http://www.violence.de/prescott/letters/BREASTFEEDING_BONDING.pdf http://www.violence.de/prescott/letters/Gender.pdf http://www.kindredmedia.org/2013/08/how-breastfeeding-and-bonding-prevent-infant-mortality-and-adult-suicide/ http://whale.to/a/prescott_h.html
Thisz isz a very important & Hersz&Hisztoricall area of learning & retraszpective for Deareszt Family with Intergenerationall Transzmisszion & Inszight that isz of importance for the undersztanding of lifelong reall heallth. Allszo viszit our Page on Reall Heallth which allszo Highlightsz the Love&Lifelong Benefitsz of On Cue Breasztfeeding https://5050now.wordpress.com/elleventh-twelleventh-heavensz-on-earthsz-heallth-alltimate-cure-for-diszeasze-isz-the-new-millenniall-golden-rule/ & asz the Alltimate Entheaon of the ElleWeCoszaviorall Myszteryesz Revealled, the Elleixir of the Goddesszesz&Godsz, the Riszen Szoma of the Vedasz asz Foundation for Goddessz & Godlike poetree, & for Becoming a Culture of Eternall Love & Life & Apotheaoszisz for All.
American children are on average worse off than children in Western Europe and barely better off than their counterparts in the Baltic states and the former Yugoslavia, according to a recent report from United Nation’s Children’s Fund (UNICEF) on the welfare of children in developed countries.
The report, which compares kids in 29 Western countries, measures well-being across five metrics: material well-being, health and safety, behaviors and risks, housing and environment, as well as education. It ranks the United States in the bottom third on all five measures of well-being and particularly low on education and poverty.
Our goal should be to develop work-life policies that enable people to put their gender values into practice. So let’s stop arguing about the hard choices women make and help more women and men avoid such hard choices. To do that, we must stop seeing work-family policy as a women’s issue and start seeing it as a human rights issue that affects parents, children, partners, singles and elders. Feminists should certainly support this campaign. But they don’t need to own it.
Why Gender Equality Stalled
Stephanie Coontz is a professor of family history at Evergreen State College and the author of “A Strange Stirring: The Feminine Mystique and American Women at the Dawn of the 1960s.”
NOTE THE INTERVIEWSZ WITH THE YOUNG COUPELLE WHO GOESZ INTO POVERTY OUT OF LOVE FOR THEIR DAUGHTERSZ & HOW EACH DAUGHTER WASZ EFFECTED BY THE PRE$$URE ON U$ PARENTSZ AT END$TAGE PATRIARCHY, WITH A CARING BRILLIANT WOMAN YE, ASZ SZO MANY U$ WOMEN. $OCILL LIE$ED TO HAVE NO DEEP RESZPECT FOR HER OWN DEEP INNER FEMININE MOTHER GODDESSZ WITHIN, SZHE ACCEPTSZ THE GROUPTHINK HERD MENTiLLITY DO WHAT I$ THE NORM & FORGO LOVE & WORK BALLANCE, ACKNOWLEDGESZ SHZE SZUPPRESSZED HER MOTHERSZ INTUITION INNER VOICE, TO FIT IN WITH PREEXI$TING (LACK OF FAMILY VALUESZ) $Y$TEM MADE BY MO$TILLY MEN, & TAKE$ A$ THE NORM PUTTING S$ALARY OVER CHILD A$ DONE BY BOTH & HER MALE PARTNER THE FATHER, $ETTING THE PATTERN. THI$ I$ THE ODD THROW THE BABY OUT WITH THE BATHWATER OF END$TAGE PATRIARCHY LACKING PARITY IN