Literature review: A Comparison between the US and Australia of Economic Factors affecting breastfeeding and Policies to Increase Breastfeeding in the Workplace

abstract: Breastfeeding has been shown by a number of studies to have numerous benefits on both the mother and the infant. Major health organizations such as the World Health Organization (WHO), now agree that breastfeeding should be encouraged and supported in all countries. But like many things, the wheels of the law are slow to catch up with scientific evident. Although breastfeeding is supported, working women do not have the option of breastfeeding without consequences. For example, in 2003, Kirstie Marshall, a then member of parliament in Australia was ejected from the lower house chamber on February 23, for breastfeeding her baby [3]. According to standing order 30 at the time, "Unless by order of the House, no Member of this House shall presume to bring any stranger into any part of the House appropriated to the Members of this House while the House, or a Committee of the whole House, is sitting" [3]. The rules did not specify the age of strangers, so the then 11-day-old baby, Charlotte Louise and her mother were shown the exit door of parliament. She had to choose between being present at times of major discussions or leaving the house to breastfeed her child, she chose to leave. More recent statistics show that developed nations like the US and Australia which also have high rates of women employment had low rates of breastfeeding. This might mean that workplace policies do not favor breastfeeding or expressing milk at work. Fortunately, laws have since been introduced in both the United States and Australia that support breastfeeding at the workplace. The next step would be to access how these laws affect breastfeeding statistics and how variation between these two countries like the paid parental leave in Australia (which is not present in all US states) would affect these numbers