OK, so I finally read the TIME magazine article that people have been buzzing about lately. I know I’m a little late to the game, but hey – I’m a busy mom of young children! Reading of any kind – even getting caught up in the not-so-critical-but-certainly-buzzworthy news of the day – is a bit of a luxury. I’m a subscriber to TIME (and several other magazines…most of which end up in a “to read” pile until the next time I fly and have to turn off all electronic devices.) But this magazine – with *that cover!* – was moved to the top of the pile once it arrived in my mailbox.
Clearly this was a thinly-veiled but nevertheless clever stunt designed to spur debate, boost magazine sales and increase website traffic. I mean, the timing was just right with the magazine hitting newsstands just before Mother’s Day. Bravo, TIME marketing team.
And I’ll admit, I fell prey to TIME’s social experiment. When I first heard about the cover and saw the provocative cover photo, I was outraged. I mean, who is TIME magazine to suggest whether or not I’m “mom enough”? And that picture? With that mother? And that…that…KID? Yuck!
Then I thought to myself: hypocrite.
Breastfeeding rates among women in the U.S. are climbing but we’re still far lower than other first-world nations. And while we can celebrate the fact that 75% of babies born in the U.S. have been breastfed according to the CDC’s 2011 Breastfeeding Report Card, a scant 35% are breastfeeding exclusively at 3 months (meaning the baby is getting formula or some other kind of nourishment in addition to breast milk), and only 44% are continuing to do any kind of breastfeeding by 6 months.
Why are moms not continuing to breastfeed? It’s a complex issue, but the general consensus is that moms don’t have enough support. Whether it’s a lack of baby-friendly hospitals or baby-friendly workplaces, or a glut of meddlesome relatives or unsupportive partners, or a combination of factors – who knows? All I can tell you is that if your 3 YEAR old is coming at you as his own personal bubbler, you are WAAAAYYY ahead of the game. And I should be applauding that.
You see, the TIME magazine cover gave me a sense of where the breastfeeding bashers are coming from. They want nursing moms not to “flaunt” breastfeeding, to put the boob and baby away and nurse in a dressing room or in a hiding spot away from the general public so they can go on with their normal lives of dressing little kids up as tarts and having young men wear their underwear above their pants. Because seeing a baby pressed up to a breast makes people uncomfortable. Even if we don’t actually “see” it, we KNOW what’s going on under that hooter-hider.
My main beef about the TIME piece is that the article really didn’t address any of this. You flip through the magazine, looking for more info about that sexy young mom with her preschooler appendage, but all you find are smiling pictures of a 72-year-old man. In fact, the article was all about Dr. Sears and attachment parenting and how the whole philosophy is based on single anecdotal observations by Mrs. Sears in her childhood and by some lady who went to Venezuela a lot instead of finishing college. As a dietitian who believes in an evidence-based approach, this is appalling.
A not-so-minor-side-“beef” with this article: in one fleeting bit near the end is a gloss-over on Dr. Sears’ controversial stance on vaccinations. It’s not mentioned directly (in the passage a mother was discussing “whether to vaccinate” her 6-month-old during her child’s routine checkup), but Sears advocates an extended schedule for vaccinating, which has no real scientific basis and could actually introduce more harm than do good. Does he also advocate slowly removing band-aids, bit-by-bit, so as not to stress the child excessively? I wonder.
But I digress. Look, TIME magazine was clearly out to make people think and talk, and talk they did. But will it help boost breastfeeding rates, or will it set us back even further as the stigma of breastfeeding is perpetuated? We shall see.
Photo credit: iStockphoto