A Canadian report was released looking at the impact of free formula on breastfeeding rates. At parentcentral.ca, Laurie Monsebraaten and Noor Javed wrote about the study in Free formula spoils breastfeeding:

Almost 40 per cent of new mothers leave the hospital with free infant formula, a recipe for spoiled breastfeeding according to a new Toronto Public Health report.

Women who didn’t receive the free samples were 3.5 times more likely to be breastfeeding exclusively after 2 weeks, said Breastfeeding in Toronto, Promoting Supportive Environments, released Tuesday.

The study, conducted in 2007 and 2008, found that of 1,500 first-time mothers surveyed, 39 per cent were given formula at hospital discharge. As a result, many of these women stopped breastfeeding sooner than those women who weren’t given formula.

These numbers are astounding, considering that 90% of Canadian women who give birth initiate breastfeeding. If we assume that the 10% that went straight to formula got a handout, then that means that almost 1/3 of women who do initiate breastfeeding are leaving the hospital with formula samples.

Overall, by 3 months:

  • 32% are exclusively formula feeding
  • 16% are combination feeding (some breast, some formula)
  • 52% are exclusively breastfeeding

I am willing to concede that some of the mothers that leave the hospital with formula samples may not have overcome their breastfeeding difficulties even if no sample had been offered. That said, the combination of the high number of women receiving free formula when discharged and the likelihood that they will break into that sample by the two week mark is likely a strong contributor to the significant drop between breastfeeding initiation and continued exclusive breastfeeding.

According to the  parentcentral.ca article:

“They give it to the women ‘just in case’,” she said. “But the real message is that you will probably fail… and one bottle leads to another.”

The Toronto East General Hospital is the only baby friendly hospital in Toronto, canceled its contract for free formula in 2005 to comply with the baby friendly requirements and the WHO International Code of Marketing of Breast-Milk Substitutes.  Since they do not get the formula for free from formula companies, they need to actually assess whether a mom needs the formula, instead of handing it out ‘just in case.’

Other countries with a larger percentage of baby friendly hospitals than we have in Canada and the United States also have higher breastfeeding rates.  I think one of the many things that needs to be done to give moms the best chance possible of being successful at breastfeeding is to ensure that they aren’t being sabotaged from Day 1. Don’t you?

Note: source for all statistics on Canadian breastfeeding rates is the Maternity Experiences Survey from 2006/2007.

Image credit: D-Arb on flickr

Bookmark and Share

{ 30 comments }

Is this how the world sees moms? It is how the New York Times sees them.

Jennifer Mendelsohn wrote an article in the New York Times on mom bloggers, called Honey, Don’t Bother Mommy. I’m Too Busy Building My Brand. I thought about writing a parody about journalists in response to it. But then I reconsidered. I realized that I do not need to diminish others in order to prove my own worth.

There are good journalists and there are bad journalists. There are journalists who do nothing more than turn around stuff written by public relations staff and there are journalists who do investigative journalism and cross-check their sources. There are journalists who write about things I consider frivolous and boring and there are journalists who write about issues I think are of critical importance.

The same is true in the blogging world. The blogs that I find interesting, intriguing, thought provoking or therapeutic, someone else might find boring, stupid or threatening. The blogs other people find interesting, I may find boring, frivolous or unethical corporate shills.

We are a diverse community. Diverse enough that there are moms who write about making crafts, tutus, felt food, or slings. There are moms who write about natural birth, potty training, sleep, and postpartum depression. There are also moms who write about corporate ethics, politics, feminism, health care issues, nutrition, social media, and more.

I don’t think it is any more appropriate to poke fun at moms writing about teaching your baby to read or hiding vegetables in their children’s food, than it would be for me to poke fun at journalists who think that this spring’s latest lipstick shade or some celebrity’s extramarital affairs are worth writing about (despite the fact that they make me yawn and roll my eyes).  If there is an audience, it is worth writing about and in the world of blogs, there doesn’t even need to be an audience for it to be worthwhile since just the therapeutic act of getting your thoughts down on the screen may be enough for some bloggers.

So when Jennifer Mendelsohn wrote an article peppered with mommy stereotypes in a tone that seemed to belittle the work of mom bloggers (although I hope and suspect that isn’t what she intended to do), it is no wonder that there was a rash of protest. Every writer chooses the wrong words sometimes. I know I do. But I don’t have an editing team to catch me before things go public. The New York Times does and this article should not have been printed without some significant revisions.

