Being ‘paid to breastfeed’ - your thoughts?

[SarahMumsnet]

The BBC's reporting this morning that new mothers living in some areas of Derbyshire and south Yorkshire are to be given vouchers for shops including Matalan, Mothercare and John Lewis if they breastfeed their babies. These will be given out as part of a study by the University of Sheffield, aimed at discovering whether “financial incentives” will increase the uptake of breastfeeding in parts of the country where rates are low; mothers will receive vouchers worth up to £120 if they breastfeed until six weeks, and another £80-worth if they continue to the six-month mark.

The scheme, according the senior researcher on the project, is intended "as a way of acknowledging both the value of breastfeeding to babies, mothers and society, and the effort involved in breastfeeding. Offering financial incentives ... might increase the numbers of babies being breastfed, and complement on-going support for breastfeeding provided by the NHS, local authorities and charities."

We've been asked by the beeb what Mumsnetters make of the idea; what's your reaction?

exhausted - I think you should have a medal for your efforts.

I've BF, FF and mixfed.
I know that BFing has many advantages for baby and mother.
What down-sides it has, are all to the mother IMO and IME. I did not like BFing, never did, had lots of problems and lots of very good support and help.
Why did I have this support:

• I live in/near a bid city with lots of agencies who support BFing
• I knew were to find said support
• I have no problem with being a 'squeaky gate' mouthy cow

I was also hellbent on BFing and with hindsight would've been more successful with DS1 if I had been aware of some of the pitfalls. And if I'd had found MN which I came across when I was looking for advice wrt recurring blocked ducts/milk transfer issues I had with DS3.

So, more support, more peer and specialist support WHEN THE WOMAN NEEDS IT. An that is not always Mon-Fri 9-5...

Watching the report on the news and saw that the US sits higher on the chart for bf'ing than the UK, even though they have ridiculously short maternity leave. Surely the differences between countries shows it's a social or cultural thing. You naturally copy friends and family.

My DM and Grannie bf all their kids but my MIL didn't. So I have been trying my darnedest to bf, but my DH was happy to ff. 'it was good enough for him' type thing.

LittleBear - actually, for the multiple people I know on the scheme it isn't. sensible. It's a financial incentive of saving which ignores that barriers that a lack of appropriate equipment, a lack of suitable, knowledgeable support, difficulty in getting there, difficulty in physically being able to make the foods they list, and so many other things. It could be taken that it assumes that people with physical disabilities are just lazy or can't afford the gym or assuming that people who work in these places have appropriate training when they don't. There have been a lot of issues with it but the research means their voices can be heard.

As someone who has done research and benefited financial from it, I find your dog comment disgusting. I don't think you understand the benefits that being part of medical research can provide its participants (I personally can contact one of the best hospitals in the country for my youngest because he is part of a medical trial, if my older daughter had been a part of the same trial, she may have been saved a lot of pain) and how 'ridiculous' research like this can lead to better research trials because we need to get through this stage to get the evidence that we need to take it to something more supportive. They're not going to find support and proper research into it until they're strong-armed into showing that that is what is needed rather than throw money at it options.

Why is it so bad to see how financial problems affect breastfeeding rates? How access to equipment like breast pumps or having the ability to treat yourself could affect breastfeeding rates? Why is paying these women so their voices can be heard so wrong? It's not a policy, it's a very small medical pilot study which will enable women who are often ignored and abused in medical care settings to be heard. As someone who was abused by HCPs when I was pregnant with my first and ridiculed, intimidated and belittled by them when I breastfed my eldest, you would have had to pay me to take part in a study with more medical professionals afterwards.

By far one of the stupidest incentive schemes Ive heard of in years. An insult to mum who have breastfed and to mum to chose not to for what ever their reasons were.
An absolute WASTE of GOOD MONEY!
Pls allocate these funds to lowering the cost of child care or to make public spaces more breastfeeding friendly (ie how about a chair in the baby changing room or even a nice little separator and a seat in the ladies toilet so mums who do want to breast feed in a restaurant are not sitting on the loo and doing it!)
OR how about a creche at work, so mums dont have to stop breast feeding or not breast feed because they have to resume work (or drive themselves insane with worry because they have to leave their 3 month old at daycare miles away).
Really, there is such many better ways to use that money - not shopping vouchers please!
Do these people even know what mums out there NEED?

I think a lot of new mothers are affecting by marketing. They perceive all sorts of things to be more desirable than other basic things, certain prams, pushchairs, brands of nappies, brands of formula milk, feeding bottles, styles of clothes (eg: GAP) We don't criticize people for wrapping their babies warmly in sweet little Gap outfits or buying a pushchair which looks more comfortable and sleek than another pushchair, and has a recognisable trademark.

