SOOTHING THE BABY.

Otago Witness, Issue 2975, 22 March 1911, Page 66

SOOTHING THE BABY.

If an infant is properly treated it should need no soothing, beyond what is afforded by giving “What every baby needs” (see pages 1 and 2 of the “Feeding and Oaro of Baby”). . Of course every child should be shown proper natural attention; in other words, should be “mothered” and comforted when necessary, but the mother or nurse should avoid undue petting o,nd “spoiling” on the ono hand 1 and the use of “soothing powders,” sweets, “pieces,” or the “dummy,” on the other. The strict observance of regularity and proper -all-round healthy habits is the sure and safe way—indeed, the only lasting way—to, ensure that a baby shall grow into a robust, contented child—the forerunner of a strong, capable, successful, and" happy man or woman. I am glad to find that the use of the dummy is becoming less and l less frequent, but as there are still thousands of children throughout the Dominion relegated to its baneful effects I make no apology for reprinting below, almost unchanged, what I wrote last year on the subject. THE UNSPEAKABLE DUMMY. Travelling by train a few weeks ago in the same compartment as ourselves was a young mother and a beautiful little baby boy of about 15 months. He had the inevitable dummy, with ring attached, hanging by a cord down the front of his dress. We were sitting near by, and the little fellow, who was full of life and energy and who was playing about in the carriage, soon made friends with us. Naturally we began to chat with his mother, and she told us the' baby was her only child, and an only grandson os well, so he was very much the apple of her eye and she was evidently much devoted' to him. The lady who was with me remarked that it was a; pity the child had a dummy, saying that by using it there was a great ' risk of deforming his mouth and spoiling his teeth. The mother replied that she knew some people said dummies were not good, but that if my friend 1 had a baby ■she would probably use one too when ho becomes cross. “At any rate,” said she, -looking with pride at the beautifully-made, plump little chap with rosy cheeks and l shining eyes, “it has not done him any harm so far, has it?” LAOK OF LOGIC. It is one of the amazing points of view of mothers that they always speak in this way. They are quite prepared to pers'st in a wrong course until they can see actual definite harm, which by that time is more or less irreparable. Women constantly say: “I know such and such a child who had a dummy, and his teeth are all right.” They don’t realise that the child’s jaws, teeth, and digestion would have been still better had no dummy been used, and that for one case where they can see no damage there would be a dozen cases where the evil effects would be clear to them if pointed out. The fact is that defective jaws, teeth, .and digestion arc PREDISPOSED TO by weakness of the mother and by artificial feeding as well as by neglect of any cf the factors making for good health, such as if rash .air, exercise, .regularity, etc.; but the more IMMEDIATE EXCITING CAUSES of mouth and teeth defects and adenoids are the use of the dummy, the long-tube- feeder, and subsequent pap-feed-ing. If the last throe were avoided, and reasonable care were exercised by mothers with regard to the hygiene of themselves and their offspring, we should hear no more about bad teeth and adenoids, which are causing such universal alarm throughout the civilised world to-day. It is not suggested that because a particular child lifted the dummy therefore it must show characteristic deformities of mouth, teeth, etc., but that the great majority of children so treated do show such defects; and th<®e will be aggravated by neglect of care ami attention in regard to any of the factors making for health. The most deplorable oases arc seen whore all the adverse factors mentioned ore brought to

