I haven't read this, and am not likely to, but if anyone has found and read
this article, is it possible the essay is a bit of social satire in the
spirit of "A Modest Proposal"?
Seems almost too wrong to be 'real' (Not that there isn't plenty of that out
there.)

Andrea Michele Simmons
Missouri, USA


> Ruth summarized,
> >1. breastfeeding does not significantly differ from formula feeding in
terms
> >of health benefits to the infant,
> >2.  extended breastfeeding exacts a health toll on the mother which might
> >outweigh health benefits,
> >3. breastfeeding for an extended time period excludes paid work; thus
> >breastfeeding is only an option for women in a traditional nuclear family
> >with a male who can support the whole family financially
> >4. breastfeeding represses women by keeping them from paid work
> >5. breastfeeding is bad for families, especially fathers because it
assumes
> >primacy of the mother-infant dyad
> >6. breastfeeding is socially unjust because it requires one-on-one
childcare
> >by the mother when quality care for children could be provided
collectively
> >while mothers contributed to society and the family through paid work
> >7. breastfeeding actually denies infants of valuable immunity experience
> >they would get in daycare and thus sets them up for more illnesses than
> >formula fed babies during the preschool period
>

             ***********************************************
The LACTNET mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software together with L-Soft's LSMTP(TM)
mailer for lightning fast mail delivery. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html