Liberal think tank CentreForum has produced a report, Parenting Matters, which advises the Government to do more to promote better quality parenting, specifically targeted at those families who need it most.
Indeed, if we consider a core element of liberalism to be allowing each individual to realise their full potential, such a squandering is in fact itself deeply and fundamentally illiberal.
Sensibly, the author has looked at countries where child wellbeing is highest, like Holland and Sweden. The UK languishes at 21 on this list. A Swedish parenting support programme which begins ante-natally and continues for several years after the child is born is cited as a success.
The report highlights that universal provision of parenting support often fails to attract those in lower-income groups who need it most and looks at ways of incentivising attendance — perhaps by using the benefits system to reward not only attendance, but positive engagement with the process by topping up child benefit. This, they argue, would also help to tackle poverty and inequality.
Personally, I’m glad to see a report which recognises the growing body of evidence about the toxic effects of stress hormones on the developing brain and which emphasises positive engagement with the child. Too many regime-orientated parenting experts focus on taming, rather than nurturing, children.
While it’s a step in the right direction, I feel that the report could have concentrated further on one area that it recognises as an important factor — breastfeeding. Professor Stewart Forsyth of the Dundee Infant Feeding Study has said quite categorically that:
“Breastfed children from lower socio-economic groups had better outcomes than formula fed children from more affluent families”
If we know that human milk is an important factor in tackling health inequalities, surely we should take a more radical approach in encouraging breastfeeding? We know that breastfeeding initiation rates amongst people in lower socio-economic groups remain worryingly low. However, if you look at OECD figures, breastfeeding rates are much higher and duration longer in Scandinavian countries. In Norway, 75% of mothers are breastfeeding when their baby is six months old. The Government’s 40 year old policy of unequivocally supporting breastfeeding and banning promotion of breast milk substitutes has to be relevant.
Anyone who has a baby in this country will be bombarded with free samples and “advice” from companies who manufacture baby milk, from early in their pregnancy. While companies are not allowed to specifically promote or discount their infant formula, their giveaways are not charitable. They are marketing tools designed to increase their profits. Much of the information, plastered in brand logos, will be handed out in health centres and hospitals. Some even have their own breastfeeding advice lines. There’s clearly a conflict of interest there.
It’s time to look at fully incorporating the International Code on the Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes into UK law. This would ban any promotion of infant formula within the health care system. The current Infant Feeding Regulations do not go far enough, nor do they protect the rights of parents regardless of how they choose to feed their babies.
There would inevitably be huge opposition to such a move from the baby food industry, but surely the Government should put the long term health benefits above commercial interests.
I am disappointed that CentreForum did not examine the issues surrounding breastfeeding in greater detail. Simply saying that “the importance of breastfeeding could be emphasised” is not enough. We have more than enough breastfeeding promotion. What we need is targeted, expert support available for mothers round the clock combined with action to curb the power of the artificial baby milk manufacturers. Without that action, promotion is like offering a bowl of delicious soup and giving a fork to eat it with.
I also think that kids shouldn’t leave school without some understanding of the basics of child development and good parenting. If the Government adopts the 5 a day idea, then it should start giving that message out as early as possible.
Despite all that, though, this report is a valuable contribution and should be taken seriously by ministers.
* Caron Lindsay blogs at Caron’s Musings.
Follow @LibDemVoice on Twitter
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Last West End Christmas Fortnight events today! #dundeewestend
How national insurance increase will undermine homeless services
Rediscovering the Wisbech and Upwell Tramway
North London's expanse
Paul Reynolds
David Allen
Ahmad
Matthew Radmore
15 Comments
Excellent summary of what sounds like an important report. Nick Clegg’s insistence on targetting resources at early years education and support is something I’m very pleased with so far.
The Professor Forsyth link appears not to work? I’d be interested to read what he says as I doubt he’s claiming cause and effect, merely a correlation?
Tim, that link doesn’t work, sorry. I was trying to link to Prof Forsyth’s PowerPoint presentation about the Dundee findings. I saw him give it some time ago. I have it on my pc, The only thing I can suggest is to find it the hard way – go to Google, type in Stewart Forsyth dundee infant feeding study and one of the things that comes up leads to the presentation. I’m sure there must be an easier way, but I’m not technically literate enough to work that one out.
