New Australian research finds that breastfeeding reduces neglect

[gategrrl]

Here's the link, and here's what I'm puzzling out.

The doctor who ran the study admitted that their was an inherent bias in the study, since you can't have a control group of mothers who don't bf and a control group of those who do (ethics, you see). Apparently the neglect isn't kept from happening if someone else feeds the baby with breastmilk. See, it *has* it *must* come from the mother and directly from her breast for neglect to be short-circuited.

I think there are assumptions being made here in the background.

A) that babies fed any other way aren't cared for as much as children who are breastfed
B) that mothers who give their babies formula, or who must use other methods of feeding their infants, even with expressed breast milk, are more likely to neglect their infants and children; this includes women who must work in order to support their families
C) and that other source-feeders of infants (fathers, grandparents, other caregivers) aren't going to make that connection with the infant that a breastfeeing mommy would

Have I covered everything here?

My bias? I tried bfing my first born, but had difficulties (thanks to bad advice given to me by male doctors and clueless nurses and a spasming back I needed medication for). For my second child, I managed to bf him for almost two years. And I homebirthed the second one in order to circumvent the clueless advice and indifferent treatment I got in the hospital. So, yes, I'm one of those women who agree with the doctor who ran that study that yes, it IS important and is *wonderful* for the baby and the mom to have that bfing connection. However. It's not necessary, and it's not all mom.

I think women who breastfeed in Western cultures (including Australia, where this study was conducted) are predisposed to want to go that extra mile for their babies and more likely to be, I don't know, crunchy granola types. Or not. Or they are simply smarter and of a higher economic class that is less likely to get child protective services and police called on them. Poorer women don't have the same choices as the middle class ones, and are more likely to have neighbors notice neglectful behavior and are more likely to have the authorities called on them. I don't think this factor was taken into account.

I'm not so sure that one (neglect) has to do with the other (not breastfeeding).

Comments

[tejas.livejournal.com]

I breastfed for three months, mostly because it was cheap. :-) That was also the length of time I was off work.

I think the study has been poorly constructed. Any woman who's going to go through the trouble (and it is its own brand of trouble) of breastfeeding is unlikely to be a neglectful mother. She may have other problems, but she's likely going to pay some sort of attention to her child. If she weren't, she certainly wouldn't breastfeed.

[gategrrl.livejournal.com]

It's self-selecting. *nods*

[tejas.livejournal.com]

Yep. And while that can be useful for gathering some base data, it's *crap* for establishing a comparative study group.

[whisper99.livejournal.com]

You posted what I was thinking. ITA :)

[sars.livejournal.com]

Those kinds of studies are always biased because they know going in what outcome they want going in.

It's the way they phrase everything that irks me the most.

[gategrrl.livejournal.com]

I think it's obvious (or perhaps not, because these studies are conducted all the time, it seems) that yes, it's good for infants to be cared for by a caring mother.

But there is so much baggage with that thesis and assumption.

Children have also been cared for by foster parents in many cultures. In many cultures, there were also wet-nurses for mothers whose own milk dried up for whatever reason or other.

What about adoptive parents? What about fathers? What about---

You get the idea, and I think I'm preaching to the choir here.

Perhaps there IS a correlation of some sort between the two, but it doesn't have to be *causal*.

This sounds like a very conservative based study.

[sars.livejournal.com]

Exactly.

Like, by their reasoning, father's are always going to be more neglectful than mothers because they can't breastfeed their child. What rubbish.

[tejas.livejournal.com]

What it ultimately comes down to is a kid needs at least *one* good parent (not one good one and one mediocre or bad one - they'd be better off with *just* the one good one in those cases). Anything beyond that is gravy. *Good* gravy, but gravy, nonetheless.

This concept pisses off the ultra-conservative types to no end.