Anyone else see this?
To sum up, United Arab Emirates are requirng mothers to breastfeed for two years. If she does not, her husband can sue her. Women who are unable to breastfeed will be provided a wet nurse.
-
That is absurd. Thank the heavens I live in the USA.
-
It sounds like this was legislation that was not thought through and by people who have no idea!
-
That's way too much government power. So sad to see a mother child relationship used to punish a woman.
-
Wow!
-
Ick.
-
Not surprising, I believe in Islam two years is the time prescribed for breastfeeding, so this would be a civil reflection of that. (NOT SAYING I AGREE!!!)
-
That makes me furious for those poor women.
-
What exactly would the husband use the wife for? Monetary damages? Civilly or criminally?
-
My goal is to BF for that long, but it's not really working out that way. Still trying!! But, I would hate to be required to do it ... Not only would I feel like a failure, but then if be stressed that it wasn't working. I don't think I'd like a wet nurse. Those poor women. Happy I live in the US.
-
NYC does something similar already. Most hospitals no longer give out formula or allow it: http://www.nyc.gov/html/doh/downloads/pdf/ms/latchon-hosp-commitments.pdf
Not as extreme but still.
-
@LindsayInNY: Gosh, I don't think that's really comparable!
-
@mamimami: Its comparable because it's something that is still being required and enforced. Not for the same period of time or with the same "punishments" obviously. But its okay for a city or state to allow such a law?
-
@Vegmama: I breastfed for 2 years and agree it would have really changed my relationship with my daughter and husband in a negative way if I felt like it was something I had to do.
@LindsayInNY: It just says for nurses not to give formula except if medically indicated or at the mothers request. I'm not sure how that's at all comparable -
@LindsayInNY: To me it's like requiring a prescription for a given food or medicine vs. outlawing it and providing grounds for legal repercussions! Not to mention we're talking 48 hours vs. 2 years. I don't want to get this thread off track into the issue of formula marketing but I think that's more of what's at stake in NY.
-
@LindsayInNY: The two laws are not comparable at all. The NYC law just says no formula unless (1) medically necessary or (2) at mother's request. I don't get how that is similar at all to mandatory, forced breast feeding. The NYC law doesn't force anyone to breast feed - it says right there that the mother can ask for formula.
-
@Maysprout: @pinkcupcake: My understanding is that you can't request it. Haven't been there to know yet though... Not trying to thread jack.
-
It's kind of in my nature to play devil's advocate, but I really can't see the benefit of the government's involvement in this.
-
@Happygal: I don't think there is any benefit for the government. They're phrasing it as a "best interests of the child" situation. The article looked like it was undecided about possible penalties though and whether to impose it on both WOHM and SAHM.
-
@LindsayInNY: oh it says in the link you added that it will be provided at the mothers request.
Like for both my girls (we don't live in NYC) they asked if they should put no formula on their card since breastfeeding was going fine. I think the NYC law just makes it that the assumption isn't to provide formula unless indicated otherwise and instead to assume breastfeeding unless indicated otherwise.
-
I'd love to know what women's rights are, can they have their own assests? What is the husband actually suing his wife for...financial settlement? Can he request a divorce?
-
@Happygal: @LindsayInNY: I recently read an article in "Pediatrcs" (the publication of the AAP) that stated that if 90% of US mothers exclusively breastfed until 6 months there would be a savings of $13 billion/year. The article I read was published in 2012, but this 2010 article from USA Today discusses it, too.
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/health/2010-04-05-study-breast-feeding_N.htm
That being said (and assuming the savings in the United Arab Emirates would be similar), I don't agree with any woman being forced to breastfeed, especially for 2 years. I don't see anything wrong with the NYC law, though.
-
It seems crazy to me to punish women who cannot breastfeed, or for whom breastfeeding is not the best decision. I don't think it is a good law.
That being said, I find it fascinating that this legislation was passed as a part of a "child's rights law." Maybe I'm misinterpreting, but it seems to me that the law is implying that children have a right to be breastfed because it's better for them. So the law is really taking the decision about what is best for the child out of the parents' (mother's, really) hands. In some ways, possibly unintended, the child is being given more rights than the mother. I'm really curious to know what other provisions appeared in this child's rights law, and whether they privilege children over parents in any other ways.
ETA: In a very different way, it made me think of child rights laws in Sweden (http://www.government.se/sb/d/15662). I think there are a few bees who live in Sweden-I'd be curious to know if you think I'm nuts for comparing the two.
-
Horrible!
-
Sorry-I realized my original comment made no sense as worded. I edited it to try again
-
This is so stupid. I hope it bites them in the ass, quickly, and gets revoked.
Also disturbed that wet nurses are the better option over formula. So do you have say over what the wet nurse consumes? Are they paid? Seems like it will mess up the child/mother relationship to have a toddler nursing off another woman.
So bizarre
-
@blackbird: to be fair, wetnurses were very, very commonplace for a long time. I'm not saying that I think mandatory wetnurses are a good idea *at all*, but in a traditional culture, it does not surprise me that they are more desired than formula.
-
yeah i know, but formula has come a long way, and as a modern woman, the whole concept squicks me out. I can't relate at all, to say the least.
-
@blackbird: I totally agree with you, don't get me wrong. It does seem really bizarre now.
-
@lovelyplum, Wikipedia tells me that the UAE is "cosmopolitan" and diverse? I've never been there, but it says there are mosques and Hindu temples and is known for its religious tolerance. I guess I got the impression it was a little more forward thinking? Not that I've ever been there!
So the whole "it's in the Quaran" part seems a bit invalid!
-
That seems outrageous.
-
Wow that's just nuts!
-
@yoursilverlining: This is what I was thinking... sue for what exactly? Maybe it's grounds for a divorce?
-
Could I just get a night wet nurse?
-
@blackbird: I've never been, either, and I really don't know very much about the place, other than I know some people who went to high school there. I guess my thought was that if the point of the law was to provide every child with breast milk, then offering formula to mothers who don't/can't breastfeed makes the whole thing redundant.
But I agree, it does seem really strange.
-
Wow! That's way out of line!
@jedeve: hahaha!!
-
@jedeve: haha!! Yes please!!
-
I read this and think it's crazy. No one should be forced to breastfeed. And for 2 years? Whew. I wonder if the birth rate will go down because of this law. "Gotta have a baby on the teat for 2 years, well you only get one, honey!"
@LindsayInNY: Not comparable.
-
Okay, guys, I get it - my comment is not comparable. I dropped the issue and don't need everyone to keep commenting at me to mention it. Point made.
-
@mamimami: very true.
Islam does encourage us Muslims to nurse for 2 years but in what world can a husband use his wife and why would the government do this shit? I do NOT agree and creating barriers like that in parenting and marriage is not Islamic. UAE is getting crazy and trying to use Islam as their excuse? No. Don't they dare!
Subscribe to our newsletter
- Google Plus
- Stumbleupon
- Twitter
- Facebook
- Pinterest
- Favorite0
43 comments