baby friendly questions - page 4
by Rhee 20,936 Views | 109 Comments
The hospital that I work at is in the process of becoming baby friendly, and I have some questions about how the baby friendly initiative is implemented in other hospitals. I want to start by saying that I think that... Read More
- 1Aug 14, '11 by kloneQuote from melmarie23That is exactly my point. It is not the belief or "policy" of LLL that you must breastfeed your child until 14. To state that represents LLL is unfair and inaccurate, just as stating that the scenario in the OP represents BFHI policy is wildly inaccurate.I think the issue here is that we're using a few bad apples to make sweeping [negative] generalizations about organizations and initiatives such as LLL & BFHI. And that I think is what klone meant by inaccurate and unfair.
- 1Aug 14, '11 by kloneQuote from nohikaLLL is ONE organization that has certain guiding principles that are meant to apply to ALL groups. She may have had one whackadoo leader or member that took things to extremes (although I am still skeptical that anyone told her that she must breastfeed her child until 14 and I suspect she was indeed being hyperbolic, but whatever, I wasn't there) but that person is not accurately representing LLL and it IS inaccurate to say that this is LLL belief or philosophy.It may not be your experience with LLL but she did say earlier that was her experience dealing with them. Not every LLL is the same.
Again, just like what's described in the OP is not BFHI policy or philosophy.
- 0Aug 14, '11 by Esme12 Senior ModeratorI know thiis splitting hairs but I never said LLL in general, I specifically said
We all have our personal journey's and one journey isn't more right than another journey. I was just my opinion, my experience, my thoughts and I'm sorry if the offended you.....Last edit by Esme12 on Aug 14, '11
- 2Aug 15, '11 by RheeI'm glad to hear that this isn't the typical baby friendly experience. I think breastfeeding is wonderful and there are so many benefits to skin to skin vs. the warmer and rooming in. It seems as though my hospital has taken baby friendly to the extreme, and has interpreted it incorrectly.
I just don't think it's my job to make my patients feel guilty. There's enough in life to feel guilty about without creating more, and there's more to having a child than how you feed him or her. We've just started with this waiver, and I kind of wonder what the fallout will be.
- 2Aug 15, '11 by mamabear85Rhee, would you mind coming back and letting us know how things go? I'm curious if anyone will have a huge issue with signing such a waiver or if there are positive effects all around. Thank you for bringing this up, its obviously a polarizing topic.
- 4Aug 15, '11 by LibraSunCNMIt just seems like this waiver policy will do what it has done in this thread---turn people off of the idea of Baby Friendly, when part of the point of BF is to make hospitals more marketable and attract patients. The administrator who came up with this idea will likely find it backfiring, and have patient complaints, IMHO.
- 1Aug 16, '11 by ischialspinesOur hospital is aiming for baby-friendly as well, and on the whole (on the L&D side), it seems to be having great benefits... especially with the immediate skin-to-skin. I'm seeing mothers that perhaps might not otherwise jump into it really bonding with their babies and it's been great. Of course I don't know what happens really when we get them over to postpartum. We have had some difficulty coordinating roles between departments. I think the "baby-dropping" and squishing is r/t to narcotic pain relief and not so much maternal exhaustion (although moms can surely be exhausted!), and parents need to be supported gently in caring for their babies, and also that babies should NOT be in the bed with mamas when they are taking narcotics! It would be ideal if there was a family member or other support person in the room with mama and baby caring for the couplet.
- 7Aug 16, '11 by rn/writer GuideQuote from ischialspinesWhile that is the ideal, it may not be feasible for families with other children who don't have close friends or relatives able to help them out. If there is no one to take those kids, dad goes home with them and mom is on her own with the new baby. And, too, there are far too many women (some just girls really) who either do not have a committed partner or whose partner won't be staying overnight with them.Our hospital is aiming for baby-friendly as well, and on the whole (on the L&D side), it seems to be having great benefits... especially with the immediate skin-to-skin. I'm seeing mothers that perhaps might not otherwise jump into it really bonding with their babies and it's been great. Of course I don't know what happens really when we get them over to postpartum. We have had some difficulty coordinating roles between departments. I think the "baby-dropping" and squishing is r/t to narcotic pain relief and not so much maternal exhaustion (although moms can surely be exhausted!), and parents need to be supported gently in caring for their babies, and also that babies should NOT be in the bed with mamas when they are taking narcotics! It would be ideal if there was a family member or other support person in the room with mama and baby caring for the couplet.
As for the baby-dropping and baby-squishing, a mom doesn't need narcs to arrive at a state where she no longer remembers her own name. Some of these moms labored for two+ days before delivering. And there are plenty of them who haven't slept comfortably for several weeks before the birth. Add to that the rush of visitors that insist they must see the baby right away before it goes home, and you can end up with a woman who feels drugged even if she isn't.
I just can't see telling any mom she has to keep the baby in her room. That smacks of the same harshness and disrespect that occurred years ago when moms were told they had to leave the babies in the nursery. Neither extreme is right for everyone. And neither edict should be coming from the nurses on the unit.
It makes me really sad to hear about hospitals deliberately eliminating nurseries so that moms will have to have their babies room in. That just doesn't take care of everyone effectively. And it's a dirty trick to play on women who didn't think to ask ahead of time if they'll be able to catch a couple of hours of uninterrupted sleep before they go home.
It's a terrible thing to do to nurses, too. I've heard many of them say they'd be more than willing to give the mom a break except that they have no place to put the baby and no one to watch it.
Do we really have to handle things this way? Or can we be halfway reasonable, provide the proper resources, and trust moms to do what is right for themselves and their babies?Last edit by rn/writer on Aug 17, '11
- 1Aug 17, '11 by ischialspinesYes, that is what I am saying. We certainly have not eliminated our nursery in the process and I don't think we are pressuring anyone into anything they don't want. We do gently give families the support and encouragement they need to continue bf. And having another family member is ideal. I care for a primarily Hispanic population, so most often another support person is there and NOT the FOB. Having cared for many women outside the hospital s narc pain relief (and lots of primips after long labors) I have never seen anyone so exhausted after birth that I was concerned about baby squishing. And if I was, I would certainly intervene! Really, I think the hospital is not the place for recovery and the state of postpartum care (first six weeks total, not hosp stay) in this country is abyssmal. Nut that is a whole 'nother post!