I hate the AAP

[Anonymous]

It is not offensive to say women who work outside the home are always going to have trouble continuing to breastfeed, and that the AAP should mention that. It is disgusting to suggest that just by saying that, I am ignoring women who stay at home. I am allowed to talk about my experience, it doesn't mean I am invalidating others' experiences.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes and that's why the AAP recommends TARGETED interventions. Also there is nothing in the policy statement that says that racial equity is a key justification for these updated guidelines. If it were, I'm sure they would spend more than 2 paragraphs on it. If they failed to note disparities that would have been so tone deaf and disturbing that they would have been rightly blasted for it. I don't think they are using racial equity as a rationale for their guidelines, I think they are giving a token amount of attention to racial disparities which is their greater failure not using racism to promote breastfeeding.

I agree that the equity analysis seems lazy - particularly since it fails to mention the contribution of racism and bias in health care to these disparities. Since AAP guidance is aimed at health care providers that is a key failing since it is actually something health care providers can do something about. (Vague allusions to structural racism are much less actionable.) Where is the discussion of that black women are more likely to be given formula or assumed to be uninterested in breastfeeding? Racism in health care was identified as an important factor in this study (very qualitative) on barriers to breastfeeding in African American women:

In this study, SMEs significantly stressed the importance of addressing fundamental issues related to disparities in breastfeeding. Provider stereotyping, judgment, racism, and equity concerns were salient throughout the findings. Key informants highlighted the realities of racism within healthcare organizations,
among providers, and within communities concerning breastfeeding initiation among African American mothers. Despite the “call to action” to support breastfeeding
initiation in African American women, accounts from key informants provided evidence regarding the continued presence of stereotyping, disparities in approaches
to care based on culture, and lack of access/resources in specific communities and locations.9

https://journals.lww.com/jpnnjournal/Abstract/2021/04000/Subject_Matter_Experts_Identify_Health_Equity.13.aspx

I agree with most of this, and certainly about addressing racism and bias in health care, but that should be part of a much larger effort because these same providers are not just discriminating with regards to breastfeeding, they are discriminating in other ways which are much more directly tied to maternal and infant mortality. I do not agree with targeted interventions to address bias and racism that solely address breastfeeding, I do not even think that breastfeeding should be the focus of those interventions.

[Anonymous]

kids eat in color had a live with one of the writers

YET AGAIN THE MEDIA PORTRAYED (as well as many posters here) THIS AS AAP SAYS TO BREASTFEED FOR 2 YEARS but in reality, the statement is exclusive for 6 months and then if, MUTUALLY DESIRED, 2 years and beyond.

https://www.instagram.com/p/CgSCqsatNli/

[Anonymous]

The job of the AAP is to tell you what is the optimal practice. Not what you should do. You should exercise every day. You should eat at least 5 fruits and vegetables a day. You won't die if you don't but that is the optimal clinical outcome. Stop being so defensive and sensitive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The job of the AAP is to tell you what is the optimal practice. Not what you should do. You should exercise every day. You should eat at least 5 fruits and vegetables a day. You won't die if you don't but that is the optimal clinical outcome. Stop being so defensive and sensitive.

Blaming the AAP is easier for some than having the confidence to chart their own parenting course. This is a direct result of how our society treats women, so I don’t think it’s beneficial to hold it against the women who are defensive about it, but rather further evidence that we need systemic change.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The job of the AAP is to tell you what is the optimal practice. Not what you should do. You should exercise every day. You should eat at least 5 fruits and vegetables a day. You won't die if you don't but that is the optimal clinical outcome. Stop being so defensive and sensitive.

Blaming the AAP is easier for some than having the confidence to chart their own parenting course. This is a direct result of how our society treats women, so I don’t think it’s beneficial to hold it against the women who are defensive about it, but rather further evidence that we need systemic change.

Which is absolutely something that the AAP is advocating for in the policy statement along with the ACOG who have stated that women would have better outcomes with longer paid leave and more frequent PP checks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The job of the AAP is to tell you what is the optimal practice. Not what you should do. You should exercise every day. You should eat at least 5 fruits and vegetables a day. You won't die if you don't but that is the optimal clinical outcome. Stop being so defensive and sensitive.

Blaming the AAP is easier for some than having the confidence to chart their own parenting course. This is a direct result of how our society treats women, so I don’t think it’s beneficial to hold it against the women who are defensive about it, but rather further evidence that we need systemic change.

