Happiness

I opened up my Blogger dashboard, and found out I had a new follower! I'm up to 10! That thrills me much more than whatever my Facebook friend count is! I feel like I should have a contest! I'll think about that. I'm actually planning a contest/fundraiser for early December, but I need to find some plain white roving, and that's proving much harder than I thought it would be :(

I also looked at my stats, and see I had another busy day last week, with 35 page views in one day. One page that got 4 views was not what I would think of being an interesting one--showed my pink fingerless gloves from early 2009 (I think...).

But what I really wanted to write about....babywearing! Yup. Now, I know, you're saying, this is a knitting blog now, take that child stuff to your other blog. Well, I did sew the sling, so does that count? :)

The week before Thanksgiving, a woman posted on Freecycle that she had borrowed a sling for the weekend, and loved it, and was hoping to get one for herself. I didn't think I had one to offer, just a knit pouch that was sized for me, and what's the chance of finding another me? But I responded, giving her some suggestions for making her own, places to get instructions to sew one, and let her know that I had the one pouch, and had some fleece I could sew her one for free, or if she wanted a ring sling she could pay for the rings ($5) and I'd sew something, either with her own fabric or something from my stash.

I was her only response! She came over later in the week, and Meg had hidden the pouch sling, and wouldn't you know...the lady, Amy, was short and big busted! However, her baby was already 4 months old so a cotton knit pouch would be limited in longevity. I showed her some fabrics I had and she feel in love with a green paisley fabric....a different colourway of the pink fabric I used to make Lucy a sleeveless dress way back in 2008 (that seems so long ago, but I guess it really wasn't). She would be coming back through town the day after Thanksgiving, to go to Sick Kids (hospital). I was aiming to have it done for then.

It'd been over a year since I've sewn a ring sling, so it took some refreshing, LOL. And I was having one of those days when I felt like I had never sewn anything before in my life. But it all came together, and I tested it with Meg. OMG. I could get her hoisted up, but she is one big girl! Where'd my little peanut go?

When Amy stopped in, her baby was sleeping in the car so she didn't disturb him. But she had done her research and seemed confident and on her way. She sent me an email later saying that he loved right away and they never even bothered to take the stroller into the hospital! She added a picture, and indeed, she looked like a pro!

I'm not going to post her photo, but I am so excited that someone else is babywearing! I got so frustrated with giving away slings before, and finding out the people never/rarely used them. One woman had a 7 month old baby, and a 4 month old foster baby. She seemed really interested in babywearing and the convenience it would offer her, so I gave her one of my slings. A month later I hadn't heard anything back from her, so I asked her how it was going. She replied that her baby had been sick and she hadn't had a chance to try out the sling. What?! Most sick babies I know of what more holding, not less. And with two babies under 8 months? How could you not have ONE chance to try a sling? So now I ask for $5 to cover the ring cost.

I have been knitting, not with the greatest, or most interesting results, but I'll get to that later. Off to look for more Hallowe'en costume items!

Semantics

Watch Your Language!

By Diane Wiessinger, MS, IBCLC(Reprinted from the Journal of Human Lactation, Vol. 12, No. 1, 1996)

“The truth is, breastfeeding is nothing more than normal. Artificial feeding, which is neither the same nor superior, is therefore deficient, incomplete, and inferior. These are difficult words, but they have an appropriate place in our vocabulary.”

The lactation consultant says, “You have the best chance to provide your baby with the best possible start in life, through the special bond of breastfeeding. The wonderful advantages to you and your baby will last a lifetime.” And then the mother bottlefeeds. Why?

In part because that sales pitch could just as easily have come from a commercial baby milk pamphlet. When our phrasing and that of the baby milk industry are interchangeable, one of us is going about it wrong…and it probably isn’t the multinationals. Here is some of the language that I think subverts our good intentions every time we use it.

Best possible, ideal, optimal, perfect. Are you the best possible parent? Is your home life ideal? Do you provide optimal meals? Of course not. Those are admirable goals, not minimum standards. Let’s rephrase. Is your parenting inadequate? Is your home life subnormal? Do you provide deficient meals? Now it hurts. You may not expect to be far above normal, but you certainly don’t want to be below normal.

When we (and the artificial milk manufacturers) say that breastfeeding is the best possible way to feed babies because it provides their ideal food, perfectly balanced for optimal infant nutrition, the logical response is, “So what?” Our own experience tells us that optimal is not necessary. Normal is fine, and implied in this language is the absolute normalcy–and thus safety and adequacy–of artificial feeding. The truth is, breastfeeding is nothing more than normal. Artificial feeding, which is neither the same nor superior, is therefore deficient, incomplete, and inferior. Those are difficult words, but they have an appropriate place in our vocabulary.

Advantages. When we talk about the advantages of breastfeeding–the “lower rates” of cancer, the “reduced risk” of allergies, the “enhanced” bonding, the “stronger” immune system–we reinforce bottlefeeding yet again as the accepted, acceptable norm.

Health comparisons use a biological, not cultural, norm, whether the deviation is harmful or helpful. Smokers have higher rates of illness; increasing prenatal folic acid may reduce fetal defects. Because breastfeeding is the biological norm, breastfed babies are not “healthier;” artificially-fed babies are ill more often and more seriously. Breastfed babies do not “smell better;” artificial feeding results in an abnormal and unpleasant odor that reflects problems in an infant’s gut. We cannot expect to create a breastfeeding culture if we do not insist on a breastfeeding model of health in both our language and our literature.

We must not let inverted phrasing by the media and by our peers go unchallenged. When we fail to describe the hazards of artificial feeding, we deprive mothers of crucial decision-making information. The mother having difficulty with breastfeeding may not seek help just to achieve a “special bonus;” but she may clamor for help if she knows how much she and her baby stand to lose. She is less likely to use artificial milk just “to get him used to a bottle” if she knows that the contents of that bottle cause harm.

Nowhere is the comfortable illusion of bottlefed normalcy more carefully preserved than in discussions of cognitive development. When I ask groups of health professionals if they are familiar with the study on parental smoking and IQ (1), someone always tells me that the children of smoking mothers had “lower IQs.” When I ask about the study of premature infants fed either human milk or artificial milk (2), someone always knows that the breastmilk-fed babies were “smarter.” I have never seen either study presented any other way by the media–or even by the authors themselves. Even health professionals are shocked when I rephrase the results using breastfeeding as the norm: the artificially-fed children, like children of smokers, had lower IQs.

