Why I’m a Feminist AND a Lactivist

Oct 05th 2011

I’m going to try to explain this in a way that I believe my fellow feminists will understand by using a hypothetical scenario. Try to imagine…

…We’re living in a society that hospitalizes healthy young women for a few days of observation when they hit biological puberty, as marked by the onset of menstruation. This is a critical time in a woman’s reproductive life, so it’s important that we monitor it in the event of an emergency.

While the young woman is in the hospital, Nesbott Inc. offers her free prophylactic breast augmentation surgery. After all, the young woman has just begun puberty, and there is no way of knowing whether she will be able to grow the Big Beautiful Breasts she desires. In our society, every woman is entitled to have Big Beautiful Breasts whether they can pay for them or not. But what if she’s incapable of growing them? We don’t want to wait around to find out. So Nesbott Inc. offers her this free procedure during her hospitalization so that she has the “choice” to have Big Beautiful Breasts. But Nesbott Inc. doesn’t tell the young woman that if she accepts this “free” surgery, she’ll be required to continue to make payments of approximately $200 per month for an entire year once their “trial” period is over. They also don’t explain any of the risks that come with the surgery, nor do they mention the long-term health implications of interfering with the natural biological process of growing and utilizing one’s own healthy tissue. Sure, they say “Your breasts are best” but we all know what they really mean is that keeping our own breasts is a lofty, unattainable goal for the majority of women. And Nesbott Inc. certainly doesn’t mention that this “trial” process is really not a “trial” at all, since the procedure will be quite complicated to reverse, IF it can be reversed at all.

But it’s her right. The feminists fought to give us choices, and it makes perfect sense that Nesbott Inc. should be allowed to enter a young woman’s hospital room and sell her a “free” product in the name of choice, no matter the health risks. They are hers to claim. To the young woman, Nesbott Inc. is an altruistic corporation who is obviously only giving her a free product because they truly care about her and her right to make this choice. The fact that they’ll make $200 a month off of her for the next year isn’t even factored into the equation because, at least while she’s hospitalized, it’s free! And who doesn’t want something that’s free? Especially when we’ve all been told that we should have Big Beautiful Breasts, and knowing how many women are incapable of growing them, she just can’t take the chance that she’ll be one of them. The guilt would consume her.

Of course, the mastectomy patients and fire victims who could really use the breast augmentation surgery have to pay a much higher price now because the altruistic Nesbott Inc. has been giving away their surgeries for “free”.

And we don’t put any money into looking for natural ways to increase bust size, which would be healthier for the young woman who truly can’t grow her own. Why do that when we have a cheap way to make fake ones?

And what about the young women who don’t want the surgery? Well, the world thinks they’re weird hippies who are constantly making a spectacle with their small, non-augmented breasts. Society expects them to use falsies whenever possible, or stay in the bathroom if they MUST bring those weird, unaltered breasts out in public. Of course, any time the non-augmented women try to assert that their real breasts are healthier, people tell them to shut their mouths and stop talking crazy. There is NO way that natural is better, and even if it were, the Natural Boob Women are only saying so to guilt everyone else about exercising their choice to have Big Beautiful Breasts. It’s a full-on war, and we must support a healthy woman’s choice to be given a free product that she may not need, which will trap her into paying a huge sum to a corporation, and compromise her long term health. It’s the feminist way!

___________________________________

Now the stark reality: If you think the above scenario is outrageous, it’s absolutely not. This is what happens every single day that a brand new mother is handed bags of free formula in a hospital, regardless of whether or not she plans to breastfeed. In the above scenario, I would think any feminist worth her salt would see Nesbott Inc.’s false charity, and recognize that Nesbott is simply snagging these young women as consumers before the women really have a chance to decide if they need the product. And what if these young women really, truly did want augmentation? Well, we’ll never know because the corporate influence is so intertwined in the decision-making process. Do these feminists even realize that breastfeeding women have a lower risk of breast cancer, ovarian cancer, Type 2 Diabetes, postpartum depression, and heart disease (the #1 killer of women?) As a feminist, I consider it irresponsible to advocate for a corporation that assists in harming women’s health while disguising it as “choice.”

In our reality, Nestle and Abbott want you to know that they don’t want to take any chances that you may actually be able to make your own milk for your baby. This is a critical time to make critical choices, so they’re going to give you “free” formula right from the start. And why not take it? It’s FREE! I mean… until it costs $26 per can every 2-3 days, never mind the increased health care costs. And of course someone’s got to pay for those free samples, so they’ll just pass that cost on to the next mom. And once you take the formula and stop your body’s ability to breastfeed that baby, there’s almost no “choice” to go back. Relactation is difficult, so they’ve got your money from now until the baby hits at least a year old, wooo hooo!

Perhaps you’ve decided that you want to give your baby donor milk? Well, sorry, we don’t put money in to making donor milk more widely available because formula is a billion dollar industry, so real breastmilk is going to cost you $4 per ounce. We cannot have women using their breasts when they could be buying an inferior, manufactured product.

