A news story lead to some shocking comments today

[ghannit]

At a baby shower today, the fact that I'd exclusively breast fed my DD until she was 10 months came up. I mentioned that her iron was tested and she was fine, & that she'd never been sick (beyond a few mild colds). In fact, she lost some weight when I began to introduce solids (doing fine now). My point was to point out that it could be done. 

Someone then mentioned a recent news story http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/29/vegans-trial-death-baby-breast-milk

I was stunned by the ensuing response(s), which essentially agreed that any mother who would delay solids is neglectful (and worse).

I asked for more details about this story and the person who'd read it only half recalled that the mother was a potentially undernourished vegan.

I KNEW that there was more to the story, & upon reading it this was confirmed... however, I was shaken up and saddened by the reality that these otherwise smart women were so uninformed about extended breastfeeding/delayed solids that all they noted was the breastfeeding, and not the parents other pertinent issues. 

I'd like to hear other thoughts on this. The article, and the response that I witnessed.

Thanks. :-)

[Hykue]

If that was the article they read, it's really no surprise that they focused on the vegan and breastmilk bits.  The title and first paragraph only mention those aspects.  And new stories are written with the "take-home" message always in the first paragraph, because people often don't read much farther, and when they do, it's with less attention.  I have to say that I largely blame the article for picking on vegans and breastmilk, rather than focusing on the child's real cause of death, which was extended lung infection that wasn't treated (or at least not properly).  They do mention that, so I can't entirely blame the article, but the first paragraph is what really sticks with people, especially when they're just skimming.  Of course, you would think that people would want to inform themselves more than to just skim a single newspaper article and draw sweeping conclusions from that.  Especially when someone in their presence has indicated that she thinks the practice in question is reasonable and safe, and implies (since your DC's iron was tested) that her doctor agrees.  Even if they had previously thought that EBF/delayed solids were a poor idea, you would think that they would want to ask you what had led you to that decision, not just cut down the practice as unsafe.

This is something that bothers me nearly constantly, how all forms of media, and especially the news, are so biased and so effective.  And that people take that bias without even apparently noticing . . . Maybe it was only because you primed me for it by asking about the article, but it was obvious to me that they had focused on some aspects of the case that were pretty much irrelevant before ever mentioning what actually happened.  I don't know which bothers me more, that the news constantly does this, or that people (including, often, myself) are blind to it.

[ghannit]

Thanks for your take Hykue

I know that it's rare I encounter any other mothers who nursed as long as I did, much less delayed solids, and I have encountered situations similar to this one before where I have to defend what I know was a careful (not always easy either!) choice on my part.

It's so true that the media has a part to play in the mindset of many, but it's also what they (the person) themselves understands to be true or possible or "good". Often it's simply what a person experienced themselves (as a child and as a parent) that they accept as accurate. Anything else is uncomfortable and causes a sort of cognitive dissonance. It's easy to write off other options as radical or even reckless (even if the option is entirely natural and healthy).

I think it's significant in this particular news story that the mother was deficient in essential vitamins herself, and that the child may have been susceptible due to that. In my personal breastfeeding experience it was quite the opposite. I was very careful to get an excess of essential nutrients to pass on to my DD, knowing that she would need this more and more the older she got (I also understood the importance of not clamping the umbilical cord too early post delivery so as to preserve iron stores in the baby).

Had I been less stunned at the time, I'd have mentioned this, as well as the reality that many solid-fed children are deficient in nutrients and get ill due to that all of the time. 

Having read the story, I am most frustrated as it's clear that the real problem was the parents taking a risk with pneumonia. Really, the nursing was not the tragedy AT ALL, and there is a likely chance that the child would have been ill and untreated in the total absence of breastfeeding.

Breastfeeding is an almost bizarrely irrationally emotional hot-button for people. It never fails to amaze me. And disappoint me.      

[KempsMama]

The couple lived in France, which apparently (I've heard) is very anti-BF still.  The headlines there read "Baby breastfed to death" or something horrid.  I read a French father's response to the article, I can't find it now, but he basically stated that the culture there is very anti-BF and this was going to set it back even farther by the way the media was handleing it.