The Top Ten Ways LLLI is Undermining the Breastfeeding Relationship

A guest post from Mothers for Mother

Mothers for Mother (MfM) was a website started by disaffected La Leche League Leaders who could see that the LLLI Board was literally killing this venerable organisation by its insistence on using “a variety of terms” in place of mother. For over 65 years LLL Leaders have provided mother to mother breastfeeding support at no cost to the many thousands of women who contact them every year. LLL has literally changed the course of breastfeeding history, but is in grave danger of losing its credibility as Board members alter policies (largely without consultation) to include men and erase women.

It was necessary for Mothers for Mother to be totally anonymous as no public criticism of LLL is ever allowed by Leaders. Leaders who complain (even in private League Facebook pages) are promptly bullied by gender woo warriors and threatened with being disaccredited. In the beginning, when MfM had a comments section, every Leader who commented was sanctioned/booted off committees or otherwise punished for their ‘insubordination’. Some Leaders are still fighting for their right to remain a Leader while at the same time holding gender critical views (AKA believing in facts and biology).

Because of the level of secrecy required to operate MfM, this website was shut down to preserve the identities of the Leaders who created it. Reprinted with permission of the Mothers for Mother authors I am republishing a series of their posts as a form of archiving them for future readers who appreciate the sanity of those who believe in biological facts, over the thoughts of those who posit that nothing is more important than what they feel or believe about a made-up world of their choosing.

This was first published on March 25, 2022

The Top Ten Ways LLLI is Undermining the Breastfeeding Relationship

#10 Promoting and supporting non-physiological practices.

The Founders of LLL believed in the immutable truth that babies need their mothers and their mother’s milk, not just to grow, but to thrive. It is in the concepts and stated philosophies of LLL that the mother/baby dyad is the foundation of a healthy society.

Well, until recently that is.

In its seemingly never-ending quest to prioritize the wants of adults over the needs of babies in the name of “inclusivity”, LLLI is now actively endorsing and appearing to encourage many practices that work against the needs of vulnerable babies in its quest to advantage adult desires.

Here are a few examples:

In replies to Leaders raising concerns, the LLLI Board has stated: “We agree that much more research needs to be done around transgender breastfeeding, and in particular nursing by transgender women…”. On the LLLI website it states in regard to breastfeeding by transgender women: “Unfortunately, there has been little or no research in this area.”

Transgender women are biological males who do not have any capacity to conceive, gestate, birth or breastfeed a baby. Exactly whose babies are these men meant to be feeding? Where are their mothers? Why is LLLI condoning medical experimentation on babies and ignoring the health detriments to mothers not breastfeeding their babies?

On the LLLI website, there is extensive information to support any gender or sex to breastfeed even when there are no breasts or breast milk involved in the process. It leaves the reader wondering what the purpose of LLL is meant to be and what the difference is between LLL and a myriad of other parenting support groups.

Consider a lesbian couple who decide not just to have a baby, but decide to also “co-feed” her. After birth, her first breastfeed was not with her biological mother, whose entire body was programmed to help the baby, adjust to extrauterine life and give her colostrum exactly suited to her needs; it was with her ‘other’ mother who had worked to establish lactation with a combination of drugs and pumping.

This story is included on an LLL website, despite the facts that are known about the importance of exclusive breastfeeding for mothers and babies. This is not to be confused with adoptive mothers inducing lactation and breastfeeding their babies. In an adoptive context, the birth mother is not available, but in this story, it was an active decision for the birth mother to not exclusively breastfeed her baby.

The increasing acceptance of formula on LLL websites and Facebook pages is another example of undermining breastfeeding. From the very definition of breastfeeding (to be discussed in point 9) to discussions by LLL Leaders and within the LLLI website, Leaders as mother/peer supporters are asking and discussing how much guidance can be given those who approach us for infant feeding help around formula use. Considering that the relevant experience of those who are Leaders are based around the breastfeeding relationship they have with their own children and there is NO requirement for any artificial baby milk component, we should not be giving any formula help at all. None. It’s not that mothers “shouldn’t” be formula feeding, it’s that Leaders do not have the skills and experience to be guiding mothers in this practice.