DECISZIONMAKING, & U$ DOMINATION CULTUR ILL. THI$ I$ MALE IMITATIVE (INSZTEAD OF BALLANCED), FAUX FEMINI$M, AN OUTLIER TO MORE WOMAN & FAMILY RESZPECTING FEMINISZM IN ALLMOSZT EVERY OTHER LAND ON THISZ EARTH, SZO MANY OF WHICH ALLSZO HAVE PARITE NOW. HER BABY NAMED CARL, COULD EASZELLEYESZ HAVE BEEN THE NEXT CARL ~SZAGAN WHO CLEARELLEY THOUGHT WOMEN KEY TO OPENING THE SZTARRGATE. HISZ GENIUSZ MOM, UPON WHOM THE ELLE CHARACTER IN CONTACT! WASZ MODELLED, WASZ NOT ALLOWED TO BALLANCE LOVE & WORK EITHER & NEITHER WASZ HISZ BRILLIANT WIFE LYNN, MOTHER OF THE GAIA EFFECT. WHILE U$ & CORPORATE CEN$ORING MEDIA DEFINE WHAT SZO MANY $EE, U$ WOMEN REMAIN NUMB & DUMBED DOWN. DURING MOSZT OF THE INTERVIEW, EVEN WHEN CRYING SZHE CONTINUESZ TO SZMILE, A $OCILLI$ED MA$OCHI$M & $UPPRE$$ION OF REALL EMOTION BECOMING A NORM IN U$ CULTUR ILL REGRE$$ION. THE FILM ALLSZO INCLUDESZ INTERVIEW WITH A RAPE VICTIM WHO LOSZT TWO CHILDREN IN CHILDBIRTH BECAUSZE OF THE LOW SZTATUSZ OF WOMEN $O TRAGIC & YET COMMON ON THISZ PLANET ON THE OLD PATRIARCHILL PLANET PARADIGM (UNTIL WE SZHIFT TO THE NEW MILLENNIALL GOLDEN RULE https://5050now.wordpress.com/newmillenniallgoldenrule-the-5-pillars-of-change/). EVERYTIME I WATCH THISZ VIDEAO I CRY & SZOB ASZ I LISZTEN TO THESZE WOMEN & YOUNG PEOPELLE & THE PRE$$URE$ ON THEM CAU$ED BY OLD PATRIARCHILL CULTURE$ OLD MEN, THE INTERVIEWER ALLSZO CRIESZ. THESZE ARE THE DRAMASZ & THE REALL HUMAN EMOTIONSZ, THAT ARE KEPT OFF TV THAT INSZTEAD COVER$ DAILLY CRIME, PATRIARCHILL POLITIC$ OF MO$TILLY OLD MEN, (& INCLUDING TOKENI$ED WOMEN WHO CANT FIGURE OUT HOW TO SZAY THE WORDSZ LALECHELALECHELALECHELALECHELALECHE PARITY NOT PATRIARCHY PASZTPRESZENTSZ FUTURE, THEY ARE SZO EAGER TO FIT IN WITH THE BOARDROOM & BACKROOM POLITICILL BAD OL BOY$), & MANMADE AGAIN$T MANMADE NATION BOMBTALK & MAN AGAIN$T NATURE DI$A$TER$. THE INTERVIEWER FAILLSZ TO CONFRONT WOMENSZ TOKENI$M & CRUMB$ BEING OFFERED BY OUTNUMBERED WOMEN LIKE THE TRAPPED IN THE WRONG GRADUALI$T TOKENI$T U$ FAUX FEMINI$T GILLIBRAND, WHO HA$ OFFERED A LEVILL OF FAMILY LEAVE, 6 weeksz (huh?????) THAT DOESZ NOT COME ANYWHERE NEAR DEVELLEOPMENTALL BESZT ALLREADY ACHIEVED IN MANY OTHER LANDSZ. U$ TOKEN$ TRAP THEMSZELLVESZ & OTHER WOMEN UNTIL THEY CAN SZAY THE WORD PARITY & SZTAND FOR THAT ASZ A REQUIREMENT IN OUR TIMESZ EVERYWHERE ON THISZ EARTH ASZ WOMEN (& MEN) IN SZO MANY OTHER LANDSZ ALLREADY HAVE
The szhocking lack of family leave in the U$ region both cau$ed & I$ cau$ed by the lack of parity & extreme low participation in policy deciszionmaking in government of women in the $o called United $tate$
FAMILY LEAVE ISZ DOING MUCH BETTER IN MANY LANDSZ THAN IN THE U$, ESZPECIALLY THOSZE AT OR NEAR PARITE IN REPRESZENTATION.
AN EXCERPT ABOUT FAMILY LEAVE IN FRANCE
AN EXCERPT ABOUT FAMILY LEAVE IN GERMANY
SZOME MATERRIALLSZ ABOUT FAMILY LEAVE IN FINLAND
says nothing about other countries
is an industry group; all industries and chamber of commerce, no women’s or childrens groups
Less than eight in 10 new mothers breastfeed their babies from birth and only a fifth are still feeding their babies naturally after the recommended six months.
