Larry, I'm snipping quite a lot of this because on many points we're
going to have to agree to disagree. However, I've answered several
specific points below.

wrote:

You seem to be taking the view we should simply inform
mothers of the value of breastfeeding with no other message attached,

That's almost exactly the opposite of what I said. What I said was that
our message ought to focus primarily on practical advice and dispelling
myths, and only secondarily on stressing the value of breastfeeding.


: wrote:
: Sarah Vaughan writes:

: [...]
: There need to be two messages. The first message
: is intended for all women and should be transmitted universally.
: "Breastfeeding is the best thing for you and your child, it is superior
: to any other feedign method,

: This whole debate started because Jo and you objected strenuously to a
: message that said this.

: and you should breastfeed unless you are
: physically unable."

: Larry, you seem to think that telling people what they should do is a
: great way to get them to say "In that case, I'll do it." It's actually
: a great way to put people's backs up and alienate them.

IMO, this response on your part ignores my distinction of general versus
targetted messages. You are treating the case of telling women that
formula feeding is inferior feeding breastmilk causes you to translate
my message into a direct "You (personally) should not feed formula."

I have spent a considerable time and effort explaining that this is NOT
the way to propogate the message, but you persist in turning my mass
message into a targetted message.

Because that's the way many people will hear it. A woman who thought
herself unable to breastfeed when she wanted to and who hears the
message that formula is inferior may know logically that it wasn't her
fault. But that's not necessarily the way she's going to hear it on an
emotional level.

[...]
A woman who is faced with the decision
of whether to consult a doctor over a health quetion is not going to base
her decision on messages propogated in the mass media, but on her (and her
friends) experience with doctors in similar situations. If compassion is
shown in these cases, there is no reason for fear. Sarah, I am afraid
that your straw horse will just not hold a rider in this case!

In the first place, as things currently stand we should definitely _not_
be encouraging women to see their doctors about breastfeeding problems.
(Not the sort that need advice, anyway - obviously, for mastitis or
thrush there's not much option, as women will need a prescription for
those.) I hope as devoutly as you do that this state of affairs changes
in the near-as-possible future; but you know as well as I do that
encouraging women to see doctors about breastfeeding problems will, in a
huge number of cases, be a complete waste of time and frequently likely
to do more harm than good. What we should be trying to persuade them to
do is to see people who actually know something about breastfeeding.

The message, therefore, should be that women with breastfeeding problems
can see counsellors, who will give compassionate, non-judgemental help.
Talking about how inferior formula is just doesn't come across as that
non-judgemental. There is an additional major problem here in that, as
I've said, pro-breastfeeders have a reputation for being harsh and
judgemental due to a strident few getting the majority a bad name.
While we definitely need to change this, we also need to face the fact
that that is the situation that currently exists; and we need to avoid
acting in such a way as to play to those preconceptions.

[...]
I don't disagree that advice and support should be given with compassion
and without judgment. You seem to be latching onto that as a reason for
not advertyising the disadvantages or formula. I think the two issues
should be separated.

I don't think the phraseology you suggested is going to allow them to be
separated.

[...]
. The only reason I can see that you've
: given is your claim that "Formula is inferior" makes a more persuasive
: argument than "Breastfeeding is superior", and, as I said, this is in
: direct contradiction to what I've learned in psychology.

Then we will have to agree to disagree. Most of the advertising industry
is based on the direct contradiction to what you have learned.

I honestly don't know what you're meaning by this. I can't think of any
examples of cases where the advertising strategy for encouraging people
to use one product is by criticising its competitor. Advertising
agencies advertise products by talking about the virtues of the product,
not the flaws of the competitor.

[...]
: If breastfeeding were viewed as the norm, they could simply be viewed
: as helpers, rather than police(women).

: Not getting blind drunk regularly is viewed as the norm, but there are
: still alcoholics who don't seek help because they're scared of getting
: criticised for their behaviour.

This is a non-sequitar, and I don't know what it is doing here. Are
you saying that formula feeding is an addicitve behavior?

Not at all. I'm saying that you are incorrect in saying that the only
reason breastfeeding counsellors are viewed as judgemental is because
they're advocating a behaviour that isn't viewed as the norm.

