I have been thinking lately (Yes, thinking is entirely possible, even 10 days after giving birth. At least for me that’s been the case with our fifth child. After giving birth to our first, though? I am fairly certain that I didn’t think, clearly at least, for a minimum of six months. But that’s water under the bridge now and certainly not the point that I’m going to be getting at here.).

While I was in the hospital recently, I heard news of the mini uproar that a breastfeeding comment made by supermodel Gisele Bundchen generated. My own very first thought when I heard that Gisele said in an interview, “There should be a worldwide law…that mothers should breastfeed their babies for six months” was that it was spoken by a person who truly loved and understood breastfeeding. I had nary a doubt in my mind that she didn’t really mean there should be a worldwide law requiring all mothers to breastfeed. I mean, if she did mean that, clearly she doesn’t understand how laws work. A “worldwide law”, while perhaps a nice idea, is not likely to ever happen. I didn’t assume she literally meant that. I took, rather, her words to be exaggeration for effect. Sort of like if someone where to, ahem, say something like, “If I don’t get another box of Honey Nut Cheerios, I’m going to die!!”

You know, something like that.

Gisele seems passionate about breastfeeding; her now well-known quote on the subject didn’t seem to me to be an intentional slam of mothers who don’t share her passion. Her words didn’t throw me into a tizzy or cause me undue aggravation or sleepless nights. MckFlurry is granting me the latter just fine. And the former? I don’t like to let myself get overly aggravated about stuff that’s beyond my control and doesn’t really affect me anyway in the first place.

What has really gotten my (Christmas) undies in a bunch has been the mini uproar I alluded to. I mean, for the love of Pete, people. The woman was just trying to make a point! I doubt she really meant that breastfeeding should be a law. And, if she did, well…I’ll get to that in a moment. Yet critics have been having a field day with Gisele’s statement.

“It’s the most absurd thing I’ve ever heard,” actress Bethanny Frankel retorted regarding Gisele’s remarks, felt by some to be highly insensitive.

But you know what? The more I thought and thought about it, the more I realized how utterly not “absurd” Gisele’s statement actually was. At least not when compared to all the other laws (now, granted, they are not “worldwide,” but that little part of her quote is hardly what got people foaming at the mouth over) our own country, for example, has as it regards the care and health and well being of children. The fact that folks are so upset about the notion that breastfeeding should be a law screams irony in the loudest way.

Bethanny, after calling Gisele’s opinion “absurd,” went on to say that “breastfeeding is one of the most rewarding experiences, but it isn’t for everyone.”

The Brazilian model was absolutely waylaid by the media, mothering groups and internet chat boards, lambasted for her insensitivity towards mothers who choose not to breastfeed, or for one reason or another, cannot. To some, her words had a judgmental ring to them, and I can definitely understand seeing them in that light. That wasn’t how I took her quote, but nonetheless, I do understand why many people were upset by her words. Clearly breastfeeding is a personal choice, just as the choice to feed our children strained carrots over Gerber fruit puffs or avocado over Go-Gurt is. We should do what we can to keep our children safe and healthy, trying our best and not bringing other mothers down for not agreeing with us. What we feed our children should certainly be the parents‘ decision. End of sentence. Sort of.

I just wonder if the idea, whether Gisele literally meant it or not, of a law supporting breastfeeding is really as far-fetched and ridiculous an idea as some people are making it. Or, at the very least, if it’s really that different than other laws or beliefs largely agreed on by everyone.

Don’t get me wrong. I am not saying that I support a law, “worldwide” or otherwise, that would mandate breastfeeding. Far from it! It’s just that the (probably inadvertent) inconsistency with which those who saw fit to bash Gisele for her thoughts is so glaring, I couldn’t ignore it. If, in fact, it is so “absurd” to entertain the idea of a law supporting breastfeeding, then why oh why do we have throngs of people, and a President, in support of mandatory vaccination of children via the public school system? Yet it hasn’t been proven beyond the shadow of a doubt that vaccines are 100% safe for all children. And on that note, what on earth is up with laws about children in carseats!? In this case it is hardly arguable that carseats are safer for children in cars than no carseats are, right? We would all probably agree. However, I have yet to hear news of angry mothers and actresses pounding their fists on their children’s high chair trays and calling foul about carseat laws. But can you imagine if the topic at hand were switched? If Gisele had been talking about something other than breastfeeding? Now that would be absurd.

