Running Head: BREASTFEEDING

The Impact of Religiosity on Breastfeeding and Weaning Attitudes

By Pam Rooks
 Running Head: BREASTFEEDING
2

Abstract

An almost invisible inequality shaped possibly by religious or socio-cultural influences, traditional or

sexist gender roles or ideas of sexuality and sin, the social pressure a mother experiences to wean a
nursing baby by its first birthday has driven some mothers deeply underground to breastfeed older
children sometimes without even the knowledge of the husband. Though not explicitly targeting the
rights of children, many states do extend breastfeeding protections to women and a few even wage
penalties upon anyone who interferes, yet breastfeeding remains a mostly private and short-lived
endeavor for mother and child. While lengthier breastfeeding would seem a natural extension of today’s
developments in child psychology that emphasize the importance of parent-child attachment and
bonding, women who have nursed their babies beyond the first year have been subjected to the open
gaping of a titillated press, brutal public scorn, particularly on the internet, and in some cases, even legal
and custodial battles. So prevalent is this American attitude that the medical literature, while rife with
studies about the benefits of breastfeeding, is nearly devoid of research examining the possible physical
or emotional benefits of extended breastfeeding. Seeking to pry open a little crack in this vastly
underexplored area and to begin an exploration into the interplay of ideas of sex, sin and religion, the
current study investigates the possible religious underpinnings of the public sentiment that children
should be weaned by age one. Results show that Christians, in comparison to non-Christian
respondents, were more likely to support earlier weaning ages and indicate widespread lack of support
for the idea of breastfeeding a child beyond age two.

Introduction

While many mothers choose bottle-feeding over breastfeeding to accommodate jobs outside
the home, those who do enjoy the luxury of staying home and opt to pursue extended nursing are often
subjected to public scrutiny, open disdain, family tensions (Buckley, 1992, Morse and Harrison, 1992)
and even legal or custodial ramifications (McTaggart, 1995). Those who go beyond the standard six to
nine months are driven to what Kathleen Buckley, writing in The Journal of Perinatal Education, termed,
“closet nursing,” (1992). Closet nursing, she said, is a mothering style which endorses more natural
parenting practices such as extended breastfeeding and co-sleeping but is often carried out behind
closed doors and, in the case of breastfeeding, without the knowledge of close friends, family members
 Running Head: BREASTFEEDING
3

or in some cases, even the husband. Often involving the use of a code word that the child can use to
signal the desire to nurse, Buckley suggested that it is difficult to get a head count on closet nursers
because the practice is so closely guarded and secretive. Asked what she thought society at large might
think of her long-term breastfeeding, one mother in Buckley’s study replied:

“Crazy. Absolutely crazy. They think it’s probably harmful to the child because we are
nurturing dependence. Many people believe that children should be taught and forced
to be independent and to take care of themselves and to deal with themselves. I believe
that children are supposed to be dependent. When they have their needs for
dependence truly met, then they’ll be able to grow into true independence and true
self-confidence… Nurturing the dependence until they are ready to give it up is a better
way to meet the emotional needs” (Buckley, 1992).

Lynn McTaggart, in a 1995 article in Mothers Know Best magazine, tells a story about “Molly”
who in the bottle-feeding zeitgeist of the mid-twentieth century apparently fought an uphill battle to
breastfeed her children. Although constantly concerned that she’d be arrested and charged with incest,
Molly breastfed one of her children for three years and another for two. Times have changed a bit since
then, writes McTaggart, but extended breastfeeding still suffers a stigma.

“Any approval over breastfeeding quickly gives way to disapproval and even revulsion
once the child is no longer a baby. Although extended breastfeeding is more popular
than in was in Molly’s day, many women in the West are forced to lie to their doctors
and their friends about weaning, doing it on the sly or secretly feeding in toilets, as
though they are doing something criminal” (McTaggart, 1995).

