Monday 29 December 2008

If Facebook deleted your photo...

.
...as they did with the one above... please consider sending it here.
.
It's a women's rights site, and is collecting the photos and health education posters that have been deleted. You can make a personal statement about the photo. They only have a few on there at the moment. As I think it's an important component of social history, to record such details of lactaphobic censorship, I'd ask you to send your photos and pass the message on to others.
.
So far, many of them, like my second deleted photo from today, were only posted under 'friends only' or in the M.I.L.C. action site. Therefore it's a reasonable assumption, that trollers are making their way through the M.I.L.C. site and reporting photos.
.
Email your photos to info@tera.ca
.
As a ps... the poster from yesterday appears to be from a cohort of breastfeeding organisations in Argentina. I've also been told that currently, Brazil has a major billboard campaign running for breast cancer awareness, involving many shots of different sized and shaped breasts. No doubt the Brazilian children so exposed, will suffer serious sexual trauma their whole lives! And hopefully no breast cancer! :-)

Sunday 28 December 2008

Censored, by Facebook

.


This photo is obscene. So obscene, it was deleted off my Facebook profile photo album, and I was issued with a warning. Does this photo, clearly part of a Government/health agency campaign to protect breastfeeding, look obscene to you?
.
Does the mother look obscene to you? Engaging in a sex act? Evoking an erotic response?
.
Does this one...?
.
.
She hasn't been deleted, as of yet.
.
EDIT: Jan 2009. The Virgin Mary was then deleted! If you check the Tera site, you'll find close up of two Virgin Mary paintings, including this one, was deleted by Facebook as obscene...
.
Why was the first mother deleted? She was deleted as Facebook have stated that photos showing aureole or nipple, are obscene. A full breast shot it obscene. Regardless of context. There has been a huge protest about this, as Facebook have been deleting family photos out of personal albums on Facebook, with no warning. The protest was organised by mothers who had had their pictures removed. There was an online virtual nurse-in yesterday, on Facebook, and a physical one outside the Facebook headquarters in California.
.
Online, people were asked to post breastfeeding photos in their profile, and to add the status line "Hey Facebook, breastfeeding is not obscene."
.
Many of us online, ended up in free and frank exchanges of views with our own online friends, and in the protest forums. Free and frank exchanges of view aren't a problem. Most lactavists, remember when they too thought breastfeeding was a lifestyle choice, and formula was benign and held no health risks to infants. We remember being duped by the hegemony too! And how hard it is to unthink formula dominant culture.
.
Also, during the day, interesting things happened. Posted comments started to appear without their profile photo, and accounts had been frozen. In short, photos were being deleted off accounts, by Facebook, as the day progressed.
.
When I'd started posting, I'd had a series of about 5 photos, I was cycling through. The first one above, was one of them. Then, I read the link that Facebook had stated that it was aureole, or full breast that was offensive. I changed by photo to number two up there - the Virgin Mary with a fully naked breast. Commissioned by the Catholic Church, to hang in a Catholic Church.
.
I left this one there. Unchanged, for the rest of the day. Still there, in fact, as I type this.
.
I didn't think they'd delete the Virgin Mary, and I felt that made a point.
.
So, you can imagine my surprise, when logging back in today, I found that the first picture above, had been deleted out of my profile album. The first picture above, shows LESS breast than the second one.
.
What's the difference between them? Why is one still up, and the other in the rubbish basket?
.
Because someone complained about photo one, and no one has complained about photo two.
.
Seriously.
.
Now, let's think about that for a moment. A *huge* number of breastfeeding photos were deleted off Facebook yesterday and today. *HUGE* One might imagine all of them following a complaint...
.
Who was complaining?
.
Who, on a protest against censorship of breastfeeding, has gone around and complained, vigorously, about breastfeeding photos. Answer: quite a lot of people. (To judge by the amount of deletions.)
.
Lactaphobes. Misogynists. Mean as skimmed milk morons who get their kicks by acting important and feeling powerful... by complaining about a breastfeeding photo!
.
But that's not what really worries me. World is full of sad and inadequate people, trying their best to feel validated in any small way. Not to mention stupid and small minded ones.
.
It's the internet. You expect morons and inadequates.
.
What worries me about this... is that Facebook is standing by such bullying. Lactaphobia is a prejudice. An unreasonable, knee jerk reaction, to a specific set of people. It's harassment, and bullying.
.
And Facebook is not only condoning it, it's carrying it out on behalf of its account holders. It's set mothers and babies up for discrimination, and then acted out on the base impulses of its user group.
.
"Nothing to do with us!" they will say. "Photo broke rules, someone complained, we deleted it."
.
No matter what it was, and how clearly it is not obscene.
.
And the surge in deletions, no doubt from a surge in complaints, on the day of a protest against censorship, has no bearing, Facebook? Just like the fact that the photo you deleted is clearly a health education poster? Huh? .
.
Blind.
.
Blind prejudice.
.
Blind lactaphobia.
.
At an online community near you.
.
Being enforced by the company making money from social networking. Using their profits, to pay people, to bully those seeking to protect breastfeeding.
.
Wouldn't it be sweet, if that poster up there, suddenly appeared everywhere on Facebook? It's still on several profiles, and in several albums. Only my personally complained about one is gone. Got a Facebook account....? Click and save on the above image! :-)
.
On another note - do you recognise the poster? Any idea where it came from? It looks like a scan from a print source, so it may be quite old. If you have any idea where this one is from, and who produced it, which country it appeared in, please contact me.  (EDIT - from Argentina!  How to breastfeed leaflet.)
.
I aim to let Facebook know exactly who they deleted, and which Government (likely) sponsored it.
.
This one, just as obscene, was sponsored by the Norwegian Government:

Go Norway!
.
Now, how can we persuade Norway to open up a Facebook account and post a profile picture...?








.
Edit: This is the photograph that was deleted from Facebook in 2007, that started the entire protest.
.
Can you see a fully exposed breast? Or can you just see the lactaphobe, lurking in the background, with their finger on the all powerful 'delete' button?
.

Wednesday 24 December 2008

Merry Christmas Janipher


Janipher Maseko has been granted indefinite leave to remain. This means that, finally, after nearly 6 years of claiming asylum, she can get on with her life. It also means that Collin and Chantelle, both born here, can now apply for British passports in a few years time, and lose their 'stateless' status and become fully legible human beings, as opposed to shadow children.
.
To all those who helped in this fight, first of all to reunite Collin with his mother's breast, and then to keep them safe and secure...
.
Thank
You!
.
... a fuller update to follow...