And what if you made the choice to breastfeed and had a successful start? Well, you’re in the minority, so ergo you are a weirdo and are not allowed to eat your dinner with the rest of us. We also will not allow you to claim lactation support services on your health insurance. After all, this is America and we are certainly not in the business of keeping people healthy. It’s better for business if we can get you sick and then charge you to get well. Didn’t you get the message printed on the side of your Enfamil-branded diaper bag? You should be formula-feeding. That’s the only “choice” we support. And the only way to support that is to invite Nestle and Abbot Labs into your delivery room to get your baby on their product first – before anyone else, including you, has a chance to mess that up for them.

For all of the reasons above, I cannot imagine why any feminist would support formula marketing and blatant violations of the WHO International Code of Marketing Breast-milk Substitutes, but apparently many loud, respected ones do. All I can think is that they have done zero research or homework on what they’re claiming to support. They think they’re taking a feminist position by advocating choice, but really, they’ve just been duped into supporting a corporation who harms human health all over the planet, and has been repeatedly boycotted for decades. Many people are also arguing that banning the free formula bags is simply the hospital’s way of cutting costs, but that’s just not true. It is largely known that the hospitals and their staff get huge incentives to accept these samples. Of course they do! That’s exactly how marketing works – especially pharmaceutical marketing (and in case we’re not making the connection here, Similac is made by Abbot Labs, which is a pharmaceutical company.)

I absolutely support a woman’s right to choose to feed her baby formula, but I absolutely do NOT support the drug company’s “right” to be in the delivery room, handing out products that are only designed to stand between the mother and her breastmilk. And contrary to the popular (misguided) belief of famous feminists like Jessica Valenti, the UNICEF “Baby-Friendly” hospitals are NOT denying access to formula, or even preventing women from receiving free formula. It is still there for the mothers who need it. Those who don’t have a medical need for it can elect to purchase it just about anywhere. Those who cannot afford it can get it through WIC (actually, the state purchases the majority of infant formula sold in the U.S.) If your baby really needs it, insurance will even help pay for it. Nobody is in any danger of losing their choice to formula feed, even if we start enforcing the WHO code.

Just because you’ve used infant formula (I have), and you support formula-feeding moms (I do), does NOT mean you should support formula marketing.

And what about the moms who intend to breastfeed? Well, Nesbott Inc. will make sure they assist in that decision if at all possible. If you’ve got a breastfeeding question, they want you to call their “Breastfeeding Help Line” so they can help you figure out why you should be buying their product instead.

And this? This is why I’m a feminist AND a lactivist, and why all other feminists should be too.

And here’s my follow-up regarding the rampant classism I’ve seen among those who will deny the truth about unethical marketing, after a self-proclaimed feminist uses ad hominem attacks and insults to deflect attention from the real issue.

_________________________________

This post celebrates Breast Cancer Awareness Month. As they say, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, and breastfeeding is a perfectly free way to help prevent breast cancer. If you’re looking for more information, visit BestForBabes.org. Dig it.

Related Posts with Thumbnails


Earth Mama Angel Baby


Post comment as twitter logo facebook logo
Sort: Newest | Oldest
LennieBK 5 pts

The hospital that I had my son in was wonderful when I came to breastfeeding. They automatically assumed you were going to BF. They encouraged rooming-in, had a lactation consultant on every shift, offered a pump to help stimulation (which you got to take all the attachments home with you when you left), they pushed skin to skin. They never once offered me formula. But at the 1 week check up at the Peds the nurse handed me two bags of free formula samples right after I told her I was BFing exclusively. I realize how lucky I was to be in such a supportive hospital but was dumbfounded by the dr office offering me formula "just in case I changed my mind"

Wonderful post! Nestle is sponsoring the American Academy of Pediatric's National Conference. They are in the delivery room and feeding our health care providers.

Here is a quote from the website, "PEDS 21 begins with a complimentary luncheon and ends with a festive reception supported by Nestle Nutrition Institute giving ample opportunity to view the latest research and network with colleagues on nearly every facet of preventing and treating childhood obesity."

Here is a with more information link: http://aap-365.ascendeventmedia.com/Assets/AAP/ema...

I have a child who tends to rescue stray orphaned injured baby animals and sometimes they need the formula. It's good for that. I love having the little bottles on hand (although I don't have a baby - I do have a granddaughter but I would never give her any without my daughters permission) I wish they sold those 2oz bottles like that in convenience stores for emergencies (and animal rescues). They are labeled not for individual sale, but that is what they should do with them.Do you have any suggestions why they don't sell those individually?

This same daughter recently had a mother cat with kittens and one of them was born with some sort of defect that was making it have a hard time nursing. My daughter actually milked this cat and dripped the expressed milk into the kittens mouth from her finger. She decided to use the real milk because The poor little thing was so small and weak that she wanted to give it the best she could, so I think she really gets that part. The kitten died after a couple of days anyway and it was really sad but it was so beautiful how she cared for that thing. I think she will be a great mom someday.

I know that story is kind of weird, but I thought you'd like it.

They do sell those 2 oz bottles individually. I bought them in cases for my first son. Check out Babies R Us.

Thanks but that's not really what I meant. They sold those in cases back when my oldest was a baby too. Someone gave me one.

