Maternity and infant products brand Mamaway (媽媽餵) recently published a promotional video comparing infant formula to cola and bubble tea, suggesting that it might cause children to become hyperactive.
When the topic of breastfeeding is raised, mothers can often be seen tearfully recounting their postpartum physical and mental exhaustion, the pressure from medical institutions urging them to breastfeed, the guilt from being unable to nurse and the criticism from relatives and even complete strangers.
Women’s organizations have been fighting this for a long time. Why are inappropriate remarks promoting breastfeeding so commonplace? Why does society always try to judge mothers? Why do some people still fail to understand that the way an infant is fed should be decided by the child’s mother and family?
The root of the issue lies in one-sided policies — to promote breastfeeding, the government deliberately reduced the visibility of infant formula. Most of the content about feeding newborns in the Health Promotion Administration’s (HPA) “Maternal Health Handbook” focuses on breastfeeding, while information about baby formula is almost entirely glossed over. Although the HPA’s official stance is that both are good choices, emphasis remains on promoting breastfeeding and not much has been done to address the lack of balanced information.
To increase breastfeeding rates, the government has long limited access to information about infant formula and purchasing channels. It was not until 2023, after demands from Taiwan Women’s Link and then-New Power Party legislator Claire Wang (王婉諭), that formula ingredients were required to be made public online and online purchases of formula for children younger than one became legal.
The original policy’s assumption — that mothers would choose breastfeeding so long as there is no discussion of formula — was fundamentally flawed. Restrictions on formula did not increase breastfeeding rates. All the more absurd is that the HPA last year admitted that the previous method for calculating breastfeeding rates was a bit strange, so they stopped publishing the figures.
So, who can women and families who were harmed in the pursuit of meeting numerical targets turn to?
Breastfeeding does indeed have benefits, but genuine support should not come in the form of figure-driven policies, nor through emotional blackmail under the slogan “breast milk is best.” What mothers need after giving birth is access to complete information and compassionate support, rather than being forced to become tools to meet policy targets.
Others should stop the finger-pointing; mothers who opt to use infant formula should not be accused of lacking love for their children, and those who breastfeed in public should not face discrimination or prejudice.
A truly friendly environment should allow mothers and families — whether they choose breast milk or formula, and no matter where they are — to feed their children without bearing any blame.
It is a positive sign that public opinion mostly stands on the side of mothers and families, no longer measuring maternal love by the act of breastfeeding alone. If the government genuinely hopes to support mothers, it should provide comprehensive and unbiased feeding guidelines, providing every family with the peace of mind to choose the approach that best suits them.
Chen Su-fang is the secretary-general of Taiwan Women’s Link.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
In a summer of intense political maneuvering, Taiwanese, whose democratic vibrancy is a constant rebuke to Beijing’s authoritarianism, delivered a powerful verdict not on China, but on their own political leaders. Two high-profile recall campaigns, driven by the ruling party against its opposition, collapsed in failure. It was a clear signal that after months of bitter confrontation, the Taiwanese public is demanding a shift from perpetual campaign mode to the hard work of governing. For Washington and other world capitals, this is more than a distant political drama. The stability of Taiwan is vital, as it serves as a key player
Much like the first round on July 26, Saturday’s second wave of recall elections — this time targeting seven Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers — also failed. With all 31 KMT legislators who faced recall this summer secure in their posts, the mass recall campaign has come to an end. The outcome was unsurprising. Last month’s across-the-board defeats had already dealt a heavy blow to the morale of recall advocates and the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), while bolstering the confidence of the KMT and its ally the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP). It seemed a foregone conclusion that recalls would falter, as
The fallout from the mass recalls and the referendum on restarting the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant continues to monopolize the news. The general consensus is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has been bloodied and found wanting, and is in need of reflection and a course correction if it is to avoid electoral defeat. The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has not emerged unscathed, either, but has the opportunity of making a relatively clean break. That depends on who the party on Oct. 18 picks to replace outgoing KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫). What is certain is that, with the dust settling
Mainland Affairs Council Deputy Minister Shen You-chung (沈有忠) on Thursday last week urged democratic nations to boycott China’s military parade on Wednesday next week. The parade, a grand display of Beijing’s military hardware, is meant to commemorate the 80th anniversary of Japan’s surrender in World War II. While China has invited world leaders to attend, many have declined. A Kyodo News report on Sunday said that Japan has asked European and Asian leaders who have yet to respond to the invitation to refrain from attending. Tokyo is seeking to prevent Beijing from spreading its distorted interpretation of wartime history, the report
RSS