Sunday 21 December 2008

The Christmas Posts

There are two posts from last year, that may be useful to you as the holiday season really kicks off.
.
One addresses the thorny issue of going out and drinking alcohol whilst breastfeeding. It can be found here.
.
The other, was written in response to a Mum being tutted at whilst her breastfeeding baby fed in Church. It's a vignette on the Christmas story, and can be found here. Nothing seems to have changed on the need for such stories... and as local newspaper links seem to die quite quickly, I'm going to archive the full text of this article below. But do go to the original site whilst it works - and have a read of 'the usual' lactaphobic comments.
.
- - -

Breastfeeding mum slams woman for her insults in cathedral

AN Exeter mother has spoken out after being insulted for breastfeeding her baby at a church service.

Nicola Wood, 27, from the city centre, said she was hurt and angered by the rude remarks made by a woman during a Christmas carol service at Exeter Cathedral.

She said: "I was at the cathedral with a friend and her baby, listening to the music, which was beautiful.

"My little boy Theo, who is six months old, was getting hungry, so I started to breastfeed him, but all I could hear was a woman a few pews back moaning and saying, 'oh my God, how disgusting'.

"It ruined the whole service for me. Then she came up to me at the end of the service and said, 'as long as this cathedral has been open I have never seen anyone as disgusting as you in church. You might as well have been naked and peeing in the church'.

"She said it was the most disrespectful thing in the world and that I was disgusting for feeding my baby, but breastfeeding is the most natural, God-given way of feeding a child, and I was very discreet about it. What she said was so unchristian."

Nicola added that several other women who heard the conversation offered support.

"A woman said to me not to listen to the other woman. She said my baby was gorgeous and that he made her smile. Other mothers come up to us as well, saying how well behaved the children were and how wonderful it was to see young people at the cathedral.

"What that woman did really annoys me. I'm quite religious, and it is only recently I have been trying church again. You can see why snooty-nosed women like this put a barrier between you and God.

"I am going to write to the Dean. I'm really hurt."

Tracey Bailey, a health visitor and breast feeding trainer for Devon Primary Care Trust, said the public should support and encourage mothers who breastfeed.

"I am really sad to hear what happened to Nicola," she said.

"There are numerous health benefits in breastfeeding, for both mother and child, and it is the best and most natural way to feed your baby.

"In my experience, a lot of mums are concerned about breastfeeding in public, but for the majority they are able to do it without any problems.

"Soon there is going to be the New Equality Bill, which will legally protect breastfeeding in public. It will make it illegal for anybody to undermine breastfeeding in public.

"We need to raise awareness that people should be supportive of breastfeeding mothers.

"I'm sure Jesus was breastfed and all the old paintings always show Mary breastfeeding Jesus

