The Case Against Breastfeeding
By now I think just about everyone has weighed in on the latest breastfeeding controversy. But if you have not been following I’ll gladly offer my opinion on Hanna Rosin’s piece in The Atlantic, “The Case Against Breastfeeding.”
Rosin describes the societal pressure to breastfeed and attempts to explain that the evidence that shows breastfeeding is superior to formula is either flawed or non-existent. While she’s right about societal pressure, elsewhere she fails. She admits that breast is best and still tries to convince the reader otherwise.
I don’t believe that formula feeding is bad. It is food. But it is food that has been engineered in a laboratory to be as close to breastmilk as possible. It is not the real thing. It is an imitation. Earlier today I read a response to the article that said formula is a luxury. That we are lucky to have the option of formula. I agree. It is a luxury to have the choice whether or not to breastfeed. My instinct is that the article was written as an excuse for women who don’t *want* to breastfeed and want to feel better about themselves about their choice.
The point that I found most irritating, and the piece more than anything else just irritated me, was the part where she responded to the notion that breastfeeding is free. She writes, “It’s only free if a woman’s time is worth nothing.” How is feeding a baby worth nothing? Whether feeding a baby by bottle or breast, feeding time is bonding time. It’s the time when mother (or father) and baby are closest. How is that worthless? And how is feeding a baby by bottle any less time consuming than breastfeeding? If you don’t want to take the time to feed your baby don’t have one.
Others have said it better than I have and have backed it up with research.
The Motherwear Breastfeeding Blog
Adventures in [Crunchy] Parenthood
My StumbleUpon Page