The Case Against "The Case Against Breastfeeding"

Yet another volley in the mommy wars…this time, the formula feeders strike back. *sigh* An opinion piece, “The Case Against Breastfeeding,” published in The Atlantic written by Hanna Roisin is the latest salvo. What is presented at the outset as a take down of the scientific studies that support the benefits of breastfeeding over formula feeding instead comes across as an angry diatribe from a woman who is trying to balance three kids, a marriage, and a career, and views the pressure to breastfeed as the one of the keys to her unhappiness. It seems to more about one woman’s insecurity in the choices she is making or would like to make and emotions she feels about those choices. Ms. Roisin, as it becomes clear, is not one of the mothers who enjoyed the breastfeeding experience. But rather than a) accepting that all of mothering is not enjoyable or b) choosing to formula feed instead, Ms. Roisin instead writes a factually and scientifically questionable article that seems intent on trying to reassure herself that if she were to switch to formula feeding, it would be ok.

Let me be upfront: I breastfed my older son until 22 months of age and I certainly plan to breastfeed my second son, who is due this summer. For me, breastfeeding wasn’t easy – my son was severely tongue-tied, which meant round-the-clock nursing until he was diagnosed and his tongue clipped at the age of 6 weeks. At that point, I did have to supplement him with formula for several weeks while I worked on rebuilding my milk supply – a process that meant nursing, followed by bottle-feeding, followed by pumping at every single feeding. It was exhausting and I could really understand why another mom in different circumstances would choose not to do it; I certainly would not have held it against another mother who chose to formula feed instead. We suffered through bouts of thrush, blocked ducts, and engorgement. When I went back to work, I lugged my detested pump with me and dutifully spent my breaks pumping. No, it was not all sunshine and roses. But I did it because on my personal hierarchy of parenting priorities, breastfeeding was high on the list. I put a lot of effort into making the breastfeeding relationship work, so please excuse me if I get just the tiniest bit irritated when Ms. Roisin comes along and likens breastfeeding to “the vacuum that was keeping me and my 21st-century sisters down.”

Ms. Roisin, breastfeeding did not keep me down. On the contrary, being able to work through the challenges of breastfeeding and being successful with it, sticking with it in spite of the looks I would get in public, and making it close to my goal of breastfeeding for 2 years was empowering for me. I’m not a perfect parent – I don’t do organic, I don’t cloth diaper, the tv is not forbidden in our house, and there are quite a few evenings when dinner is an overprocessed frozen pizza. I admit it freely: I actively make less than the ideal or best choice on more than the rare occasion – but I also own those choices and I don’t need to denigrate the choices of others in order to feel like a good parent. I’m not going to rail against the pro-fresh food lobby or try to poke holes in research that supports the premise that eating fresh and whole foods is healthier than eating frozen pizza. What would be the point? I might feel better about choosing the pizza, but it wouldn’t change the fact that the fresh and whole foods are healthier than the frozen pizza. I pick my battles based on what my values and priorities are. It’s part of being an adult and part of being a good parent. And I certainly don’t need the validation of someone like Ms. Roisin to feel good about that. Why she needs the validation of myself and the other "breast-feeding fascists" is beyond me.

Hiding Under the Couch

"Hiding Under the Couch" otherwise known as my reaction to Bobby Jindal's rebuttal to President Obama's State of the Union speech.

First, I must say, in all superficiality, damn, Jindal was wearing a lot of makeup!! The man's skin looked pretty flawless, which, well, really isn't the case.

Second, make him stop! The voice, the voice! That accent! Where in the hell did he get that accent from? That accent is not Baton Rouge! That accent is like a really bad voiceover from a 1950s educational film. And it grates! As if there aren't enough horrible stereotypes about Louisiana to begin with, now we have to add that voice to it?

Third, you know, to be honest, I can appreciate Jindal relaying that anecdote about his immigrant father talking about the plenty that America holds and the inspiration it brings. Maybe I can appreciate it because I remember repeating the same type of anecdote during speech competition in HIGH SCHOOL. Egads! As we Indians don't have to deal with enough as it is - now we have to live this one down!