Preparing, storing and feeding formula safely is a complicated procedure that, if done incorrectly can have very detrimental effects on young babies, including death. Formula feeding is not part of exclusive breastfeeding practices. And there are many resources out there that mothers can be referred to for any information they might need about how to bottle feed their babies.

Mothers all have different circumstances and sometimes need to supplement breastfeeding with infant formula. LLL has always worked to welcome and support them. However, by promoting and supporting practices that unnecessarily separate mothers and babies LLL is undermining the breastfeeding relationship and inadvertently promoting the use of infant formula.

#9 Changing the definition of breastfeeding to include formula feeding.

It has long been recognized that some formula may need to be used in a breastfeeding journey. Sometimes circumstances conspire to thwart a mother’s plans for exclusive breastfeeding either because of conditions beyond her control or ill informed ‘help’ that didn’t understand the normal course of breastfeeding. The aim is normally to use the minimum amount to keep a baby fed and well, while at the same time taking steps to recover the breastfeeding relationship while phasing out formula use.

Because LLL is (meant to be) a mother-to-mother breastfeeding support group, our organizational knowledge of formula and its safe use is zero. Yes, some Leaders as individuals may know how to safely store, mix and use formula either through their own experiences, or from helping situations they have been involved with. Some Leaders are also medical professionals in their own right (midwives, nurses, doctors, etc.) who have learned about the safe use of formula and are regularly working with mothers who choose to feed their babies artificial baby milks, rather than breastfeeding them.

Recently however, there is more and more evidence that LLL is positively endorsing the use of formula, as defined by this latest statement: “Breastfeeding as Described by La Leche League International”.

La Leche League International Statements - La Leche League International (llli.org)

In a statement that would make a formula company executive blush with pride, “the world’s foremost authority on breastfeeding” (the phrase used in regard to LLL’s trademark book The Womanly Art of Breastfeeding) states in its breastfeeding definition: “Some people are never able to latch their baby to their breast directly and some babies are unable to suckle milk from the breast/nipple.”

While technically this is true and always has been so, why is this special circumstance included in a definition on the normal course of breastfeeding?

The following statements from this definition of breastfeeding are equally puzzling:

“Some people feed their baby their milk at their breast/chest, and they also use supplemental expressed milk, donor milk or formula from the time of their baby’s birth, or for many months of their baby’s life. These supplements can be given to the baby using cups, bottles or an at-breast supplementer.”

“Mothers and parents who feed their baby their own human milk fully through a cup, a feeding line, or a bottle may also describe their experience as breastfeeding.”

Well, LLLI may describe these experiences as breastfeeding, but not everyone agrees:

“According to the definition the World Health Organization (WHO), exclusive breastfeeding (EBF) is the situation in which an infant receives only breast milk from his/her mother or a wet nurse for the first 6 months and no other solids or liquids with the exception of drops or syrups consisting of vitamins, minerals, supplements, or medicines.” World Health Organization. Indicators for assessing breast-feeding practices. Report of an informal meeting. Geneva, Switzerland: 1991.

Even if a baby is not being exclusively breastfed, based on this new LLLI definition even a baby being bottle fed formula could be considered breastfed under these terms. This voids the entire concept of breastfeeding and undermines LLL's work of the last 65+ years.

Recently on the LLL Leaders Facebook page, there was a discussion where a current LLLI Board member speculated on just how far LLL could go on supporting formula use without “running afoul of the International Code of Marketing of Breast Milk Substitutes”.

Further, there is no recognition of the relationship aspects around breastfeeding, which for many mothers becomes even more important than the nutritional component, especially as babies become children.

