Last edited by Mummasaurus Rex; 23-06-2012 at 22:05.
vile, abhorrent, disgusting, high horses.....need i go on?
to refuse to supply food for a baby is absolutely immoral and i don't know ANY hospital that would intentionally starve a baby just because of an outdated view. breastfeeding is well and truly promoted - any moron who goes through pregnancy knows the pros/cons.
why you are ff is completely irrelevant - if a mother birthed at home then refused to feed her baby she would be investigated by docs and the baby taken away.
imo that is what this thread relates to.
it is 2012, not 1960
To be honest, I'm still not convinced that ff is the "more expensive" way to feed.
Ff involves formula, bottles which can be reused, a sterilizing method (when I had dd it was Milton tabs in a plastic tub) and about 5 minutes for someone to explain the basics to a mum.
BF- you have pumps, you have lessons, specialist consultants, hours of staff dedicated to assisting, medical monitoring in some cases (mastitis etc), creams, breast pads, extra caloric requirements and longer accommodation- nearly all my BF friends stayed 4-5 days in hosp learning how to BF with their first (and some second) bubs.
I think this thread has run its course
its now closed.
Pregnant for the first-time?
Not sure where to start? We can help!
Our Insider Programs for pregnancy first-timers will lead you step-by-step through the 14 Pregnancy Must Dos!