The body of evidence on the benefits of breastfeeding for both mother and baby is too huge to ignore and I really feel it’s high time we took real action to curb the power of formula manufacturers and increase our breastfeeding rates to Scandinavian levels.
Quite right.Two thoughts:
1.. The promotion of so-called “follow-on” milk (for children over 6 months) is blatantly used to circumvent the rules on non-promotion of artificial milks to newborns.
2. How do we help women in our own party who are breastfeeding? My own experience taught me that the overwhelming attitude to me as a breastfeeding parliamentary candidate was: ” yuk”!
I don’t think that removing the companies from the process would make the improvments we would hope for- at least not in the next generation. My experience with new mums is that those from a lower socio-economic background have very negative attitudes to breastfeeding- often tied into their own personal image- by the time they are really being asked to consider the options (when they are pregnant, and without stereotyping they are often much younger than those from more educated or affluent backgrounds) they don’t even want to consider the possibility of breasteeding. The normalising of breast feeding as the “normal” choice across society has to occur alongside the removal of formula milk companies from the debate.
Also, from a health provision pov -in my relatively recent experience. How I intended to feed my baby wasn’t mentioned in my antenatal care at all. It wasn’t discussed until my baby was born and I asked if I could feed her. What chance do we have of increasing rates if this is how we manage antenatal care.
Ruth, you are right about follow on milk, an invention designed purely to get round the Code. I started writing about that but held back as I would literally have gone on for 6 years.
Go to some parts of the world & you’ll see politicians breastfeeding while giving speeches & nobody bats an eyelid. It’s annoying that you’ve had that experience. We have to support women who are getting that kind of grief. It’s not acceptable. What would have helped you?
Maybe the report doesn’t concentrate on breastfeeding because midwives and health visitors are all ready pushing this message so much? Whereas not one professional mentioned about reading a book every day, getting on the floor to play or switching the television off to talk. It’s only when children start school at 4 that you get told this – rather too late!
Breastfeeding only covers the first few months of the five years. I prefer this approach in that you feel there is still hope for your children even if, for whatever reason, you didn’t breastfeed. It also means there is a role for the father or grandparents.
When I heard about the report i thought it sounded like the nanny state but thinking about it, it makes sense. There are such big differences between groups, which can’t all be down to heredity that the idea of the 5 a day seems like a good one if it will help disadvantaged children get a better start in life.
I have seen the report on breastfeeding that Caron refers to (I cant find it on google) , it may have been in the BMJ. I am pretty sure they controlled for factors like the mothers education and still found significant differences in areas like literacy years afterwards.
I would urge some caution around evangelising breast feeding. My wife was unable to do so despite much pain and the best efforts of the excellent midwifes who were involved with her care. The problem first became evident when our daughter was kept in hospital for 12 days after failing to thrive. For a few weeks we were able (with much difficulty) to express a small amount but were left with no option but to use formula for the majority of feeds.
Because of the hype around breast feeding during the ante natal stage my wife was left with a feeling of failure that her GP felt was a significant factor in a lengthy period of PND. And this is not because of my wife’s inability to understand the facts and reality of the situation, she is an extremely experienced and qualified nurse (RN1 / RGN depending on your age!) including a significant amount of time as a practice nurse.
It’s also worth noting that my daughter is healthy, happy and thrives both in school and socially. Having just finished her sats (age 7) she was above average in all areas. I would put this down to good parenting a superb mother (and enthusiastically average father!) a happy home environment, healthy diet and lots of love and support.
Breast may be best, but not everyone can feed their child in this way. When our daughter was born, there was little or no support for mothers who feel like failures because they cannot.
Clair, I think you’re spot on – and we need to deal with these personal image and cultural issues. I think we need to do both – implement WHO Code and educate, from a very early age. You’re also right about antenatal education. La Leche League did some years ago, and maybe still do, ante natal breastfeeding classes, about 6 hours’ worth, and they were really good at preparing people for the needs of the baby and what to look for as signs things were going well and how to deal with problems. I always used to encourage people to come along to my groups during pregnancy, too.
Steve, as someone who came within a whisker of giving up breastfeeding when my daughter was very small, I understand what your wife went through. Nobody should be made to feel guilty. If you look at the Dept of Health’s figures, 90% of those who give up in the first few weeks would prefer to keep going. I think the NHS is letting those women down by not providing sufficient knowledge and support. It’s better than it used to be in some places, but still quite patchy. When I was a breastfeeding counsellor, I was shocked that some health professionals lacked knowledge that I would consider to be basic and others gave advice that was just plain wrong.