- - -

Tuesday 2 December 2008

World AIDS Day & HIV mothers in the UK

Last year, on World AIDS day, I commented on the statistics released by WHO, that breastfeeding whilst HIV positive, actually saved more babies than using formula, in most resource poor countries. That's if the mother has received no treatment at all, and is still actively being affected by the virus. Simply, formula feeding kills more babies, than unrestrained HIV replication in the mother's milk.
.
Most people are quite shocked to hear this. There is still enough phobia and prejudice around HIV (and woman and their diseased and infective bodies that drip contaminated fluids) that most people have a knee jerk fear of thinking about breastfeeding and HIV. This effect is amplified by the concurrent culture that sees formula feeding as safe and ultimately benign. Breastfeeding is always sacrificed on the altar of this combined ignorance: the dangers of the female body on one side, and the safety of the formula bottle on the other. Cow's milk, ripped out of over producing and engorged udders in factory-farmed conditions, then altered and modified in vast vats that are impossible to keep from bacterial contamination: dried to powder and then played about with ingredients not controlled or tested on human infants, pushed into tubs and sold at huge profits, with little to no awareness of the ingredient list, or how much contamination has taken place in the factory: is seen as a safer and more sensible solution than giving a baby its mother's milk.
.
Yet, as we've seen, less babies die from their mother's HIV infected milk, than do from formula feeding in resource poor countries. Where bottle culture, poor water supplies, lack of hygiene and poverty, will kill over 15% of babies being formula fed. The transmission rate for HIV in breastmilk, without treatment, stands at 4%.
.
What makes these facts even more shocking, in terms of looking at the prejudice on HIV and breastfeeding, is the transmission rate on HIV to the baby, if the mother is receiving proper anti-retro virals. That transmission rate is... zero. 0%.
.
I'll say that again. If a mother is receiving proper anti-viral treatment, during her pregnancy and breastfeeding.. the transmission rate to the baby of HIV, is a statistical zero percent.
.
In other words, HIV isn't transmitted to the baby enough times to even make it onto the figures. Figures that have over 15% deaths for formula feeding, but have no recorded transmissions of HIV to the baby.
.
Which brings me not to resource poor countries, where mothers aren't getting proper anti-retro virals. Not to resource poor countries where to bottle feed, is to invite death into your baby's crib. Not to areas where water is always a long way away, and not that clean to to start with.
.
It brings me to the UK. To HIV positive mothers here, in the UK, being told they cannot breastfeed. Being terrified that if they choose to do so, they will be reported to Child Protection Services, and their baby will be removed from them. Being told that formula feeding is the only safe option.
.
All of whom, are in receipt of full anti-retral viral treatment, free of charge. All of whom are regularly monitored for viral load and growth, and who are receiving the best standard of HIV care the world can offer.
.
All of whom are told, as standard, not to breastfeed.
.
None of whom, are told, as standard, that the ARVs they take, protect their baby if they breastfeed. None of whom are told that they can also choose to express their milk, heat treat it at home, and feed it to their baby if they want to be completely and absolutely certain they are not exposing the baby to HIV at any level. A simple, cheap and easy solution that has been designed to be safe in mud huts in villages - more than achievable by a Mum in her own modern kitchen.
.
None of whom are told that formula feeding, raises the risks of serious illness in their baby over their baby's entire adult life. That is raises the risk of cancers, diabetes, heart problems, sleep apnoea... well, you now the list. Formula feeding increases health risks; it's not news.
.
So, all these mothers, sitting there, doing 'their best' by their baby... completely unaware of the range of choices open to them. Completely unaware of the statistics and stresses and risks that can affect their babies... being told to formula feed despite the fact that at base, that doesn't make very good scientific sense. At base, it's a tricksy decision. It's a complex decision, requiring attention being paid to several fluid and interwoven factors. And that decision, and those factors, are reduced in the UK to... HIV positive mothers should formula feed. End of.
.
If you were HIV positive, would that blanket statement, depriving you and your baby of a chance of a fulfilling breastfeeding relationship, make you happy? Would you be happy not knowing that even if you didn't want to take the risk of actual breastfeeding, you could make sure your baby had your milk, and not cow's milk? Would you feel cared for in the NHS, if this was presented as your only option?
.
No, I wouldn't either.
.
But I tell you, at least I'd not be looking at my baby having a significant increase in its risk of death, an immediate and direct death, by this advice. And in that, in the UK, I'm a very lucky. For at least, in the UK, as a citizen, with rights, I'd know that if I did formula feed my baby, I wouldn't be contributing to its death later on, in a few months time. I'd have the luxury of knowing that formula feeding was as safe for my baby as I could make it.
.
Not so, all HIV positive mothers in the UK. Not so at all. There is a special group of HIV positive women in the UK, who are being consigned to their own private hell, over our HIV and breastfeeding policy - and that's mothers at risk of deportation. Mothers who have asked to be considered for refugee status as they've endured torture and persecution in the countries they have fled. Mothers deprived of all status and standing in UK society, whilst their claim is assessed. Many of them also deprived of hope. These mothers, who birth here in the UK, are on ARVs. Their milk is already as safe as it can be. And they are on deportation lists, for countries where formula feeding is so dangerous, that the WHO advice is for them to breastfeed - even if they are not on ARVs. Breastfeed at all costs.
.
Do we advise them to breastfeed? Do we look at their case for recognition of refugee status, recognise that they are on the short list to deportation, and that they are likely being deported to regions where formula feeding kills babies at the rate of 4000 per day? Do we then advise them accordingly, and point out that if they are deported, then the baby needs to be breastfeeding... and support them in establishing breastfeeding?
.
Do we hell as like. We tell them to formula feed. They're in the UK currently, no matter where they are heading out to - they formula feed. End of.
.
To then add insult to injury, we make the formula feeding as difficult as possible for them. We deprive them of proper income, and deny them the right to earn any money for themselves. We stick them on vouchers, in hostels, and expect them to live on income levels far far below that of Income Support, the catch all safety net benefit for those of us with citizenship, or status.
.
There is a mnemonic phrase to sum up the equating decision for when formula feeding is considered, especially as a replacement with HIV positive mothers - it's AFASS. Is replacement feeding:
.
* Acceptable?
* Feasible?
* Affordable?
* Sustainable?
* Safe?
.
In resource poor areas, the AFASS equation is vital in determining how a mother should feed her baby. Have a look at how detailed and thorough the WHO/Unicef training pack is for it. The results are pretty simple - if AFASS is applied, and replacement feeding is not shown to tick all the AFASS boxes.. the mother should breastfeed.
.
Well, an interesting thing happens if you apply AFASS to HIV mothers in the UK, awaiting deportation. AFASS requires they... breastfeed. And that's not just because they are going to a resource poor country, where the formula feeding fails in situ. It's also because AFASS determines breastfeeding, over formula... in the UK. You just have to look at one area - affordable. Whilst it shouldn't be happening at all, some mothers and babies in the UK, are left literally penniless in the streets because of our Immigration policy. Just last week, I was told of a mother and toddler, left stranded because the mother had had refugee status granted, and therefore her NASS vouchers stopped. But she didn't have the paperwork yet for Social Services support, and was left with no money. Her toddler was admitted to hospital for malnutrition - the child had had nothing but watery porridge for a few days. The mother hadn't eaten at all, for the same period.
.
In the UK.
.
Talk to any Church, or support organisation, and hear the tales of the mothers and children being fed by them, and some sleeping on Church floors. Does formula feeding survive AFASS scrutiny under these conditions? You bet your bottom dollar it doesn't. Mothers on NASS vouchers struggle to buy enough formula, and regularly water it down and try to fill it out with other things. Just as all mothers do, on low-incomes.. they don't understand the risks. With HIV positive mothers, this poses even more risk to the babies - for formula fed babies do contract HIV from their mothers, especially if the mother is introducing solids early. Introducing solids early, is a classic way to defer formula costs.
.
