“It Doesn’t Have to Be All or Nothing”: How Individuals Who Use Infant Formula Understand the Breastfeeding Master Narrative

ABSTRACT

Despite clinical recommendations, only 24.9% of infants in the United States are exclusively breastfed at 6 months of age, and women who use formula report facing stigma and feeling like a failure. Individual experiences are often influenced by master narratives such as “breast is best,” and stories can reveal how the discourse may manifest unintended effects, potentially eliciting guilt and shame, which are known to result in negative maternal mental outcomes, including depression and anxiety. The purpose of this research was to use a narrative framework to analyze the stories of women who used formula and determine how they interpreted the master narrative of “breast is best.” We conducted interviews with 20 women who had used formula within the first 6 months after giving birth and had an infant no older than 12 months at the time of the interview. Qualitative analysis revealed that women integrated “breast is best” into their stories, and that the master narrative influenced conceptions of themselves as mothers including the bonded mother, the good mother, the shameful mother, and, ultimately, the multitudinous mother. Participants who used formula within the first six months desired that messaging about breastfeeding, particularly in online spaces, move away from all-or-nothing framing and instead show the diversity of infant feeding experiences. It is important to consider how breastfeeding discourse evolves online, considering the unintended effect of stigma, its impact on mental health, and the potential for individuals interacting in these spaces to curate more nuanced narrative messaging about breastfeeding to improve maternal and infant health.

Acknowledgements

We would like to acknowledge the women who participated in this study and graciously shared their stories. We would also like to thank our own children, who have taught us so much.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).