This is compared with almost all mothers in Norway, Denmark, Sweden and Switzerland. Breastfeeding rates are also higher in Austria, Italy and Spain while only France, Germany and Ireland have lower rates than England, the Department of Health admitted as it launched a £2million drive to improve figures in England.
this study actually got some media
Austrian Mom calls parental leave in the U.S. in the U.S. “a complete joke” compared to Europe
Austria offers 1-3 years paid depending on the amount of payment, Germany offers 3 years paid and up to 8 years unpaid, France and Nordic countries offer about 2 years, all allowing mothers to come back to work at full pay. Natural weaning is usually around 3 years. http://www.naturalchild.org/guest/norma_jane_bumgarner2.html http://www.kathydettwyler.org/detwean.html Only in the United States among advanced countries is leave totally unpaid in most states, and only between 6-12 weeks, totally inappropriate for bonding that protects healthy social, emotional, ethical and health development, and the best protection against all forms of illness and sociopathy in later life. Oprah has never done any show on family leave, and almost never has any international guests. Her only information about it http://www.oprah.com/money/The-Economics-of-Maternity-Leave totally leaves out any comparison with the best in Europe. Insist she cover this most important issue for America’s future.
Mentions Europe but no indication of length of family leave and developmental issues.
from 2005. Nothing about Europe or optimal leave. Simpy opposes minor changes to existing law.
Nation wavers on women’s work
By Jeane Anastas, PhD, LMSW
A core principle of social work is self-determination. People should be able to make their own choices about how best to live their lives as long as their choices do not harm others. However, most employment does not pay a “family wage,” that is, it does not provide earnings that would adequately support a household, with or without children.
While too much of our welfare spending may already benefit the middle class, why are we the only wealthy industrialized nation that does not offer paid parental leave?
It took until the Clinton administration to mandate family leave without risking the loss of one’s job, although the law does not mandate paid leave. While we may argue in the political arena about whether women’s (or anyone’s) unpaid work in the home, such as child-rearing, is to be valued, we seem less ready to change our policies and practices in ways that would benefit families of all kinds and at all income levels.
Social work has been concerned with both the paid employment and the “family work” of women since its beginnings. We must not get caught up in debates about who is a “good enough” mother — the one who can forgo employment for child-rearing, the one who is required to work to receive income benefits, or the one who sees no choice but to remain employed while rearing children.
The energy and the obfuscation generated by these debates only detract us from the real priority, to change our policies and practices in ways that equalize the potential of all people to earn a living and to care for one another in the ways that they think best.
For more information about the coalition, or to join our efforts, contact the National Partnership at 202-986-2600.
Gives no comparison with other countries; just defends and marginally expands status quo.
new report; findings not summarized to include best in Europe, but when you get into report, does have a chart. Seems misleading about paid leave in Germany and Austria, show much longer unpaid leave in many countries.
has section on international comparison, but hard to find.
labor benefits like vacation and overtime
McGill Institute for Health and Social Policy
Charles Meredith House, 1130 Pine Ave. W. Montreal, QC H3A 1A3
Email: email@example.com | Tel.: 514-398-1300
coopted mentons only california; does not indicate how different than Europe, mentions “best” us companies without a clue to how different than Europe.
talks about new jersey and california, no indication that this if far less than Europe, mentions Sweden only, not but Austria and Germany
under see model legislation links to only us info; no easy to find European info comparison, Does mention Sweden, but not Austria and Germany
take action focuses on existing legislation in Congress, not trying to increase women’s rep and world comparison
Scholars have offered a number of explanations for the steep decline: increased hospitalization and anestheticization of new mothers, medical promotion of infant formula, and the use of feeding schedules all likely discouraged women from breastfeeding [16-18]. In addition to these factors, it is also probable that there is a cultural explanation worth considering, as the growing connection between infant formula and consumption and modernity – two important values, which discourage natural practices like breastfeeding, present in much mid- to late-20th century U.S. media content, for example – also may have promoted infant formula usage [18-20].