Which is absolutely something that the AAP is advocating for in the policy statement along with the ACOG who have stated that women would have better outcomes with longer paid leave and more frequent PP checks.

Again, actual paid leave advocates want PARENTAL leave, not leave that is only for mothers. They are not advocating for women charting their own parenting course, they say they are supporting BREASTFEEDING.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The job of the AAP is to tell you what is the optimal practice. Not what you should do. You should exercise every day. You should eat at least 5 fruits and vegetables a day. You won't die if you don't but that is the optimal clinical outcome. Stop being so defensive and sensitive.

Blaming the AAP is easier for some than having the confidence to chart their own parenting course. This is a direct result of how our society treats women, so I don’t think it’s beneficial to hold it against the women who are defensive about it, but rather further evidence that we need systemic change.

Which is absolutely something that the AAP is advocating for in the policy statement along with the ACOG who have stated that women would have better outcomes with longer paid leave and more frequent PP checks.

Again, actual paid leave advocates want PARENTAL leave, not leave that is only for mothers. They are not advocating for women charting their own parenting course, they say they are supporting BREASTFEEDING.

there is bonding leave and birth-related leave, they should be separate. non-birthing parents should get 12 weeks of bonding leave. birthing parents should get a) 6-12 weeks of birth-related leave and then an additional 12 weeks for bonding. dont equate parental leave (aka bonding leave) with the sheer lack of recovery leave for birthing parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The job of the AAP is to tell you what is the optimal practice. Not what you should do. You should exercise every day. You should eat at least 5 fruits and vegetables a day. You won't die if you don't but that is the optimal clinical outcome. Stop being so defensive and sensitive.

Blaming the AAP is easier for some than having the confidence to chart their own parenting course. This is a direct result of how our society treats women, so I don’t think it’s beneficial to hold it against the women who are defensive about it, but rather further evidence that we need systemic change.

Which is absolutely something that the AAP is advocating for in the policy statement along with the ACOG who have stated that women would have better outcomes with longer paid leave and more frequent PP checks.

Again, actual paid leave advocates want PARENTAL leave, not leave that is only for mothers. They are not advocating for women charting their own parenting course, they say they are supporting BREASTFEEDING.

there is bonding leave and birth-related leave, they should be separate. non-birthing parents should get 12 weeks of bonding leave. birthing parents should get a) 6-12 weeks of birth-related leave and then an additional 12 weeks for bonding. dont equate parental leave (aka bonding leave) with the sheer lack of recovery leave for birthing parents.

The only context where I have seen a distinction is temporary disability.

Paid parental leave advocates are not pushing for this distinction because they know it hurts women. Obviously, the AAP DGAF if it hurts women as long as they are making sure women are breastfeeding, which is the only thing they care about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The job of the AAP is to tell you what is the optimal practice. Not what you should do. You should exercise every day. You should eat at least 5 fruits and vegetables a day. You won't die if you don't but that is the optimal clinical outcome. Stop being so defensive and sensitive.

Blaming the AAP is easier for some than having the confidence to chart their own parenting course. This is a direct result of how our society treats women, so I don’t think it’s beneficial to hold it against the women who are defensive about it, but rather further evidence that we need systemic change.

Which is absolutely something that the AAP is advocating for in the policy statement along with the ACOG who have stated that women would have better outcomes with longer paid leave and more frequent PP checks.

Again, actual paid leave advocates want PARENTAL leave, not leave that is only for mothers. They are not advocating for women charting their own parenting course, they say they are supporting BREASTFEEDING.

there is bonding leave and birth-related leave, they should be separate. non-birthing parents should get 12 weeks of bonding leave. birthing parents should get a) 6-12 weeks of birth-related leave and then an additional 12 weeks for bonding. dont equate parental leave (aka bonding leave) with the sheer lack of recovery leave for birthing parents.

The only context where I have seen a distinction is temporary disability.

Paid parental leave advocates are not pushing for this distinction because they know it hurts women. Obviously, the AAP DGAF if it hurts women as long as they are making sure women are breastfeeding, which is the only thing they care about.

Why would it hurt women to acknowledge that the person giving birth needs time to heal? To me, paid leave advocates who gloss over the birthing part and only want to include adoptive parents or non-birthing parents seem to be doing a real disservice to that person that actually went through pregnancy and childbirth. I am personally annoyed to see the federal government giving equal leave to moms and dads, although technically, if you both work for the fed you have to split the 12 weeks is my understanding. For all of this hubbub about supporting women who want to breastfeed after 1 year, you would think the same people would be adamant that the individual who needs to heal has separate leave from bonding leave.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The job of the AAP is to tell you what is the optimal practice. Not what you should do. You should exercise every day. You should eat at least 5 fruits and vegetables a day. You won't die if you don't but that is the optimal clinical outcome. Stop being so defensive and sensitive.

