Thursday 14 June 2012

Formula for defence

Yet again, I read about breastfeeding and how "good" mothers do it. Formula bad, yada yada.

I have breast fed none of my children. The twins appeared to lack the instinct to breastfeed and did not latch on, or ever look for breast milk. They needed formula to thrive.

My baby girl was keen to try, although not at first, but she latched on and had some colostrum. And then her mother (me, using the third person unnecessarily) nearly died and decided that a live mother was more important than breast milk and so had to take medication that wasn't compatible with breastfeeding.

So am I a bad mother? It seems so. I feel entirely persecuted by the insinuation that formula is the lazy option. Reports that examine the relationship between duration of breastfeeding and anything the child does always conclude that breastfed babies do best. The one that's got my back up today concerns academic ability.

I've learned that mothers who breastfeed tend to be in better socio-economic groups, with higher levels of education and (grrrrrr) increased incidences of reading to children and general language skills development.

The insinuation being that the sort of mother who breastfeeds is a better sort of mother and is more likely to interact with and stimulate their children.

The underlying sentiment there is that mothers who do not breastfeed also don't bother reading to their children or generally attempting to educate them in their early years at all. Only the uneducated could fail to breastfeed!

This sentiment I vehemently oppose, mostly on account of being educated, older and damned hands on as a mother, as well as having phenomenally clever twins. One twin is way better than average, the other is constantly praised for his abilities. A doctor commended his vocabulary at the age of two; at the age of six he is far ahead of most peers at mathematics and reading. Books are important in our house, as are maps, languages, counting and measuring and other things that supposedly I shouldn't think of because I didn't breastfeed.

Furthermore, many other educated, older, brilliant mothers I know were unable to breastfeed for whatever reason, and yet still manage to read to their children.

Now breastfeeding may be better for baby, assuming mother eats an exemplary diet and baby thrives, but it is woefully inaccurate to suggest that not breastfeeding means you're a less good mother. Deciding to let your baby thrive is surely the most elemental aspect of mothering?

It would be good to see a study that properly demonstrates breastfeeding v non breastfeeding in like for like families, instead of making insulting guesses at what socio-economic group you belong to based on your ability to produce milk.

I'd like to put forward the hypothesis that clever parents have clever children. No?

1 comment:

Scumbag Sam said...

There is a stigma around not breast feeding, but, like most things - isn't it all just to do with personal situations and what not? I don't believe in any of that 'breastfeeding is the ONLY way to feed your child' nonsense. There used to be those women who would breastfeed OTHER people's children in ye olde days - do people really thing THAT is acceptable? I mean, it's breast milk, right? I am on your side here totally - as long as the baby gets the right nutrients surely that's the main thing!