Tuesday 12 February 2013

Joan Wolf and others, 'Is Breast Best?'

Professor Joan B. Wolf, of Texas A & M University, is giving a lecture entitled  'Is Breast Really Best? Breastfeeding, Motherhood, and the Politics of Careʼ at the Centre for Parenting Culture Studies (CPCS) at the University of Kent, where she is a Visiting Fellow, on 13 February. Several articles have been published on the subject: Viv Groskop in the Guardian outlined Wolf's academic position, as an 'American critic of research into the health benefits of breastfeeding', characterising her as 'a leading figure in a backlash against breastfeeding'. Prof Wolf herself has an opinion piece in the Independent. New Statesman published this piece by Glosswitch with the heated headline 'Our regressive, insensitive and cultish attitude to breastfeeding'.


Wolf's book, Is Breast Best? Taking on the Breastfeeding Experts and the New High Stakes of Motherhood was published in 2011; her lecture, according to the literature from the CPCS, reviews the central arguments of the book and discusses the book's reception, which has been, according to Groskop's article, 'mostly negative'. Other bloggers have already taken both Prof Wolf and the writers of these articles to task, including mummyisagadgetgeek, Michelle Atkin, and the Analytical Armadillo (who didn't have to write a new post; she'd said it all already). You might well wonder whether I've got anything left to add.

I've come across the Centre for Parenting Culture Studies at the University of Kent before - last year, when I was blogging about media reaction to UNICEF's report about the cost-effectiveness of implementing programmes of breastfeeding support. Two members of the CPCS, Dr Charlotte Faircloth and Dr Ellie Lee, were drafted in to comment on the 'other side' when the Unicef report was discussed on television, taking up positions similar to Wolf's, which rests on three main points (or, as Wolf describes them):

'fundamentally false beliefs: that every time scientific research finds a relationship between two phenomena, one necessarily causes the other; that people who behave responsibly and are willing to make difficult choices can prevent virtually all risk, including health risks; and that breastfeeding is free.'

It may not be apparent to readers or viewers in general that part of what is happening here is academic position-taking. Those engaged in research - in all disciplines - explore ideas by taking a stance on a question and investigating it further: doing research, writing it up, presenting it to colleagues, publishing it in academic journals. And in academia, as elsewhere, there are careers and names to be made and research funding to be secured, books to be commissioned and TV appearances to be lined up. So I'm not really surprised to find some academics taking a stance against breastfeeding; they've found themselves a niche. And I'm not offended by the academic debate about breastfeeding in itself - particularly in how it relates to questions of feminism and economics - although I find it hard to find any common ground at all with Wolf's view and disagree strongly with all three of her points above.

I do, however, have a problem with the language that is being used - by both Wolf herself and those reporting her work. This article by Diane Wiessinger, IBCLC - from 1996! - deals comprehensively with how, in terms of breastfeeding, elevating it to something 'special', with 'benefits', actually undermines it. Breastfeeding is normal. This idea has become mainstream in breastfeeding support (it's specifically covered in peer supporter training, for example), and it should be becoming rare now to hear someone involved in breastfeeding talking about the 'benefits'. Yet the headlines of all three articles mentioned above, and the title of Wolf's book, deliberately use the outdated phrase 'Breast is best' or its inverse, 'Breast isn't always best'. You might think I'm attaching too much significance to this; I think that the newspapers, and Wolf herself, have no interest in the realities of breastfeeding culture and support and every interest in creating a media storm where the debate is artificially polarised.

I also find it surprising, as someone who's on the front line of breastfeeding support, that Viv Groskop can say in her article, after reporting figures that show that by six weeks more than half of parents have introduced formula 'This is contrary to the cultural messages we receive about breastfeeding: that we should be doing it and we should feel bad if we don't.' What cultural messages do we really receive about breastfeeding? It seems to me the total opposite - with the exception of the NHS and a relatively small community of pro-breastfeeding individuals, our prevailing culture is downright hostile to breastfeeding and breastfeeding supporters. Breasts are sexualised, mothers are harrassed for feeding in public, the bottle is the universal symbol for infant feeding, formula and baby feeding companies flout the WHO marketing code left, right and centre (as a topical example, check out this blog about  Mothercare's current Innosense ad campaign). The women I see who are struggling with breastfeeding don't, in general, want to carry on because they feel they should - they want to carry on in spite of pressure to the contrary because it's important to them (for any number of valid reasons: they don't agree with Wolf's view of the scientific research, they feel instinctively that it's right for them, their own mother breastfed them).