The current definition of breastfeeding as published by LLLI undermines the breastfeeding relationship. It changes the purpose and mission of the organization from a breastfeeding support group to a catch all group for anyone who wants to pay dues and use the LLL name. By subverting the mission to increase revenue, LLL opens the door to everyone, but loses its purpose: to help mothers breastfeed.

#8 Using “a variety of terms” in place of mother.

Breastfeeding is every baby’s birthright. Breastfeeding is the reason that all mammal mothers have breasts (or whatever species-specific word may be used for them).

Pregnancy prepares breasts for feeding the developing baby and there is often enough colostrum produced during pregnancy that it can be collected and stored for future use in case it’s needed. For example, when a mother either has or develops diabetes during pregnancy, in many countries her baby’s blood sugars will be closely monitored and her colostrum can be given in place of formula if extra feeds are medically indicated. One of the many heartbreaks around miscarriage is that from around 16 weeks of pregnancy, breast milk is produced and if the pregnancy ends prematurely, women will still have to deal with this, despite having no baby to feed.

When a mammal baby is born, he or she instinctively reacts to the mother. In humans, being skin to skin with a mother normalizes the incredible transition to life outside the uterus. Being held next to a mother stabilizes a baby’s temperature, breathing, blood sugars and promotes the homeostasis necessary for optimal development. Exposure to the mother’s skin kick starts the baby’s immune system to cope with that family’s ‘everyday’ pathogens.

The surge of oxytocin in both mother and baby are the start of what in most cases will be a lifelong relationship of love and care and in fact research demonstrates this loss can be measured for a considerable time period in mother/baby dyads who miss out on this crucial stage.

Parents and families have their important place in babies’ lives, but not as mother substitutes in the first phase of life. Pretending that a substitute is suitable during this time undermines the breastfeeding relationship and puts the baby's health at risk.

# 7 Using language that prioritizes gender identities over the biological reality of motherhood.

Every person on the planet owes their existence to a mother. Yes, everyone has a father too, but once sperm is deposited into a vagina, the voluntary involvement of a man can be over as far as physiology is concerned. Women too, can ‘opt out’ of motherhood, but not by simply not deciding to participate any longer.

The sacrifice of women as mothers has been acknowledged in all cultures and over every era of recorded history. It is no accident that when we use animal metaphors for human actions in protection situations we talk about “Mama Bears”. In some societies becoming a mother confers a status that elevates women above those who aren’t mothers and women who aren’t mothers are objects of sorrow.

Using de-sexed language around birth and motherhood and de-emphasizing women as mothers is not inclusive, it is disrespectful. Identity politics has no place in being used to subvert reality. Choosing to identify as one wishes to is absolutely a human right, but birth is an embodied event that is not connected with philosophy or how one thinks. Identities don’t give birth, bodies do, and it is important that public health messaging reflects this.

Favoring language changes that prioritize gender identity over the biological reality of motherhood undermines the breastfeeding relationship.

#6 Substituting the words human milk feeding for breastfeeding.

Back in 1956 when those seven mothers decided to see what they could do to help other mothers to breastfeed their babies, research in lactation was almost solely about dairy cows. A paucity of research was available around lactation in humans and even less around breastfeeding. Breastfeeding support was totally experiential, based on nothing more than “I tried this, and it worked for me”. That first mimeographed copy of The Womanly Art of Breastfeeding really was about art, not science as there was so little available to back up the claims of the Founders of LLL. That they turned out to be so right once science caught up was nothing short of miraculous. Turns out that mothers really DO know best!

Fast forward to today and not only has research caught up with what the Founders originally believed; knowledge has exceeded what many initially believed were benefits only for babies. Exclusively breastfeeding until at least the middle of the first year, gradually adding table foods while continuing to breastfeed for at least the first year (preferably two years) and for as long as the child needs to continue breastfeeding have irrevocably proved to be the species-specific recipe for optimizing the short- and long-term health of not only babies, but their mothers as well.