Inverting reality becomes even more misleading when we use percentages, because the numbers change depending on what we choose as our standard. If B is 3/4 of A, then a is 4/3 of B. Choose A as the standard, and B is 25% less. Choose B as the standard, and A is 33 1/3% more. Thus, if an item costing 100 units is put on sale for “25% less,”the price becomes 75. When the sale is over, and the item is marked back up, it must be marked up 33 1/3% to get the price up to 100. Those same figures appear in a recent study (3), which found a “25% decrease” in breast cancer rates among women who were breastfed as infants. Restated using breastfed health as the norm, there was a 33-1/3% increase in breast cancer rates among women who were artificially fed. Imagine the different impact those two statements would have on the public.

Special. “Breastfeeding is a special relationship.” “Set up a special nursing corner.” In or family, special meals take extra time. Special occasions mean extra work. Special is nice, but it is complicated, it is not an ongoing part of life, and it is not something we want to do very often. For most women, nursing must fit easily into a busy life–and, of course, it does. “Special” is weaning advice, not breastfeeding advice.

Breastfeeding is best; artificial milk is second best. Not according to the World Health Organization. Its hierarchy is: 1) breastfeeding; 2) the mother’s own milk expressed and given to her child some other way; 3) the milk of another human mother; and 4) artificial milk feeds (4). We need to keep this clear in our own minds and make it clear to others. “The next best thing to mother herself” comes from a breast, not from a can. The free sample perched so enticingly on the shelf at the doctor’s office is only the fourth best solution to breastfeeding problems.

There is a need for standard formula in some situations. Only because we do not have human milk banks. The person who needs additional blood does not turn to a fourth-rate substitute; there are blood banks that provide human blood for human beings. He does not need to have a special illness to qualify. All he needs is a personal shortage of blood. Yet only those infants who cannot tolerate fourth best are privileged enough to receive third best. I wonder what will happen when a relatively inexpensive commercial blood is designed that carries a substantially higher health risk than donor blood. Who will be considered unimportant enough to receive it? When we find ourselves using artificial milk with a client, let’s remind her and her health care providers that banked human milk ought to be available. Milk banks are more likely to become part of our culture if they first become part of our language.

We do not want to make bottlefeeding mothers feel guilty. Guilt is a concept that many women embrace automatically, even when they know that circumstances are truly beyond their control. (My mother has been known to apologize for the weather.)
Women’s (nearly) automatic assumption of guilt is evident in their responses to this scenario: Suppose you have taken a class in aerodynamics. You have also seen pilots fly planes. Now, imagine that you are the passenger in a two-seat plane. The pilot has a heart attack, and it is up to you to fly the plane. You crash. Do you feel guilty?
The males I asked responded, “No. Knowing about aerodynamics doesn’t mean you can fly an airplane.” “No, because I would have done my best.” “No. I might feel really bad about the plane and pilot, but I wouldn’t feel guilty.” “No. Planes are complicated to fly, even if you’ve seen someone do it.”
What did the females say? “I wouldn’t feel guilty about the plane, but I might about the pilot because there was a slight chance that I could have managed to land that plane.” “Yes, because I’m very hard on myself about my mistakes. Feeling bad and feeling guilty are all mixed up for me.” “Yes, I mean, of course. I know I shouldn’t, but I probably would.” “Did I kill someone else? If I didn’t kill anyone else, then I don’t feel guilty.” Note the phrases “my mistakes,” “I know I shouldn’t,” and “Did I kill anyone?” for an event over which these women would have had no control!

The mother who opts not to breastfeed, or who does not do so as long as she planned, is doing the best she can with the resources at hand. She may have had the standard “breast is best” spiel (the course in aerodynamics) and she may have seen a few mothers nursing at the mall (like watching the pilot on the plane’s overhead screen). That is clearly not enough information or training. But she may still feel guilty. She’s female.

Most of us have seen well-informed mothers struggle unsuccessfully to establish breastfeeding, and turn to bottlefeeding with a sense of acceptance because they know they did their best. And we have seen less well-informed mothers later rage against a system that did not give them the resources they later discovered they needed. Help a mother who says she feels guilty to analyze her feelings, and you may uncover a very different emotion. Someone long ago handed these mothers the word “guilt.” It is the wrong word.
Try this on: You have been crippled in a serious accident. Your physicians and physical therapists explain that learning to walk again would involve months of extremely painful and difficult work with no guarantee of success. They help you adjust to life in a wheelchair, and support you through the difficulties that result. Twenty years later, when your legs have withered beyond all hope, you meet someone whose accident matched your own. “It was difficult,” she says. “It was three months of sheer hell. But I’ve been walking ever since.” Would you feel guilty?
Women to whom I posed this scenario told me they would feel angry, betrayed, cheated. They would wish they could do it over with better information. They would feel regret for opportunities lost. Some of the women said they would feel guilty for not having sought out more opinions, for not having persevered in the absence of information and support. But gender-engendered guilt aside, we do not feel guilty about having been deprived of a pleasure. The mother who does not breastfeed impairs her own health, increases the difficulty and expense of infant and child rearing, an dismisses one of life’s most delightful relationships. She has lost something basic to her own well-being. What image of the satisfactions of breastfeeding do we convey when we use the word “guilt”?

Let’s rephrase, using the words women themselves gave me: “We don’t want to make bottlefeeding mothers feel angry. We don’t want to make them feel betrayed. We don’t want to make them feel cheated.” Peel back the layered implications of “we don’t want to make them feel guilty,” and you will find a system trying to cover its own tracks. It is not trying to protect her. It is trying to protect itself. Let’s level with mothers, support them when breastfeeding doesn’t work, and help them move beyond this inaccurate and ineffective word.

Pros and cons, advantages and disadvantages. Breastfeeding is a straight-forward health issue, not one of two equivlent choices. “One disadvantage of not smoking is that you are more likely to find secondhand smoke annoying. One advantage of smoking is that it can contribute to weight loss.” The real issue is differential morbidity and mortality. The rest–whether we are talking about tobacco or commercial baby milks–is just smoke.