boar in the case of a particular child who haa been, delicate at birth ; whereas a child exceptionally robust at birth, subjected to only one harmful influence —say, for instance, the use of the dummy—may escape not really “soot free,”'but to outward appearance undamaged, and actually more normal than the average child of civilisation. . . To return to the baby in the tram. _ W e told' the mother about the evils arising from the use of the comforter; but I fear our counsels fell on deaf ears, _as the dummy was frequently popped into his mouth even when there issemed no excuse whatever for doing so. Presently the little man got down on to the floor and' crept along the passage way. which had been trodden and re-trodden by passengers going from carriage to carriage, the dummy, of course, trailing along the floor. After this excursion the abomination found its way ; back into the baby’s mouth as usual. ' ; Hero is an example of a devoted mother who had • heard something in a vague way about the evils which arise from the use of the dummy, and yet who evidently did ■ not consider the matter of sufficient import- | anoe to cause her to inquire further, or to ’ break her baby off the bad habit. In connection with the .rearing of chil- ! dren the dummy is everywhere recognised by the leading doctors and dentists as one i of the greatest evils of the day, and it is I humiliating to reflect that we women can>I not be prevented from continuing its use | without an Act of Parliament. If parents could once be brought to realise the cruel, lifelong wrong which they are doing to their dependent little ones by forcing upon them such pernicious habits, the “Longtube feeder” and the so-called “Comforter” would scon disappear from the Dominion. THE JUDGMENT-OF THE INNOCENTS. The little children whom- one sees in our streets, tram®, and trains constantly suoki irg at dummies, and who- are doomed to | have misshapen, jaws, crowded and decayed , teeth, and adenoids, will be quite justified i in turning on their parents a few years , hence and asking what right they had to j | endow thepi with life and then to impose : upon them such a handicap—why did they ! not take the trouble to find cut how best to | bring them up—why did they brand them i with deformities and disabilities from which there is no wav of escape afterwards? | What right have parents to shirk their, responsibilities and say: —“If -baby cries push a dummy into his mo\ith and let us have peace. This fuss about dummies and adenoids is only a fad, and will pass away like other fads.” The matter is much teq serious to be dismissed so summarily, and it behoves all ; parents who will not -accept what we put : forward to look into the matter and pare- I fully weigh what the -greatest authorities— | doctor's and dentists alike —have to sav on the subject. Among those qualified 1 to speak there is but one verdict. Those who have not time for investigating themselves , may take on trust our advice to destroy ' any,dummies in their possession at onoe'. JOHN BURNS ON THE DUMMY. ( The Right Hon. John Burns, President o? , the Local Government Board in the present English Government, speaking on the prevention of consumption, said in a recent address; I come to another practical remedy—that is, the abolition of the “Comfokteb” and the “ Soother.” This is a very serious thing. The bomb, the PISTOL, AND BJNAMITB HAVE KILLED THEIR SCORES, BUT I BELIEVE THE “COMFORTER” HAS KILLED ITS TENS OF THOUSANDS OF little children. What is more, doctors tell me that it subjects the baby’s mouth and throat to malformations that disclose themselves in subsequent years. lam told this is—and I believe it is—a special cause of had teeth. Later on it means impaired digestion, and the relationship of impaired digestion and consumption is a very serious one. I express it as my opinion as a layman that to a great extent the Comforter or Soother is responsible in many cases for adenoids. ... I would endure the charge of being a bureaucrat with pleasure and equanimity if with one order ,1 could make the Comforter a PUBLIC NUISANCE, AND SCHEDULE IT AS A DANGEROUS INSTRUMENT. DUMMY ALWAYS HARMFUL—NEVER ' BENEFICIAL. I No one can pretend that the dummy is beneficial in any way. The most that can. bo said is that it sometimes affords an |

easy, lazy means of keeping' the baby quiet at the moment, instead of finding out and attending to its real needs. At the Karitane Hospital babies generally come in with dummies; these are at onoe taken away and destroyed. There may bo one or two days at the farthest during which the baby misses the accustomed object and is- more or less discontented and fretful, but it soon settles down to regular habitsVand there is no more trouble. Last Saturday night an infant was taken to the Karitane BabyHospital with the inevitable dummy—tonight (Monday) it went quietly to sleep without a murmur and without its comforter. There is little difficulty in discontinuing its use, even when it has been persisted in for a considerable time. But why ruse a dummy at all-? That is the puzzle. W© are told that many nurses carry a comforter with them as part of their equipmenlt, (and .that the baby has become habituated to its use before the mother has anything, to do with it. This s very hard on the mother. She should therefore make a stipulation beforehand that no such thing is to be introduced into her home. The resorting to a dummy may be regarded as a testimony to the incompetence or laziness of the nurse. If regular habits with regard, to feeding, sleeping, movements of bowels, eto., are started at the dawn of life there will never be any need for artficial soothers. The best and roost lasting way of attaining peace and comfort in the home is to train the child in proper healthy habits stage by stage, from the first day. On this subject the mother _is advised, to read at once . the section headed “Forming a Character” (see “Character” in Index) in the Society’s book.