There's clearly a discord between academic (political, social, economic) discussion of breastfeeding and the reality of it for new mothers. Where this is most problematic is where theory and practice intersect; that's one reason why we value research into breastfeeding to give us a clearer picture, why different types of report (such as the UNICEF one mentioned above, and the Infant Feeding Survey) are important, and why the NHS and other bodies have clear policies about breastfeeding. It's the more abstract dialogue about breastfeeding that muddies the waters and turns the interested parties against each other - often unnecessarily, because questioning and debate are important (although dogmatic position-taking and scoring cheap points aren't) and in the end, that's the problem I have with the latest reports of Wolf's work.





9 comments:

  1. "What cultural messages do we really receive about breastfeeding? It seems to me the total opposite - with the exception of the NHS and a relatively small community of pro-breastfeeding individuals, our prevailing culture is downright hostile to breastfeeding and breastfeeding supporters."

    This. Particularly the last three words. What other group of people regularly get likened to the mafia, Nazis, and the gestapo, even in mainstream media.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "It may not be apparent to readers or viewers in general that part of what is happening here is academic position-taking." Quite agree. If BfN or NCT are on one side of the argument (and its always an argument!) then you know where they're coming from. If its a general academic/expert, then its a bit more difficult.

    Reading about Uni of Kent led me to this, which has some stuff on their background: http://rcpwatch.wordpress.com/. If they do have as many media links as it claims, it might explain why there seems to be so much coverage (5live as well this morning!) of a lecture about a 2 year old book!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for your comment Jay - and interesting reading about the Uni of Kent there, thank you for pointing me in that direction.

      Delete
  3. Is breast feeding 'normal'?

    In theory it is but in practice not at all imv. I never see mums breastfeeding, though I am 58 so don't spend time at places where mums congregate.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Thanks for your comment. By 'normal' I mean that it's the normal way for us as a species to feed our infants - we're mammals and secrete milk for our young. It's not something extra special that we do because we wan't to give our children advantages. It's an important distinction (for more see the post about language I linked to in the piece). I agree with you that in practice breastfeeding is not seen as normal in our culture and is often fairly invisible - those of us who support breastfeeding and breastfeeding mothers would like our culture to be a lot more breastfeeding friendly!

    ReplyDelete
  5. "Our prevailing culture is downright hostile to breastfeeding and breastfeeding supporters. Breasts are sexualised, mothers are harrassed for feeding in public, the bottle is the universal symbol for infant feeding, formula and baby feeding companies flout the WHO marketing code left, right and centre (as a topical example, check out this blog about Mothercare's current Innosense ad campaign). The women I see who are struggling with breastfeeding don't, in general, want to carry on because they feel they should - they want to carry on in spite of pressure to the contrary because it's important to them."

    You are so right about this, but yet a lot of women I see antenatally have the feeling, or the apprehension, that they're going to be pressured into breastfeeding, such is the media influence...

    Anne

    ReplyDelete
  6. What do you think of Wolf's "Total Motherhood" lament? Sexist, no? How ironic for a women's studies prof to be sexist.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, totally agree with your analysis of the way she overlooks men's contribution to parenting; also haven't seen her tackle some of the feminist discourse about breastfeeding that sees it as a woman's fundamental and biological right, and the barriers to it in society as evidence of patriarchal oppression.

      Delete
  7. An interesting dialogue is price comment. I feel that it is best to write more on this matter, it may not be a taboo topic however usually individuals are not enough to talk on such topics. To the next. Cheers. breast actives reviews

    ReplyDelete