And in an irony of all damned ironies... most of these mothers are sent out of the country via Yarl's Wood. A detention centre that can run out of formula and feed a baby oral hydration solution instead! A detention centre where mothers are prevented from making safe feeds in their own rooms at night! A detention centre that doesn't pass AFASS!!!!
.
It's almost a sick joke, isn't it? Take an HIV positive pregnant woman. Treat her with ARVs, and give her excellent HIV care. Tell her to formula feed and don't inform her there are other options. Don't give her the financial support she needs to buy enough formula. Don't give her the living conditions she needs to prepare the formula safely. Lock her up in Yarl's Wood, and prevent her from making fresh formula safely in her own room at night. One morning, put her on a plane, and deposit her and baby, in a resource poor country, with no stocks of clean water or formula to get her through. Just deposit her and her formula fed baby, at the airport, and walk away.
.
And hope what.. she can relactate somehow on the plane? That standing at the airport, with a hungry baby in her arms, she can rush out and buy formula and make it safely? That she can now also afford the ARVs she needs to keep herself alive?
.
This is UK policy. This is what we do with HIV positive mothers in this country. This is what we do with HIV mothers who are on deportation lists.
.
Think it's good enough? No, neither do I.
.
HIV and breastfeeding is a huge issue. It is complex, it is ever changing. This post was about the updated statement from WABA, on World Aids Day, on AFASS and HIV and Breastfeeding. A statement that says that...
.
At six months, if replacement feeding is still not acceptable, feasible, affordable, sustainable and safe, continuation of breastfeeding with additional complementary foods is recommended, while the mother and baby continue to be regularly assessed.
.
... which is a change in policy. Prior to this release, both WHO and Unicef recommended breastfeeding cease at six months. This position is no longer supportable, as seen by the update.
.
But it's too easy to read the report, any report on HIV and breastfeeding, and think it's a problem that is happening somewhere else. We are a global village. The mother standing behind you in the queue in Tescos, with formula tins in her basket, may be buying it as she's been told to as she's HIV positive. She may also be on a plane, with her formula fed baby, next week, and dumped in a country where the baby's chances of surviving on formula are very slim indeed. Where if she'd birthed in that country, she'd have been told to breastfeed to protect her baby's health.
.
She may also be safe in staying in this country, as she's got a passport. But she's still using formula as she's HIV positive, and no one is listening to her pain over not being able to breastfeed. She reads about formula risks, but she knows formula is better than starving her baby... but every bottle cuts her to the quick. She feels she's failed in the Mum test - she's a living danger to her baby. She may not choose to breastfeed if you told her the ratio of risks, and the protecting effects of the ARVs she takes every day. She may not be able to hack expressing and pasteurising her milk. She may still be on formula, if you tell her what her options are... but at least it would have been her choice. Her informed choice.
.
And she may choose to breastfeed. She may choose to express and bottle feed her own heat treated milk. and she deserves our support in doing it. She deserves the support of her medical and social support agencies, operating from facts, not fear. She needs us to acknowledge that her feeding options are many, and not locked into the commercial pressures of formula companies and their needs for profit at all costs. (Those same formula companies promoting their formula as the 'HIV answer' in resource poor countries, despite the much higher death tolls.)
.
We need to get this straight. We need to pay attention to HIV and breastfeeding. We need to empower mothers to care for their babies, and to protect them. We need to stop sending out blanket messages about formula feeding and HIV, and actually pay attention to the science.
.
You could start by writing your MP, and asking them to justify the DoH advice on HIV and formula feeding, especially to those mothers under threat of deportation. This country either needs to support mothers in breastfeeding if they are under threat of deportation, or it needs to promise not to deport any formula fed baby under two years of age to a formula danger area. It's not rocket science - just common sense. Writing your MP has proven to be a very effective way of raising issues, and something that just about everyone can do. For those who truly struggle to formulate a letter, I've appended a draft at the bottom of this page. Write your MP - annoy them. That's what they are there for. They're paid to listen to your concerns, and to raise issues, and respond to you - use them!
.
You can also raise awareness by setting people straight when you hear people discuss HIV and breastfeeding. Let them know heat treating exists, is proven, is cheap, is under the control of the mother... and there's no need for formula unless the mother wishes it. Talk about the formula deaths, and how ARVs can be seen as a safe pathway to breastfeeding. Discuss facts, not fears. Talk openly about how heat treated human milk is a viable option, in AIDS orphanages, rather than formula. (Empower local women to be paid for producing human milk for human babies rather than spending money rewarding cows in some other country!) Of course HIV presents huge challenges to breastfeeding worldwide - but as a race, we're really good at coming up with huge solutions to huge challenges... as long as the need for profit doesn't stomp people into the ground. As long as fear of being human...of having a body that can carry disease... doesn't block out all ratonal thought.
.
I'll leave the final words on this to Pamela Morrison, Co-ordinator WABA Breastfeeding and HIV Task Force:
.
In the context of HIV exclusive breastfeeding during the first 3 months of life followed by continued partial breastfeeding for 15-18 months has been shown to reduce breastfeeding-associated transmission of HIV to 5-7% (a reduction of 60% compared to previous estimates of risk during mixed breastfeeding) and to reduce young child mortality due to HIV and other infections to ~2% in circumstances where underlying infant mortality may be as high as 20% and where formula-feeding has been shown to provide no HIV-free survival advantage. A recent large study from South Africa shows a 4% risk of transmission over 6 months of exclusive breastfeeding, achieved by 83% of the mothers recruited into the study. Thus, exclusive breastfeeding for the first half-year of life provides dramatic protection against all causes of infant morbidity and mortality, including HIV, and research published subsequent to early recommendations clearly shows that previous estimates of HIV-transmission during any "breastfeeding" can be dramatically reduced.
.
Recommendations that HIV-infected mothers should be supported in a choice not to breastfeed need to be viewed against the backdrop of women’s vulnerability, aggravated by the harsh biological, economic and social realities in countries suffering from poverty and inadequate resources where the potential for commercial exploitation of this tragedy is self-evident. Taken together, high HIV prevalence, loss of confidence in breastfeeding, and provision of free supplies of formula, sometimes exceeding need, have the potential to destroy the cultural breastfeeding norm in communities whose babies most need its protection, and contribute to “spillover” into the uninfected population.
.
Safe feeding decisions cannot be made without up-to-date information, and should not be framed as an option when the consequences may impact on a baby’s survival. Infants have the right to be fed in the way that maximizes their chances of good health and survival. Mothers have an entitlement to receive clear medical advice about the safest way to feed their babies in the face of their personal living conditions and locally prevailing risk factors. Failure to provide appropriate information, while promoting private maternal rights over public infant health, leaves babies at risk for exploitation by the infant food industry.
.
.
.
Dear MP,
.
I'm writing to register my unease over the UK's current policy of supporting HIV positive mothers, and their babies, who are locked into the asylum system. It's come to my attention, that we advise HIV positive mothers, under threat of deportation, to formula feed. and then we deport them and their babies to areas where the WHO and Unicef advice is to breastfeed, even if HIV positive. The death toll from inappropriate formula feeding practices being several times higher than the HIV transmission rate from breastfeeding. Surely this is an inhumane policy? If we are deporting HIV positive mothers, to areas where they are advised to breastfeed to support their infant's health, surely we should support them in breastfeeding? I'd appreciate your own thoughts on this matter.
.
Would it be possible for you to obtain official figures for me, on how many babies are being deported from the UK, on formula versus breastfeeding? And which countries these formula fed babies are being deported to? I'm eager to understand how many mothers from the UK, are deported whilst breastfeeding, versus formula feeding. This is in isolation to the HIV issue. Although if there are figures about how many HIV positive mothers are deported, with their babies being formula fed, every year, I would be interested in seeing them.
.
Many thanks
.
your constituent...

