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