| From: Dannie ® | 15/11/2000
0:34:27 |
| Subject: newborn | post id:
169476 |
| How does a newborn baby instantly
adjust to feeding by mouth when they have only known nourishment through
the umbilical cord? | |
| From: fury ® | 15/11/2000
0:35:58 |
| Subject: re: newborn | post id:
169477 |
| Instinct. | |
| From: WoodGnome <{8^} (Avatar) | 15/11/2000
0:37:55 |
| Subject: re: newborn | post id:
169480 |
| Hi Dannie, the suckle instinct is hardwired into the hominid brain. The baby instinctively suckles when the nipple is placed in the baby's mouth. The baby needs no other consideration for this to occur. Back to the Oak | |
| From: Dannie ® | 15/11/2000
0:38:20 |
| Subject: re: newborn | post id:
169481 |
| Yes that would be it, but where
in the human ake up did this jumpome about? | |
| From: WoodGnome <{8^} (Avatar) | 15/11/2000
0:41:47 |
| Subject: re: newborn | post id:
169484 |
| Hi Dannie, I am not particularly good at this human tongue, could you please translate the following into simpler english but where in the human ake up did this jumpome about? It is not Gnomish, it is not Hamadryadish. Sorry but I do not understand this particular phrase. Back to the Oak, but watching for a translation. | |
| From: WoodGnome <{8^} (Avatar) | 15/11/2000
0:55:26 |
| Subject: re: newborn | post id:
169494 |
| Hi Dannie, the suckle instinct is an ancient mammalian instinct, predating humans by many millions of years. How the mammals discovered their specialised ability for feeding the newborn (and early developing young) using the specialised gland, I am uncertain. The newborn marsupials are hardwired to search above the birth opening for a pouch (a warm foldover section). They search for the nipple inside the pouch. There , the young attach reasonably strongly to the nipple. It is in the pouch that the latter part of marsupial "foetal" development occurs. The marsupial mother aids in the search by not running or jumping around too much. Apart from knowing it is a hardwired component of the mammalian brain, I do not know how it developed nor where in the brain this hardwire instinct exists. Now that the translation has been presented and discussions had, it is Back to the Oak, goodnight all. | |
| From: Minimalist Mum | 15/11/2000
12:02:29 |
| Subject: re: newborn | post id:
169670 |
| Funny then why so many babies are
unable to breast feed. Sure in earlier more primitive times, they may have
been left to die, however ... Many mothers choose not to breastfeed for
social & convenience issues, but many mothers and babies are unable to
breastfeed. When my son was born, he 'latched on' alright (closing his
mouth on the nipple) but would not suck. He quite simply did not have the
sucking instinct ... or he was lazy like his parents. Bottles were much
easier to get milk from for him - requiring much less sucking. Just wanted to let you know that the instinct usually doesnt kick in without a little help from mothers & midwives. MM | |
| From: Pete ® | 15/11/2000
12:13:34 |
| Subject: re: newborn | post id:
169682 |
| Hi MM, That's a thought that I had too. Does anyone know if the other primates have similar breast feeding problems to humans? If so, how do they resolve them? What about in third world nations, where breastfeeding is the only baby feeding option? | |
| From: Purple ® | 15/11/2000
12:24:14 |
| Subject: re: newborn | post id:
169692 |
| MM - I have to disagree. I think
most babies are able to feed. We've been given an easy way out with
formulas, so the effort that is sometimes required, is not put in. I am pro breastfeeding, but if a mum chooses to bottle feed I'm not down on her. If a woman is not relaxed and confident, it's really hard work. I had a neighbour, whose doctor was sending her breast milk away for testing. Testing for what? The milk she had in the jar was watery and grey, and she was worried that it didn't look like milk. We are not cows. Our milk doesn't look like cows milk, and breastmilk comes in all kinds from watery grey to thick creamy yellow. It changes consistency throughout a feeding session too. As someone mentioned, in third world countries, bottle feeding is not an option, and so all babies are breastfed. The babies spend a huge amount of time on the breast, and this assists with milk production. It's only us westerners who have a need to stick to a four hourly feeding regime, and this is an unnatural way for a baby to be fed, especially in the first 6 weeks or so. *end soap box mode* | |
| From: Minimalist Mum | 15/11/2000
13:34:05 |
| Subject: re: newborn | post id:
169789 |
| hi purple, interesting - australia has one of the higher rates of breastfeeding in the western world. In the UK where my son was born the 'breast is best' campaign had made little headway. I (as explained elsewhere) had very little experience with or exposure to babies. I had never considered *not* breast feeding - unfortunately it was not to be. In the NHS hospital where he was born, there was 2 midwives to 20 new mothers and 1 assistant nurse in the ward. We had no support in our struggles to feed and i honestly believe that if a bottle had not been offered he would have been in serious trouble. 30 hours after he was born he had still not eaten, was hysterial with hunger and frustration and whenever he stopped crying for long enough or opened his mouth wide enough we were shoving the breast in.... GREAT way to encourage babies to feed. A friend who gave birth here last week has already had numerous visits from a lactation consultant... gee - that would have been nice. But many women struggle to feed & this has nothing to do with thinking we are cows or not! i believe that women are given very high and sometimes unreasonable expectations by the campaign Breast is Best (which btw i agree with) but mothers who cant breastfeed are made to feel incredibly guilty, incompetent and/or selfish. | |
| From: Purple ® | 15/11/2000
13:47:03 |
| Subject: re: newborn | post id:
169803 |
| Well they shouldn't. Whatever is
best for the mother is best for the baby. My point was (supposed to be anyway) that we are told we can't feed ergo (is that a word?) we can't feed. My first mother-in-law is a midwife, and after having her constantly telling me my breasts were too small (or some such thing) I lost all confidence and gave in to the bottle (for him not me). When the next child came, I'd read and prepared myself enough to say bugger you all, I'm doing it! That particular child was fed every 2 hours for a few weeks, he was like a leech, but we did it. My sister chose from early pregnancy not to breastfeed, and I respect her decision. If she were forced to do it (as they tried in the hospital) she would've been miserable and consequently had a miserable baby. | |
| From: fq | 15/11/2000
17:19:20 |
| Subject: re: newborn | post id:
170010 |
| Re: Labour analagesia: effects on
breast feeding..........I've searched the recent midwives conference
proceedings for the paper and it unfortunately wasn't published there, but
the author is Angela Smith, a lactation consultant from King George V
Hospital in Sydney. Her literature review included many other studies,
which said the same thing Certainly is very obvious in my experience. The difference is outstanding. Because where I work we don't give any pain relief unless labour is not progressing normally I am always amazed at how readily and eagerly the newborn goes to the breast. It's the same almost every time. About 10 minutes after birth it's as if a light has gone on and the baby opens its mouth and roots, when the breast is offered they immediately attach, another miracle. If that moment is missed it is often 24 hours or so until the baby has recovered from the birth to be interested again. Another good reason to not separate mother and baby. | |