Amazingly, this is just as true in modern, industrialized countries with potable water on tap and a largely literate population able to ‘safely’ reconstitute artificial baby milk as it is in countries without these advantages. The health problems created by several generations of citizens reared on artificial milks costs the health systems of countries literally billions of dollars globally. Think what could be done with the funds that are presently used to treat diseases and conditions that could have been prevented by breastfeeding.

And it is breastfeeding that is the preventative method; pumping milk and bottle feeding this milk to a baby, while a better alternative to formula feeding, does not confer the same advantage to either mothers or babies. In life there aren’t any shortcuts to success. LLLI knows this, but still endorses a meme “Pumping is Breastfeeding”.

No, it is not, and it is giving women who ask about pumping false information to claim it is true. Similarly, de-humanizing breastfeeding by replacing breast milk with the term “human milk” leads to confusion about what is meant. The term "human milk feeding" has come to be used synonymously with exclusive breastfeeding, confusing the issue for mothers. Different feeding methods have different outcomes for mothers' and babies' health and that distinction needs to be highlighted, not hidden.

“Human milk” can be fed to a baby by any adult caregiver. This undermines the breastfeeding relationship.

#5 Supporting “trans rights” is harmful to women.

Trans men (biological women) can still get pregnant and give birth to healthy babies. They can have sex with a biological male or use IVF technologies to achieve a pregnancy. However, one of the early surgical interventions they are likely to have had is an elective double mastectomy (total removal of both healthy breasts). They also have a choice as to whether they have their nipples reattached or not. This is done under an informed consent model on children as young as 12 years old.

Frontal lobe brain development follows the same pattern in every human. The last segment to mature is the frontal lobe. This brain segment is the home of most things that are considered to be present in adults, but not children. The frontal lobe is the home of executive functioning, which is a group of important mental skills including working memory, flexible thinking, and inhibitory control.

Paying attention, organizing and planning, starting tasks and staying focused on them, managing emotions and keeping track of what one is doing are hallmarks of engaged executive function.

The development of executive function is partially dependent on sex and birth order. Females are ahead of males and first-born children are ahead of their siblings. So, while a first-born girl may be fully mature at around 18 years of age, her later born brother may take as long as 32 years before he has a fully functioning brain. No one has the ability to make life changing medical decisions before this time (and factoring in a wider life experience means that even a technically mature brain will miss important features of decision making).

Adolescent girls suffering from gender dysphoria so severe that they want this one highly identifiable physically female part of themselves removed are not capable of giving truly informed consent to mastectomy. They don’t consider the ramifications of no longer having breasts to feed the hypothetical babies they may someday give birth to. Usually, they are not even asked to think about this; it is not a factor in their quest to appear more masculine.

The research is clear that most adolescents with gender dysphoria who are supported by watchful waiting will get through this period of their lives and come to terms with their bodies as they are. Many of them will be lesbians or gay (if male). And if they have avoided surgery, they will be able to breastfeed their babies with all the attendant good that this conveys.

Supporting “trans rights” (and silencing Leaders who don’t agree with this support) undermines the breastfeeding relationship.

#4 Using the word“ chestfeeding”.

Chestfeeding is a term that some use in place of breastfeeding, but it is a dangerous word. It is dangerous because it is both meaningless and has multiple meanings at the same time. It has no universally understood meaning, so confusion is built into its use.

In the context of the trans lobby, chestfeeding is formula feeding. Because if a female has had a mastectomy to appear masculine, even if some glandular tissue escaped being excised, the milk has no way to exit, and the quantity will be insufficient to nourish a baby. If one is a trans woman (biological male), research has confirmed that not enough milk will be produced to feed a baby. In both cases, chestfeeding will require the use of a supplemental nursing system and something to go in it. A baby needs something to latch onto and something to eat. Neither of these are available naturally to transgender people.

Donor breast milk is a rare commodity. There is not enough donor milk for mothers who need it because of their own supply issues. The likelihood of a transgender person accessing enough donor milk to feed their baby is remote.