Monday 1 December 2008

Festive Baubles - buy a calender! Buy Two!

.
When working out your finances this month, and deciding you can buy yourself a present after all.. after all, you are the centre of your family's world.. you are the engine that drives your family... you deserve the cheer... consider gifting yourself a couple of breastfeeding calenders. Everyone needs to look at nice images to cheer themselves up. Most people need to know the date... and most if us need somewhere to write down that we should be somewhere, sometime, something important. So a calender is usually something we could all use.
.
Most of us also want to contribute to the world around us, and buying a calender from an organisation that uses the money to support babies, and breastfeeding, is A Good Thing. So here's my guide to where you can get your breastfeeding calenders from, and why you should buy these ones!
.
First of all, a good breastfeeding calender is more than pretty pictures and a set of dates. Photographs are a moment in time, and every year, calender committees sit and argue out who and what should be included this year. Their decisions are always interesting, and always say something; they set out to show us where breastfeeding is 'at' that year. Sometimes, when I view the calenders, I swear I can hear the ruckus that went on behind the scenes! I commend you to the opening picture here - last year's October in the Australian Breastfeeding Association calender - and ask you to ponder with me for a moment, what sort of hell and high water discussions must have gone on to include this startling, wonderful and gorgeous photo! How many matrons must have fainted, when presented with a pink haired Mama feeding her older baby over the top! ABA - I applaud you! This photo is just a wonder, and I for one am very glad that whoever wanted it in, won the debate.
.
Lest you think this year's crop from Australia cannot compete with the wonder of last year - this one here is currently my favourite of 2009. All together everyone... aaahhh. :-)
.
And yes, I do have an actual paper copy of October 2008. And yes, it will be being put in a proper frame as soon as I can afford it. And no, you can't have it.
.
See, you really do need to buy these beauties on your own, in time!
.
The one calender that everyone needs to buy, no matter where they are in the Globe, is the IBFAN calender. The International Baby Food Action Network, is the core defence for babies worldwide, on infant feeding issues. They fight to protect breastfeeding, and breastfeeding babies, and to keep as safe as possible babies being fed formula. The work they do is both immense, and totally underfunded and undervalued. Every year they produce a stunning quality, cheap to buy, breastfeeding calender on a global scale. Most of the main breastfeeding support organisations only sell the IBFAN calender, and you can purchase it in your own geographical area, from the local region IBFAN office.
.
The main suppliers in the UK and Europe, are Baby Milk Action. For North America, go to INFACT Canada. For other areas, go to the IBFAN group map.
.

.Some of the groups, such as Baby Milk Action, will also offer you last year's calender for under half price. Think about this - if you buy it, you get 12 superb photographs/posters, very very cheaply. You up profits on previous print runs, and you free up storage space. Know anyone pregnant? Giving any talks or peer group meetings? How often have you thought "I could use a nice picture now, to pin to this wall whilst people file past..." Buy last year's calender. If all else fails, it's excellent wrapping paper for a maternity gift!

You will get a lovely warm glow inside... and 12 superb posters. And no, there isn't a big black box on them - that's just for the internet!

The message here, today, is... if you can only afford one calender... buy the IBFAN one. Every penny you spend, will be used wisely, and well. How often can you say that?

Other areas, and regions, also produce their own breastfeeding calenders. My searching found two lovely ones, both in the USA. Unfortunately, my searching hasn't yet found out how to buy them! I actually did the research on this a few weeks back, and found that New Mexico, and Sonomo Country California, hold competitions etc, on putting together their next year's calender. So I can show you images of the 2009 from both...

But neither site have let us into the secret of how to purchase them yet..
.

Although New Mexico now has an eddress to contact!.

.There are much more gift options available, of course, than simply buying yourself a stunning calender. Baby Milk Action does a wide range of postcards, t-shirts, mugs, magnets and cotton shopping bags, all in support of defending babies and their health. One of the most thoughtful gifts I received this year, personally, was someone who sent me a mug from Baby Milk Action, as a thank you. I felt warm and touchy feely and acknowledged, and thrilled that the same gift went in protecting babies too. It's a lot of bang for very little buck.

.

The holiday season is a time for giving - give yourself something nice to look at for the entire year. If all else fails, give one to someone who is giving you grief about breastfeeding! Many an office wall will look the better for having the IBFAN calender proudly displayed! ;-)

Wednesday 26 November 2008

La Leche League Update

No matter how hard we worked at it, we couldn't get the above pic in on good resolution, when I made this post. So here it is, as a huge ps!

Tuesday 25 November 2008

The BBC, promoting Fear & Misinformation...

When I got the call to go watch Doctors, as it had a bit about breastfeeding in it, today, I said I wasn't going to watch it. I've given up expecting anything but incompetence from this shoddy drama. I won't bore you with the details, but shall we say it's not been known to be very factually accurate, or breastfeeding friendly.
.
Well, I ended up watching it, and even I was beggared by what came up.
.
A conversation from a GP to a patient, in England:
.
GP: Did you know it's illegal to interrupt a Mum and baby breastfeeding these days?
.
Mum: Yes, I know. But that's only up to six months. He's 7 months old now, no help for me. I can be done under public indecency you know?
.
GP: No!!
.
Yes, no! This is complete codswallop! Total and complete mumbojumbomyth. The very myth that sparked a huge panic earlier in the year. You cannot be done for public indecency when breastfeeding in public.
.
If this was any other channel, you could complain to OFCOM, under the Accuracy rules. But it's the BBC, you have to complain to the BBC, about the BBC.
.
And I've just spent 20 minutes trying to let them know about how inaccurate their info was, and how much harm they have done, and how they must retract the info now. But no one wanted to know. I even got a nice man on the phone to phone INTO the editorial unit that OFCOM stated I need to speak too... but no one wanted to know. The usual fill in a form... we'll get to it.
.
So if you are angry about this, you will have to follow the BBC in how to complain to the BBC, about the BBC.
.
Sound rigorous to you?
.
Phone 03700 100 222 or web email.
.
I've highlighted two aspects - factual inaccuracy over the Sex Discrimination Bill. This is presumably what they meant by 'illegal to interrupt' comment as it's England. They presumably mean the measure whereby you can sue if you are discriminated in supplying goods and services, because you are breastfeeding. This is a civil action, and there is no time limit on the age of the baby, as there is no time limit on maternity provision. But it's not illegal to do it - you can just be sued for it afterwards! So the six months thing is really damaging. The other is raising that breastfeeding in public is not illegal, and does not come under the Public Indecency laws as they stated.
.
Honestly, such complete rubbish, going out prime time to Mums! Arrgghhh!!!!!! Although at least they shot themselves in the foot by saying it is illegal... they can hardly claim they meant something in the upcoming Single Equalities Bill... when they stated it _was_ illegal. And that would be the Single Equalities Bill that doesn't mention breastfeeding in it...
.
Hands up who bets they'll say "We're sorry we got it wrong, but it's what people think and it's important in a drama to say what people think and it was a nice positive story about breastfeeding so it doesn't matter, does it?" And they'll say all that in about 4 months time...
.