One maternity center uses a “balanced” approach on an “infant feeding preference card” (5) that lists odorless stools and a return of the uterus to its normal size on the five lines of breastfeeding advantages. (Does this mean the bottlefeeding mother’s uterus never returns to normal?) Leaking breasts and an inability to see how much the baby is getting are included on the four lines of disadvantages. A formula-feeding advantage is that some mothers find it “less inhibiting and embarrassing.” The maternity facility reported good acceptance by the pediatric medical staff and no marked change in the rates of breastfeeding or bottlefeeding. That is not surprising. The information is not substantially different from the “balanced” lists that the artificial milk salesmen have peddled for years. It is probably an even better sales pitch because it now carries very clear hospital endorsement. “Fully informed,” the mother now feels confident making a life-long health decision based on relative diaper smells and the amount of skin that shows during feedings.

Why do the commercial baby milk companies offer pro and con lists that acknowledge some of their product’s shortcomings? Because any “balanced” approach that is presented in a heavily biased culture automatically supports the bias. If A and B are nearly equivalent, and if more than 90% of mothers ultimately choose B, as mothers in the United States do (according to an unpublished 1992 Mothers’ Survey by Ross Laboratories that indicated fewer than 10% of U.S. mothers nursing at a year), it makes sense to follow the majority. If there were an important difference, surely the health profession would make a point of not staying out of the decision-making process.

It is the parents’ choice to make. True. But deliberately stepping out of the process implies that the “balanced” list was accurate. In a recent issue of Parenting magazine, a pediatrician comments, “When I first visit a new mother in the hospital, I ask, ‘Are you breastfeeding or bottlefeeding?’ If she says she is going to bottlefeed, I nod and move on to my next questions. Supporting new parents means supporting them in whatever choices they make; you don’t march in postpartum and tell someone she’s making a terrible mistake, depriving herself and her child.” (6)
Yet if a woman announced to her doctor, midway through a routine physical examination, that she took up smoking a few days earlier, the physician would make sure she understood the hazards, reasoning that now was the easiest time for her to change her mind. It is hypocritical and irresponsible to take a clear position on smoking and “let parents decide” about breastfeeding without first making sure of their information base. Life choices are always the individual’s to make. That does not mean his or her information sources should be mute, nor that the parents who opt for bottlefeeding should be denied information that might prompt a different decision with a subsequent child.

Breastfeeding. Most other mammals never even see their own milk, and I doubt that any other mammalian mother deliberately “feeds” her young by basing her nursing intervals on what she infers the baby’s hunger level to be. Nursing quiets her young and no doubt feels good. We are the only mammal that consciously uses nursing to transfer calories…and we’re the only mammal that has chronic trouble making that transfer.

Women may say they “breastfed” for three months, but they usually say they “nursed” for three years. Easy, long-term breastfeeding involves forgetting about the “breast” and the “feeding” (and the duration, and the interval, and the transmission of the right nutrients in the right amounts, and the difference between nutritive and non-nutritive suckling needs, all of which form the focus of artificial milk pamphlets) and focusing instead on the relationship. Let’s all tell mothers that we hope they won’t “breastfeed”–that the real joys and satisfactions of the experience begin when they stop “breastfeeding” and start mothering at the breast.

All of us within the profession want breastfeeding to be our biological reference point. We want it to be the cultural norm; we want human milk to be made available to all human babies, regardless of other circumstances. A vital first step toward achieving those goals is within immediate reach of every one of us. All we have to do is…watch our language.

References
Olds D. L., Henderson, C. R. Tatelbaum, R.: Intellectual impairment in children of women who smoke cigarettes during pregnancy. Pediatrics 1994; 93:221-27.Lucas, A., Morley, R., Cole, T.J., Lister, G., Leeson-Payne, C.: Breast milk and subsequent intelligence quotient in children born preterm. Lancet 1992; 339 (8788): 261-64.Fruedenheim, J.L., Graham, S., Laughlin, R., Vena, J.E., Bandera, E., et al: Exposure to breastmilk in infancy and the risk of breast cancer. Epidemiology 1994, 5:324-30.UNICEF, WHO, UNESCO: Facts for Life: A Communication Challenge. New York: UNICEF 1989; p. 20.Bowles, B.B., Leache, J., Starr, S., Foster, M.: Infant feeding preferences card. J Hum Lact 1993; 9: 256-58.Klass, P.: Decent exposure. Parenting (May) 1994; 98-104.

Bad Link!

I was looking/checking my list of links the other day, and the one about Bjorns isn't working! Nothing seems wrong in the HTML code, and the address that shows up in the window when you click is right.
Just in case I've messed up, LOL, here's the correct, whole, address:
http://www.continuum-concept.org/reading/spinalStress.html and hopefully I can get that fixed later.

Bad Babywearing

I got this picture in an email from my MIL, with a bunch of other cute baby pictures. This is admittedly a cute baby picture, but it is BAD babywearing! I can't believe that two people doing this found themselves together at the same time, where someone had a camera.
See the legs dangling straight? That means the baby is supported by the crotch. It's not funny when someone gives you a wedgie in grade 6, it's not fun when your own parent does it at 6 months. All the baby's weight is put on their lower spine, puting them at risk for spinal stenosis. And, a baby that age can't stand alone, and put weight on their legs...that means the baby is supported like this for who knows how long, in an unnatural position for their physiological age.
Second, see the baby on the right, see how low the support is; how far forward the baby is leaning? Not safe! And if this baby was on your front in this position it would be very painful on your shoulders and back.
Third, who knows what's going on behind you! It might not be another charming baby sticking their fingers in your baby's face! How can the baby retreat if it's over-stimulated, tired, cold?

Western society is supposed to be so advanced. We've got all these gadgets and gizmos to make life and baby raising easier. But in the end, is it good for the baby; is it good for our society? Sometimes I think the African woman with her baby tied to her hip with a simple piece of cloth has it right.

Found the Camera!

