To think that "97% of women can breastfeed" is a load of crap

[elliejjtiny]

I've been seeing this phrase a lot over the years, about how 97% of women can breastfeed and all the rest of the people who say they can't just need support.

I would guess that 97% of women can probably produce milk (although I wouldn't be surprised if it was lower) but there is so much more to breastfeeding than the mum producing milk which never seem to be mentioned. Mums with disabilities/medical conditions, babies with disabilities/medical conditions, babies who are born prematurely, mums separated from their babies and mums on medication that means they can't breastfeed.

When people gaily spout that 97% of women can breastfeed I find is so annoying and inaccurate. It's usually the same people who want the number of c-sections reduced as well and think that everyone can give birth with no interventions, they just need to stay mobile and ignore the nasty doctors.

The point is that even if the 97% figure is true-and to be honest, it’s pretty likely that evolutionarily it probably is not far off-it doesn’t mean it’s what 97% of women want to do. But it should be a proper informed choice. Fine not to want to. Not fine to want to and be prevented by external factors. Some Scandinavian countries have very high rates of BF because there is excellent practical and cultural support.

One thing I can recall, is from a Victorian novel by Anthony Trollope, regarding one of his aristocratic characters (Lady Arabella) who had (IIRC) 9 children, but always employed wet nurses for them. IIRC 3 or 4 of the girls - ‘frail little flowers’ - died as young children.

With reference to breastfeeding, or not, Trollope said, ‘…the Ladies Arabella never can. They have bosoms for show, but not for use.’

What ordinary/poor people did, if they couldn’t breastfeed and couldn’t afford wet nurses, he didn’t go into.

No, it doesn't. Nevertheless it does suggest that the majority of women could breastfeed. And in developing countries most mothers do.

So well put !

My brother was born in the 1930s and was EBF. My mother was middle-class, well-fed and at that point a SAHM. She recalled poorer women commenting when she was out on what a chubby bonny baby he was. When she stopped to talk to them, turned out that their babies were breastfed from a poorly nourished mother when she wasn't out working, the rest of the time they got diluted evaporated cow's milk if they were lucky, or diluted ordinary milk or sugar and water. Formula wasn't readily available and it was expensive. They were weaned off the breast as early as possible. They often didn't thrive, and were often very small and underweight.

My baby had a tongue tie and I wasnt able to breast feed. Baby couldn’t latch on properly and was never satisfied. Constant crying. After a few days I had mastitis as milk wasn’t being drawn through. At this point I gave up and bottle fed. No one seemed to know anything about the TT being the issue. No one suggested a snip. It was only months later speaking to another mum with the same issue that the penny dropped.
ETA 5-10% of babies have a TT

And less scaremongering, guilt tripping or stigma towards mixed feeding.

I can physically produce milk. I wasn’t allowed to breastfeed due to medication that I’m on.

I think there is too much emphasis on this and it makes mums feel guilty if they are struggling. I did combo breast and bottle, I think from about 6 weeks but I wish this was suggested to me earlier rather than the professionals making me feel guilty when DS was losing weight. I just didn’t make enough milk.

And quickly looking at some of the posts on here, it seems that some MNers also delight in making those unable to fully BF feel guilty.

In answer to those questioning what happens in societies where there isn’t the availability of formula, they tend to be societies where there is a higher level of pregnancies, and lactating women, so women would feed the child of their sister or neighbour as well as their own (historically this is what happened so would guess this is also the case today for some people).

I don't get a say on what they CHOOSE to do with their bodies.

This thread is about whether women biologically CAN and the vast majority can, IF they want to, at least from an anatomical perspective.

If they decide not to because it's doing their mental health no good, that's absolutely their choice and the right decision for them.

Breasts are an organ, like any other organ. If there was this many people saying that their kidneys didn't work and they needed dialysis, no-one would just shrug and say dialysis is a perfectly good option, we'd want to know why on earth so many kidneys are malfunctioning so badly in this country.

I am surprised by the sheer amount of women who feel they didn’t produce enough milk. Is this actually true because obviously if this were the case in some many women before formula, their babies would likely die. I think they believe they’re not producing enough and lose confidence, rather than not actually having enough.

Norway has something like 98% initiated and 80% still doing it at 6 months.

if you'd bother to read the thread you'd see there is a whole conversation about this aspect of it.

Yes they would have died. All mine would have. Infant mortality was high throughout history.

I pumped at least every 2.5 hours for two weeks for my prem baby. If she hadn't been my second i wouldn't have managed but I had breastfeed my first and knew just how often a tiny baby will feed, I knew every 4 hours during the day and no pumping from 11pm til 7pm (what one of the nurses suggested!!l) was not mimicking how often a baby feeds and wasnt going to lead to a good milk supply.

Not a truth I recognise. Was hard at the start but after that easy. And I introduced a bottle too at 6 months and expressed so her dad could feed her in night and then weaned off the breast entirely at 13 months, very easily.

80% are getting some breast milk. Many will be mixed feeding.

I don’t see the problem with the stat. It’s quite easy to understand what it’s saying and in the context of our peer group; with mothers who mostly didn’t breastfeed so have very misguided knowledge on it - it’s a much needed stat.

My point is that it’s not just determination. There is luck involved as well

There was a tendency for the wealthy to hire someone to bf their babies, wet nurses. And there were all sorts of concoctions given to babies with often not great results.

Yanbu

I don't think 97% of women can breast feed. I also don't think it matters which you choose for your baby.

Having a c section can delay milk production and make it difficult from the outset.

Medication might make breast feeding prohibitive.

I can believe it. If you've ever read Working Class Wives, from about 1910ish so a little earlier, they talk about the experiences of poorly nourished mothers breastfeeding.

I always say I “couldn’t” breastfeed, but if there was no such thing as formula I would have had no choice given the alternative would have been to let my baby die. I think the issue is that it’s about support/education for women but we live in a society where if it’s really difficult we don’t have to press on. Which is good IMO

People think this, but milk "not coming in" until later doesn't actually matter. Colostrum is enough until the milk comes in.

I thought a third of women used to die in labour historically? So it's very unlikely 90% can give birth vaginally - we have giant heads relative to other animals. Evolution decided a 2/3 success rate during birth was worth it for the advantage of our giant heads/brains.

Where do you get the data that 90% can give birth vaginally?!