Karen Kedrowski and Michael Lipscomb, in their 2008 book, Breastfeeding Rights in the United
States, report that as of their writing, an examination of state divorce, custody and visitation cases
where extended breastfeeding played a role showed courts ruling against the mother in every case.
Kedrowski and Lispcomb also comment on a few cases where sexualized ideas of breastfeeding resulted
in abuse charges for mothers. One mother who called a local hotline because she was alarmed at
feelings of sexual arousal that had occurred while nursing her almost-three-year-old daughter said that
the police had been at her doorstep before the day was out and that she was interrogated for five hours
and arrested (Glabach, 2002). Karen Carter (a.k.a. Denise Perrigo) lost custody of her child for over a
year. Two other mothers were charged with abuse, one after breastfeeding in front of an older child and
the other for breastfeeding in front of an estranged former lover (Kedrowski and Lipscomb, 2008).
 Running Head: BREASTFEEDING
4

Kedrowski and Lipscomb write that mothers who choose extended breastfeeding have been treated by
the courts similarly to “deviant” mothers.

“Among the deviant mothers are those declared incompetent parents who are drug
addicted, alcoholic or ill. Rather than receiving the benefit of drug or medical treatment,
these mothers bear a heavy burden: losing custody of their children and their right to
breastfeed them. In this group are also those who breastfeed for more than one year.
Courts ruled against these mothers in every child custody case, and Karen Carter (Denise
Perrigo) paid a terrible price because of a normal physiological reaction to
breastfeeding. State authorities defined the very practice of extended breastfeeding as
perversity and sought to terminate her parental rights as a consequence” (page 112).

Although Perrigo’s nursing nightmare occurred nearly 20 years ago, and cases like hers are very
infrequent, fear of legal reprisal and social stigma still drive many women to keep quiet about extended
nursing. Even from La Leche League, an international breastfeeding advocacy organization, there are no
official statistics available about the number of women who practice extended nursing, especially those
who do it “in the closet,” or of those who have faced abuse accusations or custody issues. A February
28, 2009 forum at Breastfeeding.com, however, which posed the question “Are you in the closet
nursing?” returned 29 posts, 15 from women who said they were not in the closet, nine who said they
were and another five who said they weren’t “in the closet” but preferred to keep their nursing
practices private. Anecdotally, then, at least according to the Breastfeeding.com forum, it would appear
that just under half of the women who practice extended nursing prefer to keep it under wraps.

Literature Review

The World Health Organization officially recommends that all infants breastfeed exclusively for
six months and in tandem with other foods for a minimum of two years (WHO, 2010). In this country,
breastfeeding goals set by the United States Department of Health and Human Services Healthy People
initiative center mostly around the first six months of life (CDC, 2010). Rates of breastfeeding reported
by the National Immunization Survey of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show that in
2007, less than 14% of babies were exclusively breastfed at six months and that percentages of children
still receiving some breast milk at one year of age (22%) rapidly dropped off by 18 months (7%) (CDC,
2010).
While studies examining breastfeeding behaviors in the first few months of life abound, those
that look into extended nursing behaviors, intentions or possible medical and psychological benefits are
 Running Head: BREASTFEEDING
5

quite sparse. Approaching the subject in a tangential manner, however, provides something of a
framework for the current research.
Regarding breastfeeding duration, a 2004 study of mothers in Canada, the United States, Europe
and Australia by Jennifer Callen and Janet Pinelli found that European and Australian moms were more
likely to breastfeed longer than North American women and that those who breastfeed longer tended
to be married and older. A study of breastfeeding intentions among college students revealed that those
with more positive opinions about breastfeeding were more likely to say that they intend to breastfeed
their own children (Marrone, Vogeltanz-Holm and Holm, 2008). In a separate longitudinal study of
breastfeeding behaviors and duration (2004), Nita McKinley and Janet Shibley Hyde separated reasons
for breastfeeding into personal attitudes and structural factors where personal attitudes might include
enjoyment of breastfeeding and relationships with family and structural factors might include workplace
limitations like length of maternity leave. McKinley and Hyde found that workplace factors strongly
predicted breastfeeding behaviors. While older women breastfed longer, according to the study’s
findings, higher levels of education and gender-role equality at home were related to having initiated
breastfeeding but did not predict increased duration and in fact, for stay-at-home or work-at-home
moms, egalitarian gender role attitudes were associated with earlier weaning ages. Finally, McKinley
and Hyde’s study also found that, among the personal attitudes, enjoyment of breastfeeding
contributed most to breastfeeding plans and duration.
Worldwide, the debate over formula feeding or breastfeeding rages on as mothers faced with
the necessity of returning to work try to make the most effective decisions for their families. While
manufacturers espouse the benefits and breast-milk-mimicking effects of various formulary
enhancements, there is a noticeable lack of scientific literature available to back these claims.
Meanwhile, in their 2007 overview of studies on the benefits of human milk, Lene Schack-Nielsen and
Kim Michaelsen of the University of Copenhagen point out that those seeking to explore long-term
benefits of breastfeeding face difficulty teasing out other variables such as parental socioeconomic
status and education, which could also account for better outcomes for breastfed babies. In their review
of meta-studies on breastfeeding, Schack-Nielsen and Michaelsen reported support for claims that
white blood cells in animal mothers’ milk appear to cross directly into the bloodstreams of their suckling
young. Studies of breastfeeding, they said, have also shown some protective effects against Crohn’s
disease, obesity, high cholesterol, ulcerative colitis, asthma, type-one diabetes and ear, respiratory or
 Running Head: BREASTFEEDING
6