Blaming the AAP is easier for some than having the confidence to chart their own parenting course. This is a direct result of how our society treats women, so I don’t think it’s beneficial to hold it against the women who are defensive about it, but rather further evidence that we need systemic change.

Which is absolutely something that the AAP is advocating for in the policy statement along with the ACOG who have stated that women would have better outcomes with longer paid leave and more frequent PP checks.

Again, actual paid leave advocates want PARENTAL leave, not leave that is only for mothers. They are not advocating for women charting their own parenting course, they say they are supporting BREASTFEEDING.

there is bonding leave and birth-related leave, they should be separate. non-birthing parents should get 12 weeks of bonding leave. birthing parents should get a) 6-12 weeks of birth-related leave and then an additional 12 weeks for bonding. dont equate parental leave (aka bonding leave) with the sheer lack of recovery leave for birthing parents.

The only context where I have seen a distinction is temporary disability.

Paid parental leave advocates are not pushing for this distinction because they know it hurts women. Obviously, the AAP DGAF if it hurts women as long as they are making sure women are breastfeeding, which is the only thing they care about.

Why would it hurt women to acknowledge that the person giving birth needs time to heal? To me, paid leave advocates who gloss over the birthing part and only want to include adoptive parents or non-birthing parents seem to be doing a real disservice to that person that actually went through pregnancy and childbirth. I am personally annoyed to see the federal government giving equal leave to moms and dads, although technically, if you both work for the fed you have to split the 12 weeks is my understanding. For all of this hubbub about supporting women who want to breastfeed after 1 year, you would think the same people would be adamant that the individual who needs to heal has separate leave from bonding leave.

First of all I think it's ironic that you don't think a woman can bond with her baby while she is recovering from the birth, when we're being told breastfeeding is the BEST way to bond with your baby. Well after I gave birth I spent most of my waking hours breastfeeding. It's not like I was just "recovering". But yeah, overall I hear you, but there's a lot of evidence that long maternity leaves hurt women because employers perceive women candidates differently after they've had multiple female employees gone for months, sometimes two or more times in a few years, and not the men.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The job of the AAP is to tell you what is the optimal practice. Not what you should do. You should exercise every day. You should eat at least 5 fruits and vegetables a day. You won't die if you don't but that is the optimal clinical outcome. Stop being so defensive and sensitive.

Blaming the AAP is easier for some than having the confidence to chart their own parenting course. This is a direct result of how our society treats women, so I don’t think it’s beneficial to hold it against the women who are defensive about it, but rather further evidence that we need systemic change.

Which is absolutely something that the AAP is advocating for in the policy statement along with the ACOG who have stated that women would have better outcomes with longer paid leave and more frequent PP checks.

Again, actual paid leave advocates want PARENTAL leave, not leave that is only for mothers. They are not advocating for women charting their own parenting course, they say they are supporting BREASTFEEDING.

there is bonding leave and birth-related leave, they should be separate. non-birthing parents should get 12 weeks of bonding leave. birthing parents should get a) 6-12 weeks of birth-related leave and then an additional 12 weeks for bonding. dont equate parental leave (aka bonding leave) with the sheer lack of recovery leave for birthing parents.

The only context where I have seen a distinction is temporary disability.

Paid parental leave advocates are not pushing for this distinction because they know it hurts women. Obviously, the AAP DGAF if it hurts women as long as they are making sure women are breastfeeding, which is the only thing they care about.

Why would it hurt women to acknowledge that the person giving birth needs time to heal? To me, paid leave advocates who gloss over the birthing part and only want to include adoptive parents or non-birthing parents seem to be doing a real disservice to that person that actually went through pregnancy and childbirth. I am personally annoyed to see the federal government giving equal leave to moms and dads, although technically, if you both work for the fed you have to split the 12 weeks is my understanding. For all of this hubbub about supporting women who want to breastfeed after 1 year, you would think the same people would be adamant that the individual who needs to heal has separate leave from bonding leave.