Wednesday 12 November 2008

Be A Star - Update

.
My blog is a year old! :-) I couldn't be happier that my sorta anniversary post is this one!
.

Back in March, I did a post on the Be A Star campaign. I felt it was one of the best designed, and well founded breastfeeding awareness campaigns I'd ever seen. Read the original post, for why I feel it's such a 'vital' campaign.

.

.
As the campaign has grown, it's spread into other health trust areas, who have produced their 'own' breastfeeding Mums in new posters. All continuing the theme of photographing breastfeeding Mums and their babies, as glamorous yet individual 'stars'.
.

.

Be A Star is currently undertaking an evaluation, to take stock of how effective the campaign has been. The results will be analysed and used to determine if the 'buzz' created by the posters, leaflets, radio ads etc, has been effective in actually encouraging, or sustaining, breastfeeding.

.

As part of the evaluation, there is a survey is for anyone who has seen the campaign. It's one page long, and takes approx 2 minutes to complete. You can find it here. It's vital that health campaigns are assessed rigorously for evidence of their results - and it's not just that people already converted 'like' them. So if you saw the campaign, even only through the blog and then went and looked at the website, please fill in a survey. Do your bit! There is actually a category for seeing the campaign on a website, or blog, so the internet exposure element will be assessed too. :-)

Tuesday 4 November 2008

Just Call Me Daisy - voting opens

I told you about Just Call Me Daisy in August.
.
It's an online book, a collection of breastfeeding stories and poems, written by Mums.
.
The project is complete, and now is up for voting for publication.
.
So there's a lot of online reading, that's fun, enjoyable, illuminating and inspirational.
.
And a voting form if you are so inclined. (It contains two poems from me, so I'm not actually asking you to vote, just telling you you can. :-)
.
The site is a bit complicated, if you're a Net newbie. So this is what you need to do:
.
.
It takes you to the facing page of 'the book'. On the RIGHT hand side, there is a "Start Reading" column. This is a long box, with the original story listed, and several others underneath. There are two pale blue triangles above, and below, this box. Press the bottom one, to allow the titles of all 30 stories to scroll up and down. If you see one you'd like to read, hit the lilac "read it" button.
.
A new page, containing that story, or poem, opens up.
.
The stories are submitted directly by mothers. There is no editing or control. There is no making sure they are 'on message'. Each one is a little slice of life. Together, they illuminate the realities of the struggle to breastfeed successfully, in a culture that is bottle led. In a culture that is not supportive of breastfeeding. You'll gnash your teeth at the litany of failure on behalf of family and medical support staff, as mothers were encouraged to 'give up'. You'll thrill when someone says...
.
In walks my Angel, a midwife who had come to give me my intrevenous antibiotics and turned out to be my angel. My mum told her why i was upset and she came back in the room with a knitted breast and a doll. She gave me a few tips and explained how the baby stimulates the milk and just because i couldn't hold baby i could still feed. LAYING DOWN! So when my baby woke for his next feed we buzzed this amazing lady who came back and showed my mum how to help put my baby boy to my breast then i fed him laying down and squeezed in a lovely cuddle. AMAZING x For the next few days my mum and my husband helped latched my beautifull boy on and i fed laying down. Breast Breast BREAST by Saribo*
.
You'll ignore the housework as you just want to read one more.
.
If you want to vote for this book, you need to sign in. It's only your eddress and a password. There is then a BLUE vote box, on the facing page, bang in the middle under the info box. (Don't hit the 'vote' tab at the top of the page. You'll get lost in a hundred books to vote for, but if you do do this... this book is on page 3).
.
You won't like every entry in this book. You will rage at the inadequacies of those who supported these mothers in their earlier pregnancies, that resulted in a depressed and defeated mother bottle feeding. You'll bite your knuckles when you read kooky advice, and cringe. You'll cry in oxytocin rush, at the gentle love you'll find there.
.

Moment of Satisfaction
by Anita MacCallum*
.
Proudly sitting anywhere
and everywhere, deliberately.
Showing how it's done.
.
Milk drawn from deep inside,
complete openess, eyes drinking,
moments that are imprinted.
.
Skin to skin, feeling
utter satisfaction, gently drifting,
sleepily falling, into dreamland.
.
.
As I said, it's a slice of real life. A thumbnail representation of what it's like to birth, and attempt to breastfeed, in our culture. And it's by Mums, for Mums. Go read! :-)
.
.
.
.
*copyright retained by original contributors, 2008

Saturday 1 November 2008

A Stitch In Time...