American breastfeeding rates experienced their record low in 1971, when an estimated twenty-one percent of the population breastfed their infants at birth . By this time, however, breastfeeding campaigns had started to develop. With the onset of the late 1960s and 1970s, some feminists and other advocates began campaigning for mothers to breastfeed their infants . These campaigns, together with a changing ideology about infant feeding, may have helped to reverse existing trends. Over the next decade, in fact, breastfeeding rates rose dramatically. By 1984, nearly sixty percent of new mothers chose to breastfeed their children .
Contemporary studies suggest that the decision to breastfeed continues to be a complex issue, shaped by a multitude of factors, such as a mother’s prenatal care and the influence of her health professionals, her perception of the father’s views on breastfeeding, and her fear of lack of an adequate milk supply for the infant [17,21-23].
In the last thirty years, breastfeeding rates have generally increased, though there have been periods of slight decline. According to the 2001 Ross Laboratories Mothers Survey (RLMS), almost 70 percent of mother’s initiated breastfeeding, which marks the highest breastfeeding initiation rate ever recorded in the United States [14,24]. Mothers also have been nursing for longer periods of time. Results from the RLMS indicated that almost a third of mothers were breastfeeding their infants six months after birth [14,24].
In sum, in past decades in the United States breastfeeding rates have fluctuated significantly. From the slow decline of breastfeeding in the early 1900s, the sharp descent of rates in the 1950s, and the growth of breastfeeding rates since this time, many external factors have been proposed as explanations for this variation, including changes in hospital resources and popular culture trends. Consideration of these various factors raises the question: what specifically might have been the role of exposure to media content?
For those who view reality as being socially constructed, media outlets can shape and reinforce dominant ideologies and convey these messages to a mass audience through systems of representation . Under this assumption, it is likely that media messages about infant feeding influences how a mother decides to feed her infant.
breastfeeding in various counties
missing developed countries
history of breatfeeding in us
Examples of alternative feeding practices, such as the use of wet nurses or human milk substitutes, occur throughout recorded history (Fildes, 1986). The early twentieth century was marked, however, by an unprecedented increase in formula feeding, in part because the development of nutrition science coincided with a pervasive increase in the value placed on scientific products and processes (Rosenberg, 1976; Starr, 1982). As women asserted their rights for self-determination in public life, those who were wealthy enough and sufficiently in tune with contemporary values were adopting formula feeding for their infants.
A corresponding and consistent decline in breastfeeding is evident in data from U.S. fertility surveys (Hendershot, 1980, 1981; Hirschman and Hendershot, 1979), specific studies of infant feeding (Meyer, 1958, 1968), and market research surveys conducted by Ross Laboratories, 1 a manufacturer of infant formula (Martinez and Krieger, 1985; Martinez and Nalezienski, 1979, 1981; Martinez et al., 1981). Seventy-seven percent of the infants born between 1936 and 1940 were breastfed; the incidence declined during the subsequent decades to about 25% by 1970 (Hendershot, 1980, 1981; Hirschman and Hendershot, 1979; Meyer, 1958, 1968). Duration of breastfeeding declined as well, dropping from a mean of 4.2 months in the early 1930s to 2.2 months in the late 1950s.
The upward trend in breastfeeding after 1972 appeared to peak in 1982 at about 61% for initiation and 40% for the percentage of mothers breastfeeding 3 months or longer
However, American breast-feeding is at a low, something hospitals and government have been at pains to address.
Non-bathroom lactation rooms are such a paltry substitute for maternity leave, you might think that the craze for pumps-especially pressing them on poor women while giving tax breaks to big businesses-would be met with skepticism in some quarters. Not so. The National Organization for Women wants more pumps at work: NOW’s president, Kim Gandy, complains that “only one-third of mega-corporations provide a safe and private location for women to pump breast milk for their babies.” (When did “women’s rights” turn into “the right to work”?)
” (When did “women’s rights” turn into “the right to work”?) The stark difference between employer-sponsored lactation programs and flesh-and-blood family life is difficult to overstate. Pumps put milk into bottles, even though many of breast-feeding’s benefits to the baby, and all of its social and emotional benefits, come not from the liquid itself but from the smiling and cuddling (stuff that people who aren’t breast-feeding can give babies, too). Breast-feeding involves cradling your baby; pumping involves cupping plastic shields on your breasts and watching your nipples squirt milk down a tube. But this truth isn’t just rarely overstated; it’s rarely stated at all…No one seems especially worried about women whose risk assessment looks like this: “Should I take three twenty-minute pumping ‘breaks’ during my workday, or use formula and get home to my baby an hour earlier?