It might go something like this:

A beautiful model and mother is interviewed and says, “”There should be a worldwide law…that mothers should secure their babies into five point harnesses when riding in the car for six months.”

Another beautiful mother and actress, with thousands of other opinionated voices angrily behind her, chimes in, calling the idea of mandatory carseats “absurd,” saying “harnessing children into carseats when they travel in cars is one of the most rewarding experiences, but it isn’t for everyone.”

Um, what!?

Do you see where I’m going here? I cannot, just cannot, wrap my mind around the (very true, in my opinion) notion that the angry mob attacking Gisele’s words has been clinging to: that the government has no business telling us how to best care for our children when these same people daily support the government in fact stepping in and telling us, in other ways, how to best care for our children.

Even Bethanny’s quote that “breastfeeding is one of the most rewarding experiences, but it isn’t for everyone” kind of rubbed me the wrong way. It was as if she was saying that the benefits of breastfeeding are solely for the mother. That we get rewards from nursing our children. And certainly, as a lover of breastfeeding, I can attest that those rewards most definitely exist! But that isn’t the sole reason why I breastfeed. Neither should a mother thinking that breastfeeding just “isn’t for her” use that as her only reason not to nurse. What if taking the time to buckle our child into a carseat “wasn’t for us”? Or if making sure our children had enough vitamins in their diet just wasn’t a concern of ours? I venture to say that it shouldn’t matter. Breastmilk is best for our children. Carseats are the safest way to travel. Why the severe digging in of heels when the notion of a breastfeeding law is brought up, then?

I do realize, sadly from personal experience, that the desire to give a baby breastmilk is not the only factor in a mother’s ability to provide it. I shed many, many tears over the milk supply issues I had when Small Fry was a baby. I endured sore nipples, extreme engorgement, stress during the time of Stellan’s many hospitalizations and pregnancies while nursing that all contributed to a decline in my desire and ability to breastfeed. I have chosen to use other milks, have purchased donor breastmilk and have weaned some of my children much earlier than I would have liked. A law requiring me to have continued to nurse, for example, past one year would have been a very, very hard one for me to have fallen in accordance with. It’s pretty silly to think such a law would be enforceable or even wise. What about mothers with chronic mastitis? Inverted nipples? Adopted children? Although many of their adoptive mothers try, producing breastmilk is not always possible, and for a multitude of other reasons, it often isn’t, either. I think we ought to, nay we need to, give other mothers the benefit of the doubt and unconditional support in this journey of motherhood. It’s hard enough as it is without the pointing out how other mothers aren’t doing things the best way, according to use.

Why then the inconsistency with other areas of mothering? No one seems to get any flack for telling new mothers that they need to put baby back to sleep, should get all the recommended vaccines on schedule, are required by law to put children into carseats or that they must not allow their baby to eat honey, peanut butter or cow’s milk until at least after age one. What is the big deal, then, with breastfeeding? Isn’t it, also, a similar health related act that unarguably is best for baby? Why then did so many people balk at Gisele’s assertion that it also be required for young babies?

I don’t know why. I just wish that the same intensity with which so many people bristled (and rightly so) at the idea of a breastfeeding law would be also afforded to other areas of mothering. Educating mothers on what kind of milk is best for their babies, how long to rear face a carseat and what vaccines are recommended for their health is one thing, and a good thing at that. But supporting legislation that would require parents to, say, vaccinate, properly restrain while in a vehicle, circumcise or breastfeed their babies? Pretty much not the government’s job.

At least in my opinion. And I don’t really think Gisele meant that it was, either.

What think you?!