diarrheal infections but wavering support for claims that breastfeeding protects against some forms of
cancer. Though the legions of claims that breastfeeding increases intelligence were shown by Schack-
Nielsen and Michaelsen to be difficult to prove at best, the authors did find some support for the idea,
citing in particular a Danish study illustrating a “dose-response of duration of breastfeeding up to nine
months of age and higher adult intelligence.”
In a 1997 article in Natural History magazine, anthropologist Katherine Dettwyler pointed out
that children are nursed well beyond their third year in many non-Western cultures. Her study of other
primates also showed larger animals breastfeeding until offspring attained a body weight four times its
birth weight in some cases and in others, until offspring weight reached one-third of the average adult
weight for the species. Dettwyler noted that for many species, weaning age correlated with the arrival
of molars which, translated into human terms, would mean breastfeeding until the age of five and a half
or six. She wrote,

“Taken together, these and other projections suggest that somewhat more than two
and a half years is the natural minimum age of weaning for humans and seven years the
maximum age—well into childhood. The high end of this range, six to seven years,
closely matches the completion of human brain growth and the maturation of the
child’s immune system.”

Why don’t we breastfeed longer then? Do ideas of sex and sin play into weaning decisions in our
culture? University of Alberta professor Janice Morse wrote that when she casually asked an
undergraduate class of 100 anthropology students how many had ever seen breast milk, only six hands
went up, leaving her to wonder, “Isn’t that strange for such a common, and essential, food?” (1992).
Pointing to the lack of research regarding sexual connotations of the breast, marital impacts of a nursing
mothers’ decreased libido and social stigmas and taboos associated with incest, Morse called upon the
scientific community nearly two decades ago and, with the exception of Dettwyler’s work in the mid-
1990s, received scanty response. Recent scholarship, however, especially in just the last four years, has
begun to delve into issues of cultural norms, sexual perceptions and breastfeeding through surveys,
mostly of university undergrads.
In 2008, researchers from the State University of New York’s department of psychology
(Johnston-Robledo, Wares, Fricker and Pasek) surveyed 275 female undergraduates in an effort to
contrast the women’s perceptions of their own physical appearance against their intentions to
breastfeed later on. Citing Fredrickson and Roberts’ 1997 objectification theory—which, they explain,
 Running Head: BREASTFEEDING
7