Only 44 percent of American mothers attempt to breastfeed at all.
Only 15 percent of American mothers breastfeed their children for the first six months of their lives.
Fewer than 25 percent of American mothers continues to breastfeed past one year of age.
These movements in the West towards earlier weaning, however, are recent. Breastfeeding beyond the age of 1 year old was at one time a very common practice worldwide. Dr. Martin Stein wrote in Parental Concerns about Extended Breastfeeding in a Toddler that “The discussion about extended nursing is similar to that of co-sleeping. They are both characteristics of child rearing that are closely linked to time and place. In most cultures before the 20th century, both practices were the norm. Changes in social, economic, and sexual expectations altered our views of the meaning of breastfeeding and bed sharing.” Extended breastfeeding was encouraged in Ancient Greek, Hebrew, and Muslim cultures. The Koran, the Talmud, and the writings of Aristotle all recommend breastfeeding for 2 to 3 years. In Breastfeeding Beyond 6 Months: Mothers’ Perceptions of the Negative and Positive Consequences, Dr. S. B. Reamer states that “Over the past 100 years of American history, the acceptance of unrestricted nursing decreased and the age acceptable for weaning dropped dramatically, until the average weaning age was 3 months in the 1970s.”
n a study published by the Journal of Tropical Pediatrics, 24% of American and Canadian mothers nursing past 6 months felt social hostility towards them. This number grew to 42% when mothers were nursing after 1 year of age. Also, 10% of mothers claimed embarrassment when more mobile, verbal toddlers made known in public the fact that they were nursed.
In the United States, breastfeeding beyond 1 year of age is considered ‘extended breastfeeding, and in contrast to WHO recommendations, the American Academy of Pediatrics stated in 1997 that, “Breastfeeding should be continued for at least the first year of life and beyond for as long as mutually desired by mother and child”.
In the United States overall, 43% of babies are breastfed until 6 months and 22.4% are breastfed until 12 months, though breastfeeding rates varied among the states.
Breastfeeding rates in the U.S. at 6 months rose from 34.2% in 2000 to 43.5% in 2006 and the rates at 12 months rose from 15.7% in 2000 to 22.7% in 2006. The U.S. Healthy People 2010 goals were to have at least 60% of babies exclusively breastfed at 3 months and 25% of babies exclusively breastfed at 6 months so this goal has yet to be met.
In the United States a study published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that 75 percent of mothers began breastfeeding. However, by 6 months, the rate fell to 43% and was just 22% after a year. Breastfeeding rates vary across the country, from nearly 90 percent initiating breastfeeding in Utah to 52.5 percent in Mississippi. The health care law now requires large employers to provide breastfeeding mothers with breaks and a private space to feed their babies.
DECEPTIVE BECAUSZE NO DISZCUSSZION OF FAMILY LEAVE IN OTHER LANDSZ
SZOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau, Survey of Income and Program Participation.
In 2011, 49 percent of children ages 0–4 with employed mothers were cared for primarily by a relative—their father, grandparent, sibling, other relative, or mother—while she worked. This was not statistically different from the percentages in 2010 and 2005. Twenty-four percent spent the most amount of time in a center-based arrangement (day care, nursery school, preschool, or Head Start). Thirteen percent were cared for primarily by a nonrelative in a home-based environment, such as from a family day care provider, nanny, babysitter, or au pair.
The rate of care by fathers was between 15 and 16 percent in 1985 and 1988, increased to 20 percent in 1991, and settled between 16 and 18 percent from 1993 to 2005. By 2011, the father-care rate was 19 percent.
Among children ages 0–4 in families in poverty in 2011, 18 percent were in center-based care as their primary arrangement, while 11 percent were with other relatives (relatives other than the mother, father, or grandparent). By comparison, a greater percentage of children in families at or above the poverty threshold were in center-based care (26 percent) and a smaller percentage were cared for by other relatives (4 percent).