Is there anyone who can honestly say they aren't affected by marketing and wrapped their babies in handknitted items, and bought every essential item secondhand without interest in the brand?

Breastfeeding needs marketing. No-one believes in the "brand" in certain parts of UK. Formula is the "brand" of choice. They haven't read long comparisons, they just feel formula is the right choice. Just like we don't want to buy Silver Cross prams for our babies anymore (although they had prams like that in the 50's even in poorer communities - they lasted several babies - but now we don't buy those prams. Why? Inconvenient or just a change in fashion? Same with slings and sleeping bags and duvets...none of these things existed in the 50's some changes are good and some just fashion)

Vouchers market breastfeeding. They make it seem culturally "normal" and desirable for those who might not otherwise care whether they breastfed or not. I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT PEOPLE WHO WANTED TO BREASTFEED AND AFTER MUCH DIFFICULTY MADE THE DECISION TO STOP. The people who otherwise might not breastfeed at all think it is normal and culturally desirable to formula feed ATM. Nothing is going to jog their thoughts except marketing.

The only other way you could possibly market breastfeeding is to "plant" lots of new mothers who have been singled out for loads of support (and therefore more likely to succeed) in communities of non-breastfeeding mothers and try and sow the seeds that way. And that would be criticised too as immoral, for those who did not receive support.

I think the vouchers are a crude idea but they might just jog cultural consciousness where there was no culture of breastfeeding in the first place. And then the rest might follow. .

Spork why is saying that this study attempts to train women in the manner of pavlov's dog disgusting? Why should they need to buy themselves treats for feeding their baby?

I agree with Swanhilda that there are communities where breast feeding is discouraged. Mentioning recently in passing that my DD bfs, but it took a while to establish, I have had a couple of 'Well, once we'd (GParents) mixed a good bottle of milk for baby, baby never looked back', when talking about their grandchild.
That attitude is difficult to stand up to as a new mum with a fractious new born but having a blatant financial incentive might just help.

Trouble is, this won't market breastfeeding.

It WILL market the companies that provide the vouchers though.

There's a difference here. The difference being that it does nothing to market breastfeeding to the rest of the population which is where the real issue lies. There has to be a cultural shift which means unlike other things the marketing needs to be targeted more broadly and perhaps aimed at other groups.

Like men.

This is not just a problem for women who have just had a baby. And we need to stop thinking it is. If you can change that mindset then actually you might get the funding that breastfeeding support needs.

Until you start getting society to broaden its idea that women are to blame rather than society as a whole then you are not going to ultimately achieve anything, apart from put more stress on women or put very paternalist ideas into people's head that women can be controlled, coerced or forced by money. I find the idea very sinister and highly unethical.

Don't forget that marketing on formula feed had to be changed and more regulated because of the way its been done and its impact. Why are we thinking that marketing breastfeeding will be wholly positive? Yes, undoubtedly it will help a lot of people but there will be numerous groups which feel a negative force here. There are a lot of downsides to marketing any public health initiative which are very conveniently brushed under the carpet and deliberately ignored in order to get people to 'comply' which may not actually be to the benefit of their health in their own personal circumstances. People need support to do things on their own terms not be somehow bullied or manipulated into doing something.

We need to stop building this idea of 'failure' within health - and thats ultimately what schemes like this do. Thats no good for mental health. And I do wonder whether that is something that will be factored into the study in someway.

(And I hate to keep point it out to all the people who keep saying the £200 would be better spent on support, but there is no real money here. Not NHS money anyway. It will be companies sponsoring this rather than cash being found to invest in this and thats what is really needed).

yy to forgetmenots

This thread is itself a micro research opportunity. I haven't got time to go and read the entire thread but one thing is very striking. There are a significant number of women on this thread who have cried writing their posts.

The problem seems to be, if a socially sanctioned, state funded and powerful message is repeated often enough it conditions people to assimilate this thinking into their own. When this happens as successfully as the Breast is Best Message has, women internalise this and this "individually conceived or powerfully held idea" becomes a part of the individual, no longer just a social message or powerful propaganda. This is the point at which when "desire to" and "ability to" (do anything incl BF) when thrown into conflict start to affect the persons conception of self causing guilt or shame. So there is an element of guilt-internalised and shame-internalised and socially reinforced at the point of "failure". It is this reason why even many years after the BF has stopped, women are so emotionally invested in both how they and others feed their babies.

I really hope someone from this research reads this thread, for they should feel shame not the millions of women bullied into BF, or those that "failed" or those that actively chose to FF.

The money should be spent helping women who choose to BF, all bullying, harassing and coercion, all shaming and guilt inducing propaganda needs to stop, it is effecting the well-being of almost 50% of the population, and as a feminist I would go as far as saying it is women hating and subjugating women.