states that when it comes to their bodies, Western women have been socialized to put more importance
upon issues of vanity and “sex appeal” than health and function—the researchers expected to find that
higher scores on self-objectification questions would predict more negative attitudes toward
breastfeeding, particularly public breastfeeding. The survey showed that over three-quarters of the
women intended to breastfeed and of those, most planned roughly an eight-month duration for nursing.
The survey also showed that those with more positive opinions about breastfeeding were less worried
about embarrassment or impacts on their sex life or body shape. Plans for earlier weaning ages
correlated with opinions of the indecency of public breastfeeding. These women also scored higher on
questions measuring their concerns with the embarrassment or physical and sexual impacts of
breastfeeding.
A 2009 study by Michele Acker of the Otterbein College Department of Psychology (Ohio) tested
levels of hostile and benevolent sexism in participants’ responses to pictures of women breastfeeding
either in public or in private and found that of a sample of 106 college students and 80 people from the
surrounding area, men who ranked higher on measures of benevolent sexism displayed higher concerns
over breastfeeding location. Women, older men and nonsexist men were less concerned with location
of breastfeeding. Citing Glick and Fiske’s measures of ambivalent sexism, Acker described hostile sexism
as a gender role ideology more entrenched in tradition and “characterized by a dislike and distrust of
women in general” and benevolent sexism as one in which women are regarded as objects to be
cherished so long as they keep their place. “This interplay between veneration and disdain for women,”
wrote Acker, “is the essence of ambivalent sexism.”
Employing the same definitions of hostile and benevolent sexism, a 2003 study by Gordon
Forbes, Leah Adams-Curtis, Nicole Hamm and Kay White sought to add the dimensions of moral beliefs,
guilt and erotophobia to college students’ perceptions of breastfeeding and found that on the whole,
college students perceive breastfeeding mothers as “better” mothers. The authors underscored that
public health efforts intended to influence more mothers to breastfeed appear to have reached their
target. Erotophobia, however, both among men and women but more so for women, did explain some
of the less positive perceptions about breastfeeding.
“This finding is consistent with the hypothesis that objections to breastfeeding, and, by
extension, the highly emotional and often irrational responses to the breastfeeding woman are, at least
in part, rooted in the confluence of the objector’s perception of breastfeeding as a sexual act and the
 Running Head: BREASTFEEDING
8

objector’s discomfort with sexual stimuli, feelings and experiences,” wrote the authors. “This association
is stronger for women than for men.” Among men, both benevolent sexist and hostile sexist types
supported breastfeeding, possibly, said the authors, because they felt it reflected the mother’s proper
role.
The current research will seek to determine whether Christian religious beliefs figure in to this
possible interplay between social attitudes and weaning age. Of specific interest would be to begin an
exploration of how concepts like sex and sin impact breastfeeding. Although there are some studies in
the scientific literature that have focused on religious and social influences on breastfeeding in
developing countries, there appears to be little, if any, research pursuing this particular, and exclusively
American, angle on breastfeeding. In her 1995 article in Mothers Know Best, however, Lynne McTaggart
points to the trend among polygamous Mormons and a few other non-monogamous, non-Western
cultures to breastfeed longer and explains that a breastfeeding mother’s decreased libido, which might
disrupt monogamous marriages, becomes moot in these instances where the husband can go
elsewhere. McTaggart quotes obstetrician and author, Michel Odent, who said, “Whenever there has
been a society that is strictly monogamous, there is a tendency to reduce the length of breastfeeding.”
Additionally, a study conducted in India found that Muslims, Sikhs and Christians were more
likely to discontinue breastfeeding sooner than Hindus. Harvard School of Public Health authors Rahul
Malhotra, Amit Noheria, Omar Amir, Lelean Ackerson and S.V. Subramanian wrote, “This might suggest
that recommendations in religious scriptures or texts of some religions support early termination of
breast-feeding. But, this does not appear to be the case. Religious texts across religions support not only
breastfeeding, but also a long duration of breastfeeding,” (2007).

Method

The research question for this study was: Do personal philosophies about religion impact
opinions about how long babies should be breastfed and, as a sideline, do parents feel that at a certain
age, breastfeeding becomes increasingly sexual (or sinful)? The study attempted to measure this
question by investigating the hypothesis that people with lower levels of religiosity and fundamentalism
would be more likely to support extended breastfeeding (defined as breastfeeding beyond the first year
of life).
 Running Head: BREASTFEEDING
9