Rob's birthday present! After he finally wore Megan at the Maple Syrup Festival, I decided to make a carrier just for him. They tried it out on the weekend.
Megan likes to tuck a doll or stuffed animal in her shirt, so I dug out this pouch I made back in the early days. Gathered up the extra with an elastic, and viola! We went to IKEA on the weekend and Lucy was upset she couldn't go in the playroom because she didn't have socks on. But right at the top of the escalator was a clown making balloon animals. We were skeptical when she offered to make a Spiderman for Huey, but wow! She was good!

And yes, I did take some knitting pictures, LOL. Outside enjoying the nice weather. But it appears that I haven't gotten around to downloading them yet! Right now I've got some other things to do. Like, knit!

Imagine this...

...you're 18, and give birth to a 29 week preemie. Wow. Then, 4 months later, get pregnant again. Now, having babies 14 months apart it not too unusual (Rob and his sister!), but....the second baby comes 13 weeks early, and now your kids are barely 10 months apart! OMG. Someone new joined the Attachment Parenting Yahoo group I'm in. Some of the member's stories are pretty interesting. Like the discussion on long after your baby's birth before you had sex again. One woman wrote in saying THREE DAYS!!! THE DAY she came home from the hospital!!! But she finished off by saying that she was only 16 at the time, LOL. Generally, that response got a colletive 'ICK' by group members, LOL.

For Josee

(Did I spell it right?)

I told her I'd put up some babywearing links, so here they are!

www.thebabywearer.com the first place to look. Vendors from around the world, info on every type of baby carrier out there, how to's, Forums for questions....everything!

www.wearyourbaby.com

www.slingrings.com The BEST source for ring sling rings! I like the aluminum ones. These are medium turquoise rings on a rayon sling, extremely long tail. Might take it apart and make a dress after my surgery :)

www.sleepingbaby.net/jan/Baby/index.html she has great instructions for making any kind of sling. I used her fleece pouch instructions and was so impressed I could sew! Then I made a ring sling with a pleated shoulder. Me! Making pleats! I've also made several of the FrankenKozy's.

We went to the Ontario Science Center in June for Huey's birthday, and did not take a stroller! I wore her all day, a few different positions, but at nursing time, we needed a chair, LOL. Many people nurse in their slings, especially if they learn earlier than we did. The red RS is my 'workhorse' sling. Dependable, short tail, not fussy.

www.upmama.com is a sling maker from Belleville

www.kiddiecradles.com is a good site, the instructions on using a RS are good, but hard to find.
www.hotslings.com has good instructions for using a pouch.
www.mobywrap.com is a great wrap carrier for newborns, up to about 18lbs. You can also make your own, very easily! Aren't we cute? She loved to kick Huey in the head while caried like this!
http://www.continuum-concept.org/reading/spinalStress.html is a good site about the dangers of Bjorn baby bucket type carriers.
www.storchenwiege.com makers of great woven wraps
www.didymos.com also woven wraps (one of these two sites also has info on why babies shouldn't face out).
www.nineinnineout.org is "Nine In, Nine Out" organization, dedicated to making the transition from womb to world a little easier. Listings for Babywearing groups.
www.askdrsears.com The grandfather of attachment parenting
www.hipbundles.com is from North Bay, carries babywearing coats/ponchos too.


An absolutely terrible picture of me! Just trying out the first FK to see if it would hold Lucy!

www.mayawrap.com is the 'traditional' RS, Guatemalan fabric. But some new products too!
www.heart2heart.on.ca is a Canadian, heavily padded RS. You either love it, or hate it.
www.slingbaby.com is home of the Over the Shoulder Baby Holder, one of the older RS on the market, heavily padded as well.
www.handsfreebaby.com is a great shopping site (American)
www.attachedtobaby.com all round good site
www.kozykarrier.com makers of great MTs
www.babyhawk.com more great MTs
www.kangarookorner.com a good educational site, as well, their adjustable flece pouches are very popular.


I could go on and on. Here's how I would go about selecting a carrier. For a newborn, a fleece pouch, or other stretchy pouch is wonderful. Perhaps not for the summer, although some people say they are still okay. Not too easy for bustier ladies to nurse in though (that's why the KKAFP is popular). I don't like the idea of a twill pouch for a newborn (Hotslings style). The one above is a two layer jersey knit pouch. It took a bit of work to get it sized right because of the stretch. I should dig it out again and see if it'll fit still.

I didn't use a RS with a newborn, but many really like it, especially for nursing. I REALLY wish I had given a stretchy wrap a try for a newborn! It is so cuddly, so cozy, so easy to make. Perhaps not the greatest for someone learning to nurse, but no sling really is. Nursing takes practice and patience, and so does learning to babywear, although a pouch is really easy to use. However, a pouch is not something you can make as a surprise for someone else, as it has to fit well. A wrap or RS or MT is more 'forgiving'. I LOVE my FrankenKozies that I've made (I need to make another animal print one--that one is lined with fleece and the print is flannel, so it's too warm for in the house), I wish I had had one earlier. I could not figure out back carries with a wrap very well (not recommended with a Moby, so I made a cotton gauze one, and a linen/rayon (maybe) one). Some people love a MT right from the start, but I think I would prefer a pouch or a wrap.

Any questions? If I can sew these things, ANYONE can!!!

Phew. Now back to American Idol and some knitting (and yes, I did try a knitted pouch!)

Kudos

I really want to get back to knitting posts (or at least show off some funny March Break photos), but I just have to address this issue a little bit more.

Women who don't breastfeed fall into two catagories. The first group are those who WANT to b.f., who struggle for weeks and months, who pump fulltime for a year, who won't give their baby a bottle in public because they feel ashamed. They KNOW b.m. is best, they WANT to do it, they've TRIED. These women are to be acknowledged (like I did back last fall), respected, accepted, and wrapped in the love of the b.f. community. All too often they hang on to feelings of guilt, when they are the mothers who should not have any. For more about this issue, see Rev. Jan's essay about b.f. advocates, guilt, and who should feel it. It's a good article. If I knew more about graphics, and HTML, and buttons, I'd make one just for these breastfeeding
warriors (but as you can see by my sidebar, I'm just a little slow at that stuff. I really want to get more links up there, I'm not trying to ignore anyone's blogs, but I'm just slow!).