Whereby I can tell you, finally, and thankfully, that the Home Office have seen sense and apologised over the Baby C farrago.
.
Or to be precise, Jeremy Oppenheim, the outgoing Children's Champion to the Home Office, has stated that what happened with Baby C wasn't acceptable. In his own words...
.
Your first concern is that no infant should be deprived of food for 14 hours and particularly not while in an Immigration Removal Centre. Further you believe that more could and should have been done to ensure that the necessary formula did not run out and more effort should have been made to obtain new supplies promptly when it did. I can confirm in writing as I did at our meeting that I agree with you on all of these points.
.
If that sounds a little sticky, and not-quite-an-apology, I'd advise you to go read the full text of his letter. It's a long and detailed response, taking time and effort to meticulously document the objections that myself and Alison Blenkinsop have raised with the Home Office, time and again, since this debacle erupted. It also documents the struggle everyone has undertaken in getting this issue dealt with, and it acknowledges the effort that was made by all of us. and by all of us, I mean you to, as the contacting and re-contacting of MPs over this, was clearly of real importance in getting this result.
.
Since the event occurred you have spent considerable time writing to and telephoning the agency about your concerns. You did not receive a response that satisfied you. You approached Members of Parliament who wrote on your behalf. The responses they received did not reassure you. You met Yarls Wood staff together with Morgan Gallagher. At that meeting you thought that the staff minimised your concerns regarding the lack of necessary food for the infant. They therefore could not reassure you that a similar incident would not occur again. Following this meeting there were further delays before your meeting with me.
.
The letter is addressed to Alison Blenkinsop, and I'll explain a little about that. This sequence is important, if you want to get an understanding of how, and why, these things both happen with UK Gov, and aren't then actioned upon. So pay attention. :-) The devil is in the detail...
.
When both Alison and I became aware that the Home Office had been sending letters out to MPs, reassuring them that the situation was under control, and naming Alison personally, in her role as a member of the Lactation Consultants of Great Britain.. and stating she and Brian Pollett and Jeremy Oppenheim were to have a meeting.. a meeting that had never been arranged, or spoken about... she contacted Meg Hillier at the Home Office, and asked for an explanation. Why was her name in this letter sent to MPs, and why were MPs being informed of a meeting that didn't exist?
.
Meg Hillier never responded. Jeremy Oppenheim's office, did, several days later. Only to Alison, not to myself. It was a request for a meeting. By this time, we'd discovered that two versions of the "everything is under control" letter had been going out to MPs, from two different people at the Home Office. The text had been copied and pasted from one letter to the other. And had been sent out over a span of several weeks, to different MPs who had written requesting an answer to the issue of Baby C going unfed.
.
Alison responded to this request, by demanding that it was clear upfront, what was going to be discussed. After the horrendous meeting at Yarl's Wood we'd both attended in early September (that we were forbidden from quoting) neither she, nor I, were prepared to attend more of the same, without reassurances.
.
Answer came there none.
.
Several days passed. Alison again contacted Meg Hillier's office, and requested clarification.
.
Answer came there none.
.
Last week, she got a phone call from Jeremy Oppenheim, who is leaving office to take up a new role in the Government, stating he was in her area and could she attend a meeting that afternoon? Alison agreed, and off she went.
.
I wasn't at the meeting, but Alison felt it went very well, and fed back elements to me, and stated that Jeremy Oppenheim had promised the same in writing. Which duly arrived on Friday, and is the letter above.
.
So if the letter looks ungainly, and super step-by-step detailed, I'd reassure you that it is in order to reflect the torturous path we've taken, to get to this point.
.
Importantly, it acknowledges what we've all been so incensed about. Not so much the dire mistakes that led to the baby going hungry, but to the complete and utter refusal by the Home Office, that there was anything wrong with this. And their complete refusal to listen to all of us, when we said time and again, that this wasn't acceptable. Oppenheim is extremely clear on this:
.
You are also concerned that our responses to you and your colleagues were unnecessarily delayed and defensive. It would have been a relief to you and your colleague if you had known the steps that the agency was actually taking in response to this incident. You also believe that an earlier meeting with a sufficiently senior member of the Agency would have ensured that the replies to the letters sent on your behalf by Members of Parliament were more helpful. Again I can confirm as I said at our meeting that delays should not have occurred and that the Agency needs to be more welcoming of well meant criticism from professionals concerned for the welfare of children. I apologise on behalf of the Agency for the delay and personally for the fact that I did not meet with you much earlier.
.
That earlier meeting was a complete stonewall. I never reported it, as it was pointless. No one had agreed to my even mentioning who was present, and no single quote was ever agreed. I was personally attacked, several times, and accused of breaches of confidence with mothers and babies I have supported. Thankfully, I have always obtained signed consent forms for every aspect of support and publicity we give via Nursing Matters and I was able to refute those allegations. Further, we are still in contact with every mother and baby we have ever helped and can ask them to testify to this. We continue to support most of them to this day.
.
There were 2 of us - myself and Alison, and 7 senior managers from the Home Office and Serco. Their tone was one of complete defensiveness; there was nothing to answer for apart from a delay in getting in the formula. It is of note that Oppenheim has both accepted, and apologised for this, and stated very clearly that the Home Office needs to be more welcoming of well meant criticism from professionals concerned for the welfare of children. I suspect this is a powerful message, in the world of UK politics, especially within the Home Office. Those of you who have continued to engage with your own MPs over this matter, might want to consider sending them a note, containing this quote from Oppenheim, and the URL for the full letter.
.
Especially if you got a "Quite all right dear, there's nothing to worry about, I'm sure it's all as it should be." response from your MP. Those MPs need to hear these words far more than the ones who responded "I'm shocked and will be following this up."
.
Because, intrinsically, those "there there dearie, there's no problem" MPs are part of this problem.
.
Part of the complacency that allowed the senior Home Office managers in that meeting in September, to sit and stonewall us, and accuse us of wrongdoing, whilst they carried on maintaining it was perfectly acceptable not to feed a three month old baby.
.
Part of the complacency that allows senior civil servants and contractors for the Government, to act completely outrageously (3rd paragraph).
.
So where does this letter leave us? Well, it does stop short of a complete apology to Baby C and her mother. As such.. well, this letter isn't designed for that. I do know Alison did request that a letter of apology should be sent direct to the family, and I do have some confidence this will happen. I'll update at the bottom of this post, if, and when, it does.
.
Aside from that, I am very happy with this letter. I am very happy with the acknowledgement of the incident, that the Children's Champion at the Home Office agrees with our complaints that it should never have been allowed to happen, and that the delays and refusing to listen should not have occurred. The whole stitch in time tone sits well with me. Brian Pollett was informed by me, personally in email, that evening, before Baby C ever got hungry, about what had happened. Senior management at Serco have stated that they knew about the situation within minutes of my first phone call to Yarl's Wood, so they did have time to act before Baby C became distressed. Her mother, of course, was already in a state of extreme anxiety. If they'd acted then, and just gone to Bedford Hospital, or sent baby there with her Mum, she'd never have gone hungry in the first place.
