In a recent post, Kathy Dettwyler remarks on the lack of breastfeeding among British and other English-speaking women with young children who were POWs during WWII in SE Asia. I'm no historian, but my impression is that most Anglo women in Southeast Asia around the onset of WWII were upper class, the wives of high-ranking military officers, government officials, and businessmen. At that time, the military and civilian gov't drew their ranks from the highest echelons of society. Most British officials were graduates of Sandringham, Eton, Oxford, Cambridge, which were then, even more than now, reserved for the privileged classes. I don't usually base my ideas on fiction, but I do believe a reading of "The Raj Quartet" by Paul Scott gives a very realistic depiction of life (including childcare) among this particular group. In India, Burma and other colonial outposts of the British Empire, the ruling class raised their children as they were raised: at a distance, well-buffered by devoted servants. Even though it was the 20th century, I believe wetnursing was still practiced. In Asia, servants were plentiful, grateful and cheaper than they were back in England. So it doesn't surprise me that the Anglo women did not breastfeed their children --- for the most part they only saw their children during "audiences" at a set time each day. On the other hand, isn't there some data on Anglo women who were pregnant at the time they were imprisoned who were helped to breastfeed by missionary nurses when the babies were born? and the good survival of those babies given the wretched conditions of the camps? I may be off on this. So any of you out there with "non-fiction" information, please enlighten me. Mary Cummins, M.Ed., IBCLC private practice, Scottsdale, AZ