I'm rivetted by the different points of view on this thread.  Firstly I
wonder how the Code fits in with mothers receiving free formula from various
agencies like WIC and the British equivalent that Heather writes about.
Secondly, with the benefit of seeing this from a very great distance, I
wonder how it is that such agencies believe that providing impoverished
mothers with free formula is in any way beneficial to the babies? Surely,
the poorer the mother, and the less able she is to afford to buy formula for
her baby, the *more* the baby needs to be breastfed?  And thirdly I find it
truly astonishing that the recipients of these hand-outs are just casually
permitted to "choose" how they want to feed their babies, or "opt" not to
breastfeed, presumably from birth, and then the agency just doles out cans
of formula (which *someone* pays for, but it's obviously not the mother) to
support that "choice".

It has been said that for formula feeding to take place it has to be (a)
easily available and (b) socially acceptable.

Living in a very impoverished country where a mother has the right to
"choose" but then has to put her money where her mouth is if she chooses not
to breastfeed, with the result that breastfeeding is almost universal, I
just find this alternative point of view amazing.  A 15 year old homeless
mom here who left her baby anywhere to go and visit her boyfriend in prison,
or to take drugs (whatever) would *know* without a doubt that the baby would
starve.   We have cases where newly born babies are "dumped", but I've never
heard of a baby older than a day being abandoned, presumably because the
mother has already commenced breastfeeding and once started she just has to
carry on or the baby dies.  So far the only handouts are for triplets or
orphans.  It works.

Pamela Morrison IBCLC, Zimbabwe
mailto:[log in to unmask]