The survey included ten questions. The first three addressed basic demographics including
gender, education and whether or not the respondent had children. Second, a pair of multiple choice
questions asked at what age the respondent’s most recent child weaned from breast milk and the latest
age at which the respondent believed any baby should be weaned. Next, a pair of semantic differential
questions asked respondents to rank, on a scale of one to seven, how they would feel to see someone
they knew breastfeeding a child of two months, two years, three years and four or more years and then
mark an opinion, again on a one-to-seven continuum, where one equated to a response of “very
uncomfortable” and seven equated to a response of “okay with it.” A similar semantic differential
question had respondents choose one of seven points between “absolutely true” and “absolutely false”
to describe their level of agreement with statements of religious belief such as “The Bible is the word of
God” and “God listens to and answers prayers.” The final two questions asked respondents to choose a
label for their own religious beliefs from a multiple-choice list then employed a verbal frequency scale to
elicit information about how often they attend church, pray, listen to Christian music and quote or read
from the Bible.
When data collection was complete an additional fill-in-the-blank question which read,
“Children should be ___ years old before they learn about ‘where babies come from,’” originally
intended to explore possible relationships between opinions on sexuality, religion and weaning age, was
thrown out of all statistical analyses for being too vague. The complete survey is included in the
appendix.
The study received approval from the university’s human subjects board and was subsequently
posted online at SurveyMonkey.com then promoted via e-mail, Facebook and in the community section
of free online classified ad boards including the Kansas City and Columbia, Missouri Craigslist and Kansas
City Pitch Backpage. It was believed that some groups would likely be more represented than others so
advertising for the survey disproportionately targeted atheists, agnostics, Unitarian Universalists and
men in the hopes of collecting a wider spectrum of opinions. The survey received 110 total responses,
five of which were not included in data analysis due to errors in filling out the online form or because
they arrived after final data collection. Participants in the survey included 84 women (80%) and 21 men
(20%) who described themselves as Christian (62.9%), atheist, agnostic or Unitarian Universalist (28.6%),
Wicca or nature-oriented (1.9%), non-religious (5.7%) or “other” (1%). Because the survey was intended
to test only the religious influences of traditional American Christianity on breastfeeding, it was the
 Running Head: BREASTFEEDING
10

intent of the researcher to exclude any surveys from respondents adhering to other religions, such as
Islam, Hinduism or Buddhism, however there were none. The Wicca and “other” groups were removed,
however, from the regression analyses in the interest of clearly separating American Christian
respondents from non-religious respondents.
Independent variables reflected survey questions about religion including, “The Bible is the
word of God,” “Jesus was God’s son,” “Hell is an actual, physical place” and “God listens to and answers
prayers.” Independent variables were also employed to measure frequency of religious participation
including church attendance, prayer, listening to Christian music, quoting from the Bible and reading the
Bible. The variables for the different religions were condensed into a variable entitled “Christian” (coded
as “Are you a Christian?” where 1= yes and 0 = no) to measure differences between Christians and non-
Christians.
This study sought to explore impacts of religion on opinions about weaning age so those
questions that measured opinions regarding the age of weaning became the dependent variables.
Addressing the question, “How does religion impact opinions about the age at which babies should
wean?” the dependent variable for the first linear regression was labeled, “Should Wean By.” The
second set of linear regressions looked at different ages of nurslings and attempted to establish when a
respondent would become uncomfortable with the idea of a child of that age breastfeeding. To that
end, this set of linear regressions used the dependent variables, “Uncomfortable (at) 2 Years,”
“Uncomfortable 3 Years” and “Uncomfortable 4 Plus” reflecting a semantic differential scale posing the
question, “If I saw someone I knew breastfeeding a _(age)_ child, I would be…” Answer options ranged
from 1 to 7 where 1 was labeled “very uncomfortable” and 7 was labeled “okay with it.”
Survey responses were entered into IBM Statistics Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 18
and then checked for errors before beginning regression analysis. Original linear regressions and
correlations yielded irregular results so the data was investigated for collinearity, or interference
between very similar independent variables, and it was discovered that the variance inflation factors for
several of the dependent variables were above the cutoff of 2.5. Through dimension reduction, the
variables were factored into two components, the first of which showed heavy similarity among
independent variables measuring religious beliefs including, “The Bible is the word of God,” “Jesus was
God’s son,” “Hell is an actual, physical place” and “God listens to and answers prayers.” This grouping
became the new independent variable, “Beliefs,” and replaced the original four beliefs questions
 Running Head: BREASTFEEDING
11

throughout the remaining regressions. Likewise, the second grouping showed heavy similarity among
independent variables measuring frequency of religious behaviors including church attendance, listening
to Christian music, Bible quoting and Bible reading so these were grouped together into the new
factored independent variable, “Behaviors.” The independent variable representing frequency of prayer
loaded high in the collinearity statistics and so was removed from the “Behaviors” factor.

