Here is the final, somewhat conciliatory, salvo in the discussion over the
Washington Post's illustration using baby bottles in a story in the Friday
Weekend section on backpacking with a baby.

Rachael


------- Forwarded Message Follows -------
From:          "Kelly, John" <[log in to unmask]>
To:            activist <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:       Bottle rockets
Date:          Mon, 20 Oct 97 10:52:00 PDT


Ms. Hamlet:

I apologize for my wall-of-flame response. Chalk it up to a bad mood at the end
of a cold, rainy Friday.

I still don't agree that our modest illustration will set back breastfeeding in
the United States. (I can't tell you how hard it is to actually influence the
public: Tell them a movie sucks and they flock to it. Tell them about a great
new folk singer and her concert is canceled for lack of ticket sales.) But you
obviously are committed to your cause, the central tenet of which I embrace. I
guess it's just the periphery where we part ways.

Yours sincerely,


John Kelly

>
> Dear Mr. Kelly:
>
> I was little flabbergasted by your response. Before I wrote you back with rash
> words, I forwarded it to some of my friends who have been working in the field
> of breastfeeding promotion for much longer than I, asking for their advice on
> how to respond.  You may have heard from some of them by now.
>
> I am glad to hear that you favor breastfeeding.  It is an important child
> health issue -- important enough that the federal government has issued a goal
> of 75% of babies being breastfed at discharge from childbirth facilities
> (Healthy People 2000 goals).  Many millions of taxpayer and private insurance
> dollars (not to mention parental time and energy) are spent caring for
> children suffering from the illnesses that are commoner among formula-fed
> children than breastfed children (e.g., ear infections, gastrointestinal
> infections, bronchitis, pneumonia, allergies, asthma). I have on my web page
> citations to numerous medical journal citations to epidemiological studies
> that demonstrate that point.
>
> You say that I have read too much into the illustration.  However, you
> have read quite a bit into my letter that I did not say.  After all, I
> did not accuse you of being part of the "military-industrial-Nestle-baby
> formula complex" or any such thing.  My letter was merely an attempt to
> inform you about the implications of the practice of routinely portraying
> babies with bottles.
>
> Increasing breastfeeding is an important health issue that needs to be
> addressed by everyone in our community, including the media.  Images that
> perpetuate the bottle=baby myth are counter-productive to the goal of
> increasing the awareness of everyone in this society that the healthy and
> normal way to feed babies does not require the use of a bottle.
>
> >
> > Dear Ms. Hamlet:
> >
> > It's really too bad that breast-feeding has been tarred by the lunatic
> > fringe. I suppose that's a natural overcompensation to the shameful way
> > breastfeeding was suppressed earlier this century, but still...
> >
> > I am a big fan of breasts in general and breastfeeding specifically. I
> > was breastfed, as were my two daughters. If anyone were to ask my
> > opinion, I would recommend breastfeeding. It's obviously better than
> > the alternative. But I find some breastfeed-or-die proponents to be
> > tiresome. When I read, as I have, that children can be breastfed until
> > they're 3 or 4, my reaction is, "Ooo, gross."
> >
> > And when I read in your note that the "obvious" implication of a
> > cartoon-like illustration incorporating two bottles is that a baby
> > can't be seen without a bottle and, ergo, that bottlefeeding should be
> > the norm and that I am somehow part of the
> > military-industrial-Nestle-baby formula complex, I just have to scratch my
> > head. (I won't even ask if you've heard of breast pumps or bottled breast
> > milk.) I suppose the obvious implication of the blue teddy bear, blue
> > pacifier and yellow rattle is that no baby can do without these, either.
> >
> > Thank you for reading Weekend, but please do not read too much into our
> > illustrations.
> >
> >
> > John Kelly
> J. Rachael Hamlet
> Author, The Breastfeeding Advocacy Page
> http://www.clark.net/pub/activist/bfpage/bfpage.html
>