mean that FF is like not wearing a seatbelt-I don't think she was comparing FF and putting baby to sleep on their front as being alike at all.

 

[amandad192]

well, thats just plain ridiculous. i just dont agree with loads of info on formula feeding when someone is pregnant. once the baby is born and is already being bottle fed, its nonsensical not to give info on how to make up bottles or w/e.

What use is the information AFTER someone has started to FF, given their baby an unsteralised bottle made with cold water, too much formula and warmed in teh microwave to give hotspots? How is the information on safe formula feeding going to benefit a parent whose child is on life support (or worse...) after drinking a dodgy bottle.

Information on safe FF..or safe EBM feeding..should be given to ALL parents whether they plan to BF or FF. Why leave it until it's too late??

 

[MrsPOP]

I think information on both feeding methods should be readily available. By withholding support for FF mums, it's almost as though you are being punished for not conforming to the guidelines - and that's all they are - guidelines, not the law.

Who the hell is to tell me that I am not entitled to a bit of feeding support any more when I've had to switch to FF in the middle of the night for my child's health and nutrition when I could have it yesterday when I was trying desperately to BF?

And what is the point of withholding information on FF unless the parent asks, if they don't know to ask because they just assume that they are persona non grata as far as their healthcare professionals are concerned.

Luckily I had a supportive MW who explained to me "unofficially" the various ways to prepare a bottle that didn't involve standing there making up a fresh one each time.

And feeding groups/antenatal classes should definitely not be slagging off FF - fine, promote BF and cover FF briefly if that's the best they can offer, but putting formula across as something bad is exactly why many mums feel like failures if they can't BF, because they have been programmed to think they are providing inferior care to their babies which simply is not true.

Well said!

 

[indy and lara]

tat and have read the whole thread. I also said a few pages back that it was not about who it was harder for. I am not having a go, I have asked over and over again what information people want but am yet to really see an answer to that question really. Lots of information is available from our health board if you ask. Same with BF info, it is there if you ask.

We're not talking about that. We're talking about information given to FF mums by HVs and MWs being restricted to only being given when asked and also the information is very basic (ie: not being able to recommend a certain type for a refluxy baby etc).
Not everyone has access to the internet to look at health boards and forums. Not everyone is able to purchase pregnancy and baby books. Not everyone is able to access antenatal classes (for example, I couldnt make the NHS ones and couldnt make the NCT ones, some people cant afford the NCT ones).

The basic point of this thread is mothers who FF only can access advice re: FF when they ASK. And also HVs and MWs are restricted in the info they can give. Im aware not all trusts are the same and some do give info leaflets to pregnant women etc without asking. I never got any info on FF but had plenty of BF leaflets given to me. But in general, the restriction of information is there

And that restriction is discriminatory and prejudiced against those who FF.

People have answered what info FF mums need quite clearly actually as you would see from previous posts.

Info on making up bottles correctly and storing bottles are vitally important as if done incorrectly it can be harmful to babies. Yes it is on the back of the tin but imagine a mum whose own mother FF her. Back then, her mum could make up the entire days bottles. The new mum may ask her mum about bottle making and think making 12-14 hours worth of bottles is ok and choose to ignore the tin because she trusts her mother's advice...when it isnt ok at all!

Like I said, we're not asking for promotions, for workshops, peer support workers or anything like that. But to be able to access the basic information regarding FF from the HCPs that guide us through pregnancy and early childhood surely is an unreasonable ask? To restrict information is not only potentially dangerous to those who may not comprehend the new guidance for FF but also unfair and prejudiced against those who FF. I think its the principle of the matter.

Honestly I am not sure if I am not writing this clearly or if there is some other issue. As far as I can see we are talking about just that- the availablity of information about FF. As I have said upteen times, my Health Board (meaning MWs, HV etc) openly talk about FF if they are asked. They discuss storage, making up bottles etc. I have also heard them suggesting that people look to hungry baby milk etc. So the information you say people want is available if needed from my Health Board and is not restricted. This is surely the case for all information- it is there if you need it. As I said already, I cannot believe this is the only one where this is the case.

I find it interesting the people want to be told what to do regarding FF but as a society there is a constant outcry when the government issue guidelines regarding parenting and raising children. I do think that if you are planning to FF from the get go then it is your responsibility to educate yourself about how to do it before baby arrives. Surely that is the case about all aspects of parenting? Guidelines change over time and it has to be our responsibility to make sure we are educated about what is current. I do not know anyone IRL who was not offered NHS ante-natal classes or who did not get the Ready, Steady, Baby book. At the ante-natal classes FF was discussed and it wasn't looked down at, nor was it looked down upon subsequently.