Results

Descriptive statistics for all surveys showed an average preferred maximum weaning age of 18
months to two years (mean = 3.41 where 3=18 months and 4=2 years; n=100 and standard deviation =
2.159). Likewise, the mean for real weaning age for all participants was 3.65 (n=103), which fell between
the responses, “by the age of one year” and “by the age of two years” with a standard deviation of .417.
The first linear regression measured the impact of the three dependent variables against wean
age preferences. Here, an explained variance (Adjusted R2 value) of .079 indicates that, as a combined
group, the variables for Christianity, beliefs and behaviors do not impact wean age preferences.
Beta values and significances for the separate variables in the regression indicate that survey
respondents who listed themselves as Christian, as compared to atheists, agnostics, Unitarian
Universalists or the non-religious, were less likely to support extended breastfeeding (Beta = -.597, Sig =
.005).
The factored behaviors scores, however, showed a dissimilar association. The behavior factor
correlated positively with preferred weaning age, (Beta = .256, Significance = .039) meaning that those
who indicated increased frequency of religious practices, such as attending church, reading the Bible,
quoting the Bible or listening to Christian music, also showed opinions more supportive of long-term
breastfeeding.

Wean Age Preferences 1:

How do Christians compare with non-Christians when asked by what age children should wean?

Variable Adjusted R2 Beta Significance

Dependent Variable = “Should Wean By” .079

Independent Variable = Christian -.597 .005
Independent Variable = Behaviors .256 .039
 Running Head: BREASTFEEDING
12

The second set of linear regressions investigated whether Christians and non-Christians would
be “okay with it” to see someone they knew breastfeeding a child of varying ages. As a baseline
comparison here, 92.4% of total respondents indicated that they would be “okay with it” if they saw
someone they knew breastfeeding a two-month old child. For a two-year-old child, however, the
regression showed a significant negative correlation between Christianity and opinions on wean age
(Beta = -.517 and Significance = .013), meaning that non-Christians were more likely to have indicated
that that they would be “okay with it.” In the second and third regressions, however, the significance
falls away with increasing age of the child. For a breastfeeding three-year-old, the negative correlation
still appears (Beta = -.385) but drops from significance at .062 (the maximum value for significance is
.05). The same trend continues regarding the breastfeeding of children ages four and above
(Beta = -.309), however the negative correlation is far from significant at .136. From these results, it
would appear that even those who are supportive of extended breastfeeding begin to abandon support
for the practice beyond age two and are in agreement with the more general population by age three.
Frequency data here also indicate that nearly all of the survey respondents said they would be “okay
with it” to see someone they knew breastfeeding a two-month-old child, that number dropped to 33.3%
at age two, 13.3% at age three and 7.6% at age four plus.
 Running Head: BREASTFEEDING
13

Wean Age Preferences 2

Does a child’s age impact Christian and non-Christian responses to breastfeeding?

Variable Adjusted R2 Beta Significance

Dependent Variable = Uncomfortable at 2 months .042

Independent Variable = Christian -.475 .049
Independent Variable = Beliefs -.296 .192
Independent Variable = Behaviors .307 .018

Dependent Variable = Uncomfortable at 2 years .105

Independent Variable = Christian -.517 .013
Independent Variable = Beliefs -.154 .427
Independent Variable = Behaviors .209 .077

Dependent Variable = Uncomfortable at 3 years .116

Independent Variable = Christian -.385 .062
Independent Variable = Beliefs .017 .931
Independent Variable = Behaviors .140 .233

Dependent Variable = Uncomfortable at 4+ years .100

Independent Variable = Christian -.309 .136
Independent Variable = Beliefs .072 .709
Independent Variable = Behaviors .123 .297

Frequencies of behaviors and beliefs also showed that non-Christian respondents claimed to
engage in behavior typically thought of as “belonging” mostly to religious groups including praying,
reading the Bible and attending church. Of the atheists, agnostics, non-religious and Unitarian
Universalists that comprised the non-Christian group, 38.2% said that they pray at least every few
months. Frequency of prayer for the Christian group was of course substantially higher with 95.5%
claiming to pray at least once every few months. Of the non-Christian respondents, 55.6% reported that
they attend church at least every few months, 25% reported reading the Bible and another 13.9% said
that they quote from it at regular intervals. The non-Christian group also showed notably mid-range
responses to questions about religious belief, as indicated in the chart below.
 Running Head: BREASTFEEDING
14

Table 3: Comparison of Frequencies of Behaviors and Beliefs

Christian Non-Christian
Participated at least every few months in…
Prayer 95.5% 38.2%
Church attendance 93.9% 55.6%
Reading Bible 81.8% 25%