I am talking about selling them for convenience, like just ONE at the gas station - like you can buy 1 pepsi if you want a drink and are thirsty right now (you don't have to buy a 6 pack).They don't do that.I was thinking of what I would consider an immediate need situation - like if you are babysitting and run out of milk, or if a bottle feeding mom is out and about and runs out (but has some at home).Leaving her to have to wait until she gets home or spend money on another whole can.

Thank you for the suggestion to go to Babies R Us. They probably would carry something like that if anyone would.

But again - in an emergency,I need to buy something at a gas station, not at the mall. The only reason I can think they would not sell single small servings at outlets that serve beverages is that just one isn't enough to dry up someones boobs, and they probably figure they can make people buy a larger amount than what they need if that's all that's available.

Gina, there is a major error in your post and thus in your analogy:

The posts you're linking to are *not* about Baby-Friendly hospitals in general, formula marketing, or blatant violations of the WHO code. They are responding to an article (at http://menmedia.co.uk/manchestereveningnews/news/s...) about one particular hospital that has decided to stop providing formula for newborns in all but situations in which the medical staff judge there to be a genuine medical need.

We're not talking, here, about a situation where a hospital decided to ban a formula company from coming into the rooms of new mothers to tell them how wonderful formula is. We're talking about a situation where:

a) a woman cannot simply come up and *ask* the staff for free formula and expect to be given it, absolutely regardless of how much time and effort she has put into researching her decision to formula feed prior to entering the hospital,

b) a woman who's trying to breastfeed but struggling mightily will not be allowed to give up and formula feed while in the hospital, or even give her baby a supplementary bottle to ease matters in times of desperation, unless the medical staff deem it acceptable for her to do so. She will not be allowed to make that choice herself. Again, regardless of how educated she is on the matter or how much thought she has put into her decision.

That situation is *not* about protecting women from vulnerable marketing. It's about saying that they need the stamp of medical approval to make their parenting decisions.

One other point: By using girls starting their first period as the analogous group here, what you've actually just done is used the decision-making abilities of girls in or around the 12 – 14 age range as an analogy for the decision-making abilities of adult women. No, thank you.

A.) You're completely ignoring the other choice women have for feeding: donor milk.

B.) The staff isn't refusing to allow women the choice to formula-feed. They have merely said that the mothers must bring it themselves. Adults are allowed to eat whatever they want in hospitals, but we don't expect them to provide our alternative foods for free? Do we? No. Valenti and the other uninformed feminists here keep framing this as though a choice is being taken away. It's not at all, and they're argument is complete misrepresentation of the UNICEF initiative.

It's not up to hospitals to provide processed food. However, they SHOULD be required to provide donor milk for moms who don't want to or cannot breastfeed.

You keep bringing up donor milk like it's the panacea to all formula-related woes, but is that really practical? From what I've heard, donor milk is kind of a scare resource and is much more important for preemies and babies with food intolerances, health problems, etc. How would it effect the supply and demand situation if every woman who was just struggling to breastfeed went straight to donor milk when their healthy full-term babies would realistically do just as well on formula?

The main reason donor milk is not more widely available is because no ethical entity is putting money into making it more widely available. (note: one of the companies providing donor milk to hospitals is in bed with the formula manufacturers, it takes milk DONATIONS from moms, then turns around and sells them back to moms in hospitals for several dollars per OUNCE.) http://justwestofcrunchy.com/2011/06/23/swindled-t...

However, there are many informal milk-sharing organizations (Eats on Feets http://eatsonfeets.org/, Human Milk 4 Human Babies http://www.hm4hb.net/) who all make FREE donor milk available to the moms that request it. With more support, they could be doing even more.

Prolacta's profit-driven markup on the price of donor milk is obviously sleazy, but I was under the impression that some degree of processing or pasteurization was necessary to ensure that donor milk is safe, and that even the non-profit milk banks need fees (or money from somewhere) in order to do what they do. Not sure I'm sold on the wisdom of free informal breastmilk sharing if it's true that both the AAP and LLL discourage it for safety reasons.

But getting back to the supply and demand thing... Even if every woman donated who possibly could, would it be enough to replace formula for those unable or unwilling to breastfeed? Not a rhetorical question, I'm genuinely not sure what those numbers look like. Although intuitively it seems like there are reasons (other than the lack of support / funding) that donor milk would be much more difficult to adequately mass produce than formula.

I'm not suggesting that it would or should replace any mass-marketed formula product. I've said again and again that it should be offered as an option, and funding should go into increasing access, especially when we know that it can mean the difference in survival for sick and/or premature babies, and many other babies as well.

Sorry if I misunderstood, it seemed like you were saying that hospitals should provide only donor milk and that it shouldn't be up to them to provide formula. My thinking is that if a woman isn't able or wiling to breastfeed, and there isn't a large enough supply of donor milk to go around -- which seems to be the case today, and which may be the case indefinitely -- then it absolutely should be the hospital's responsibility to provide formula.

But I completely agree that more funding and support should be going towards increasing access to donor milk, especially for sick and premature babies, even if it can't realistically be expected to completely replace formula.