Here are some of the fabulous voices on this article, ones that demonstrate a thousand times over the greatness of moms who blog:

  • Newspaper Bias Against Mom Bloggers (Kelby Carr): Kelby (also known as Type A Mom) writes about the condescending and insulting tone the article uses to describe mom bloggers. She points out that mom blogging is an industry, not just “something we cute adorable widdle mommies do to share diaper stories” and that there are a number of reasons why we are being marginalized by traditional media.
  • Mommy is Busy Blogging (Motherlode): Lisa from NY Times very own mommy blog put up a brief post about the article. There isn’t much to the post, but there is plenty to read in the comments if you are interested in a rather diverse set of opinions on this article.
  • An Open Letter to the New York Times About Mom Bloggers, Women Writings & the Universe (PunditMom): Joanne, one of my BlogHer 10 co-panelists, wrote that she is “so weary of [the New York Times] attempts to marginalize women writers online who happen to be mothers” that she almost didn’t write her post, but she did because she wants to change the landscape so that her daughter won’t have to fight the same battle we are fighting. She breaks down the language and content of the post and wonders whether primarily male-attended conferences would have received the same type of condescending coverage.
  • NY Times Not So Mind Blowing Expose of the Mommy Bloggers (Momma in the Fog): Priscilla  writes that the article seems a bit confuses as to what its point and angle is, but that ultimately it “shows how very unprogressive our thinking is these days if we are still unable to talk about female industriousness outside of the typical stereotypes — the gold digger, the career ‘bitch’ and the vapid homemaker. Let’s call someone a hooker and call it a day.”
  • An Australian Fringe Dweller (Good Goog): Zoey wrote that she is somewhat removed from the situation, as an Australian blogger, but that she found it off-putting nonetheless. She delves into some of the particularly colourful and not-so-helpful comments on the story.
  • Bette Nesmith Graham, Mommy Bloggers and the NY Times (The Smartmama): Jennifer tells the story of a “mommy” business later sold to a major corporation for $47.5 million.  Can you guess which one? The point being that to dismiss and belittle this “diverse group of very powerful, very passionate, very invested, very active women” would be a huge mistake.
  • She is Vast, And She Contains Multitudes (Her Bad Mother): Catherine writes about how the important advocacy work she is doing for her sick nephew Tanner was belittled in the article, about how diverse mothers are,  and also about the silliness of the big (male-dominated) SXSW conference that she just attended.
  • Tear Down that Wall? (Work. Life. Balance): Chrysula writes about the expectation that we will have clearly delineated lines between our professional and personal lives and about the trend away from that towards a more integrated life.

Rather than just complaining, I’d like to put a challenge out. Is there a journalist who would like to write an article for a mainstream paper that would present a balanced view of mom bloggers? Or is there a mainstream paper out there that would like a writer who could write one (because I know a few people who could take that on). Let me know.

Bookmark and Share

{ 35 comments }

Anti-princess heroines from my youth

by phdinparenting on March 10, 2010

After posting about Disney princesses yesterday, I was chatting with Rebecca from A Little Bit of Momsense and she pointed out that she was She-Ra for Halloween when she was little. I responded saying that I was once Wonder Woman. The conversation got me thinking about the female heroines of my youth and I realized that none of them are the Disney Princess types. Sure, I liked Snow White, but it was the story that intrigued me and not the Snow White character in particular (I loved the dwarfs!). I also played with typical girl toys like My Little Ponies and Strawberry Shortcake, but I would say that the majority of my childhood media influences were either strong heroines or were male. Not all of my  heroines are the perfect feminist ideal, but they are certainly not the typical princess type that is so popular today. Here is a sampling…

She-Ra – Princess of Power

Yes, she’s a princess, but certainly not your typical Disney Princess.

Wonder Woman

Nancy Drew

ShellyS on flickr

Pippi Longstocking

Caitlin Ryan on Degrassi Junior High and Degrassi High

Charlie’s Angels

Ramona Quimby

Elizabeth Wakefield from Sweet Valley

Peppermint Patty from Charlie Brown

The girls from the Facts of Life

I loved the girls from the Facts of Life, except the pretentious Blair of course.

Velma and Daphne from Scooby Doo

Lisa Simpson

Note: Most of these images and the corresponding links are from Amazon because I was having trouble finding good Creative Commons images of the heroines of my youth and Amazon provided a good alternative. Clicking on the links and purchasing the products from Amazon does provide me with a much appreciated yet small affiliate payment.

Bookmark and Share

{ 44 comments }

All I think about is princesses…

by phdinparenting on March 9, 2010

My partner is a stay-at-home dad and he sometimes fills me in on the deep conversations he has during the day with our little girl. Ones like this:

Emma: Daddy, what are you thinking about?

Daddy: I’m thinking about putting the tiles on the backsplash. What are you thinking about?

Emma: I’m always thinking about princesses.

Such is the life of an almost three year old girl.

As a thirty-something feminist, I don’t expect to spend a lot of my time thinking about princesses. But these days, it does seem like I’m spending a lot of time thinking about them. From princess books, to princess movies, to princess birthday parties and princess pretend play, princesses are invading my home, my life and my thoughts. As if that wasn’t enough, when I try to escape into the world of adult conversation and news, I find princesses, princesses, and lots more princesses.

I don’t really like princesses. At least not the popular image of a princess. I don’t like how focused they are on their looks. I don’t like that their life’s goal is to meet and marry a rich and handsome prince. I don’t like their completely impractical clothing. I don’t like the fact that every single girl in Julian’s preschool class was a princess for Halloween. I don’t like the entitlement attitude. I don’t like the lavish lifestyle. I don’t like the snobbery. I don’t like the daintiness.