La Leche League is premised on mother-to-mother support. Leader training does not cover the wide variety of the needs of the transgender population with its highly medicalized features and specialized psychological support.

LLL is also not an agency that pressures mothers to supply donor breast milk to others for any reason at all. Donor breast milk is not free, it is the product of the time, expense and labor of a mother who is already feeding her own baby and on top of this is producing for another baby. It is an unrealistic expectation to ask women as mothers to provide breast milk for those who have deliberately chosen a path that knowingly imperils the health of themselves and their babies.

Using the term chestfeeding undermines the breastfeeding relationship.

#3 Welcoming biological males into women’s single sex spaces.

Think about that new mother breastfeeding in public for the very first time. She may need to spend some time getting her baby correctly latched, while having to deal with clothing that seems to be always in the way. Which scenario works for her: in a circle of other women who are also breastfeeding their babies or in a cafe filled with men in suits having a coffee? What if she sees a post or notice telling her about that LLL meeting welcoming new mothers, but after she sits down and starts to feel comfortable, a new person comes in.

This person is taller than her partner and appears to be a male attempting to breastfeed. This new attendee asks questions around formula use because this is what is in the supplemental nursing system being used. The meeting is dominated by this individual's concerns and not much welcoming breastfeeding discussion happens. This new mother decides that LLL is not for her and never returns.

Lactophilia is a sexual fetish based around breastfeeding and breast milk. These fetishes can take many forms and an entire segment of pornography is based around male fantasies with lactating women and the milk they produce.

Autogynephilia (AGP) is a male's propensity to be sexually aroused by the thought of himself as a female. It is a major force behind many transgender women. Despite the fact that relatively few men have reconstructive surgery that removes their penis and testicles, many AGP men go to great lengths to appear to be women. They have surgery to give them visible breasts, and dress and style their hair to give the illusion of femininity. And what is the ultimate feminine accomplishment? That would be having a baby. Or at least, appearing to breastfeed a baby.

They also loudly demand the right to access women’s single sex spaces. These are the same spaces that were created to protect women from unwanted contact with men, even those who pose no threat. Shared single sex spaces are often the most practical way to provide lots of people with everyday privacy and dignity in places such as gyms, hospitals, dormitories and changing rooms and washrooms in schools, workplaces and other public places. Specialist single sex services such as women’s refuges and rape crisis centers are crucial services that need to be reserved for women.

Until recently we could rely on an understood social contract to retain our single sex spaces in circumstances where a person of one sex might reasonably object to the presence of a person of the opposite sex. That means one could assume that in a women’s only public restroom, women would not be exposed to male genitalia because men would not be in that space. But in societies where woman is a “feeling” we cannot count on this any longer.

The need for single sex spaces is required for women because 98% of sex offenders are male bodied and the overriding majority of their victims are women and children. How is a Leader to know which male bodied persons are “safe” and which are not?

Leaders have always been subjected to male callers who clearly are using their breastfeeding ‘inquiries’ for non-informational purposes. Until recently, there were acceptable guidelines for dealing with men behaving badly. But under the adoption of a political ideology where anyone can be accepted as a woman, Leaders today may risk dis-accreditation if they refuse to offer breastfeeding support to everyone.

“I am personally committed to furthering the mission of LLL and to supporting breastfeeding as presented in The Womanly Art of Breastfeeding and other LLLI publications. I understand and agree that in using the designation “La Leche League Leader,” and in representing La Leche League, I will comply with the most recently published version of the La Leche League Policies and Standing Rules as posted on the LLLI website. I will resign from this position if for any reason I find that I can no longer represent La Leche League in accordance with this agreement, and I will discontinue use of the designation “La Leche League Leader.””

“LLLI is committed to serving everyone inclusive of race, ethnicity, religion, sex, national origin, ancestry, age, marital status, physical or mental ability, socio-economic status, political views, gender identity, sexual orientation, family structure, or other protected status.”