The evidence for the benefits of breastfeeding is compelling and we can’t lie to people about that. By the same token, those who encountered problems and were not able to continue should not be blamed. We need better support and information.
Maria, nobody’s saying your child is doomed if you don’t breastfeed, but the evidence is there that it brings health benefits, real, long term health benefits, for mother and baby and should be encouraged. What we do now is cruel – over promoting breastfeeding without giving decent support to mothers who have problems in many cases. Virtually every breastfeeding problem has a breastfeeding solution.
As far as fathers and grandparents being involved in playing with the child, well, of course. And mothers need to too. I like that part of the report – I just feel that they didn’t go far enough on the breastfeeding angle. I have seen people moan, though, that they can’t feed the baby because a selfish mother insists on breastfeeding him or her. That is such a load of nonsense. There’s so much more other members of the family can do with the baby and to support the mother.
Caron – thank you for sharing your expertise on this issue. I think what would have helped me most was a generally more supportive attitude to women who are nursing older babies or toddlers. Most people are OKish about a woman feeding a newborn in public but I have experienced outright hostility to my breastfeeding a child over a year/18 months even though the World Health Organisation recommends nursing for 2 years plus.
Steve – I sympathise greatly. As someone who breastfed one child for three days and breastfed another child for three years I found everyone and her auntie had an opinion on my actions in both cases!
Caron – just to say thank you for your positive and fair response to our report. I am very pleased that you felt the report makes a valuable contribution in the crucial area of a child’s early years. I fully take on board your point about breastfeeding. We did look in detail at the evidence that clearly identifies the link between breastfeeding and both later health and cognitive outcomes. There is also clear evidence of a significant social gradient in terms of breastfeeding which is one of the many factors linked to the lack of social mobility in Britain. I accept entirely that this is an area that requires greater attention, while always bearing in mind the comments from yourself and other contributors recognising that many people may encounter difficulties with breastfeeding and that this requires sensitivity.
The key point behind the report was to recognise that information on the activities that aid child development in the crucial early years is not shared equally by all. It then looks at ways of getting this information into the hands of all parents, beyond simply those who already see it as ‘obvious’. It is difficult to see how the desire to have this information more widely available can be anything other than a positive thing.
To encourage good parenting, child benefit should cease after the fourth child in a family is born as an interim measure. Then it should be abolished altogether and replaced with a Parenthood Allowance set at the minimum wage rate times 100 hours. To qualify for this a parent or grandparentwho will have “care and control” of the child must pass a GCSE or NVQ course in Parenting skills. Perhaps the course should be designed by the “Supernanny” Jo Frost. Benefits would then reward responsibility and not irresponsibility. If every parent was qualified in childcare the cost of childcare would come down. But this could not and should not be done in isolation from the banking system, the taxation system, the legal system, the healthcare system, the welfare system, the education system and the economic system. All of these systems are interconnected and impact on each oher in highly complex ways. A virtual integrated system must be designed and tested. Then people can choose to move over to the new system because it will be in their self-interest to do so.
As a parent, there’s nothing I find more irritating than “experts” telling me how to bring up my child, whether it is the teacher, the community midwife or a think tank who have rigid ideas on what children should be like.
My wife and I stopped the community midwife coming to our house after our son was born because she was totally obnoxious about the issue of breast-feeding. My son was in intensive care after he was born and we put a lot of effort into trying to keep up breast milk supply, but the disruption meant it wasn’t possible to put him on a breast-only diet without him starving. The midwife insisted we were wrong and that giving him a mixture of bottle and breast was harming his health, stopping just short of accusing us of child abuse. I told her she was talking nonsense and demanded she leave. My son was fine – in fact, he continued breast feeding until the age of three, long after he was weaned onto solids and only possible because my wife stayed at home and wasn’t at work. If we had listened to the expert (who informed me she knew best because she’d just done a course), it is likely that breast feeding would become so distressing that we’d have abandoned it after six months.
There’s nothing wrong with advice, but State harassment is illiberal and we should be very careful that experts don’t overrule the freedom to bring up children as we choose. If anything, the experts themselves never agree, particularly over parenting.