
Breastfeeding offers parents a win-win-win-win-win scenario. First, the child gets nutrients and natural antibodies from the mama, which means the kid gets a great head start toward building a powerhouse immune system. Secondly, the wife gets to bond with the baby and work through her postpartum emotions. Third, it makes tight-assed people very uncomfortable. Fourth, it’s free, and fifth, it’s always there, like a bottomless keg ready to be tapped at a moment’s notice, so no late-night trips for formula, no fumbling with bottles and microwaves, and minimal cleanup.
True, there are potential pitfalls for the mom, like sore nipples (ouch), plugged ducts (double-ouch), and mastitis (super-humongous-ouch), and there lots of places where it’s easy to feel self-conscious about showing your breasts to the easily titillated. But I think these are easily outweighed by the pros, so if the mother is willing and medically able, more power to her.
If nothing else, we should consider the adage that "Michael Jordan was breastfed, Michael Jackson was not."
Our second is now two months old so we're in the height of breast feeding. Just thought I'd like to strike down the idea that breast milk is free. That milk doesn't get produced out of thin air you know. My wife eats many more meals per day to produce the milk she does. That food surely ain't free.
Of course it probably *is* still cheaper than formula, but one could argue that formula is ridiculously expensive in the first place.
Also, breasts aren't bottomless. We had to supplement our son with fomula at the beginning due to his initial ravenous appeitite.
And you can add pumping to one of the negatives for working moms. My wife absolutely hates having to do it.
Posted by: Scott C | Dec 6, 2005 12:38:13 AM