Do you object to this Time magazine cover?

[Pandora II]

I've seen that article before - I've also seen many others that state the opposite (the one linked to below for example).

www.sepeap.org/archivos/pdf/10488.pdf

It is well known that breastfed children have much lower cases of gastrointestinal disorder, otitis media and many other childhood infections. The chance of contracting otitis media is doubled for FF babies for example.

Interesting article here on this:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2812877/

The experience I have with my daughter is obviously anecdotal and there will always be FF children who are never sick and BF children who get everything, but I know that so far my DD has had 2 days off nursery for a high fever, but has yet to get anything else - even a cold. Since my husband is immuno-compromised and gets every illness going, she is exposed to more pathogens than a lot of other children. I have a very strong immune-system and rarely get sick so I have often thought there may well be a link between the two in our case.

 

[kenny]

Yes the boy looks much older than 3.
It's a very in your face staged studio pic.
It's not a warm, loving, or affectionate portrayal of BFing.

But the boss' job is to sell magazines.
IMHO, this cover does that.
It stops your eye and, "Are you mom enough" is very provocative.
My Gosh! There is media doing articles on the cover and here we are in a long thread, with poll results that have stayed around 50 50.
Objectionable or not it will go down as a "successful" cover, like that Vanity Fair cover of a very nude and very pregnant Demi Moore.

I have not read the article but I assume it must be about what some "experts" feel results in healthier kids.
Is this or that "expert" always 100% correct? Of course not!
But raising kids well is really really important and I think parents should at least take into consideration the findings of research.
So in one sense I applaud Time for 'stooping' to such a cover for a good cause.

 

[jaysonsmom]

I'm also one of the modest ones who agree with extended nursing, but would not do it so publicly with everything hanging out, so this cover is disturbing. I nursed my kids to 15 months and 12 months, but I remember my son who was an early talker could ask for it by 9 months! So I disagree that if they are old enough to ask for it, theyare old enough to stop nursing.

 

[kennedy]

I never intended to do attachment parenting - I fell into it.

My DD wouldn't sleep in a cot at all and 3 weeks in I was so exhausted I fell asleep feeding her in bed one night - I got the first 5 hour stretch of sleep I had had in a month and so she moved in with us - she hasn't quite got round to moving herself out. She doesn't move at all at night (neither do my husband nor I) so I've never been kicked.

It's also awfully nice in the winter to get into a warm bed with a snuggly baby to cuddle up to.

I think the position the mother and child are in on the cover is not a good one for representing extended breast-feeding - a child snuggled on his mother's lap is far less in your face.

Between 3 and 4 years is the 'normal' age for weaning from the breast, not the incredibly short time most Western women breast-feed for. Yes my daughter can ask for milk in a full sentence (has done since she was 18 months) and she could probably spell it too and she's not yet 3 - does that mean that she should give up nursing earlier than a child like my brother who didn't speak in sentences till he was 4?

Extended breast-fed children all eat solids as well - although it's quite usual for breastmilk to make up the major part of the calories in the first 2 years of life. It has numerous benefits - above all for the immune system. My daughter is pretty much never ill. In 2010 we all contracted H1N1 - I had it 3 days before DD and she threw it off in 36 hours (confirmed H1N1) almost certainly because of the antibodies she was receiving form me through the milk.Interesting article here: http://kellymom.com/ages/older-infant/ebf-benefits/

DD is extremely confident, independent and not clingy - so she has great coping skills... she's one of the few children at her nursery who are never in tears in the morning when I drop her off.


One thing I have never understood is how many people really want a baby and even go through years of difficulty to have one - and as soon as it arrives they want it to sleep in a separate bed/room, want it to sleep as much as possible (hence CIO etc) and to be off the breast as soon as possible. IMO we start pressuring our children to behave like adults almost as soon as they are born.