My children are bigger now but I did breast feed. One big drawback to breastfeeding is how time consuming it is and I have a very clear memory of sitting in front on the TV breastfeeding my small baby while the whole place looked like a bomb had hit it. I did have two older children and was doing the school run. I felt a bit guilty sitting there while there was so much to be done. Maybe a good incentive for young mums to breastfeed is to pay for a cleaner once a week for six months. That way dad doesn't get to decide how the money is spent!

"The money should be spent helping women who choose to BF, all bullying, harassing and coercion, all shaming and guilt inducing propaganda needs to stop, it is effecting the well-being of almost 50% of the population, and as a feminist I would go as far as saying it is women hating and subjugating women."

I'm still wondering though, does this mean you think there should be no breastfeeding promotion of any sort, or that any sort of breastfeeding promotion (leaflets showing advantages of BF, or, I dunno, plans to show more women BF in soaps, for instance) is "woman hating"? I completely agree that there should be money spent on supporting women once they've started/decided to BF and that hand-wavey platitudes without this support is worse than useless and can be genuinely hurtful and damaging (I'm in Ireland where the breastfeeding initiation rate is even lower than the UK and drops off even faster), but do you/other thread participants think that people who haven't already decided to breastfeed should never be told anything other than "FF is just as good, here's how you do it" in case they feel "bullied" or "shamed"? Communities where hardly anyone has BF for generations, well, that's ok then, let's just leave them to it? Or do you think BF rates will go up once the "dedicated" breastfeeders get support and it becomes more common? Or do you think BF rates being low isn't a problem/BF advantages are a big myth so there's no point?

Sorry for all the questions, as I said, I've discussed this before on other forums and am genuinely interested.

(and really, I think saying that half the population is being negatively affected and wounded and bullied by BF promotion is a bit much - surely amongst the female population there are plenty of women like me who are happy with their choice and experience of BF or FF and who aren't affected by breastfeeding promotion in the slightest?)

Shameless blog push. Have written a complete RANT this morning about imperialist lactivism. I am SPITTING!!!!

Isn't it bloody typical that news of this came the same week as the enquiry into Hamzah's death from starvation? Can we please spend MY MONEY on stopping children from dying. Babies don't die from being fed Aptamil. At least they're bloomin' FED.

And breathe.

likepeasinapod.com/2013/11/14/imperialist-lactivism/

WOW, stinkingbishop - you don't let ignorance of the facts (any facts - I can't find one correct point in any of your 7) get in the way of a good rant, do you?

I don't think I have ever read a post on here or elsewhere where the basic information about bf, what women do, what affects their choices and so on which is so consistently wrong.

It's astonishing.

You are entitled to your view that this scheme is not a good thing, of course, but how about checking your info first?

Just a thought. Makes your argument a little weak.

And while you deserve a lot of support and sympathy for your struggle, the rest of your post is riddled with misunderstanding, too :( :(

(to take one point: pre-term birth and caesarean section do not impact on the time the milk comes in....though it's understandable you think that because it's a common myth)

stinkingbishop, doxastic Love it! just started studying philosophy and recently discovered its meaning. Will read the blog later, thank you.

leedy, It would be interesting to know in advance whether extra practical help and support, whether that be help from husbands and partners with other DC and domestic help, cultural attitudes to BF or support from peers and professionals had the greatest impact on: women choosing to BF and women being able to establish and maintain BF, first, before deciding to push BF as the must do choice. For if you must do it, it is no longer a choice. If we desire a cultural shift so that these women targeted by this recent research actively want to BF, then it would make more sense to offer every available support to women so that they can establish and maintain BF. Happy, healthy, well supported BF women are the best ambassadors for BF. As things are we have a lot of marketing of the idea but the reality for many falls short. We have all heard of or experienced first hand the enormity of the undertaking, the change to lifestyle, the impact upon mental health when it doesn't work and the guilt induced in women when they feel they have failed.

I think we need less marketing and less coercion, information should be given dispassionately and professionals should not push an agenda but simply support the choices women make.

At the end of the day, more success stories and less angst is the best marketing for BF.

tiktok exactly which of my 7 points are factually incorrect?

Good rant, stinkingbishop, v good.

And I understand that the money put forward for this ill-advised scheme can in no way be translated in to funds for more BFing support - which is what makes it so hideous.
It's cynical marketing at its worst, it is unmanageable, I doubt that it will increase BFing rates significantly and it is horribly dismissive of anybody who does not (for whatever reasons) BF.
It also seems to imply that women are easily 'bribed' in to doing something they'd rather not do by giving them some glass beads or the equivalent thereof . We can think and make up our own minds, you know!
So, no, in case that wasn't clear from my previous post, I don't like it. And I too am quite angry about it being proposed.