I think the biggest problem with the issue of donor milk is understanding. Raw milk is such a boogeyman in this country. Oooh, if you drink raw milk, you will sprout horns and die a horrible death. Similarly, if you feed your baby donor milk that has not been collected in a sterile environment, screened and pasteurized (all of which makes it obscenely expensive), your baby is practically guaranteed to get HIV.

It's not that donor milk is not a practice in the hospital in question; rather, the problem is that donor milk is so often passed over as a possible choice. We can talk and talk and talk about the potential risks inherent to untested and unpasteurized donor milk. But how many of us talk about the potential and guaranteed risks of giving formula instead? The regulations on formula manufacturers are nothing, NOTHING, compared to the regulations placed on milk banks and the women who donate. I'm not allowed to donate milk to a milk bank because I take a medicine for my allergies that is considered perfectly safe for bf. Yet there's a certain level of rocket fuel present in formula that is considered perfectly safe. Bug parts, why not? Just a little extra protein, right?

I've donated 900 oz of milk in the past seven months to friends and complete strangers via my local Eats on Feets chapter. I have another 1050 oz and my stash grows by about 60 oz/week. I'm glad I can help these people out, people whose babies really need the breastmilk but their moms cannot provide it and they cannot afford the $3.50/oz mugging charged by the milk banks. I've always been clear to these women about my eating habits, what kind of meds I take or am likely to take, and I've been more than willing to show them that I've been tested for both drugs and serious diseases. Not a one has asked me to prove this, though. Apparently knowing that I feed my own baby the same milk is enough for them.

Apparently knowing that I feed my own baby the same milk is enough for them.

Bravo! Why don't more people realize this? And thank you for being a donor.

Holly, I don't think it's a matter of anyone assuming that unprocessed breastmilk is guaranteed to give your baby HIV. It's a matter of weighing the miniscule risk that the unpasteurized, unregulated breastmilk *might* be contaminated with HIV (or medications or whatever) against the similarly miniscule risk that the FDA-regulated formula product might cause some kind of lasting harm to your baby. I don't think it's fair to assume that anyone who would choose one over the other is necessarily doing so out of irrationality or ignorance.

Of course, if there are any needlessly strict rules against breastmilk donation that serve no useful purpose, these should obviously be revisited. And sure, if it turns out that the problem with formulas is really that they contain too much rocket fuel, those regulations should be revisited as well.

I've written a post at http://goodenoughmummy.typepad.com/good_enough_mum... explaining why I can't agree with the policy of no longer providing formula. However, regardless of whether you agree or disagree with me on that one, the main point I was trying to make is that refusing to provide formula for a woman who has asked for it is *not* the same as haranguing a girl in her early teens with one-sided information, and treating those two situations as though they were morally equivalent is not helpful.

As for donor milk, the reason I didn't discuss that was because there's no mention in the article of the staff providing it. The choices given are that a woman breastfeeds or that she makes her own arrangements to have formula available. If the hospital were to start providing donor milk, I think that would be great. Currently, what they're doing is refusing to provide any food for newborns apart from in emergency situations and insisting mothers have to arrange it themselves.

Thank you for this fantastic post. I gave birth to my daughter in July and made the decision even before I was pregnant to breastfeed. While in the hospital, we got off to a bit of a rocky start with bf'ing but overall, she seemed full and was wetting enough diapers. However, one of the nurses informed me she was nearing a 10% weight loss and I would need to supplement.

I instantly made a disgusted face and couldn't believe she was telling me that I would "need" to do this. She reacted to the face I made and said if I wanted, we could find alternative ways to feed her the formula rather than with a bottle but seemed determined that I would need to supplement. I outright refused to let her feed my baby formula because 1) baby was showing no signs that she wasn't getting enough to eat 2) she had NOT dropped 10% of her weight...

Well later in the day, baby was sent to the nursery to be examined by the pediatrician, and when she returned, a sample pack of similac was conveniently placed on her bassinet and I was pissed. I moved it away from the baby and continued to nurse her and I had been for two days. On the day we were discharged, there was another pack of similac in our room for us to take home. I left it right next to the bed, knowing that it had no place in my home.

I'm so thankful that I had prepared myself for breastfeeding beforehand or I would have instantly given in to that nurse and probably would have started supplementing right away. Once I returned home, my milk came in,the baby quickly gained back all of her weight and we've never looked back.

It is upsetting to see how little support there is for breastfeeding in a hospital setting. I have received numerous free samples, coupons, and checks for similac, enfamil, and gerber since then and wish they would just stop.

So thank you times a million for the work you do in the name of breastfeeding. Your blog helped me in the first few weeks when I was up at 3 am, my nipples felt like they were going to fall off, and I didn't know up from down.

You are very welcome. I rarely get to hear success stories (they are plentiful, but people aren't quick to share), and I really appreciate you sharing yours with us. Go Mama!

I was also sent home with free samples. I received some in the mail as well. I kept them in my pantry for 6 months before I realized I didn't need them. It's a good thing, because it turns out one of the canisters was recalled for having beetle larvae in it. Nice job, Similac.

Crystal
http://www.SoooBig.com

I recieved formula in the mail when my child was 16 months old.
?????? :/
They have def. wasted their time and money on me.