The second camp of non-b.f. are the ones I was addressing yesterday (and last fall). The ones who don't even try. Who give lame excuses like "I want Daddy to give some bottles" or "I don't want to feel like a cow" or who give up after two weeks, without seeking assistance, because it "wasn't going well" (it might be the natural and normal way to feed an infant, but not very many mothers can say it's going well in the first week!). Or "My doctor says I'm too old to breastfeed". Yup, I heard that one, by a woman around 43-44. Or, "you can't b.f. twins/triplets..." Or, like my neighbour "It'll be more convinient to bottle feed" and then they're at the doctor's twice in the first 3 days and on three different formulas already because their baby hasn't passed the meconium. How's that convinient? What was convinient was soaking through her t-shirt, flowing freely, the free and perfect constipation cure, wasted on a blue cotton t-shirt. Children are NOT convinient, LOL. These are the women who SHOULD carry the burden of guilt, but because of their ignorance about the importance of b.m. they don't harbour any shame. I just don't understand THESE women. How could you NOT want to do what's best for your baby? Or, the women who don't bother to read the stickers ON the carseat to make sure it's in correctly (I'm not even talking about the instruction manual, just the stickers in plain view). The same neighbour with the convinience excuse also put her baby in a re-called carseat, in the front seat of her truck, with the handle up. Three big mistakes. How can I take her seriously as a mother? You'll rarely hear these mothers get upset when they read something like I wrote yesterday, or last fall. Perhaps they do know, deep inside, that they make a poor choice. I'm always hopeful for that, and that if they have other kids they will try to do better.

Phew. Enough. Did you see that Miriam left me a comment? Me! Okay, she wasn't praising my knitting or anything, but she was here :) I really really love getting comments--doesn't matter if you're a 'knitting nobody' or Grumperina! I've always loved to write, and while I knew I would never make a career out of it, blogging is the perfect tool for me. Yeah, I'd love some blogging fame, be on a first name basis like "Wendy" or "The Harlot", but for now, LOL, just knowing that SOMEONE has read what I wrote, and especially that they felt moved/angered/sympathetic enough to comment, blows me away. Am I really that simple, LOL. When you're a SAHM of three kids....it doesn't take much to make my day :)

Edit: I had a picture of two of my kids making a mess in Grandma's bathtub. I've just found out that someone came to this blog after Googling "Kids in Tub" so I've edited the picture. They're still kids in a very dirty tub!

Thanks Grumperina!

Grumperina left a link in a comment yesterday, and I've been enjoying it so much I think it deserves it's own post. The postcards are particularly funny! And in the calendar, there is a picture of a bride, nursing while in her wedding gown! I love the little t-shirts for baby "Little MotherSucker" LOL. The Lactivist has one "I play with my Baby's food". I wish I had seen that earlier, I think Rob would really have liked it :) (And in case you've been wondering, the Pork Board apologized to her, but asked her to change the slogan to "Breastmilk: The Original White Milk" which I think is a much better slogan!).
While you're at the BabyMilkAction site, you might see some things about deaths from bottle feeding. Although the images are of 3rd World countries, it is applicable to North America. Just think of Hurricane Katrina. I don't know if any babies died from Hurricane Andrew, or the Ice Storm '98, or the Big Black Out of Aug '03, but if you are dependent on sterilized water and bottles, and refrigeration, while stores are closed and power is out....Even if you use 'ready to feed' formula--do you have a manual can opener? There was an episode of "Untold Stories of the ER" on TLC and a one month old baby just happened to be at a children's hospital because his 15 year old mother was having surgery. A nurse pauses to admire the baby, and notices that he's quite blue. It turns out the family ran out of bottled water and was using tap water. The water had high nitrite levels due to agricultural runoff and the baby had nitrate poisoning. Formula gets recalled, farms get outbreaks of diseases, hormones weren't declared, the milk truck was 2C above required temperature, hands don't always get washed....the chain of events from the cow that provides the original milk to the formula in the bottle is HUGE. At any one of the events, something can happen. Let's see what the chain of events are for breastfeeding...Pull up shirt, unhook bra, latch baby on. (I'm NOT trying to make b.f. look so simple. I KNOW it's not--I've had lots of different issues. Huey almost didn't get b.f. past 3 days, but I was adamant that he should have human milk--after all, despite what we call him now, LOL, he IS a human!).
Human milk should be the first choice for all babies. Women should have the support needed to work through ANY difficulty. Doctors who say "Formula is just as good" should have their license suspended. Hospitals who say "Your milk hasn't come in yet (on day 1!), here's some free formula" or "Baby is jaundiced, here's some formula" should pay a hefty fine. Only 5-10% of mothers really, truly, cannot breastfeed their newborn. It should be seen as a national shame that 30% of newborns are formula fed. Don't even get me started on C-Sections :)

PS--And for goodness sake! The Blogger spellcheck should have the word Breastmilk in it!!!!!!

Some Artwork

I came across a breastfeeding art site today. What ISN'T there on the internet? I really liked this picture!

This one is titled "Lovin' It" LOL. But soon I won't be looking like that sign :)

There is a great book you can download and print (or just view) for children about breastfeeding.

Babywise? Or Babystupid?!

Another member of the Slightly Crunchy Attachment Parenting group sent a link to a website with something about 'Ezzo' and Babywise. His name gets mentioned on the list, and the general consensus is that he knows nothing about the true nature of infants. Apparently he has gotten in trouble for claiming relationships with colleges/universities. All I had heard about his Babywise 'technique' was that babies should be fed on a schedule. Uh huh. I decided to read this link to learn some more, as I am a 'learner'. I was shocked by what I read:

REGARDING THE DANGERS OF PREPARATION FOR PARENTING (BABYWISE)
The following is Matthew Hsieh's history as described by his parents, Michael & Michelle Hsieh, April 1999.

The purpose of this letter is to generate public awareness about yet another child who has surely suffered due to following a Christian parenting program entitled Preparation for Parent-ing/Preparation for the Toddler Years (secular versions marketed in stores as On Becoming BabyWise 1 & 2) by Gary and Anne Marie Ezzo . We hope that knowledge of his case can be used to promote existing and future efforts to inform communities of the extremely serious dangers associated with following the Ezzos' program, even in its newest editions. It is our hope that, as awareness grows, popularity for its teachings will diminish to the extent that most churches will no longer promote or choose to be affiliated with them.

