participant (Deedee) asked me why I hadn't (her midwife had mentioned that I was there as Deedee had told her about the project). I said that I had not wanted to intrude, and she seemed to think this was reasonable though said that it would have been nice "to see a friendly face". Although I always introduced myself as a researcher, the participants seemed to regard me as a midwife. From general conversations they saw the value in the pragmatic goals of the research, basically that I was finding out what helps mums with breastfeeding, but did not perhaps understand either the research process or the role of academic research in practice development. Prior to beginning fieldwork, I had discussed what I would do with my supervisors, should I be asked questions about midwifery care or motherhood by the participants. We decided that I should refrain from making any clinical recommendations but to listen and try to signpost the participant to the most relevant service (e.g. midwife or GP). In the end, I was actually asked very few questions about infant feeding. The two direct clinical questions I was asked were about infant care in the extended period. This was perhaps because they all had intensive support from their midwives in the early days. I suggested for each of these questions (one about the development of the spine, another about an eye infection at four months) that they call their GP as these symptoms were outside my professional remit in any case. The clinician-researcher dialectic (Kanuha 2000) Some, if not all, of my analysis and interpretations of data are undoubtedly affected by my professional training and experience. Indeed, as in the introduction to this thesis (pg. 9), the topic itself grew out of observations from my practice and personal experience of breastfeeding mothers. This has positives in that the field was familiar to me, undoubtedly helping me to quickly build rapport with the participants. One concern is that the results may be seen "through the lens" (Allen 2004) of midwifery. Through reflection and discussion I tried to separate my 'midwifery' thoughts from that of a health researcher. Perhaps because my initial training was anthropology followed by several years of working in grass-roots research and support, I found this
participant (Deedee) asked me why I hadn't (her midwife had mentioned that I was there as Deedee had told her about the project). I said that I had not wanted to intrude, and she seemed to think this was reasonable though said that it would have been nice "to see a friendly face". Although I always introduced myself as a researcher, the participants seemed to regard me as a midwife. From general conversations they saw the value in the pragmatic goals of the research, basically that I was finding out what helps mums with breastfeeding, but did not perhaps understand either the research process or the role of academic research in practice development. Prior to beginning fieldwork, I had discussed what I would do with my supervisors, should I be asked questions about midwifery care or motherhood by the participants. We decided that I should refrain from making any clinical recommendations but to listen and try to signpost the participant to the most relevant service (e.g. midwife or GP). In the end, I was actually asked very few questions about infant feeding. The two direct clinical questions I was asked were about infant care in the extended period. This was perhaps because they all had intensive support from their midwives in the early days. I suggested for each of these questions (one about the development of the spine, another about an eye infection at four months) that they call their GP as these symptoms were outside my professional remit in any case. The clinician-researcher dialectic (Kanuha 2000) Some, if not all, of my analysis and interpretations of data are undoubtedly affected by my professional training and experience. Indeed, as in the introduction to this thesis (pg. 9), the topic itself grew out of observations from my practice and personal experience of breastfeeding mothers. This has positives in that the field was familiar to me, undoubtedly helping me to quickly build rapport with the participants. One concern is that the results may be seen "through the lens" (Allen 2004) of midwifery. Through reflection and discussion I tried to separate my 'midwifery' thoughts from that of a health researcher. Perhaps because my initial training was anthropology followed by several years of working in grass-roots research and support, I found this
Phoebe%20Pallotti%20090267684%20Young%20Mothers%20Infant%20Feeding%20Final.docx