I don't disagree that formula companies are unethical, but I do disagree with the implication that women are so easily manipulated and persuaded. Either women are intelligent enough to make informed decisions for themselves (which you seem to think is true when it comes to making decisions about pregnancy and birth), or they are too vulnerable and hormonal to make good choices.

In this day and age you'd have to be living under a rock not to get the gist of the breastfeeding/formula debate. The bottom line is people make choices based on a lot of different things, and women who choose to bottlefeed should be able to do so without being shamed or disrespected because of it. The self-righteous (not you, specifically, the blogosphere in general) "my way is the only way" attitudes have got to stop. This is not how you convince people to come to your side of things.

Yes, I believe women are smart enough to make decisions for themselves, but then entire reason for my site's existence is because I believe in Informed Choice. That's why I call out providers who push interventions on moms in labor. That's why I help moms find information to make their own decisions. And if one more woman knows that the "free" formula isn't all it's cracked up to be, then I've done my job. If we thought women were never vulnerable to marketing, then why are feminists so mad at the beauty industry? Shouldn't women just know better than to be made to feel "fat?"

And let's not forget about pediatrician's offices! I worked as a postpartum doula with a mama who struggled to get her milk supply up during the first 3 weeks, and was going in to her pediatrician frequently for weight checks. Her pediatrician was initially quite supportive of the process even given baby's lower-than-average weight gain, and finally at week 3 we were seeing some big increases. The same weight check appointment as this good news, however, instead of offering praise that we had had a breakthrough, the pediatrician says "Great job but you know breastfeeding around the clock can be tiring. Give her this formula once a day instead of breastfeeding" and chucked a can of sucrose-based formula at us. I. Was. Stunned. I can only imagine that the formula rep had been by recently with a mountain of free samples. Because, WTH?

Sooo...

Marketing formula in the hospital is against the WHO codes...

Formula companies are doing it anyway...

How could anyone NOT have a problem with that?

I'm Canadian, and I have never seen free formula samples in hospitals here. Some formula companies send free samples in the mail when they get your name and address (I'm looking at you Motherhood Maternity, selling my information), but it comes to your home around your due date, and not from the hospital.

I can assure you that Canadian mothers have access to formula, even if it's not given out free in the hospital outside of cases of medical necessity. I don't feel that our choice is being taken away from us in any way. I feel that, on the contrary, choice is being given to us, because upwards of 95% of mothers here plan to breastfeed, and so we're honouring that choice and ensuring that no corporation interferes with it, one way or the other. Although it still irks me when I get the free formula in the mail.

Oh Amber - you tease me with all your socialist talk of keeping corporations out of human health. Sadly, our system is so broken that even the anti-establishment feminist folks can't see the forest for the trees.

I can't breast feed because I had breast cancer and lost my breasts. I was so thrilled to have a baby after cancer that I didn't care that she was fed formula. It was the best for my baby because that was all I had to offer. Thankfully, she doesn't show any ill effects from it and I have zero guilt about it.

I've watched the debate of whether formula companies should offer free formula or not and have been undecided until Gina's post. Even though I used formula and think there is nothing wrong with it, I don't think it should be given out free. I can how it would be detrimental to breastfeeding.

I was also given sample packs of diapers and a coupon for a diaper delivery service. Should these be given out? Some people use cloth. What about the pack of baby soaps? Some people use organic soaps.

One thing that I haven't seen mentioned is how little formula is actually given out free. Maybe it's different at different hospitals. I was given 6 cans of formula that made 6 bottles. I was given a can of powdered formula that made about 3 days of bottles. That isn't very much at all so the free formula really doesn't help much as far as expense for the parents go.

One more point - moms need to support one another. Please don't assume that a formula fed baby isn't loved or that the mom is lazy. I had a stranger walk up to me and tell me that she thought I was "disgusting that I was saving my perfect breasts instead of using them to feed my child." Believe me, I'd rather have my real boobs instead of my perfect implants if it meant that I never had cancer.

Thanks for your comment and perspective. To answer your question, I'm ambivalent about diapers and other samples because they don't derail other choices, especially ones as important as infant feeding. Getting a few free Pampers at the hospital doesn't stop anyone from using cloth diapers, but getting a little "free" formula can definitely derail breastfeeding efforts almost irreversibly.

But marketing of any kind in the delivery room should definitely be examined and vetted.

I forgot something in my previous post that I think is important to the issue of hospitals giving formula out.

The marketing definitely works. I bought the same formula that I was given because my baby did well with it from the get-go. I didn't want to mess with her not liking the cheaper brand. Incidentally, it was one of the most expensive brands (I won't say which one).

Blah blah.. Look, a company that violates the WHO codes deserves to be boycotted by mothers everywhere. Period. Women (even those who are not primary wage earners)often make purchasing decisions. So, stand up for babies by not purchasing any Nestle products. It's that simple. Goodbye Godiva.

Rock on! I wrote a blog post about this subject almost exactly a year ago in the wake of the massive Similac bug-parts formula recall. It's called, "A Formula For Wealth: Abbott Labs and the Rhetoric of Choice." Here's a link, if anyone would like to read it:

http://talesfromthecrunch.blogspot.com/2010/10/for...