Pandora, you may want to read this. You may do with it what you will, but I see it as evidence that the claims for breastfeeding are overstated. I'm not saying it's not good, not advocating not doing it if that's a mother's choice, but I think it is being snake-oiled...

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2006/03/tales_from_the_nursery.html

by Sydney Spiesel
Sydney Spiesel is a pediatrician in Woodbridge, Conn., and clinical professor of pediatrics at Yale University's School of Medicine.

This article states that 6 million infant lives are saved annually with increased breastfeeding across the globe and that it has the potential to prevent an additional 1.6 million deaths! How exactly does that add up to snake oil??

What this article seems to be saying is that there is a lot we still don't understand about the benefits of breastmilk due in large part to the difficulty of doing research on human infants. Will babies die from being formula fed the way a pig or horse might? No, apparently not. Should women be forced to breastfeed if they find it intolerable? Certainly not, but this article is not, to my mind, diminishing the importance of breastfeeding.

 

[HollyS]

I don't think there is any reason to run a cover - - on a venerable news magazine, not a tabloid - - that is MEANT to shock for the sake of shocking. They did NOT run it because they feel strongly about the issue, and believe there should be debate, pro and con. They ran it so people (like us) would talk about them.


Aside from TIME magazine's agenda . . . yes, a three year old is too old. Well, outside of a third world country where people are starving for lack of food, anyway. This is all about mommy, because the child would move on to big kid behavior if she would let him. And good mothers let their children grow up.

 

[Laila619]

I don't think there is any reason to run a cover - - on a venerable news magazine, not a tabloid - - that is MEANT to shock for the sake of shocking. They did NOT run it because they feel strongly about the issue, and believe there should be debate, pro and con. They ran it so people (like us) would talk about them.


Aside from TIME magazine's agenda . . . yes, a three year old is too old. Well, outside of a third world country where people are starving for lack of food, anyway. This is all about mommy, because the child would move on to big kid behavior if she would let him. And good mothers let their children grow up.

Not necessarily. Some toddlers can be hard to wean and they want their milk! They are persistent little buggers.

 

[kennedy]

Hate to break it to you Kenny, but while demonstrably good for a period of time, the benefits of breastfeeding appear to be overstated by the popular press and the La Leche League by quite a lot. And there seems to be a growing backlash against what women in certain circles (mainly affluent) are starting to see as a very oppressive environment created by "total motherhood". It has the same fervor as a religion in some respects, and as such, instantaneously sends up red flags with ME. This also ties in heavily with the current environment of attempts to slam women back into the 19th century, so there is a bunch more here than we can possibly address. But still... you have probably opened a serious can of worms by starting this thread.

I've just about finished "The Conflict - How Modern Motherhood Undermines the Status of Women." Not the best feminist work I've ever read - too short and too repetitive - but it makes some good points about the current societal model of the "good mother" and how the trope of total sacrifice for a helpless infant has actually done a better job of guilting women back into "their place" than anything men have attempted. It also punches back hard at the idea of "maternal instinct" and addresses that thing which must not be named - maternal ambivalence and downright regret at having had children.

I'm sure many of the attachment mothers in here might come frothing into this fray, but I see the whole thing as being not unlike the Komen situation - starting with the best intentions, the move to breastfeeding started as a backlash against the male-dominated medical profession treating women like children. However, also like Komen becoming something quite other than it started, the "breast is best" mantra has itself morphed into an oppressive guilt-inducing force in the other direction. Big lack of balance.

In any case, Time Magazine is NOT my trusted source for "public service announcements".

This is an opinion piece by Hannah Roisin, mother of three, and Slate blogger (or that's where I read her most). Take only this link! The Atlantic Online is being particularly wonky today and locking ME up at least. This link is a "print" option, without all the ad tracking crap...

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/print/2009/04/the-case-against-breast-feeding/7311/

Interesting post.

