Please don't think I am trying to "pathologise" anyone or anything, nor somehow trivialise or ridicule womens' choices in regards to infant feeding.
unfortunately I could not read the whole article that was linked to (Leaving Facebook... | Facebook), as I don't have subscription rights to Jstor... would have loved to read the whole article. Qing Dynasty was 17th-20th Century. My point about Han Dynasty was that the Chinese have been writing about these kinds of 'conditions' (please note my use of 'scare quote' notation) and how to help mothers and (just as importantly) their dependent infants.
Whilst the influence of Confucianism did make Chinese society and its official structures seemingly paternalistic, it wasn't the only dominant ideology throughout the rich history of this civilisation - Daoism and Buddhism in their various forms have also been hugely influential over Chinese society.
What's more, folk traditions have always been the cornerstone of CM practice. Whilst it has always been males in the spotlight of officialdom, there were always women in the villages and rural settings who used the CM principles of diagnosis and treatment to help their neighbours and loved ones. More often than not, it was this grass roots knowledge that was gathered and formally published within medical canons by the male physicians who were academics (medical schools and colleges were established very early) and usually Court-approved practitioners. Herbal medicine was not controlled, as all indigenous herbs were wild-growing or cultivated locally by farmers. Only imported medicinals in the form of spices/herbs were solely accessed by these academics and Court-approved physicians. A good book to read if you're interested in feminine history of Chinese Medicine is "A Flourishing Yin" (can't remember author).
The "crones and witches" (read: wise women) held the knowledge of what foods, herbs, teas, therapies could help mothers and their babies. But so too did many men in these settings - as they were village folk, they were not formally trained in Confucian ethics, principles, etc. They would have had a 'common/folk' understanding of what Confucian society expected of them, but Confucianism was very much a formal ideology that was taught in royal colleges, universities, to educate the higher classes destined to work in the Bureaucracy. The common folk did not generally have access to this level of education. But there were still no shortage of physicians - male or female - who worked to heal their neighbours.
The vast amount of medical texts we have today is born from a combination of grass-roots/folk medicine, the recording of clinical experience, and formal study and practice in formal institutions of medicine. What we have today in the form of Tradtional Chinese Medicine (as the 'brand' presented to the world by the PRC) is a syncretisation of ALL of this knowledge. And we haven't touched on the medical knowledge, practice, and ideas from all of Asia, where this paradigm of health and healing were practised. Hence why many practitioners and writers refer to East-Asian Medicine, Oriental Medicine, or simply Chinese medicine (to distinguish it from the official, practice of TCM. in fact, one could argue there is nothing 'traditional' about TCM, as it is a highly sanitised and Confucian mish-mash of the entire spectrum of health & healing traditions and practcies in Eastern Asia.
CM approaches to the inability to bf is always centred around finding methods/solutions to help mums and bubs survive and thrive in the face of such conditions. Do we assume companies like Nestle are being paternalistic in their production and marketing of formula - or are they offering a solution to all those mums out there unable to bf? As many mums have told their stories on this forum, it is clear that in these cases Formula was a viable option available to them - for many CM was not available, let alone an option.
As I finish up my clinical studies and head out into the big wide world, I want to know how I can best be of service to the community in this regard. I have no desire to control women, children, or demand obeisance to my opinions - professional or otherwise. I have some knowledge and some tools that may be of assistance in these situations. If they work, then I want families to know about it, and I would love the opportunity to help out.
In the stories I have read thus far - and thank you so much for sharing them here (this is a great forum to open up honestly about such matters) - it seems that a lot of the issues have been centred around support, stress, expectations, and access to information and/or services. I don't think this is news to anyone who frequents this forum. And to be fair I think everyone offers their knowledge, assistance, and treatments in good faith. I think there are always a variety of factors behind the inability to bf: the state of the mum, of the baby, of the support-systems, the knowledge/experience of practitioners, etc.
I instigated this conversation because I was curious to hear womens' own experiences, to ascertain whether a) I can help; and b) if I have that capacity, then how best to.
Please don't end the discussion here. Please continue to share your stories. I am genuinely reading and learning. I appreciate it, and can feel some of the hurt that exists there. i don't feel its helpful to criticise or accuse you women - you have done what anyone would do, and that is do your best at seeing the survival of your children. I applaud you!
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks