The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Breastfeeding and defeasible duties to benefit

Breastfeeding and defeasible duties to benefit
Breastfeeding and defeasible duties to benefit
For many women experiencing motherhood for the first time, the message they receive is clear: mothers who do not breastfeed ought to have good reasons not to; bottle feeding by choice is a failure of maternal duty. We argue that this pressure to breastfeed arises in part from two misconceptions about maternal duty: confusion about the scope of the duty to benefit and conflation between moral reasons and duties. While mothers have a general duty to benefit, we argue that this does not imply a duty to carry out any particular beneficent act. Therefore, the expectation that mothers should breastfeed unless they have sufficient countervailing reasons not to is morally unwarranted. Recognising the difference between reasons and duties can allow us to discuss the benefits of breastfeeding and the importance of supporting mothers who wish to breastfeed without subjecting mothers who bottle feed to guilt, blame and failure.
breastfeeding, ethics, motherhood, guilt, judgment, defeasible duties
1473-4257
515-518
Woollard, Fiona
c3caccc2-68c9-47c8-b2d3-9735d09f1679
Porter, Lindsey
ac674521-d2af-4325-bee6-4c8b1d93dbe9
Woollard, Fiona
c3caccc2-68c9-47c8-b2d3-9735d09f1679
Porter, Lindsey
ac674521-d2af-4325-bee6-4c8b1d93dbe9

Woollard, Fiona and Porter, Lindsey (2017) Breastfeeding and defeasible duties to benefit. Journal of Medical Ethics, 43, 515-518. (doi:10.1136/medethics-2016-103833).

Record type: Article

Abstract

For many women experiencing motherhood for the first time, the message they receive is clear: mothers who do not breastfeed ought to have good reasons not to; bottle feeding by choice is a failure of maternal duty. We argue that this pressure to breastfeed arises in part from two misconceptions about maternal duty: confusion about the scope of the duty to benefit and conflation between moral reasons and duties. While mothers have a general duty to benefit, we argue that this does not imply a duty to carry out any particular beneficent act. Therefore, the expectation that mothers should breastfeed unless they have sufficient countervailing reasons not to is morally unwarranted. Recognising the difference between reasons and duties can allow us to discuss the benefits of breastfeeding and the importance of supporting mothers who wish to breastfeed without subjecting mothers who bottle feed to guilt, blame and failure.

Text
AuthorsAcceptedVersionbreastfeedingpaperforR&Rfinal - Accepted Manuscript
Download (40kB)

More information

Accepted/In Press date: 6 January 2017
e-pub ahead of print date: 10 February 2017
Published date: 1 August 2017
Keywords: breastfeeding, ethics, motherhood, guilt, judgment, defeasible duties
Organisations: Philosophy

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 411655
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/411655
ISSN: 1473-4257
PURE UUID: 21ed7fa6-ce72-4623-9b88-df8d18bf7168

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 21 Jun 2017 16:33
Last modified: 05 Jun 2024 17:54

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Fiona Woollard
Author: Lindsey Porter

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×