Since I’m not a huge princess fan, you would think I would welcome news from Disney that it is trying to make its next big animated movie less princess-focused. But I don’t. At least not the way they are doing it. According to the Los Angeles Times article “Disney restyles ‘Rapunzel’ to appeal to boys“:

After the less-than-fairy-tale results for its most recent animated release, “The Princess and the Frog,” executives at the Burbank studio believe they know why the acclaimed movie came up short at the box office.

Brace yourself: Boys didn’t want to see a movie with “princess” in the title.

This time, Disney is taking measures to ensure that doesn’t happen again. The studio renamed its next animated film with the girl-centric name “Rapunzel” to the less gender-specific “Tangled.”

But that isn’t all. In addition to changing the name of the movie, they also introduced a new male character, an infamous bandit Flynn Rider just to appeal to boys. A character that isn’t there in the original. The New York Review of Books A Girl in the Tower article on Rapunzel stories explains:

In the Grimms’ tale of “Rapunzel” (though not in the Pentamerone), the prince is a fairly ineffective figure. After he climbs Rapunzel’s hair into the tower and is confronted by the witch, he jumps from the window in despair and is blinded by thorns. Both he and his beloved then wander about alone in misery for several years, but at last they are reunited and when Rapunzel’s tears fall on his eyes his sight is restored.

The NPR’s blog on this topic, called “Dear Disney: Boys Aren’t Stupid, But Renaming ‘Rapunzel’ Is” explains that other Disney princess movies like the Little Mermaid did fine at box offices [emphasis mine]:

There are princess characters who do just fine with boys, but I think the word “princess” now carries an implication of passivity and romantic fixation and therefore a lack of interest that Disney has created, not discovered.

The blog post goes on to explain that Alice in Wonderland is expected to do well despite not being called Hatter! and that Up would probably not have failed if Russell had been a girl instead of a boy.

I recognize that Disney’s primary goal is profit and not ensuring an appropriate cultural education for my children, but I wish that instead of keeping the princess and adding a “cool guy” on top, that Disney would think about what role it can play in deconstructing gender stereotypes and showing girls that they don’t have to be princesses and boys that they don’t have to be charming machos. As a feminist, I don’t object outright to girls wanting to pretend that they are princesses, but I do object to them being consistently brainwashed with the princess mentality. As a pacifist, I don’t object outright to kids playing with swords and guns, but I do object to them being consistently brainwashed into thinking that violence and war is a way to solve problems. We need some balance. Balance that allows all kids to experiment, use their imagination, and have fun without being told “girls don’t do this” and “boys don’t do that“.

My challenge to Disney: Instead of thinking about how to appeal to girls and appeal to boys, think about how you can create strong characters that help to break down the gender stereotypes you’ve invested so much money into building.

Image credit: Express Monorail on flickr

Bookmark and Share

{ 43 comments }

What should we say instead?

March 6, 2010

Language is a powerful thing. I sometimes object to other people’s choice of words. They sometimes object to mine. We let words impact us and give them power they may or may not have earned. There are words that cut like a knife and words so powerful and so objectionable that they really shouldn’t be [...]

0 comments Read the full article →

Mentoring the Next Generation (Almost Wordless Wednesday)

March 3, 2010

I far too often hear “but I don’t want my children to see THAT” in people’s objections to nursing in public.  I think we need our children to see more of THAT.
Be a mentor!

var addthis_language = ‘en’;var addthis_options = ‘email, favorites, digg, delicious, kirtsy, myspace, google, facebook, reddit, stumbleupon, twitter, more’;

38 comments Read the full article →

A day in the life of marginalizing “fringe groups” in Canada

March 2, 2010

Most days, I’m proud to be Canadian. Whether I’m talking about our health care system, our maternity and parental leave programs, feminist leaders, or other topics close to my heart, my country usually makes me proud (even if it isn’t perfect). Today, however, my heart sunk. I was hit with bad news and then slapped [...]

13 comments Read the full article →

A different kind of baby-led weaning

March 1, 2010

When people talk about baby-led weaning, they are usually referring to the method of introducing solid food that involves introducing finger foods and allowing the baby to decide what and how much to eat, rather than the parents spoon feeding baby food. Over time, feedings at the breast are gradually replaced with self-feeding of the [...]

38 comments Read the full article →

Are we using our brains when it comes to epidurals?

February 26, 2010

A 2009 study called Social disparity and the use of intrapartum epidural analgesia in a publicly funded health care system by Ning Liu MB, MSc et al concluded that in Canada “the use of labor epidural analgesia is decreased with decreasing neighborhood economic and education levels.” Or, in plain language: rich highly educated women are [...]

91 comments Read the full article →

Healthier Olympic Sponsorship Videos

February 24, 2010

A few days ago, I wrote about how I despise the McDonald’s and Coke sponsorship of Olympic athletes. Today, I want to share a few better Olympic sponsorship videos with you.
American Ski Champ and Organic Farmer: Bode Miller

Hockey Players and Egg Farmers of Canada: Hayley Wickenheiser and Kim St.Pierre

Thanks to Lisa from from Borden [...]

Related Posts with Thumbnails
15 comments Read the full article →