Children ages 0–4, with employed mothers, whose primary child care arrangement is with a relative 48% (2010) 49% (2011) NS
Children ages 3–6, not yet in kindergarten, who were in center-based care arrangements 55% (2007) 61% (2012) Arrow pointing up
Children of at least one foreign-born parent
No mention of family leave on thisz page at all!!!!!
https://www.momsrising.org/blog/new-yorks-paid-family-leave-law-coming-jan-2018-learn-more Deceptivilly advocate$ for eight weeks to begin in NY Europeansz get 2-3 yearsz
12 weeks in washington state. more $ub$tandard care for U$ region babie$ in the land with mo$t bomb$
WOULDNT IT JUSZT BE SZIMPLER TO GET ONLY RECOGNISZE PARITY ASZ REALL GOVERNMENT & GIVE REALL CARE TO CHILDREN & FAMILYESZ
TOKENISZM & NATIONALISZTIC NEAR SZIGHTEDNESSZ THISZ WOULD BE LAUGHED AT IN EUROPE & CANADA. WHY ARE AMERICAN WOMEN ACCEPTING SZUCH BETRAYILL$
Contact: Emily Hecker
December 5, 2017 202/371-1999
No connection to parite or womensz preszence in deciszion making asz connected to welle bring for babyesz
department or person, please contact our main office.
ZERO TO THREE
1255 23rd Street, NW, Suite 350
Washington, D.C. 20037
1-800-899-4301 | BookStore@zerotothree.org
https://monsanto.com/news-releases/monsanto-named-to-2017-working-mother-100-best-companies-list/ NO CONCERN HERE ABOUT MON$ANTO$ IMPACT ON THE INTERCONNECTED WEB OF LIFE THAT ALL CHILDREN OF ALL AGESZ MUCH DEPEND ON. $O $AD THAT U$ regionill culture cannot connect the dot$ of it$ own deception$
“The U.S. is nearly unique in its failure to require paid family leave, as one of only two countries to not have any laws mandating paid family leave (Addati, Cassirer, & Gilchrist, 2014). The current Family and Medical Leave Act ensures that only employees of large businesses (i.e., those with more than 50 employees within a 75-mile radius) do not lose their jobs when they take time off to care for a newborn; however, employers are not required to pay workers during that time – and nearly 40% of U.S. workers receive no job-protected leave at all. Of a large survey of employers in 2008, only 1/2 offered partially paid leave for mothers, and less than 1/6 did so for fathers (Gomby & Pei, 2009). Lower income workers are even less likely to have access to paid leave (Phillips, 2004).,,,We can help parents, like Melissa and Rob, access family leave. Current proposed legislation, the Family and Medical Insurance Leave (FAMILY) Act (S.786, H.R.1439) would provide workers up to 12 weeks of partial income when they take time off for their newborns or an elderly or disabled family member. This leave would be funded by very small payroll contributions from both employees and employers – so small that most workers in states that have implemented similar laws have reported not even noticing a change in their paychecks (Warner, 2012)!So why haven’t we passed paid leave yet? One argument often made to oppose paid family leave is that this will hurt business owners and the economy, but this does not appear to be the case. States and countries that have implemented similar policies have actually seen their economies grow (Deprez, 2015; Ruhm, 1998)” MORE U$ regionill deception, giving no szpecific information, in fact hiding the glaring fact & exampellesz of much better ballance allready in many other landsz GIVESZ NOTHING TO INDICATE DEVELLEOPMENTALL NECESSZITY OF 2 to 3 YEARSZ OF BESZT EQ IQ SZQ & BQ, & HOW OTHER COUNTRIESZ DONT JUSZT HAVE FAMILY LEAVE, THEY HAVE MULITYEAR PAID FAMILY LEAVE THAT UPHOLDSZ NATURALL BABY & MOTHER & FAMILY BONDING.
SZO P$hame on thi$ Cooptatation at
American P$ychological Association
Public Interest Directorate
750 First Street, NE
Washington, DC 20002-4242
Phone: (202) 336-6056
The U.S is one of the only countries in the world that doesn’t offer paid leave to new mothers.