Initially, we would like to qualify a couple of points. We are both college graduates from prestigious universities. Michelle has a business degree with an accounting concentration from the University of Washington (a rigorous and highly acclaimed program), and Michael has a me-chanical engineering degree from the University of California, Berkeley. He currently works in international sales in the high-tech industry, while Michelle is currently a full-time mom. We point this out to say that we are not uneducated, fly-by-night, take-whatever-we-hear-as-gospel types of people. In fact, we have always prided ourselves on possessing strong common sense, thinking things through in an analytical manner, and distinguishing between right and wrong. Secondly, we want to stress that the classes we attended were, and still are as of this writing, the most up-to-date versions of the program. For instance, the program's infant feeding schedules have been revised to suggest feeding every two-and-one-half to three hours and to incorporate "flexibility," yet the overall message is indeed the very same as in earlier editions (it was shocking to us to learn what they used to recommend!). Major problems still exist with following the Ezzos' parenting program.

Matthew was born March 26, 1998. Just prior to his birth, we took the first parenting class, Preparation for Parenting (Prep), in a series of what was promoted to be the most Christian-based, medically accurate parenting information. We took the second class, Preparation for the Toddler Years, a couple of months later. As first time parents, we were excited about applying the principles, thereby raising our children to be both loving and obedient. The messages were strong and clear, and the boastful claims of thousands of parents correctly applying the principles with only optimum results left little room for debate or need to question the material. A couple of times we remember hearing there was controversy regarding the program, but we were encouraged to dismiss it as coming from parents not using good judgement or incorrectly applying the principles, or as simply "secular" society's attack due to the program's Christian affiliation.

Other than his first week, Matthew's first two months went rather smoothly. His first week was tough, and, looking back, it should have been our first indication not to follow the feeding schedule we were taught in Prep. We should point out that Matthew was a small newborn. Al-though he was full-term and healthy, he was just under six pounds at birth, possibly due to low amniotic fluid levels, which, although not significantly alarming, prompted the obstetrician to induce labor eleven days early. (Induction is a relatively common practice, and Matthew was still considered full-term.)
Matthew was born on a Thursday; we were discharged on Friday, and yet, during that first week of life, we were back at the hospital every day but one. In his third day, he already appeared to be losing a little too much weight too quickly, and he was getting increas-ingly jaundiced. His before/after nursing weights indicated that he was getting adequate amounts of breastmilk, even though he was found to be an extremely efficient eater-normally five minutes on one side, and he was done. However, telling the lactation consultants and nurses that he was fed every two-and-one-half to three hours gave them the intended message (you mean, that while the program is intended to develop loving and obedient children, the adults are encouraged to be deceitful?) that he was being fed on demand. Yet, "we knew better"-demand feeding was unhealthy, and we were using the Ezzos' parent-directed feeding (PDF) approach.

(Me--I just have to acknowledge this point. The parents claim to have strong common sense, and an anylitical nature, but yet the idea that the baby's need for food is to be ignored didn't strike them as odd, or worth further investigating?)

Tuesday his jaundice was severe enough to require hospitalization, and while there our pe-diatrician also had mother-baby compatibility tests performed to see if his body was rejecting Michelle's milk-tests were normal. We were sent home the following day but continued on home photo-therapy for the following couple of days. This required a daily visit from a nurse. Michelle remembers them telling us 1) to be sure to feed on demand, 2) not to press beyond the two-and-one-half- to three-hour mark, and 3) to monitor (actually document) all feeding times and wet/poopy diapers. Again, we chose to ignore the feeding on demand advice due to our "medically supported training," (and a lactation consultant's training is what? From a bubble gum wrapper? The parents knew better because they took a short course offered by their CHURCH?) but we did make sure to feed him in the time frame suggested, as this went right along with PDF. (Ask any mother of a newborn. They nurse a lot more than every three hours. That's the very, very, maximum, and if often a sign of jaundice).

Ignoring this advice to feed on demand (or cue) was our FIRST BIG MISTAKE. However, despite our scheduled feedings, Matthew's jaundice did clear up, and his wet/poopy diapers met the minimum number, although they did seem fairly "weightless." As new parents having no ex-perience to compare it against, we assumed infants just eliminated very tiny amounts fairly of-ten. Things continued this way through his two month appointment, where his weight registered in the twenty-fifth percentile. Although his nursing continued to be short in length, the milk sup-ply seemed adequate, and Matthew was fairly content.

Things slowly began to change at this point. Matthew became more fussy/irritable and Mi-chelle found herself always questioning her milk supply, wondering if he had colic or excess gas (we tried Mylicon Drops) or was just overtired. She began pumping regularly, hopefully to en-sure sufficient milk supply, and also tried supplementing with a bottle, but he repeatedly and vehemently refused, becoming so upset that he would even refuse the breast at that feeding. Many times Michelle's intuition told her that Matthew was hungry before the scheduled time, yet she chose to ignore those signals and instead comfort him back to sleep, due to the Ezzos' scheduled feeding philosophies, which had been drilled into us. Our training specifically said that regularly feeding him sooner than our schedule would interrupt his hunger, digestive, and sleep/wake cycles, causing him to be a snacker, and this would just be unhealthy for him (and how is snacking on breastmilk going to be unhealthy?) (and us) overall. We had no reason to argue with this supposed medically-backed advice (hysterectomies were once prescribed to treat women who weren't acting normal...it was medically backed...). On very rare occasions, Michelle would exercise "flexibility" and feed him before "time" due to his uncontrollable cries, but most often he would "submit" to her comforting him to sleep.

It was at Matthew's three-month (possibly between three & four months) check-up that we discovered his weight, in terms of percentiles, had plummeted. He had dropped off the charts altogether. To say the least, we were very alarmed, as he was soon diagnosed as "Failure to Thrive" (FTT). Again, when asked about nursing frequencies, we answered every two-and-one-half to three hours and of the lack of success in getting him to supplement with a bottle. We were told that as long as we had always fed on demand, Michelle's supply should meet his needs. We were told to continue as we were, and to come in for frequent weight checks between well-child appointments. During this time Matthew's temperament had evened out a bit, and once again he seemed fairly content. What we now believe, in fact, to have been the case was that Matthew had become resigned to taking only small amounts of milk-not nearly close to what he needed to "thrive."