One of my favorite tidbits: <>

I'm probably oversimplifying this but why do we need to remove the marketing from it's targeted audience? A marketing strategy without a targeted audience isn't much in the way of marketing now is it? Instead, why aren't we encouraging women to educate themselves on how the options available to them to feed their children so they can make an informed decision when the advertisement is presented to them?

If a commercial comes on the TV and I don't want to be subjected to the marketing I flip the channel or turn off the TV, if I don't want to see the Enfamil "commercial" in my hospital room I simply decline but that is because I've listened to the sales pitch PRIOR to standing in the checkout line and have decided I don't want or need that product. Waiting until you are in the delivery room to decide how you're going to feed your baby seems a bit irresponsible and I don't think it happens all that often.

I don't think I'm pro-breast feeding or pro-formula feeding, I'm more pro-feed-your-baby. I wrote a blog post not too long after delivering my daughter (she's my first) about how we had a really rocky start to breast feeding. I will never forget the second night home with her and she was screaming because she was hungry and couldn't focus enough to latch because she was so hungry and upset, couple that with the pain I was dealing with because of a bad latch and you can imagine the chaos that was our house. I finally told my husband to mix up a bottle using the sample formula Enfamil had sent to me in the mail a few weeks earlier. He did, she ate, I pumped and we all slept a few hours. She woke up later that night and we nursed. I still say that can of formula saved my sanity and our nursing relationship because it gave me the small break I needed to gather myself together and try again. The key thing to note in that story though is that I was informed on both products (if you will) and made an informed decision.

A woman in the hospital is not the same as a woman in front of a TV. She can't just get up and walk away, and (perfect illustration with your example) she is in a very vulnerable state with a new crying baby and may not realize what is or is not normal about it and will quickly resort to the free samples, which undermines the breastfeeding process. Free samples are one way I ended up formula-feeding my first son, even though it wasn't my intention. I made the decision to breastfeed LONG before being in the hospital, but that was NOT the choice that was supported. It was easier for them to just give me formula instead of helping me lactate. I wrote a post after delivering my last baby - the first baby who has never had formula. Like the first two, she went through that crying-seeming-hungry phase a couple days post birth. UNLIKE the first two, I knew that it wasn't formula that she needed, and I stuck with exclusive breastfeeding. and UNLIKE the previous two, I never once doubted my ability to keep breastfeeding. A formula sample *may* seem to save a mom's sanity for a night, but lots of other things can accomplish the same thing without introducing the same risks.

A couple of comments:

1) Formula companies are just that, companies. They want to maximize their profit. And, let's not forget that their competition doesn't have a powerful lobby or marketing department.

2) My milk didn't come in for six days post birth. Never once did the LC or pediatrician encourage me to supplement since it had the potential to do more damage than good. Pediatricians often create unnecessary worry over "weight gain" as if that was the only measure of a baby's health. It isn't.

3) When we hold formula companies responsible we do so to SUPPORT women. I want all children to have the best food possible for themselves. That means making sure formula companies are doing their due diligence when it comes to safety, marketing, etc.

I think the difference is that when you turn off the TV, there isn't a formula spokesperson to come into your room to say, "No, really, your baby isn't gaining weight the way s/he ought to be so you need to supplement with formula." And in your house, even if such a breach of your privacy were to occur, you'd be able to order the person out of your house. In the hospital, it's not either easy or realistic to expect that women will tell nurses and doctors what they may or may not suggest, recommend, or insist upon. And as forthright as I am, I have never told a medical expert charged with my care that they must leave my room immediately.

The fact is that formula companies are in the business of making money. Refusing them access to someone's hospital room is not denying them access to their target audience. It's removing their access to their targeted audience in a place where they have no business marketing. I don't want to see marketing for women's clothing in my post-partum hospital room, either.

YEP! That. Exactly.

Absolutely! Companies can market within marketing contexts; the hospital room isn't one.

Also, consumers have a right (or even a responsibility) to respond to marketing through both commentary and purchasing decisions. It is not an infringement on the company's "rights" to hold them accountable for the claims they make and the information they present.

Thank you Gina!! You completely echoed my feelings on this issue. It isn't guilt trippy to say that formula feeding has risks, it isn't anti-women to want them to have REAL choice.

The biggest thing that I don't get about the whole "not giving formula" is the double standard. The formula in the hospital is NOT FREE, it will be on your bill - if the insurance is picking up the tab, then yes I believe it should be medically necessary. Maybe I'm on a soapbox here, but if I had decided to formula feed. I can guarantee that I would rather have brought my own, because of the cost (with a $4000 deductible). They want to give the "free" stuff (the bags) to every mother, breastfeeding mothers especially (I've seen them called breastfeeding bags), so they have something to "turn to in a time of need" and they hope you never turn back. But when breastfeeding mothers have trouble getting a pump or nipple sheilds or find out that their insurance wont cover that "free" tube of Lansinoh at the hospital, that doesn't spark the same kind of heat. I believe that everyone has the right to decide for themselves if they want to breastfeed or not, and I do not think that you are not capable of packing a tub into your hospital bag before you go if you so desire to go down that road.