Replied “absolutely false” to…

“The Bible is the word of God.” 3% 63.9%
“Jesus was the son of God.” 1.5% 50%
“Hell is an actual, physical place.” 10.6% 80.6%
“God listens to and answers prayers.” 4.5% 55.6%

Discussion

These results do not defend the hypothesis that people with lower levels of religiosity and
fundamentalism would be more likely to support extended breastfeeding but instead give scattered
results. Although Christians were less likely to favor extended breastfeeding according to this survey,
people who answered “absolutely true” to questions reflecting fundamentalist religious beliefs or who
showed more frequent participation in religious activities were more likely to support a longer
breastfeeding duration. On the series of questions that measured respondent’s imagined comfort levels
if faced with a nursing child of various ages, non-Christians indicated that they would be significantly
more “okay with it” vis-à-vis the Christian group to see a two year old breastfeeding. The difference
dissipated with the increasing age of the child, however and by age four, Christians and non-Christians
were both unsupportive. Although at face value these sets of regressions seem to give conflicting
results, it may be instead that they draw a bigger picture of the complexity of the issue. Survey results
showed that both the non-Christian and the Christian groups engaged in “religious” behaviors such as
prayer, church attendance and reading the Bible. As indicated by Table 3, middle-range frequencies for
religious behaviors and beliefs among the non-Christian group may have interfered some with the
research goal of drawing a definitive split between those who hold more fundamentalist worldviews,
those who hold less and the impacts of those belief systems on breastfeeding opinions. The wide range
of religious beliefs embraced by the Unitarian Universalist denomination may account for some of the
variation in the non-Christian group.
 Running Head: BREASTFEEDING
15

With only 7.6% of survey respondents claiming that they would be “okay with it” to see someone they
knew breastfeeding a child of four or more years, this study does reflect a large-scale lack of support for
extended breastfeeding in our society. Although long-term breastfeeding carries a stigma even in the
21st century, the World Health Organization recommends breastfeeding for a minimum of two years and
anthropologist Katherine Dettwyler suggests that a physiologically correct weaning age for children
might be somewhere between the ages of two-and-a half and seven (1997). Given recent upsurges in
childhood asthma and diabetes as well as increasing medical claims of the immunological and social
benefits of breastfeeding, it seems that any research furthering the cause and available knowledge on
extended breastfeeding is sorely needed, even if for no other reason than to finally allow a faceless
population of marginalized moms and their nurslings to come out of the closet with the parenting
practices they think best.

This paper was presented at the Midwest Sociological Society’s annual convention, March 25, 2011.
 Running Head: BREASTFEEDING
16

Works Cited

Breastfeeding.com. (2009, February 28). Are you in the closet nursing? Retrieved March 22, 2011, from
The Breastfeeding.com Community:
http://www.breastfeeding.com/forums/showthread.php?t=39046

Buckley, K. (1992). Beliefs and practices related to extended breastfeeding among La Leche League
mothers. The Journal of Perinatal Education, 1, 2, pp. 45-53.

Callen, J., & Pinelli, J. (2004). Incidence and duration of breastfeeding for term infants in Canada, United
States, Europe and Australia: A literature review. Birth , 31 (4), 285-292.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2010). Breastfeeding Among U.S. Children Born 1999-
2007, CDC National Immunization Survey. Web site:
http://www.cdc.gov/breastfeeding/data/NIS_data/index.htm

Dettwyler, K. (1997). When to wean. Natural History, 106, 8, 49.

Forbes, G., Adams-Curtis, L., Hamm, N. and White, K. (2003). Perceptions of the woman who
breastfeeds: The role of erotophobia, sexism and attitudinal variables. Sex Roles, 47, 7/8, p.
379.

Glabach, D. (2001). Naturally sexual breast-feeding: an evolutionary prescription for emotional health.
Journal of Prenatal and Perinatal Psychology and Health , 16 (1), 151-166.

Johnson-Robledo, I., Wares, S., Fricker, J. and Pasek, L. (2007). Indecent exposure: Self- objectification
and young women’s attitudes toward breastfeeding. Sex Roles, 56, pp. 429-437.

Kedrowski, K., & Lipscomb, M. (2008). Breastfeeding Rights in the United States. Westport, CT: Praeger
Publishers.