Fourth, maybe I missed something, but how was the Bush administration's response to Katrina a positive show of Republican leadership?

Fifth, make it stop! Make it stop! I feel like I am being lectured by Farmer Folksy McFolks-a-alot. For the love of all that's holy, make it stop!

I'm going back to hide under the couch now...

The Long Arm of the Law

There are some days when nothing lawmakers do (or try to do) surprises you. Then there are days like this. In Virginia, state senator Mark Obenshain has introduced Senate Bill 926, a bill that is not only an insult to each and every female in the Commonwealth, but also, if passed, an insane intrusion into the right of privacy that every individual has. In a nutshell, the bill seeks to mandate that within 24 hours of a miscarriage, law enforcement officials must be informed of the incident, if medical professionals were not present at the miscarriage. In addition, the remains must be saved until law enforcement professionals give their permission for the disposal.

What?!?

First of all, 20 to 25% of all pregnancies end in miscarriage. And I would venture a guess that a large number of those miscarriages do not conveniently occur with medical professionals in attendance. That would be a large number of incidents that would need to be reported to and investigated by law enforcement. Given the budget shortfalls occurring across the nation in light of the recession, is that really an effective use of investigative resources?

Second, the majority of miscarriages occur before the end of the 1st trimester. Any remains of the fetus can be hard to discern at that point. Are women really supposed to hang on to every bloody toliet paper strip and maxi pad? Are they not allowed to flush the toliet? No showers during the loss, because blood and tissue could go down the drain? I mean, honestly? I hate to say it, but only a man -who could never have personally experienced a miscarriage - could write such an inane bill.

Third, many miscarriages are the loss of a very much wanted and hoped for baby. For the mothers (and yes, the fathers as well) who experience them, there is very real grief over something that is still poorly understood by medical science. There are few answers for the woman who is - or has - suffered a miscarriage, and as a result, women will often times blame themselves for real or imagined mistakes that they made during the pregnancy. To have to deal with law enforcement personnel at that time, rather than spending that time and energy dealing with the emotional and physical aftermath of the pregnancy loss, is an unconscionable mandate.

The bill is an affront to the rights of every woman - not just those of childbearing age. Should this bill become law, it would set a dangerous precedent as to when and how government can intervene in the private medical matters of women. I mean, what's next? A government inquest every time a woman gets her period?

Give me a break.

Someone needs to go back to Journalism 101...

Someone at 20/20, that is. On January 2, 2009, 20/20 ran an episode themed "Extreme Parenting." As part of this package of segments, they ran one about homebirth. Sort of. Captioned as a story about homebirth, the segment interchangeably describes homebirthing with a trained nurse-midwife in attendance with homebirthing without medical personnel in attendance, a practice often called unassisted birth. By conflating the two, 20/20 not only does a disservice to the general viewing audience and those who choose to homebirth, it also calls into question the intelligence of its story editors and journalists.

The segment opens somewhat dramatically with a shot of a log cabin surrounded by mountains. Journalist Elizabeth Vargas voices over this image, inviting the audience to think about what it must have been like to give birth on the American frontier 200 years ago. "There's not a hospital or a pain-relieving drug or an ob/gyn in sight." Heavens to Betsy!! What shall we do? In order to showcase what Betsy might have done, the segment then shows snippets of classic Western movies (or perhaps they confused these fictional movies with actual historical documents - one can only guess). Vargas states that in spite of the "primitive" and "dangerous" methods, by today's standards, women seemed to do okay. However, she states, there is a small segment of modern American mothers-to-be who are "choosing to give birth without medical assistance." As Vargas says this, we see images of women holding newborns right after giving birth - images that are likely familiar to anyone who has seen the documentary "The Business of Being Born." You know, that documentary that followed medically-trained midwives as they helped women give birth, not just some layperson off the street who don't know nothing about birthing no babies. Next, we are introduced to Laura Shanley, a Colorado woman who is one of the most outspoken proponents of unassisted birth. We move directly from a quote by Shanley to a snippet from The Business of Being Born showing Ricki Lake's homebirth with her 2nd child. A homebirth that was attended by a midwife. Confused yet? This back and forth between unassisted birth and midwife-attended homebirth continues throughout the poorly-written segment. To blur the line even more, the last part of the segment is Shanley talking about unassisted birth. Wow. Way to not muddy the waters, ABC.