Two things:
First, The hospital isn't paying for this formula. The formula companies spend tons and tons (and tons) of money on getting these hospitals to pass out these free samples. They spend the money because they know that if they get you, they've got you for a year.
Second, I think it's wise to question ANY marketing in the delivery room, even a "breastfeeding" product (and Lanisoh is a WHO code violator, BTW.) However, nipple cream samples do not create the same consumer that formula samples create. A nipple cream can be used only as a therapy to treat a few days worth of sore nipples, and then probably never needs to be used again (I've never used a nipple cream more than two weeks after the birth.) Using a nipple cream doesn't hook someone into paying $200 per month for a full year, NOR does it carry the same huge health risks that formula feeding carries for both the mother and the baby.

You're right, the hospital isn't paying for this formula. But someone still is, it is not in any way free. If the baby gets it while in the hospital it's on the itemized statment, so the hospital gets a kick-back. If the mother switches to the brand in the sample bags then they're paying for it the whole year through and it's a win for the formula company.

I think it should be wise to question marketing in any hospital or professional advice setting be it childbirth or psychiatry. Companies are out to make money at whatever cost under the guise of assistance.

My point about the breastfeeding supplies, was that breastfeeding mothers have never had easy access to the things that could alleviate the burden of cost for the supplies that they wanted (not counting the recent changes about tax deductions etc), and I don't see why just because someone formula feeds that they should get freebies and feel entitled to them for for that reason. Again reiterating before it starts a big fuss with someone, medically necessary not withstanding, I'm talking about want here not need.

Sorry, just wanted to clarify. I was flustered when I wrote the first comment :) Thanks for writing this piece, I wish that this view was the general consensus.

Since the nipple balm given out in hospitals is a WHO code violator (and just isn't as good)Might I suggest you tell women to use Bag Balm instead. It's non toxic (is made for cow udders) inexpensive, works really well, and can be used for softening your hands and/or healing up small scrapes and abrasions for both kids and adults. You get it at a feed store or at Walgreens.It comes in a green tin that last a long time, or you can sometimes find smaller purse size tins (which they must make for human use or for people who have just one cow?)

I didn't find out that my daughter was given a bottle while I was in recovery for my unnecesarean until she was 18 months old (because my DH just didn't know any better to stop them or tell me at the time). And that was even though we had TOLD them she was going to be exclusively breastfed.

When my son was born, we knew better and even though I ended up with an HBAC turned CBAC (long story, off topic) and my DH stayed with him and made sure it didn't happen (because he was a bit more educated)... That one bottle was the first, last and only formula either one has received (unless DH is keeping something from me, LOL)

Of course in both situations I got a plethora of samples... With DD, I almost broke down and used one when she hit a growth spurt and was nursing *constantly* But DH knew by then that I was determined and he wouldn't "let" me (even though I think he wanted to). I finally gave those samples away, because I didn't want them there to tempt me.

My MIL works at a beauty school in another state, and women there are all the time having babies and needing formula, so when she left, she took about 4 cans of sample formula with her. There is a big part of me that feels like I am just contributing to the problem by doing that, but then again, by the time those women have come back to the school, they have made their choice (or in more cases, have had it made for them). So, at least it helps them get their babies fed. If I were closer, I would probably try to get information to them, or try to somehow work with my MIL to educate them. I figure I am just happy that my inlaws don't bug me too much about extended BF of my own kids since DH and his sister were both formula babies... :)

I couldn't agree with this more. It's such a commentary on our culture when even a well-respected feminist supports formula feeding over nursing!

Parents who want to formula feed have that right, but that doesn't mean that hospitals have to give them free formula. When you choose to breastfeed, you don't expect them to send you home with a free pump!!! It also shouldn't mean that families who don't want formula should have it forced on them and their baby. I refused any and all formula both in the hospital and at discharge with Sawyer. However, my MIL (who works for a hospital) took it upon herself to sign me up for samples of Similac!!! Some people just can't help themselves, I guess.

OMG YES.
My first son was born (after a failed induction led to a c-section) in a not so baby friendly hospital. He was kept for 4 hours before being brought to me. Luckily we had much success with nursing immediately. However, the staff ped told me to give him formula after he lost 6 oz overnight (um, I had TONS of amniotic fluid and then TONS of IV fluids while in labor, I assume a lot of that was water weight). I refused and my son left the hospital 2 oz under his birthweight. Of course they gave me a HUGE bag of formula since I started supplementing for a delay in milk (he was screaming in hunger) the night before we left. 1 week postpartum and we stopped supplementing and never looked back. He nursed for 19 months. My sister in law also had a baby at that same hospital and was told that since her daughter was only 5 lb 11 oz she HAD to supplement. My husband and I were her only breastfeeding support, as her husband and mother FORCED formula on the baby constantly. When I was in her presence I only saw her nurse 1 time. Every other time someone was giving the baby formula. She quit because of a "low supply" after 3 weeks. OF COURSE.
I refused to go back to that hospital for my second birth. I had a wonderful VBAC with a midwife in a baby friendly hospital. They never once offered formula and they do not even have pacifiers. He is 4.5 months old and nursing is the easiest thing ever.
I think hospitals should NOT give out free formula. If you don't want to breastfeed or you are not sure, bring your own when you go into labor. You are having a baby, things aren't cheap. Why do we expect hospitals to provide formula?? This practice needs to end. I don't think it is fair that I essentially pay for their formula in my hospital bill. It just doesn't make sense to me at all.