We began introducing solid food, which Matthew took to very eagerly. We hoped this would help him to put on some more weight. We again followed the strict suggestions for proper training from our parenting class, and encouraged Matthew to keep his hands down while we spoon fed him. He did NOT like this, but we were encouraged to persevere, as our training had indi-cated that he could and would learn to keep his hands down and out of/away from his food.

This was our SECOND BIG MISTAKE. He did, in fact, learn to submit to keeping his hands down (or our holding them down), but his interest in food was quickly diminishing. At six months, we knew beyond a doubt that he was still getting far below adequate amounts of milk (we rented a highly accurate scale and did before- and after-feeding weights to get his total in-take for twenty-four-hour periods), and felt we had no other choice but to keep feeding him solids as well. His growth had not improved, and he was still off the charts.

More and more, Matthew was losing interest in nursing, while still refusing outside supple-mentation by bottle or cup. It was obvious that nursing was not a "comfort" to him, as Michelle had always read and heard it to be for other babies (a trust issue). It was increasingly common for him to arch his back and display other obvious signs that he did not want to nurse any longer-just a couple of minutes every four hours or so, and he had enough. His back arching was interpreted as a possible sign of acid reflux, so we tried Zantac but experienced no change in behavior.

If we had rigidly been following the Ezzos' advice in this scenario, we would have punished him for his defiant arching. (Punish a six month old?!) However, Michelle was unwilling to punish Matthew for this, in fear that it would cause him to reject nourishment even more. At this time (still about six months) Michelle was placed on Metaclopramide, a generic form of Reglin, to increase her milk supply. It worked wonders. It was obvious through pumping that she now had plenty of milk. However, Matthew's behavior about nursing did not change. For so long he had resigned himself to small amounts, we believe he had learned to feel full on that insufficient amount of milk.

Things continued like this until Matthew was nine-and-one-half months old. He was learning up through this time to supplement breastfeeding by taking formula from a cup, but again, ex-tremely small amounts of maybe an ounce or two. His spoon-fed and fingerfoods were, however, on the decline to the point where he would refuse to swallow the spoon-fed food we did get in, and wanted nothing to do with fingerfoods. Then, within a two-day period, Matthew stopped nursing altogether (apparently due to Michelle becoming pregnant, which changes breastmilk flavor). Over the next week he became increasingly dehydrated, with a fever above 103-104 de-grees. He would take perhaps eight ounces of formula over the whole day, and, still to his dis-like, we continued to spoon feed him until he would protest too loudly or stop swallowing. We felt we had no choice but to push the baby foods, as we were so concerned with his lack of formula intake. With his continued rapid decline in energy/health/weight, he was admitted to Chil-dren's Hospital to begin naso-gastric (NG) tube feedings. He was released from the hospital after 4 days but has remained on the NG tube.

To say the least, these last months with him on the NG tube have been the hardest ever. There were times that he was throwing up so much we didn't know if he would make it. However, with the proper amounts of nourishment, his weight has begun to climb dramatically, along with his energy and disposition. At the beginning of the tube feedings, he was almost ten months old and weighed a mere fourteen pounds, eleven ounces. (If he had continued following the curve he set in his first couple of months, he would've been just shy of 20lbs at this point.) At twelve months, he showed significant progress, weighing in at a wonderful eighteen pounds (still off the charts, but getting closer).

During this time, we spent a lot of time reflecting on what brought a perfectly healthy baby boy to this state of complete food aversion/infant anorexia. He has undergone every test (a gruel-ing process) to rule out medical problems, which left us with an unexplained "behavioral" diagnosis. It was then that a chance reading of an article warning against Babywise in a local paper led Michelle to do a little more research into the Ezzos' parenting program that we had been so sold on.

What we found was astonishing. Matthew is just one of hundreds who have been diagnosed with improper weight gain or "Failure to Thrive" associated with this program. We were not just looking for somewhere to put the blame. We had complete respect for the Ezzos and their methods. Friends have followed through with the program with only "success." In our hearts, we just knew, as we looked back over his history, analyzed medical reports and other articles, that this program indeed was the significant reason for his problems.

We cannot begin to explain the feelings of anger, guilt, and remorse that accompany the re-alization that due to some very improper and unsound medical advice and child-rearing tech-niques, our son has had to endure so much. "Unpleasant" doesn't even come close to describing how it feels to force this unnatural tube down our son's nose as he is held there screaming, only to have to do it again if he pulls it out or, worse, throws it up. And to think that it has been rec-ommended and is quite probable that we will have to proceed with the invasive surgery for the more permanent stomach tube.

It is our firm opinion that the Ezzos lack the background and, therefore, the authority to be preaching about step-by-step methods for raising an infant into a thriving toddler. They allow no room for individual temperament, size (premies, low birth weight babies, etc.), stomach capacity and digestion speed, along with a variety of other factors. When their program doesn't work just right, or they are notified of cases of low weight gain, the Ezzos immediately seem to attribute it to the parents (a guilt trip) for either not following teachings correctly, or following them too rig-idly, which is contradictory. It has been proven that there is a 300% variation among mothers for storage capacity of breastmilk . Those with larger capacities can more often nurse at longer intervals, whereas women with smaller capacities need to nurse much more frequently. Most importantly, it was noted that all women in these studies had the ability to produce plenty of milk over twenty-four hours; what varied was the maximum amount they could deliver at one sitting. It is also known that if an infant is fed on demand, more appropriately titled "cue feeding," during the first couple of months, the mother is much more likely to establish appropriate milk quantities. We were taught to ignore those "cues." Yes, we were told to incorporate some "flexi-bility" when the child was obviously hungry (like crying to be fed), or when it was to suit our own needs. However, the Ezzos' definition of demand feeding as feeding a baby only when it cries is simply wrong. In fact, demand feeding is actually recognizing the child's hunger cues (before crying, as crying is often a late sign of hunger ) and feeding them accordingly. We remember those cues vividly, and yet ignored them and tried to pacify Matthew in other ways until his "appropriate" feeding time. How very sadly wrong we were.