Minor reference to other landsz no factsz about that mentioned event though availabelle on wikipedia
1515 N. Courthouse Road
Arlington, VA 22201
Get Driving Directions
Phone: (703) 341-4100
Fax: (703) 341-4101
Media (703) 341-4130 firstname.lastname@example.org
Member Engagement Services (703) 341-4105 email@example.com
Public Policy (703) 341-4116 firstname.lastname@example.org
of 2011, 12.5 million (61 percent)
of the 20.4 million children under
5 years of age were in some type
of regular child care arrangement
In the interview, respon
dents report only arrangements
used on a regular basis, at least
once a week. Preschoolers—
children under 5 years old—
receiving care were more likely
to be cared for by a relative (42
percent) than by a nonrelative
(33 percent), while 12 percent
were regularly cared for by both.
Another 39 percent had no regular
child care arrangement.
The positive impact of breastmilk on the growth and development of babies is widely accepted . However, breastfeeding is more than just the provision of nutrition; the act of suckling at the breast has an impact on both child and mother. Breastfeeding calms and provides analgesia to infants, as evidenced in reduced heart and metabolic rates and a reduced ability to perceive pain during suckling [9–11]. There are several reasons for this calming and analgesic effect. Firstly, suckling at the breast stimulates the infant’s oropharyngeal tactile- and mechanoreceptors and focuses attention on the mouth, reducing outside influences [12,13]. Secondly, suckling and intestinal adsorption of fat from milk stimulates the release of the hormone cholecystokinin [14,15], which activates an afferent vagal mechanism that induces relaxation and pain relief . Thirdly, the sweet flavour of milk stimulates the release of opioids in the midbrain of infants, which act on receptors that decrease the perception of pain [10,17–19]. Fourthly, breastfeeding involves maternal skin-to-skin contact, which stabilises blood glucose levels , body temperature and respiration rates [20–22], aids neurobehavioral self-regulation  and also reduces stress hormone release  and blood pressure . Finally, breastfeeding involves intimate social interaction between mother and child, which may result in the release of the anti-stress hormone oxytocin [26,27]. These mechanisms of relaxation and analgesia work synergistically [28,29] and while research has thus far focused on newborns, the experience of mothers is that the calming, analgesic and relaxing effects of breastfeeding remain for as long as breastfeeding occurs .
Breastfeeding also has an impact on mothers. The physiology and behaviour of mothers are influenced by the release of the hormones oxytocin, prolactin and cholecystokinin during breastfeeding. Oxytocin is released from the hypothalamus in response to skin-to-skin contact and suckling at the breast [31,32]. Oxytocin release during breastfeeding ejects milk from the myoepithelial cells in the breast allowing the infant to extract milk ; it also acts on the mother’s central nervous system, causing physiological as well as behavioural changes in her [31–33]. Oxytocin is known to be essential for expression of maternal behaviour in some mammals [34,35] and, although the research is as yet scant, there is some evidence that oxytocin is also involved in the development of maternal love in humans . Oxytocin also has a potent anti-stress impact on mothers [32,33].
The hormone prolactin is released from the pituitary in response to nipple stimulation, such as that occurring during suckling . Prolactin is involved in milk production  and is thought to act on the central nervous system to promote maternal behaviour . Prolactin acts as an analgesic and reduces stress responsiveness in animal models [33,38] and may well operate in a similar way in humans .
Cholecystokinin is released in infants as they suckle but it is also released in the intestine of mothers during breastfeeding . Cholecystokinin is thought to promote maternal behaviour  and, as with infants, it relaxes and provides analgesia to mothers . Oxytocin, prolactin and cholecystokinin act synergistically in mothers [33,40].
There is evidence that the hormonal and other effects of breastfeeding influence the physiology and behaviour of mothers. Breastfeeding women have lower blood pressure and respond less to emotional and physical stress than non-breastfeeding women [32,41–44]; they also show a “relaxation response” in their brains during breastfeeding . Mothers who are less stressed are able to be more responsive to their babies [46,47], and it is therefore not surprising that some studies have found that breastfeeding women are more socially interactive  and exhibit a greater responsiveness and caring to their babies than non-breastfeeding mothers [49,50].
The increased responsiveness of breastfeeding women to their infants is perhaps a result of the hormonal influences already described, but it may also be related to the physical closeness of breastfeeding. Breastfeeding requires frequent close physical contact between mother and child [51,52] and some research has found that breastfeeding women seek greater proximity to their babies [53,54]. Breastfeeding involves infant-mother skin-to-skin contact which both increases a mother’s desire to be with her baby [55,56] and her sensitivity to her infant [57,58]. Research has found that the more that babies and mothers are kept together, the greater the impact on the mother in terms of exhibition of responsive caregiving  and security of attachment in the child . As will be discussed, development of attachment security is of great value to children [61,62].
