No tässä on white trashien kuningatar :D Järkyttävä naikkonen, järkyttävä tyttären nimi :O

Three charities -- Save the Children, Baby Milk Action and the National Childbirth Trust (NCT) -- have initiated a regulatory action against UK formula maker SMA Nutrition in connection with Katie ' Jordan' Price' s recent interview with OK! magazine, in which she discussed her preference for formula over breast milk when it comes to feeding daughter Princess Tiaamii.



Specifically, the charities allege, photographs of Katie and her husband Peter Andre giving Princess Tiaamii an SMA branded bottle of formula violate UK laws which prohibit the promotion of formula for children under 6-months of age. In the controversial interview, Katie said " I don' t want a baby drinking from me" and that the very thought of nursing Princess Tiaamii, who is 5-weeks-old, made her feel " really funny." On an adjacent page, SMA ran a full-sized advertisement for its ' follow-on' milk, which is legal as it is intended for older babies.



According to NCT chief executive Belinda Phipps -- whose organization aims to ban all formula advertising on grounds that it undermines the efforts of new moms who may want to breastfeed -- the comments combined with the photographs and corresponding advertisement all add up to a violation of the relevant law.



Money couldn' t buy this sort of publicity for formula milk.



Katie and SMA have no commercial endorsement deal in place, the formula-maker said in a statement, adding that SMA " fully supports that breastfeeding is best for babies."



Sources: Metro, Herald Sun



Note from Danielle, CBB Publisher:

I would like to refocus the comment conversation on what is the basic issue of this post - that there is a clear conflict of interest with Jordan being so anti-breastfeeding, proclaiming how wonderful this particular company' s product is, using that product with her daughter in the photo, AND then an ad on the opposite page for that product, which, coincidentally, is supposed to only be marketed for babies of a certain age. And if you want to get technical, we are reporting on the fact that there is an inquiry about the ethics of this, not taking a stance either way.



That said, all of you know the Celebrity Baby Blog position on breastfeeding (at least regular readers do) - that we want moms and moms-to-be to understand why breastfeeding is so amazing and important so they will hopefully decide to breastfeed (and continue to do so as long as they desire) BUT I think the problem is that this has turned into the old breast vs bottle debate and therefore a lot of readers are not really paying attention to what we think the issue is- the ethics of her promoting a product that is advertised on the facing page, whether or not she is an official spokesperson for the brand. And keep in mind that this may be getting more attention right now because we' re in the middle of World Breastfeeding Week/Month.



Please let' s take a step back and consider the issue using another product that isn' t as controversial, such as diapers. Imagine if Jordan gushed about her preference for Huggies diapers over any other brand of disposables or cloth diapers and said that she feels funny about putting cloth diapers on her daughter' s tush, then preached how wonderful Huggies diapers are because they are SO easy to use, then was shown putting a Huggies diaper on her daughter (with the brand name prominently featured), and then there was a full page advertisement for Huggies on the next page AND by the way, (in this scenario), disposable diaper advertisements are banned.



Does that change anything for you?



We will not publish any more comments about breast is best or saying that you or your husband or your kids were breastfed and they turned out fine. YES, formula is " good enough," as one commenter posted, but this post is about an ethics inquiry.





Posted on Aug 7, 07 at 03:44 PM in Breastfeeding, Legal issues, News | Link | Comments (124) | Email this post