rss
24 February 2011

Breasts are good, breast milk is even better

Photo courtesy of Flickr and macieklew Photo courtesy of Flickr and macieklew
I'm not sure if it's my city-winter-itis getting to me, or if I'm just a bit overwhelmed with global news in general, but I've taken a tiny little break from regular blogging. You probably didn't notice, and if you did, you might want to get some other hobbies. Whatever the case, I'm back, and I'm annoyed. Recently, in the U.S., the Internal Revenue Service announced that breast pumps would be eligible for tax breaks. GREAT! More support for working mothers to ensure their babies have the best start possible. Sadly, not everyone supports this move - enter She-Devil Sarah Palin.

I'll preface my rant with this little fact: I've never liked the name Sarah. It seems like everyone I've ever dated either has an ex or a current named Sarah. The entrance of Sarah Palin into the daily political conversation (albeit an irrational conversation when she's involved), seriously grates on my nerves. It seems Palin has a problem with Michelle Obama promoting breast-feeding. Seriously? The economics of breast-feeding should make enough of a case for any individual arguing for reduced government and fewer handouts. 

According to a recent piece in Grist,

The surgeon general also lists the economic benefits of breast-feeding; something you'd think might pique Palin and Bachman's interest. According to the website, a study published last year in the journalPediatrics estimated that if 90 percent of U.S. families followed guidelines to breast-feed exclusively for six months, the U.S. would save $13 billion annually in reduced medical and other costs. The site also says that for both employers and employees, better infant health means fewer health insurance claims, less employee time off to care for sick children, and higher productivity.

And finally, Mutual of Omaha found that health care costs for newborns are three times lower for babies whose mothers participate in the company's employee maternity and lactation program. Add to this the fact that the federal government is one of the biggest buyers of baby formula through its nutritional programs for women and infant children, and as the New York Times article rightly points out, a tax break for breast-feeding could reduce government spending -- something Bachmann and Palin both advocate.

While neither Bachmann nor Palin have come out against breast-feeding (Bachmann says she breast-fed her five children), to imply that Obama's campaign to encourage women to nurse is somehow akin to a nanny state is harmful to the health of our nation's babies and mothers. We currently face a national health crisis largely fueled by a toxic food supply that does not support easy access to healthy options. On the other hand, breast milk is the perfect food for newborns -- and given the proper guidance and support, access is not a problem for most women.

, ,
Written by: Melanie Redman

Melanie Redman

Melanie Redman is a Social Mission Collaborator with more than 10 years of direct experience in strategic, leadership and advisory roles across the social mission sector in the U.S. and Canada. She calls many places home - most recently Toronto, Buenos Aires and Seattle - but was sprouted from the Ozark Mountains of Southern Missouri. Learn more about her work at www.melanieredman.com or on LinkedIn.

 

Responses to “Breasts are good, breast milk is even better”

1
David Says: March 6, 2011 9:32 PM

not an expert but it would seem that the problem has been over simplified.
no one has factored in diseases that can be transmitted thru breast milk nor
the possibility that if the mother is short of vitamins and nutrition that the baby
will also be. no provisions for pre-natal care have even been brought into
the conversation. all of these should be factored in. obvious advantages of course
are antibodies from the mother, possible isolation from external pollution etc., since
the mother's body may be a fairly good filter. A lot of factors should be addressed if
the goal is to have healthy childred.

also no advantage given for 6 months vs 1, 2, or 3 years. which is optimal?