While I'd agree that it's possible to be a feminist and an advocate for breastfeeding, this topic has been weighing on my mind since I saw the Facebook link the other day, and I can't help feeling a little ambivalent about it. Here are some thoughts, in no particular order:

1. The hypothetical breast augmentation scenario doesn't quite seem to fit the situation, largely because "big beautiful breasts" are not a necessity in the same way that eating is -- nobody is going to die without big boobs, whereas babies do need nourishment, whether it's breastmilk or formula.

2. I don't think I've ever seen anyone seriously claim that formula is better than breastmilk in this day and age. The most I've seen is claims that formula isn't *that* much worse, so don't worry about it -- never that it's actually better.

3. Formula companies giving out free formula is either a duplicitous act of marketing, or an act of charity that drives up the cost for those who legitimately need it -- I don't see how it can be both. (And my guess would be that whatever they're spending on these formula gift bags is made up tenfold in profits from the women who start formula feeding when they may not have otherwise.)

4. The fword article seemed mainly concerned not that women were no longer going to get loads of free formula by default, but that at this particular hospital, formula won't be given at all except by "medical necessity," whatever that means, and that those who choose to formula feed without being judged to meet that criteria will be subjected to the added hardship of buying formula elsewhere and bringing it to the hospital themselves.

5. Dismissing a woman's choice to formula feed as tainted by marketing doesn't seem all that different than dismissing a woman's choice to have an abortion as tainted by our degenerate culture (or whatever). And I thought feminists generally objected to third parties presuming to know what's best for a woman better than she does herself.

6. Imagine if an anti-abortion advocate were to say, "Of course I support a woman's choice to have an abortion, but not without being fully educated about what that means. Therefore we should institute mandatory ultrasounds, waiting periods, and seminars about how they're stopping a beating heart, just to make sure they fully understand the implications of their choice." Feminists seem to find this objectionable (I know I absolutely do) and yet this seems disturbingly similar to what I see the lactivist side saying in some comments.

Again, these are just some thoughts and concerns I've had regarding this whole debate -- I don't mean to start a flame war or insult anyone here, and I'd be very interested in hearing anyone's thoughts on the points above if I've misunderstood something. Thanks.

If you want to frame this against the abortion issue (which I specifically avoided because it will turn this into a debate about abortion, which I don't want, but since you brought it up.)

Formula markets being in the delivery room is, in my mind, the same as Gerber standing outside an abortion clinic and handing out free samples of baby food. Sure, maybe the woman has already made the choice that she doesn't need that product, but Gerber wants one last chance to grab her as a consumer. Some would argue that Gerber is just offering her a "choice", and if she keeps the baby, she'll need to feed it. But that "choice" is being helped along by a company whose "gift" isn't a gift at all since it isn't going to stick around and continue to feed the baby for free. It's an unfair influence on a woman who is facing a major decision about her reproductive life, which the issue of breastfeeding absolutely is since it has such an impact on a woman's whole-body health.

For the rest of my argument, I still stand by it.

Also, to respond to this: "Formula companies giving out free formula is either a duplicitous act of marketing, or an act of charity that drives up the cost for those who legitimately need it — I don’t see how it can be both."

Perhaps it was unclear, but I am saying that handing out free formula is NOT an act of charity. They want you to think it is, but what they're really doing is giving out samples as a marketing tactic and passing on the cost to the next mom. Clearly it is both. That's how marketing works. This is why companies spend money on marketing - because it makes them cash in return.

Huh? Why the implication that I'm trying to frame this as an abortion issue out of the blue? My understanding was that this whole feminism vs. lactivism debate got started (at least in part) by articles claiming that there's a disconnect between how feminists view obstacles to abortion and how they view obstacles to formula feeding. Since you're unabashedly pro-choice, and have made some really great postings on the subject in the past, I don't understand why you'd be so reluctant to weigh in on that central aspect of it.

(Thanks for addressing it here in the comments btw, although the Gerber example seems pretty strained and doesn't really address my main concerns about why a woman's choice involving abortion is legitimate, but her choice involving formula is too tainted by ignorance, culture, and marketing to be taken seriously.)

Regarding the marketing vs. charity issue, I think we both agree that the free formula samples are a dangerously effective marketing strategy -- and if that's truly the case, and the formula companies are making back in profits whatever the freebies cost and then some, there should be no costs getting passed on to anyone. Or to put it another way: I don't believe for one second that formula would cost less for women who really need it if only those formula companies weren't allowed to give out samples in hospitals.

Of course they make tons of money off free samples. And of course they pass that cost on to consumers. This is Marketing 101. If Nesbott spends 1M on samples, and they make 10M in returns, it's not like they just eat the cost of that first 1M - they pass on the cost of their marketing budget through increased formula costs. That is how any business works.