.
Likewise, if they'd just accepted they got it wrong after they didn't feed her, the past four months of struggle could have been avoided. So there was a stitch missed, that caused a huge tear in the public's confidence in the care of babies in detention. This letter does lay this out, and address that, competently and clearly.
.
However.
.
Well... you know.. much as I like this letter. Most of that is just sheer relief that someone is listening. I'm totally on board with this letter, and the meeting that took place. I feel it is an honourable letter, and one that should be applauded. Well Done! round of applause
.
However.
.
Whilst, in itself, it's a good letter... well, there's a lot still missing in this situation, isn't there? Oppenehim says that he should have been in touch earlier... why wasn't he? We've made a huge fuss over this affair, we mothers. We've blogged, written to MPs, complained, passed on details to journalists and had major television news coverage of the incident. His office, which I can't find a URL for, or any meaningful link to, has never responded. I've been supporting mothers and babies in Yarl's Wood for over eighteen months, and have never had any sense or suggestion from anyone that the pathway of progress led to the door of the Children's Champion Office. It was not mentioned at the meeting in Yarl's Wood. I've emailed literally dozens of officials and MPs and civil servants over alleged mistreatment, and actual mistreatment, of babies and children in the detention system, and contact with this office has never occurred. If you engine search, you get a plethora of hits on documents, debates, meetings and fervent activity. But no contact point, no explaining what this office does, how it can be approached, and how it deals with complaints about children's treatment in the detention system.
.
There doesn't appear to be a direct, transparent and accountable procedure set up, for this office, that enables individuals to contact them directly? No sense of what it does and how it acts?
.
One wonders if this office only became aware of the situation after MPs had been misinformed of their involvement?
.
One wonder where this office has been over the past few years as stories of the systemic mistreatment of children detained in Yarl's Wood have become more and more public?
.
Now, don't get me wrong. I'm not questioning Mr Oppenheim's, or his office's integrity. I have never met him, know nothing of his work, but for what I've encountered in the past few days. And I am greatly impressed by that contact, and am saying so up front. What I am questioning, is the process by which we've ended up here. A huge Government funded and directed operation, working from within the Home Office, that is locking up babies and children in secure units for months at a time, and refusing to accept that not feeding a baby was A Big Deal. That's what I'm questioning here.
.
And part of that questioning, is centred upon the letter. Oppenheim makes the following statement:
.
You are now aware that the Agency has arranged for the full time presence of Bedfordshire social workers at the centre who have an independent oversight of children’s welfare. They can be contacted at the centre during office hours.
.
Which sounds really good, doesn't it? I'm sure some of you reading it, nodded your head and thought "Good, that will help." Well, I have to report... Bedfordshire Social Services have had an office in Yarl's Wood for months, if not years. There is a Social Services worker assigned there. And that social worker office was contacted, directly, the day Baby C was going hungry. And the social worker who answered the phone, initially went "Oh that's terrible, I'll go see." and returned with "There is no problem, thank you for your concern."
.
So comments about liaising with Social Workers to ensure protection... do not ring true. How can a single social worker, stand against the might of the Home Office senior managers based in Yarl's Wood? The social work department were part of the stonewall and silence on the baby going hungry. They were complicit in not seeing this as a big deal, as that's what they'd been told by senior civil servants and managers in situ.
.
Further, it's not as if we haven't been here before. Reports on babies and children suffering harm in Yarl's Wood have been made public for years. The Home Office have always blamed such incidents on the contract providers, and have changed them to new contractors when contracts are due for renewal. They then state it was a mistake and it 'won't happen again'. Always, in these stories, is a sense that the Home Office are refusing to take responsibility for the problems - it's not their fault...
.
In 2005, Baby D was released from detention in Yarl's Wood suffering from rickets and anemia. The mother engaged a lawyer, who sued on behalf of the baby, on the basis of unlawful detention and that the lack of care of the baby, was a breach of the baby's human rights. The Home Office stated that it wasn't reasonable to expect them to be held responsible for the baby developing rickets and anemia, as it was the responsibility of the contractor providing medical care to ensure the health of detainees. The judge disagreed:
.
.
Case No: CO/9745/2005 THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE WYN WILLIAMS : [2007] EWHC 1654
.
The Defendant in this case was the Secretary of State for the Home Department. The Home Office.
.
So the ruling is clear - that the medical care of detainees is the responsibility of the UK Government, who detain the babies, and employs and supervises the private company who provides medical care in the compounds.
.
The contractors change. The problems continue. Who is responsible for that?
.
If you look at the report of Yarl's Wood staff acting illegally this past week, you'll find the same argument:
.
Officials tell us these were isolated incidents and that a contractor is culpable
.
How can a contractor - Serco in recent times, but others have held this dubious 'honour' in past years - be culpable in an institution that is overseen by the Home Office? Surely the Home Office are the ones in charge? They write the contract? They pay the contractors? Senior managers and civil servants for the Home Office, sit in Yarl's Wood itself, running it! They're not on a phone line in London - they have their offices in Yarl's Wood, side by side with the 'contractor's management.
.
But they aren't reponsible?
.
Hmmm... I'll leave you to make your mind up on that.
.
But before I go... an explanantion for those of you who might be a bit confused about my comments on the role of 'Children's Champion'.
.
Because I suspect some of you read the statement "Children's Champion for the Home Office" and think "Oh, that's the Children's Commisioner, he's spoken out about Yarl's Wood and children before." Yes, he has - but these are two different roles, and two different people.
.
Professor Sir Al Aynsley-Green, is Children's Commssioner for England. It's an independent post, and he and his office are charged with looking into, and reporting upon, the lives of children in England. There are other Children's Commisioners around the UK.
.
Jeremy Oppenheim has just left post, as Children's Champion within the Home Office itself. As I said, I can't find any URLs that explain this position clearly - if you do, let me know. :-)
.
Al Aynsley-Green's department have already reported on the treatment of detained babies and children. He's about to publish a new report, sometime this month. It will be interesting to see if the defence outlined above... that a contractor is culpable.. reappears in its wake.
.
The Home Office. Paid for by you. Its leaders voted for, by you. Acting in your name.
.
At last someone at the Home Office, has been listening. So, once again, great news that Oppenheim has written this letter and broken through this stonewalling. :-) Gold Star on the report card for Jeremy.
.
However, could do better scrawled across the Home Office report card... especially the Home Office managers in Yarl's Wood itself. I suspect Serco's report card will soon show they've been expelled... or at very least are up in front of the headmaster for a severe ticking off. (After all, rumours abound that the Serco employed head of medical services at Yarl's Wood, when Baby C went hungry, has subsequently been sacked.)
.
And a heads up to the rest of you. When this new report from the Children's Commissioner is published... keep you eye out for comments that any problems are the responsibility of the 'contractor', Serco. I guarentee you'll see them!
.
But I'll end this post on a happy note! Yaaaay! Yaaay for mothers! Yaaay for MPs who wouldn't sit back and accept the first response! Yaaay for fighting back! Yaaay for letter writing and constituents taking the lead!
.
Yaaay us! :-)
.