Human Milk Donation

Facilitators and Barriers of Human Milk Donation

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to examine perceptions and experiences of women who donate human milk and highlight various aspects of the breast milk donation process.

STUDY DESIGN

A cross-sectional descriptive study.

METHODS

An online survey was conducted with a convenience sample of women who donated milk at several milk banks in the United States. A questionnaire of 36 closed and open-ended items were developed and validated by the research team. Descriptive statistics and content analysis were used. Semantic content analysis involved three procedures: coding, categorizing text units, and refining the identified themes.

RESULTS

A total of 236 women who donated breast milk completed the questionnaire. Mean age of participants was 32.7±4.27 and 89.40% were non-Hispanic White women with a bachelor's degree (32.20%) or graduate degree (54.70%). Most participants were women who actively donated breast milk, ranging from one to four times. Two themes, facilitators and barriers of milk donation, were identified. Facilitators to milk donation included attitudes toward milk donation, commitment for donating, motivation in donating, and support. Barriers included personal factors, environment, milk donor process, and psychosocial factors.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

Nurses, health care providers, and lactation professionals should educate women about milk donation resources and opportunities. Strategies to increase awareness about milk donation among underrepresented groups such as women of color are highly recommended. Future research is needed to further explore specific factors that increase milk donation awareness and minimize barriers to potential donors.

Use of shared milk among breastfeeding mothers with lactation insufficiency

Social media platforms have facilitated the use of shared breast milk for infant feeding since 2010. This study aims to assess the prevalence of shared milk use among breastfeeding mothers with insufficient milk supply; and compare shared milk users with non-users. Data were collected from breastfeeding mothers with low milk supply through an anonymous Internet-based survey in 2013. Shared milk users were those who used shared milk for at least 10% of their infant's needs; the rest were considered non-users. Chi-square comparisons between these groups assessed reasons and information sources for supplementation options; breastfeeding and supplement choice satisfaction; and breastfeeding duration. One hundred thirty-eight (29.1%) of 475 participants reported shared milk use. Healthfulness and reduced risk were most important to users (p < .001), whereas non-users cited convenience and lack of knowledge about other options (p < .001). Users reported receiving information from medical/breastfeeding professionals and online discussion forums, whereas non-users were more likely to not seek information about supplementation options. Users of shared milk were significantly more likely to provide breast milk at 6 months (59.3% vs. 39.6%, p = .001) and be satisfied with their supplementation choice (p < .001) compared with non-users. For women with self-reported lactation insufficiency, this study found that shared milk users were more likely to breastfeed longer, seek resources, identify healthful options, and report greater satisfaction with their supplementation choice than non-users. Importantly, shared milk may play a role in achieving U.S. Healthy People 2020 targets for breastfeeding duration.

"Someone's generosity has formed a bond between us": Interpersonal relationships in Internet-facilitated peer-to-peer milk sharing

Internet-facilitated peer-to-peer milk sharing enables the giving and receiving of human milk between individuals previously unknown to one another. However, the process of milk sharing allows for milk sharing partners to develop relationships with one another. The development of relationships between 41 milk recipients and 97 milk donors in Internet-facilitated peer-to-peer milk sharing was explored via a questionnaire. Thirty-seven recipient respondents and 55 donor respondents placed some level of importance on developing a relationship with their milk sharing partner. Thirty-four recipient respondents and 48 donor respondents had developed a relationship with at least one milk sharing partner, from acquaintanceship to close friendship. Respondents also described milk kinship relationships. Friendships were commonly noted as a positive repercussion of milk sharing. Milk sharing stigma was the only commonly reported negative repercussion of milk sharing. Peer-to-peer milk recipients and donors are forced by circumstance and encouraged by the process of milk sharing and by their similarity to one another to trust each another, which acts as a catalyst to friendship development. Peer-to-peer milk sharing is a type of cooperative mothering wherein milk recipients are assisted in parenting their children via the gift of milk. However, reciprocity is evident as milk donors benefit from good feelings from helping another mother and child, pleasure through seeing the recipient infant grow, and often friendship with their milk recipient. Although Internet-facilitated peer-to-peer milk sharing is instigated by the impersonal medium of the Interweb, each milk sharing connection has the potential to become a real relationship.

Peer-to-peer milk donors' and recipients' experiences and perceptions of donor milk banks

OBJECTIVE

To explore the intersection of peer-to-peer milk sharing and donor milk banks.

METHODS

A descriptive survey design containing closed and open-ended questions was used to examine women's perceptions of peer-to-peer milk sharing and milk banking. Closed-ended questions were analyzed using descriptive statistics and conventional qualitative content analysis was used to analyze open-ended responses.

SETTING

Participants were recruited via the Facebook sites of two online milk-sharing networks (Human Milk 4 Human Babies and Eats on Feet).

PARTICIPANTS

Ninety-eight milk donors and 41 milk recipients who had donated or received breast milk in an arrangement that was facilitated via the Internet.

RESULTS

One half of donor recipients could not donate to a milk bank because there were no banks local to them or they did not qualify as donors. Other respondents did not donate to a milk bank because they viewed the process as difficult, had philosophical objections to milk banking, or had a philosophical attraction to peer sharing. Most donor respondents felt it was important to know the circumstances of their milk recipients. No recipient respondents had obtained milk from a milk bank; it was recognized that they would not qualify for banked milk or that banked milk was cost prohibitive.

CONCLUSION

Peer-to-peer milk donors and recipients may differ from milk bank donors and recipients in significant ways. Cooperation between milk banks and peer sharing networks could benefit both groups.