Breasztfeeding of their wivesz & children isz an important experience for other family membersz, certainelley eszpecially fathersz, too & the fathersz allszo do naturally form deeper bondsz to their wivesz & children becausze of thisz. Family leave & love & work ballance isz necesszary for men, too. Here again, the Europeansz & other landsz are doing much better than the currentilly very regre$$ed, individuilli$tic U$ culture.
It szhould allszo be noted that many peopelle now work from home & are szellvesz employed & many peopelle live off grid, in even more naturall ballancesz of the laborsz of love & creative work. Thisz isz likelley the alltimate future for humanityesz asz we become szimpeller & yet more szophisztcated & reevolved toward szusztainabellity asz the Children of All Agesz of the MotherFatherGoddesszGod on thisz & all our Planetsz
*The Light Of Universzall & Eternally Susztainable Love & Life in Yin Yang Ballance Deszigned by the MotherFatherGoddessGod of the Universze for All Their Children Female and Male, of All Agesz,
THE NEW MILLENNIALL GOLDEN RULE/RAJ of Good ReAll Faith for Both Gendersz and All Huesz
“Thisz Day I call the Heavensz and the Earthsz asz witnessesz intercszesszoreally for and againszt you that I have set before You Life and Death, Blessingsz and Curses. Now choosze Love & Life in LIGHT, so that You and YOur Children may Live,,, LOVE & LIVE YOUTHFULLY ETERNALLY & PROSZPER ALL ON THISZ & ALL PLANETSZ ASZ ALL INTERCONNECTING IN CONTACT! HEAVENSZ ON EARTHSZ”
“For I give you good doctrine, forsake ye not MYOur (New Millenniall) Law.” https://5050now.wordpress.com/newmillenniallgoldenrule-the-5-pillars-of-change/
The Above GOLDEN RULE is Backdated Retroactively By Loving Consciousznessz to the Millenniall Year “2000” on the Calendar in Current Use in North America (and actually before that, for it is Higher Consciousznessz & Love asz the necessary ingredients to Szusztain Life, that Mediate SzpaceTime, which isz, in fact, a Creation of DIVINE LOVE). LOVE & LIVE YOUTHFULLY WITH GOLDEN UNIVERSZALL HEARTLIGHTSZ OF BUDDING BLOOMING MARVELLOUSZ MIRACULLOUSZ SZPRING WITHIN YOU YEARSZROUND ALLWAYSZ & PROSZPERALL
THE GOVERNMENT OF THE WORLDSZ SZITSZ UPON MYOur SZHOULDERSZ
For More Information Please Contact UsZ COSZAVIORASZ
c/o COSZECRETARY GENERALL COSZAVIORA MaraIAmma AsztReah Rajchelle Onefamily T’PAU EQUINOX TRUE Q and More (working With and on Behalf of ManyMore for All)
Geneallogically Representativesz, with Many Othersz and You, FirstCoFirstandNotLasztorOnly CoMessiahCoMaitreyaCoKalkiCoWhiteCalfBuffaloWomenandMen,CoSaoshyant,CoImmamaMadhi ELLE T’PAU ALL ARROUNDSZ EQUINOX TRUEQSZ https://5050now.wordpress.com/about/ https://5050now.wordpress.com/help-wantedpositions-available/ and More, (Re)Uniting All Heritagesz in the Onenessz of the .
NEW MILLENNIALL GOLDEN RULE/RAJ of Good ReAll Faith for Both Gendersz and AllHuesz
(011) -1- (641)-715-3900 Extension: 380929 (24 hour phone answering service) & DAILY TELLECONFERENCE~VIDEOCHATSZ EVERYDAYSZ ARROUNSZ* 8 45~9AM “AEASZTERN TIME” IN THE DAYSZLIGHT & 8 45 PM~12:11AM “AEASZTERN TIME” IN THE SZTARRSZLIGHT AND ADDITIONALL TIMESZ FOR SZELLECTED COLEADERSZ & ASZ GIVEN AT https://plus.google.com/u/0/115600689453254764852/posts
allszo audible worldwide via conference line (011)- 1-641-715-3580 access code 773 342