: : Larry, that just isn't true. I know this because I've _done_ a
: : psychology course which specifically covered the topic of public health
: : messages and how they should be presented. So if you want to know what
: : the equivalent of Psych 101 actually does teach - well, it taught me
: : that research shows people to be more motivated by aiming for benefits
: : than by trying to avoid harms.
:
: Based on what you argue above, I would suggest than in addition to you
: public health psych courses, that you also take some advertising and
: advertising psych classes. This not just a question of phrasing the
: message regarding aiming for benefits rather than avoiding harms.

It isn't just that, no; but that was the original point you brought up,
and your claim that your view is supported by basic psychology is
completely inaccurate. Your view is *opposed to* basic psychology, and
you really don't seem to be addressing this.

It is
: a question of deviating from the norm or not. Human beings have a very
: strong herd instinct. They are usually very unwilling to deviate from
: the norm unless there is a strong reason to do otherwise.

[...]
: If anything, I'd say that messages about the inferiority of formula *or*
: about the superiority of breastmilk both make breastfeeding seem *less*
: like the norm, because they leave people with the subtle message that if
: the point needs to be argued in this way, then clearly lots of people
: *aren't* breastfeeding. It's a 'protest too much' kind of effect - it
: draws attention to the problem.

First, there is a problem. To wit: 60 years of false and misleading
adversiting have led the general public to believe that there is no
effective difference between feeding breastmilk and formula. Second,
a significant portion of the population still hold that belief, particularly
among the poor and disadvantaged. Third, even among those that believe
breastmilk might be better, they believe that the advantages are small
enough that it makes no effective difference in the health of children.
Fourth, a significant portion of our children's health is being risked
by these false beliefs.

This is why it is not a question of "protest too much." We have a
situation where a false message has been disseminated and ingrained into
the publich psyche that it is necessary to conduct an very publich
education campaign to reeducate the public and discredit the falsehood.
The problem requires attention for an effective solution.

Well, fine; but that's in direct contradiction to the "bring the herd
instinct into play" plan. If you're trying to tell people that large
numbers of people have been conned out of breastfeeding, you're not
exactly going to be able to convince them simultaneously that everybody
else is breastfeeding so they ought to just go along with the herd.


: Not remotely, I'm afraid. I still don't see how "Formula is inferior"
: is meant to inspire women to seek help with breastfeeding problems. If
: you're a woman who's feeling guilty over having struggled with
: breastfeeding and who's worried about being criticised, to whom are you
: going to turn? To the people who are telling you what you should do,
: telling you how inferior your course of action is, telling you that the
: stuff you're not managing to give your baby is the stuff it needs, who
: are generally making you feel so much worse than you already feel? Or
: to the people who tell you that it's just fine to give formula and who
: make you feel OK about what you're doing?

As a summary paragraph, you comments above must represent the points
you want to emphasize at the end of your post.

They do; and, as you didn't answer the question in that paragraph, I've
left it in.

1. The "formula is inferior" message is intended to correct and retract
misleading claims made in the last 60 years that formula is just a good,
and which claims are still believed by a significant portion of the
population.

1.b There is still a significant faction of the medical profession that
pushes formula and supplementation as the solution to any feeding problems.
This message would give women the background to question such advice.
That problem is a order of magnitude larger than the guilt problem you
seem so concerned about.

I don't think it would give women the background to question such
advice. A woman who is advised to use formula is being given the
message that she *cannot* fully breastfeed; and, no matter how much she
believes that breastfeeding is best, she is not going to refuse to give
her baby formula if the message she has been given by the medical
professionals is that the baby *needs* formula. Stressing the
inferiority of formula is no help at all in dealing with this particular
situation, because it doesn't address the real issue. What we *should*
be concentrating on is putting across the message that the vast majority
of breastfeeding problems can be dealt with without using formula and
that many health care professionals are giving out inaccurate advice in
this situation. In other words, the important message is not that
formula feeding is inferior, but that it's *unnecessary*.

2. The criticism should be reserved for the formula itself. The women
should be treated with compassion. The message medical professionals
should be given to women is "I empathize with your difficulties, and I
pledge to work with you to find the best possible solution we can for]
you and your baby."

Indeed - but that isn't going to happen if women are put off from seeing
breastfeeding counsellors in the first place because the message
they've had from the general advertising leaves them feeling judged or
guilty, and we need to try hard to avoid that happening.


All the best,

Sarah

--
http://www.goodenoughmummy.typepad.com

"That which can be destroyed by the truth, should be" - P. C. Hodgell