I really wonder if after viewing the final version of the segment, Ricki Lake got pissed off and decided to do an expose of the geniuses at 20/20, because if I was her, I would be right pissed off. Really, the only thing lacking from the terrible segment was an interview with the notorious homebirth opponent, Amy Tuteur. Eh, maybe someone at 20/20 was thinking that day...

The Scent of Desperation

So, yeah, even though I am totally Team Aniston, I have to say, the latest cover of GQ with Jennifer Aniston posing wearing only a necktie reeks of desperation. It pains me to say it, but it is true. Between running around with John Mayer (who, incidently, I thought was better than Jessica Simpson but is a cad and beneath Jennifer Aniston) and the recent spate of interviews, I fear that we are getting an Aniston overload. I would hate to have the J.Lo-type backlash hit Jennifer Aniston, as she really is probably one of my favorite actresses out there today. I sincerely hope Aniston will find her clothes, put them on, find a decent guy who is not an honorless jerk, and fulfill the dramatic promise she showed in movies like "The Good Girl."

Hey, Santa? Is that too much to ask for?

Oh, for pity's sake!

You know, I thought it was bad enough when stores started putting out Christmas stuff before the Thanksgiving turkeys were in the grocery stores. Something about jumping the gun and wearing out a welcome. But this - this is much worse.

President-elect Obama has not even dropped the "elect" part of the title and Republicans are already jockeying for position for the 2012 race.

I think I'm going to be sick.

Sarah Palin, who I was really, sincerely hoping would just slink back to Alaska in her RNC duds with the First Dude, will not GO AWAY!! Sarah, honey, the election is over. You LOST. Stop torturing the lower 48 with your idiocies and put-upon folksiness, will ya? I am tired of going to CNN.com and seeing your face and your name there. Especially when it for something really lame, like having a photo-op at a Turkey Farm. Go track some moose or some, will you? Sheesh!

Then, there is all the talk about Louisiana Governor Boby Jindal. Ok, ok, I have to make some things clear at the outset. One, I am a proud Louisiana girl, though I am quite happy to be displaced from my state of birth. Second, I happened to grow up in the same neighborhood with Gov. Jindal and my older brother was friends and classmates with him; from what little contact I had with Jindal, he seemed to be a decent guy. Hey, he remembered my brother when I happened to meet Jindal on a plane a couple of years ago. So, I have no real enmity towards the man. At least personally. Political enmity is another matter all together. While I am, in fact, the same ethnicity as Bobby Jindal, I disagree strongly with many of his political and ideological views. Just because someone happens to be brown does not mean they are like me. The man is extremely well educated, but I wonder how that meshes with his self-professed belief in intelligent design. And, as my mother pointed out, the man has yet to finish out an office before making a run for his next one. Things that give me pause to ponder.

At any rate, I for one, would like a break from the election-mania (even if I am in withdrawal from it, in some ways). Can we please let Obama officially become the president before we start trying to defeat him? Please?

Oh, Miss Manners??

So, I have a question in regards to etiquette. When does it become unseemly to continue sporting the bumper sticker of the winning presidential candidate? It's not that I am not still thrilled to pieces that Obama won, it's just that I am wondering whether it might be considered, oh, I don't know, sort of like rubbing it in to still have the Obama bumper sticker on my cars. I mean, the number of McCain/Palin stickers dropped considerably by the morning after Election Day (though I'd like to think that was because those individuals saw the folly of their ways). We took the yard sign down last weekend, as neighborhood covenants gave clear guidelines for that. But what about the car? Is there a point at which you shouldn't have the sticker on your car anymore, sort of like not wearing white shoes after Labor Day? Or is it strictly left up to individual interpretation?

Where's Miss Manners when you need her?