I love the idea of more education being directed at men, fathers, grandparents, employers, shop assistants and anybody else who may have contact with a BFing mother. It IS true if more BFing was seen in public it would become more of the norm.

Has anybody seen the new mother in the Philippines on the news? Newborn chomping away beautifully at her breast? What on earth would she have done if she had not been able to BF?? Now thankfully the vast majority of us will never find themselves in straights quite as dire as hers but I am sure BFing rates would go up if there was no other choice. By which I simply mean more women are physically capable to BF than currently do (I do NOT propose getting rid of FF btw ) and the question needs to be "why don't they?". Partiularly as a large majority of pregnant women state that they would like to BF - how sad for them if they then cannot get it to the point where it is working??

As others have said it would have helped me to know about some of the pitfalls before I started, not to put me off, but to have a more realistic expectation of what it could be like: hard. Rather than the fluffy idea of mother holding contented baby that I had in my head. It never occurred to me before I had DS1 that I would NOT bf, of course that was what I was going to do. Well, dear reader, DS1 almost finished me off. The feeding was only part of what was so difficult in getting through his first year, but a rather big part.

Sorry, about my rather unfocused rant .

I have no idea whether this scheme would or wouldn't work, but I would assume from the info in the OP that it is aimed at communities where there is no guilt about not breast feeding and few people intend or try to breast feed.

I don't get the impression that it is a scheme that is supposed to be rolled out nationwide, even if the results do lead researchers to conclude that it has been successful. On this instance.

Sorry, in this instance.

It is indeed patronising to assume that a woman struggling to breast feed would carry on for shopping vouchers, but as far as i can tell this scheme is not aimed at that woman.

"So those women have TRIED and it hasn’t worked. They’ve not gone ‘oh, I can’t be arsed, I’d rather shove a bottle in its gob and pop down Matalan’. They’ve stopped because their baby is crying with hunger and losing weight" Really? My understanding is that many stop because they are given bad advice or no support for things like tongue-tie, bad latch etc. The support is just no there and also my experience and that of others is that health professionals suggest a bottle of formula rather than help with latch etc. Thus effecting the milk production. Or they stop because of pressure from family/society/friends or a fear of feeding in public or because they are told their baby will sleep better on formula.

"The 6 weeks drop-off also correlates with the date at which maternity pay plunges from 90% of your salary to £136 a week and those unlucky enough not to have a high earning partner or sufficient savings have to go back to work. Now, of course, you can express milk. But rare must be the bovine marvel who can express an entire day’s worth overnight, or has a workplace understanding enough that she can nip off to the loo every few hours and attach herself to a pump." Most people don't go back after 6 weeks. Do they?

Most people don't go back after 6 weeks. Do they?
A lot do in the States. In the UK 6 weeks mat leave are compulsory, thereafter a woman can return.

stinkingbishop - like I say all of them....really! Each and every one of them....how did you do it??! :)

"Most people don't go back after 6 weeks. Do they?"

I was just wondering that. I possibly live in a middle class bubble but the earliest I've heard of anyone going back was 3 months. Can totally see why there's a drop-off at 6 months or a bit earlier as I do know a lot of people who've gone back to work then, and that's a point when baby still might need a fair whack of milk during the day.

I am blessed to have an actual room in which to be a bovine marvel at work. Mooooooo.

OK - SB....I should be doing something else entirely but here's a quick skim of where you get it all wrong:

• Vouchers are for several shops – John Lewis is one (opposite end to Matalan!). Please don't be sneery about Matalan, or about people being poor - the scheme is targetted at women who are poor.

*”Most women stop breastfeeding in the first 6 weeks” - not correct. Initiation in UK is 81 per cent; breastfeeding at 6 weeks is 55 per cent. So about a quarter of the mothers who start have stopped bf by 6 weeks– not ‘most’

• “They’ve stopped because their baby is crying with hunger and losing weight.” No. The most common reason for stopping in the first six weeks is soreness - losing weight and crying are not even on the list of common reasons (though 'not having enough milk' is a common reason and within that, there will be babies who are crying and have lost weight...actually losing weight is very uncommon, however)

• Most people in the UK don’t go back to work after 6 weeks and going back to work only features on the reasons for stopping after 6 mths

• The scheme will be verified by midwives and other HCPs by simply asking mothers

• mixed feeding will be counted as breastfeeding

• you would not have missed out – the first and larger payment is for bf to six weeks

• Analogy with nursery pick-up - that money removes guilt? Isn’t that a good thing? The financial incentive acknowledges that for women who are trying to bf in areas with no social support, it is a hard thing to do.Maybe I have not understood this analogy well.

None of my information and details about the scheme is hard to find.

Maths correction :) : just under a third of women who start breastfeeding have stopped by 6 weeks. Still far from 'most'.