We mustn’t call breastfeeding “natural”

We mustn’t call breastfeeding “natural” 2017-05-10T17:43:32-04:00

Henri_Lebasque_-_Mother_and_ChildAn article in the medical journal Pediatrics says that it is โ€œunethicalโ€ to describe breastfeeding as โ€œnatural.โ€

โ€œCoupling nature with motherhood,โ€ says the study, โ€œcan inadvertently support biologically deterministic arguments about the roles of men and women in the family (for example, that women should be the primary caretaker.โ€

We shouldnโ€™t couple nature with motherhood? The old politically-correct order insisted on a distinction between โ€œsex,โ€ which was about nature (biological organs, reproduction, the body), and โ€œgender,โ€ which was about culture (gender roles, cultural norms).

Then โ€œgenderโ€ went from being a โ€œsocial constructionโ€ to an individual construction. Then โ€œsexโ€ became an individual construction. Nature became swallowed up completely.

In this mindset, nature ceases to exist. And yet I suspect many people who buy into this shop for โ€œnatural foodโ€ and fret about the way human beings are destroying nature with pollution, development, and global warming. And yet surely they are the ones who are destroying nature in their repudiation of the body, as in transgenderism, and their unwillingness to acknowledge the natural function of sex and its connection to reproduction and thus to family structures.

But breastfeeding is, indeed, the natural way a mother nourishes her baby. She shares this power with all mammals. She and her baby and the father are all part of nature, even as they also are part of a supernature, and denying that fact is a rejection of reality itself.

Itโ€™s โ€œethically inappropriateโ€ for government and medical organizations to describe breastfeeding as โ€œnaturalโ€ because the term enforces rigid notions about gender roles, claims a new study in Pediatrics.

โ€œCoupling nature with motherhoodโ€ฆ can inadvertently support biologically deterministic arguments about the roles of men and women in the family (for example, that women should be the primary caretaker,โ€ the study says.

The study notes that in recent years, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the World Health Organization, and several state departments of health have all promoted breastfeeding over bottle-feeding, using the term โ€œnatural.โ€

โ€œReferencing the โ€˜naturalโ€™ in breastfeeding promotionโ€ฆ may inadvertently endorse a set of values about family life and gender roles, which would be ethically inappropriate,โ€ the study says.

Unless such public-service announcements โ€œmake transparent the โ€˜values and beliefs that underlie them,โ€™โ€ they should quit describing breastfeeding as โ€œnatural.โ€

But the studyโ€™s authors, Jessica Martucci and Anne Barnhill, clearly have in mind an alternative set of โ€œvalues and beliefs,โ€ about which which they are not transparent.

[Keep reading. . .]

The original article is here.

HT: ย Mary Moerbe

Painting byย Henri Lebasque [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

"I think Newsom is actually doing a good job in opposing and showing Trump up. ..."

DISCUSS: Completely Realigning Baseball
"My only question is whether defining human nature to be whatever we want it to ..."

How to Make Natural Law Arguments
"If it is true as Jeremiah reminds us that : the heart is deceitful above ..."

How to Make Natural Law Arguments
"I don't mean to disagree with any of this, but I'm a little uncomfortable with ..."

How to Make Natural Law Arguments

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TAKE THE
Religious Wisdom Quiz

What is the Christian principle about speaking words?

Select your answer to see how you score.