Leaders can no longer safeguard women or their children from predatory men if they sign their annual Statement of Commitment. They cannot remain as Leaders if they refuse to sign this. LLLI has stretched past the safety point of the boundaries of women’s kindness and generosity, by forcing them to accommodate the desires of “everyone”.

Once men (however they may identify) are regular participants at LLL gatherings, they will insist on taking their place as Leaders. So where has peer support gone when those who are incapable of pregnancy, birth and breastfeeding are in a position to “help” those who have been through these life altering, physical experiences? What will the distinguishing feature be that differentiates LLL from every other parenting organization?

Supporting or encouraging male bodied persons to participate in breastfeeding undermines the breastfeeding relationship.

#2 Insisting on inappropriate inclusivity.

Inclusivity as currently defined by LLLI, appears to fall into two camps. First, of course are mothers as there have always been (although fewer and fewer as they are displaced by “a variety of terms” including such confusing ones as “parents” and “families”) and then there is everyone else. Lesbian, bisexual, queer, trans dads, women who become mothers through surrogacy and autogynephilic men who get a sexual thrill from perceiving (and being perceived by others) as women and a veritable alphabet of letters in our new make-up-your-own-gender world.

The problem is that babies haven’t changed with the times. They don’t read philosophy texts or care about new social conventions. The only person that a baby cares about is his or her mother, because she is the primary person who can ensure a baby’s survival. It’s only her body that will adjust its temperature to warm or cool a baby, who will endanger her own life to save theirs and of course, it’s only a mother’s body that is designed and programmed to secrete the species-specific milk that evolution designed just for human babies to optimize their health, development and wellbeing.

“Including” everyone under a rubric of breastfeeding support, including male bodied adults is insulting and disrespectful to women and mothers. By attempting to be inclusive, LLLI is sanctioning the disruption of the breastfeeding relationship and colluding in medical experimentation on babies. These are contrary to the foundation of LLLI.

Not everything can be truly inclusive, and some things actually work better by excluding those who cannot genuinely participate. To do otherwise is to undermine the breastfeeding relationship.

And the number one way in which LLLI is undermining the breastfeeding relationship is:

#1 LLLI is betraying its own volunteers and hundreds of years of lived experience in its quest to overturn biology in a crusade to embrace a political ideology.

Leaders are suffering moral distress about what they are expected to support, and many are either resigning or may be asked to leave for their gender critical views. Official LLLI policies no longer respect the tenets of biology and Leaders are not able to voice self-evident truths such as all mothers are women. Bodies are out, feelings are in.

Research is either being ignored or altered to suit the queer theory framework now in vogue in LLLI. False information (“pumping is breastfeeding” as just one example) is being posted on public information sites and Leaders are chatting on LLL only sites about just how far ‘we can push formula without breaking the Code’.

The wants of adults are prioritized over the needs of babies and the value of the breastfeeding relationship, and the agency and human rights of babies is being ignored in favor of following a political agenda whose stated purpose is chaos and destruction.

The very real distress of an entire generation of young women is not being addressed. Cutting off healthy body parts has never been a ‘cure’ for mental health issues and LLL celebrating this openly makes them into colluders rather than healers. Expecting Leaders to cope with so many complex social and mental health problems takes Leaders way past our mother-to-mother peer support framework and plunges them into unknown dangers. Putting Leaders into circumstances where they may have to deal with a male bodied person with ‘breastfeeding problems’ could actually mean they can’t safeguard themselves, without risking being sanctioned by other Leaders.

Instead of communication skills that favor constructive dialog and discussions, the LLLI Board now specializes in gaslighting and ignoring the pleas of distressed Leaders from around the world. There exists no complaints procedure available to Leaders. When the Board is questioned over blatantly mixing causes and pandering to political ideologies, it simply denies that this is occurring. LLLI is like a narcissistic partner who insists you deny the truth of your eyes in favor of their oft repeated lies.

“How does this support the breastfeeding relationship?” is a question that has gone unanswered for some time now. It’s past time that all Leaders start asking this again.