From today's New York Times comes yet another article serving up a heaping dose of guilt for American moms. Entitled "Breastfeed or Else", the piece details some of the many proposals on the table for encouraging breastfeeding and, by corrolary, discouraging formula feeding.
Here's one example:
"Senator Tom Harkin, Democrat of Iowa, has proposed requiring warning labels, on cans of infant formula and in advertisements, similar to the those on cigarettes. They would say that the Department of Health and Human services has determined that 'breast-feeding is the ideal method of feeding and nurturing infants" or that "breast milk is more beneficial to infants than infant formula.'"
And another:
A two-year national breast-feeding awareness campaign that culminated this spring ran television announcements showing a pregnant woman clutching her belly as she was thrown off a mechanical bull during ladies' night at a bar — and compared the behavior to failing to breast-feed.
"You wouldn't take risks before your baby's born," the advertisement says. "Why start after?"
Don't misunderstand me. I believe in breastfeeding. I breastfed my son for nearly 16 months until he self-weaned. I would have kept going if he'd wanted to. But I also don't think there could be more than seven pregnant women out there who don't know that breastfeeding is best and formula is only an adequate substitute. Just announce at Kindermusik or Mommy and Me that you're not planning to breastfeed and witness the horrified silence, the looks as if you'd just proclaimed your intention to grill up the family dog.
Women don't need to hear another laundry list of how breastfeeding is best, offered up with a gleaming patina of fat-phobia--Breastfeeding prevents OBESITY!!! OBESITY KILLS!!! Only women who don't love their babies would risk having an OBESE child!!! OBESE children are a bigger risk to America than Osama bin Laden!!!--what they need is a way to make breastfeeding realistic.
American moms have no guaranteed leave, not even under the lame-ass, best-we-can-manage Family Medical Leave Act, since that only covers those who work in enterprises with more than 50 employees. And if you qualify for that, ooooh boy, what a bonanza. Twelve whole weeks of unpaid leave just stretching out before you like a luxurious berber carpet. And if you don't? Well, that's really your problem, isn't it? You should have thought about that before you took that job.
Breastfeeding is best, but it also takes the one thing most American moms just don't have: a metric ton of time. In the early days, it's not unusual to have to feed your infant every two to three hours, and I had friends who swore their babies wanted to nurse 'round the clock. At the very least a mom is going to have to make sure that her boob or her milk is available to her baby seven to ten times per day. How does that work into the average worker's schedule? Answer: It doesn't. Most people I know take lunch at their desk, for heaven's sake, because they don't "have time" to go have a proper meal. Leaving work to pump or, if you're lucky, get to the baby, just isn't going to fly with most employers.
This emphasis on breastfeeding seems to me to be completely out of order. Why aren't children's health advocates and politicians pushing for guaranteed leave for new parents so that moms can actually have a real choice about breastfeeding? The only reason I was able to breastfeed my son for as long as I did was because I was in Europe, where leave is guaranteed and paid. European countries are also committed to helping moms successfully breastfeed, but it's done in a way that makes sense. You'll still see "breast is best" informational campaigns there, but at least it doesn't feel like pure lip service and shame-mongering.