I would agree that it might be possible to coerce a child who was really not
interested to continue breastfeeding. But, gee, parents coerce their
children into doing things all the time and they aren't removed from their
homes, even if we might think it isn't the best way to parent. Let's say
this mother was giving her six-year-old some cow's milk in a baby's bottle
every day when he got home from school, even though he says he might prefer
to have it in a cup. We might think she was a bit peculiar, but I find it
hard to imagine that her child would be put in foster care. Heck, if she was
giving him Coca-Cola in a bottle nobody would even notice. If she was
coercing him to go to church or school, she'd probably be praised, even
though there are other parents who disagree with that.

I think this has more to do with our society's sexualization of
breastfeeding. Why else would everyone be claiming that this will cause the
boy "great emotional harm?" Even if he's being coerced, why would this be
more harmful than any other kind of coercion? Only if you imagine there is
some sexual component to this.

(Please note that I am not in favour of coercing children to breastfeed or,
in fact, anything else. I'm a pretty permissive parent myself. But my
argument is that we rarely consider parental coercion a reason for foster
care - except when breastfeeding is involved.)


Teresa Pitman
Guelph, Ontario

             ***********************************************
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