Mother and baby's right

t's counterproductive today to say that the child has a universal human right to be breastfed. We can't bombastically say there is a right when there is a strong opposition to saying so. Because if it is not within the rights system established by international conventions, such a statement means nothing. But you can use what is already there. Such as children have the right to adequate nutritious food. And you can accuse governments if they create obstacles to achieving this.

The issue of the right to be breastfed will never, in the foreseeable future, come into a legally binding convention which is universal for all countries. Because they would have to say: Who has the obligation to see to it that the child is breastfed? As we heard in Wednesday's workshop, in Muslim tradition, the mother had an obligation to breastfeed, and if she could not, the father had the obligation to hire someone to carry it out. You could not introduce that type of law in modern society. I am very reluctant to say just now that a baby has a right to be breastfed. 

Before I arrived at the Forum, I had not thought through it very carefully. What if the mother doesn't want to or has chosen not to breatfeed her child? Because if she does not breastfeed, and it's a legal right of the baby, you would have to punish the woman. You can't do that. So, why not say it like this: The mother has the right to breastfeed. Then the relationship is between the mother and the state. And it is the obligation of the state to see that there are no obstacles, but rather they must create an environment - economic and social - to support the mother's right to breastfeed. 

I believe that most women would take advantage of their right to breastfeed their children. .