First of all I think it's ironic that you don't think a woman can bond with her baby while she is recovering from the birth, when we're being told breastfeeding is the BEST way to bond with your baby. Well after I gave birth I spent most of my waking hours breastfeeding. It's not like I was just "recovering". But yeah, overall I hear you, but there's a lot of evidence that long maternity leaves hurt women because employers perceive women candidates differently after they've had multiple female employees gone for months, sometimes two or more times in a few years, and not the men.

Im separating healing vs bonding. Parental leave is bonding. Of course a mom can bond with her child at anytime but I get annoyed with people who gloss over the real physical, emotional, and mental ramifications of birthing and pregnancy- none of which, a non-birthing parent go through. Thats why a 12 week leave for dad and a 12 week leave for mom- both for the birth (what birth did Dad do?) and bonding with child is minimizing the pregnancy and labor component and only focuses on bonding with said child. There is also the question of what happens when pregnancy and birth dont mean a living child- there needs to be separate leave for the physical recovery of childbirth.

[Anonymous]

I believe the acknowledged “best” is a significant leave for mothers and a substantial leave for fathers which is less than what mothers get (and mothers often start before delivery recognizing the last weeks of pregnancy are also very physically taxing) but fathers get enough— and take enough— that all parents are equally “risky” hires.

And, quite a lot of the advocacy for maternity leave does include the benefits of breastfeeding and the higher success rates of breastfeeding so I don’t know why separating them would be a thing…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The job of the AAP is to tell you what is the optimal practice. Not what you should do. You should exercise every day. You should eat at least 5 fruits and vegetables a day. You won't die if you don't but that is the optimal clinical outcome. Stop being so defensive and sensitive.

This all day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The job of the AAP is to tell you what is the optimal practice. Not what you should do. You should exercise every day. You should eat at least 5 fruits and vegetables a day. You won't die if you don't but that is the optimal clinical outcome. Stop being so defensive and sensitive.

Blaming the AAP is easier for some than having the confidence to chart their own parenting course. This is a direct result of how our society treats women, so I don’t think it’s beneficial to hold it against the women who are defensive about it, but rather further evidence that we need systemic change.

Which is absolutely something that the AAP is advocating for in the policy statement along with the ACOG who have stated that women would have better outcomes with longer paid leave and more frequent PP checks.

Again, actual paid leave advocates want PARENTAL leave, not leave that is only for mothers. They are not advocating for women charting their own parenting course, they say they are supporting BREASTFEEDING.

there is bonding leave and birth-related leave, they should be separate. non-birthing parents should get 12 weeks of bonding leave. birthing parents should get a) 6-12 weeks of birth-related leave and then an additional 12 weeks for bonding. dont equate parental leave (aka bonding leave) with the sheer lack of recovery leave for birthing parents.

The only context where I have seen a distinction is temporary disability.

Paid parental leave advocates are not pushing for this distinction because they know it hurts women. Obviously, the AAP DGAF if it hurts women as long as they are making sure women are breastfeeding, which is the only thing they care about.

Why would it hurt women to acknowledge that the person giving birth needs time to heal? To me, paid leave advocates who gloss over the birthing part and only want to include adoptive parents or non-birthing parents seem to be doing a real disservice to that person that actually went through pregnancy and childbirth. I am personally annoyed to see the federal government giving equal leave to moms and dads, although technically, if you both work for the fed you have to split the 12 weeks is my understanding. For all of this hubbub about supporting women who want to breastfeed after 1 year, you would think the same people would be adamant that the individual who needs to heal has separate leave from bonding leave.

First of all I think it's ironic that you don't think a woman can bond with her baby while she is recovering from the birth, when we're being told breastfeeding is the BEST way to bond with your baby. Well after I gave birth I spent most of my waking hours breastfeeding. It's not like I was just "recovering". But yeah, overall I hear you, but there's a lot of evidence that long maternity leaves hurt women because employers perceive women candidates differently after they've had multiple female employees gone for months, sometimes two or more times in a few years, and not the men.

Im separating healing vs bonding. Parental leave is bonding. Of course a mom can bond with her child at anytime but I get annoyed with people who gloss over the real physical, emotional, and mental ramifications of birthing and pregnancy- none of which, a non-birthing parent go through. Thats why a 12 week leave for dad and a 12 week leave for mom- both for the birth (what birth did Dad do?) and bonding with child is minimizing the pregnancy and labor component and only focuses on bonding with said child. There is also the question of what happens when pregnancy and birth dont mean a living child- there needs to be separate leave for the physical recovery of childbirth.

You already said all of this