Malhotra, R., Noheria, A., Amir, O., Ackerson, L. and Subramanian, S. (2008). Determinants of
termination of breastfeeding within the first 2 years of life in India: evidence from the
National Family Health Survey-2. Maternal and Child Nutrition, 4, pp. 181-193.

Marrone, S., Vogeltanz-Holm, N. & Holm, J. (2008). Attitudes, knowledge, and intentions related to
breastfeeding among university undergraduate women and men. Journal of Human Lactation ,
24 (2), 186-192.

McKinley, N., & Hyde, J. (2004). Personal attitudes or structural factors? A contextual analysis of
breastfeeding duration. Psychology of Women Quarterly , 28, 388-399.

McTaggart, L. (1995). Long-term breastfeeding: Torn between society and biology. Mothers Know Best,
1, 7, pp. 2-4.
 Running Head: BREASTFEEDING
17

Morse, J. (1992). “Euch, those are for your husband!”: Examination of cultural values and
assumptions associated with breast-feeding. In J. Morse (Ed.) Qualitative Health Research, (pp.
363-375.) Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Morse, J. and Harrison, M. (1992). Social coercion for weaning. In J. Morse (Ed.) Qualitative Health
Research, (pp. 363-375.) Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

World Health Organization (2010). Breastfeeding. Web site:

http://www.who.int/topics/breastfeeding/en/

Schack-Nielsen, L. and Michaelsen, K. (2007). Advances in our understanding of the biology of human
milk and its effects on the offspring. The Journal of Nutrition, 137, 2, pp. 503S-510S.
 Running Head: BREASTFEEDING
18

Appendix
Breastfeeding and Religion Survey Questions

This survey seeks to learn more about your religious views and also your opinions on extended
breastfeeding (breastfeeding beyond one year.) Please reply to the questions using only the answers
provided.

1. What is your gender?

a. Male
b. Female

2. How much education have you completed since high school?

a. None
b. Bachelor’s degree or equivalent
c. Master’s degree or equivalent
d. Multiple master’s degrees
e. Doctoral degree or equivalent
f. Doctoral degree and more

3. Do you have children?

a. Yes
b. No

4. If you do have children, at what age were they weaned from breast milk?
a. My children did not breastfeed
b. By the age of one month
c. By the age of six months
d. By the age of one year
e. By the age of two years
f. By the age of three years
g. After the age of three years

5. Babies should be weaned no later than age _____

a. Zero (Babies should not breastfeed)
b. Six months
c. One year
d. 18 months
e. Two years
f. Three years
g. Four years or more
 Running Head: BREASTFEEDING
19

6. Children should be at least ____ years old before they learn about “where babies come from.”

7. The following four-part question takes the form of:

If I saw someone who _____, I would feel ______.

Please choose one circle per horizontal line to estimate your feelings where 1 = “Very uncomfortable,” 7
= “Okay with it” and 2 through 6 help you more precisely pinpoint reactions in between.

The exact question is:

If I saw someone I knew breastfeeding a __(age)___ child, I would be…

A two-month-old child
Very uncomfortable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Okay with it

A two-year-old child
Very uncomfortable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Okay with it

A three-year-old child
Very uncomfortable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Okay with it

A child over the age of four

Very uncomfortable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Okay with it

8. The next series of questions is similar in format only for these you will indicate to what extent you
believe the following statements are true or false.

The Bible is the word of God.

Absolutely true 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Absolutely false

Jesus was God’s son.

Absolutely true 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Absolutely false

Hell is an actual, physical place.

Absolutely true 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Absolutely false

God listens to and answers prayers.

Absolutely true 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Absolutely false
 Running Head: BREASTFEEDING
20

9. How would you describe your religious beliefs? (Please choose only one answer.)

a. None
b. Christian (including Protestant, Lutheran, Catholic, Baptist, Methodist, Evangelical, etc.)
c. Muslim
d. Buddhist
e. Jewish
f. Hindu
g. Atheist, Agnostic or Unitarian Universalist
h. Wicca or Nature-based
i. Other

20. Please choose the letter from the following scale that best describes your rate of participation in the
activities listed below:

a. Never
b. Less than monthly
c. Monthly
d. Several times a month
e. Weekly
f. Several times a week
g. Daily
h. Several times a day

_____ Attend church

_____ Pray

_____ Listen to Christian music

_____ Quote from the Bible

_____ Read the Bible

Thank you for participating in this survey!