Against the backdrop of life as it is really lived, the decision to breast-feed or bottle-feed is minuscule.
Whether or not you decide to breast-feed your baby -- and for how long -- is, in the scheme of things, just one decision out of a million. And ultimately, you should do what works best for you and your family.
Full disclosure here: I never wanted to breast feed. I don't know why. But I knew that's how I felt. My husband and I always shared the night feedings, I never wrestled with a breast pump, we nuked bottles of formula in the microwave, and I never looked back. And I'm a registered nurse.
And guess what? Our kids -- now in their twenties -- turned out just fine. They have no allergies. They are smart. They're not fat. They're healthy. They are kind, and funny and athletic, and you couldn't pick them out in a crowd. But if you read some of the research and most of the women's magazines, you'd think we'd be hauled in for heresy for disclosing this seldom-talking-about fact: in the end, whether you breast-feed or you bottle-feed, no one -- not even a physician, a nurse, a teacher or a psychologist -- will ever be able to tell the difference.
Here's the common sense explanation. From the moment of conception, there are virtually millions of different things affecting your baby's growth and development. There are genes. There is your diet, your anxieties, your personal health and the general health of the pregnancy. Then there's labor, and delivery, and the first year of life. There are decisions about vaccinations, check-ups, dental care, vision and hearing checks, speech assessment. There's fast food and there's slow food. There's your income level and resources and priorities for spending. There's climate, and whether you live in an urban, suburban or rural community. There are vegetables and fruits and burgers and french fries. There are childhood illnesses. There's the child's personality. And then, don't forget, there are 17 more years of all these factors and more churning until that baby turns 18.
From fetal life to adulthood, there are millions of things affecting a child's health and well-being, from your own level of happiness and mental health to your culture, your values, your faith, the meals you serve, how careful you are about safety, your lifestyle, whether you smoke, or exercise, or expose the children to books and words and new experiences.
So that's why I was pleased to see the World Health Organization announce that although they recommend breastfeeding for the first six months of life, they say it may not be a realistic option for many. The report was published online March 14, 2012 in the BMJ Open.
In essence, the researchers say there is a mismatch between idealism and realism. The participants said that over time, the general well-being of their families -- the hassle factor of breast feeding -- made people switch to giving their babies solid food or formula.
Meanwhile, there is a ton of research with headlines like, "Breast-Feeding Linked to Fewer Behavior Problems in Children," "Longer Breast-Feeding May Not Protect from Childhood Eczema," "Breast Feeding Linked to Higher 14-Month Mental Development," and on and on. Most of the research is solid enough, but it's very difficult to control for all the variables, which means there's too much going on in real children's and real families' lives to know just how strong a role breast feeding did or didn't play.
So I'll just say it. Do you what you want to do. Don't feel guilty if you bottle feed. Know that you'll have a gazillion other decisions to make for and about your child, and, if you do it right, you're likely to end up with a happy, healthy adult. And if you're really lucky, they'll call home.
7 comments:
Sorry, I so disagree and am surprised to hear this from a nurse. As a society, we should be doing EVERYTHING to show that breastfeeding is the NORMAL way to feed a human baby. Period. Formula, while it may be "adequate," it is certainly not ideal and should be used only for rare medical exceptions when breastfeeding isn't possible. (Which is very rare.)
If you have to justify your decision to use formula, that reeks of guilt to me. I feel immense sorrow for the mother who has never known the joy of a nursing babe, and an even greater sorrow for the babies denied their birthright of breastmilk from mothers who couldn't deal with the "hassle" of nursing. The irony is that breastfeeding is the most hassle free way to feed a baby. I'm sorry you simply do not get it.
Hi Dara:
Thank you so much for commenting. What I'm saying is simple. If, as you concede, formula is "adequate," then I believe we should allow women to make a choice without feeling they are doing something wrong. I've never seen a study showing any long-term negative impact of formula feeding on children. From a public health point of view, car seats, seat belts, vaccinations exercise, childhood and adolescent nutrition all have a greater long-term impact than does formula. I guess you could say that when it comes to the personal decision of formula vs. breast milk, I'm pro-choice.
There was NO announcent from WHO stating this. The study you cite was in BMJ and I dependent of WHO.
The World Health Organization responded to the research published in the BMJ saying it's not realistic for everyone to breast feed. Their action got quite a bit of news coverage in the healthcare press.
A response is not an announcement. It is indeed correct that it is not realistic for all women to breastfeed particularly for women have to put food on the table (if they have a table) for the whole family via a low paying manual labor job that can result in abandonment of breastfeeding. There are many other complex situations where breastfeeding cannot be sustained. Your blog post is not a critical and thoughtful comment about issues that complicate breasteeding must be navigated carefully in order to help mothers succeed in breastfeeding whenever possible. It is a careless devaluation of one the most important goals of every major health care authority including WHO, AAP, ACNM, IOM, USDA, USPSTF, CDC, AAFP, ACOG, and your own profession AWHONN and ANA http://nursingworld.org/MainMenuCategories/Policy-Advocacy/Positions-and-Resolutions/Issue-Briefs/Breastfeeding.pdf.
I respect your post as I am a very open minded person, but I also have to say that I strongly disagree. You are correct in that this is one small decision out of a million but if we say that about all decisions eventually we will be not doing a huge chunk out of a million of what is best for the child. If you could make just one small decision that has proven through research to be better for your child why would you just do it? I know that there are multiple reasons women simply can't breast feed and that is fine, they tried but to just flat out not try and not give what is best for your child is mind boggling to me. I agree with Dara even though she is very passionate and direct to her point she is right. Every woman has the right to their opinion but just simply being level headed and looking at the facts that one small decision is actually quite a big one and I think that every woman should at least try to do everything that could possible be good for their baby, including breast feeding.
I really appreciate your comments. My core point is just that many women, for all sorts of reasons, feel breastfeeding isn't right for them or for their families. I think they should know that in the scheme of things, bottle feeding will not hurt their children. Maybe because the choice about breast feeding is one of the first choices we make as mothers, it looms larger than other decisions. But if women and men would put equal focus on other decisions as the children mature -- nutrition, milk intake, exercise, vaccinations, seat belts, helmets, etc. etc. -- our children and our communities would be healthier.
Post a Comment