On Babies and Baby Food

I was just reading through some old comments on my blog . . . which I am very bad about doing, by the way, and discovered that I offended my sister a few weeks ago by not mentioning my new niece who, according to my sister, wears cloth diapers and drinks organic milk. At first I was unsure about the organic milk part. My sister doesn't buy organic milk. She buys Kroger 2%, usually two gallons at a time, and sometimes throws a half gallon of chocolate milk into the cart too.

Right. But she makes plenty of organic milk at home. http://ellie-belly-days.blogspot.com/2010/06/i-was-right.html
Okay, maybe it isn't certifiably organic, since she might use antibiotics or take tylenol or other medications, but it's the real deal. No processing for Anna. Plus, it is 100% local. Who knew my sister (who recently read Michael Pollan's Food Rules - but just the bolded rules, not the descriptions - and commented "this is nice, but I'm not sure it works for for a family with toddlers.") was a locovore at heart?

Seeing this comment reminded me of a potential post I've been mulling over and trying to wrap my brain around. When I started this blog, I called myself a "locavore-in-training." I think it is official now. I am doing the best I can to eat locally whenever possible. Much to my husband's delight, I regularly go to the grocery store and come home with just four or five items - usually dairy - rather than a whole cartload of food. I just can't buy processed food anymore. I usually don't even buy produce at the grocery store, because it is summer and I can get all of the veggies I need (and then some) from local sources.

But some day my locovore shopping habits will probably have to change. Not in the very near future, but in a few years down the road, we plan to adopt a child. And she'll probably have to eat. The question is: what will our imaginary future adopted baby eat?

I don't think anyone in 2010 is unaware of the fact that there is a huge "breast is best" campaign out there. In fact, this campaign has grown so loud, powerful, strong, and pushy that some "bottle moms" are beginning to retaliate. I wasn't planning to blog this when I read the articles I'm about to mention, so I don't have any sources for you. Will you take my word for it this time, if I use plenty of qualifications such as: these words are mine, they are very rough paraphrases of stuff I read in a number of possibly credible and probably less-credible places, including some ticked-off mommy blogs?

There seems to be a new movement out there against nursing. I was at the doctor's office a few months ago and picked up a Parenting magazine (All of the patients at the Portage Clinic must be parents. I base this assessment on the fact that Parenting is the only magazine they offer in their waiting rooms, not on the fact that the day I was there the waiting room was full of several geriatric patients and myself). I think the title of the article included the phrase 'breast bully' and I thought it was going to be about nursing babies who are too pushy/demanding. The article was actually geared towards mothers who choose not to nurse their babies, for whatever reason, and mainly talked about how to deal with pushy nursing mothers who refuse to accept this choice. Until I read this article, I though the big debate over breastfeeding was still whether it was okay to do it in public. Apparently, the debate has shifted to a question of whether la leche league and its ilk ought to be making non-nursing mothers feel so badly about their lifestyle.

If I were to have a child in the usual way, I would plan to nurse that child, no question. But some mothers (like my own, for example) can't nurse - in our case, we were allergic to her milk. (A few days ago I read a blog by a woman whose son had been allergic to her milk. She said people asked her if she was an alien. How terrible.) I read a harrowing comment on a blog from a woman who desperately needed anti-psychotic medication that was not for use by breastfeeding mothers - and she had to make a choice between her own health and her child's. She was made to feel like a terrible mom by breast bullies. Some women have babies who don't take to nursing. Others - whose children will grow up to be my students one day - may nurse their infants for a few weeks but have to go back to work and find it difficult or impossible to pump during the work day. Is it fair for nursing moms to make these women feel so badly about something that is out of their control?

Here's where I wish I'd paid more attention to my sources. I read a long article from a magazine (online) that said that there is actually very little research to indicate that breastfeeding is better for a child's development. Apparently, even the studies that do show a difference between breast-fed and bottle-fed babies may not be based on sound research practices. Some of the studies do not adequately control significant variables such as the home environment -- which could have a lot more to do with brain development than the food a child eats. (Boy, did the breast bullies have comments to make about this article!)

On the surface, the breastfeeding debate does not seem to affect me at all. First and foremost, I don't have any children! Also, my girlfriends who are moms all seem to have taken to nursing easily and naturally. I get the sense that the hardest part for all of them was the eventual weaning. Other than my own mother, I don't know any moms who struggled so much with the choice of food for their babies. (And, by the way, my sister and I were also allergic to formula, so no one can blame my mom for not trying!) But as a locovore future adoptive mom, I have started to realize all the implications of this debate on my life in the years to come.

My reasons for thinking breastfeeding is (generally) better are more in line with what my sister had to say in her comment. Breast milk is 100% natural, you have complete control over what is in it, and it is the most local food in the world. Local, organic milk. For free. Delivered to you by nature. Mother nature doesn't even charge for shipping. (Okay, I'm minimizing the physical toll on the mother here, but I have no experience in that area and I've read descriptions of nursing that range from "pure hell" to "pure bliss" and "wonderfully convenient" to "completely inconvenient" and I'm afraid if I try to summarize what other people have gone through to nurse a baby I'll just end up offending everyone, which is not my intention at all!)

There are ways for adoptive mothers to stimulate their own milk production. Some involve taking hormones, which I can't see myself doing. (Where do they come from? What will they do to me? Would they be passed along to the baby?) Almost all involve supplementing with formula (unless you can actually trick your body into thinking it has gone through a pregnancy - which seems far-fetched). Most organizations who advocate for adoptive mothers to try to nurse their infants suggest that this be done not for the nutritional benefit to the child, but for the bonding experience. (See above where I mentioned variables not being considered during the breast v. bottle studies. This is one of them.) They also sell special packets of formula that fit in a holster around the mom so that the formula stays at body temperature. A small tube is used to deliver food to the infant while he or she is at the breast - no bottles are used. Are they in the stimulating milk production (which does not net them any profit) business, or the hormone, plastic tubing and formula (presumably highly profitable) business?

There are also ways for adoptive mothers to access breast milk from milk banks. I suppose this is the solution to my real food lifestyle. Except that I've read it can cost something like $32,000 a year for the milk. That is my entire non-existent salary! I don't think I'm going to add La Leche League to my grocery list any time soon.

So I'm stuck with formula for my not-currently-existent future child.

Why on earth would I want to feed my baby processed food that I won't eat myself? On the other hand, as one bottle mom pointed out in her blog, baby formula keeps babies alive! If the alternative to formula is nothing - and starvation, I'll go with formula every time.

It all boils down to this: I am probably going to end up being one of those moms who would really rather nurse her baby, but cannot. And I may face some severe bullying by other moms about my choice. I think I'll follow Michael Pollan's advice (again, my Food Rules book is now in Minneapolis so I don't have the page number, sorry). He says a person should be the kind of person who takes multivitamins, then skip the multivitamin. I will be the kind of mother who breastfeeds. Then I'll feed my adopted kid formula, because it's the most practical solution. (Or I'll start looking for donations of "liquid gold.")