How obviously wrong we were again to choose to follow the seemingly medical and biblical advice of the Ezzos in Preparation for the Toddler Years. Here we were taught to teach our child appropriate "highchair manners" of holding his hands down while he was being fed, and again it was said all children can learn obedience in this area. Health and medical professionals in the feeding therapy arena would all say this is actually one of the worst things one can do. A child naturally wants to touch, experiment, etc.-this is a developmental stage/activity all children should be allowed to experiment with. Is avoiding a messy floor or table to teach compliance worth the possible costs? Yes, some infants and maybe even most will learn to be happy to let you hold their hands down while spoon feeding and then to let them experiment after with finger foods. But, it can be argued, is this really success? Or, is success worth the possible cost of later food aversion? Let us tell you, it most definitely is not! We remember heartily laughing at a friend who, having not taken the parenting program offered by the Ezzos, often had to give her six-month-old a bath after a feeding. "How do you keep him from exploring with the food and keep it out of his hair?" she would ask. We would simply think how much extra work she was creating for herself by allowing her child to be, as the Ezzos might describe, "out of control and sinful." Her child is now a healthy, well-behaved one-year-old, and that laugh was sadly at our own expense.

So, did we have success with the parenting program? Obviously not. Do others have success? Some think they do, as their children learn to be fed on schedules, sleep through the night, and otherwise be "obedient." However, is there a long term cost of this obedience? Have bond and trust areas been unknowingly damaged? We really wonder. There are plenty of good parenting books and classes, but any one of those that comes across as if theirs is the only good way (for it is God's way, right?), not only has a lot of nerve but should be questioned in other areas as well. If readers take the time to do this, we are confident that they will find not only that many of the Ezzos' ideas on parenting are being widely questioned as unreliable and outright wrong, but that deeper issues of integrity, accountability, and honesty are also in question. And, contrary to what we were told about "secular" criticism, much of the questioning has come from within the Christian community.

Please, don't just take our word for it. Do your own research. When you are finished, we be-lieve you will draw the same conclusions we have. We thought we were following sound parenting information and doing what was proclaimed to be in the best interest of our son. We could not have been more wrong, and we will always live with that knowledge. We now believe nursing on demand, especially in the early months of life, is among the most critical things one can do for the long-term health and well-being of their child. The harm that has been associated with the Ezzos' parent-directed feeding schedules is not always easily undone, and is simply not worth the potential risks. No other child or parents deserve to endure what we have suffered.
It is our sincere prayer that as awareness of the controversies and problems with the Ezzos' Preparation for Parenting and Preparation for the Toddler Years (On Becoming BabyWise, books 1 & 2) programs increases, the followers will decrease.


Back to me. Whew. What a terrible thing to go through. But I jsut don' t get how smeone who has such strong common sense could not realize that a baby cries to communicate, that only a baby could know when he is actually hungry. How can an adult think that they know better than the person who needs to eat?
Imagine if there was a "Wife-Lead Marriage Course". Husbands would eat only when their wife tells them that the clock says it's time. And they can't have ketchup on their meatloaf. And they must finish every single vegetable they the wife puts on thier plate. Uh huh. Take that Ezzo. See how long you last with that program!

Decisions

I started writing a post last night about Wal-Mart and Similac, how earlier this month they were promoting obesity, diabetes, ear infections, SIDS, allergies, cancer, and oral malformations, with a link to a series of funny cartoons by the Cow Goddess (I think there's 5 comics in this series, check them out, starting with #1). But then Megan got at the computer and my some stroke of good luck, managed to shut the computer down.

So as I laid on the couch, feverish again, I contemplated what else to write. There's "The Three odd things about my Toyota". No. There's "How to get Puke Stains out of Anything". No. There was "How did Sanjaya get in the Top 4 Boys and How did Antonella not get Voted Out?" No.

Then I watched Oprah and Bob Greene and thought about a long, soulful, deep post about exactly why I'm not at my optimal weight, even though I would say "I just like to eat" and I know Oprah would say "NO!, That's not why! What's your PAIN?!". But I just couldn't do it today.

So, instead, I leave you with some inspiration for your weekend knitting:

You've got to realize something sucks when your model will only posed when stoned!

Knitless

Why some sad itty babies are going hatless at Headwaters:
That's Megan, this afternoon, in our favourite carrier. It was a ROUGH night for both her and Lucy. It's been a very long day. Megan was up, bright eyed and bushy tailed despite being up much of the night, at 6:20am. She finally went to sleep at about 9:30, but only for 45 minutes. She didn't go to sleep again until I finally slung her, around 1:30. And of course, I had to wake both of them at 2:30 to go get Huey. We got a prime parking spot and I was able to run into the school and drag him out the side door.

That carrier is called a FrankenKozy. It's a variation on the Kozy Karrier, a type of Asian Baby Carrier (ABC) or Mei Tei (Mai Tei). You can get instructions to make your own on the internet, and sometimes she sells them, but no one is marketing them (although Maya Wrap has created one called a Maya Tie). The leopard print is left over from Huey's pajama pants I made him. Inside the body piece is a hidden layer of fleece leftover from the pouch I made when Megan was a newborn. The black I bought. It is reversible, but I love the leopard print showing! And it is very warm, and VERY comfortable. It's what we use everyday to walk the mile to the school.

We got a lot of snow last night/today. It's nice, but I'm not quite ready. I stopped working on my tipless gloves so I could concentrate on the baby blanket. Huey needs new mitts and wants a new hat. I need a hat that covers my ears but doesn't make me look like a dork. We haven't started Christmas shopping. I'm feeling a little overwhelmed and having two sick kids just doesn't help!

I messed up one of the baby hats last night and couldn't fix it till this morning. There's 7 more hats, only one is seamed. I wanted to seam and wash them today, glue the pompoms tonight, and deliver them tomorrow when Lucy goes for her speech therapy again. I don't think that's going to happen! I don't even know how dinner is going to happen, at it's almost 5:00!

For those who like felted bags, check out this site! Oh, for pete's sake, I didn't bookmark the site! If you go to the current Knitty and check the purple and green purse. Then go to the designer's link at the bottom. Or, go to Z's blog and look at the last comment I left her, LOL. And at Knitting Pattern Central, there is a great listing of felted patterns. That's a great site for just about any pattern you can imagine. Even Marie's hats are there!

Gotto go, sick baby girl stuck on chair UNDER the table.