There are lots of different ways to look at this. The underlying assumption in this argument is that the workforce is necessarily the site of power and the domestic sphere the site of oppression. While this may have been true 50-100 years ago, is it still the case today? One could certainly turn this argument on its head and say that being a cog in the capitalist wheel is the true site of oppression (for both men and women) and the fact that (some) women have the choice to opt out is actually quite empowering. Or perhaps it isn't either-or.

What I find especially problematic is that women in the US who do go back to work (either by choice or by necessity) usually must do so by 3 months, still a somewhat fragile time in the breastfeeding relationship. For those women who would like to continue breastfeeding, they must become a slave to the pump, taking time out of their workday to hook themselves up. Women are simultaneously being told that "breast is best" (and I firmly believe it is!) while at the same time they are not being supported by the power structure to allow them to nurture that relationship. Talk about a schizophrenic, guilt-inducing double message!

Re: maternal instinct: As a graduate student in my early 20s, I believed wholeheartedly that gender was entirely a social construct. Now, as a mother, I can see that there is some room for biology. I actually do believe that there is such a thing as "maternal instinct" and that the maternal drive is different than the paternal drive (not better or worse, just different). Do I think that biology should be used to oppress women and take away their choices? Certainly not. Nor do I believe that there is only one definition of "maternal." But I don't think we can or should discount the biological drive to care for and, yes, breastfeed our infants and young children.

 

[dragonfly411]

I don't object to what the cover represents. I do object to extended breast feeding past 3-4 years of age. The idea of continuing past milk teeth is silly. Horses lose their last milk teeth when they are 7-10 years old. Their mothers kick them off the boob when they are 6-10 months of age. You don't see year old cats walking around still nursing, or 8 month old dogs doing it. All mammals have a stage where their parents teach them to eat properly and stop nursing. I believe there is an age for children too and they shouldn't get to say when. Horses would continue to nurse throughout life if their mothers let them. Cows do... b/c cows are stupid (no offense meant... they are stupid creatures though). I do believe breast feeding is beneficial, and believe in it, and I have no problem with public breast feeding. I think it is natural, and we should do what is natural to us.

 

[kennedy]

I don't think there is any reason to run a cover - - on a venerable news magazine, not a tabloid - - that is MEANT to shock for the sake of shocking. They did NOT run it because they feel strongly about the issue, and believe there should be debate, pro and con. They ran it so people (like us) would talk about them.


Aside from TIME magazine's agenda . . . yes, a three year old is too old. Well, outside of a third world country where people are starving for lack of food, anyway. This is all about mommy, because the child would move on to big kid behavior if she would let him. And good mothers let their children grow up.

I take offense to this very judgmental and shaming statement. So, any mother who nurses a toddler is selfish and not a "good mother?" Really? What about the fact that most major health organizations suggest breastfeeding until the age of 2 or beyond?

I find it both fascinating and disturbing that our culture is so obsessed with children becoming independent at ridiculously young ages! A 3 year old is a big kid!?!

 

[Pandora II]

I don't think there is any reason to run a cover - - on a venerable news magazine, not a tabloid - - that is MEANT to shock for the sake of shocking. They did NOT run it because they feel strongly about the issue, and believe there should be debate, pro and con. They ran it so people (like us) would talk about them.


Aside from TIME magazine's agenda . . . yes, a three year old is too old. Well, outside of a third world country where people are starving for lack of food, anyway. This is all about mommy, because the child would move on to big kid behavior if she would let him. And good mothers let their children grow up.

Not necessarily. Some toddlers can be hard to wean and they want their milk! They are persistent little buggers.

So if a child is too old for breast-milk in a developed country why do people insist on shoving another animals milk down them? There are many reasons why humans and especially human children shouldn't drink cow's milk - there are many benefits to them continuing to drink human milk.

I would be quite happy to wean - my daughter has other ideas. I tried to night-wean and after 3 weeks of screaming I gave up, tried again 6 months later and managed after a week of protests to get it down to bedtime, morning and once during the night. Then she got sick and wanted to nurse non-stop and we are back to square one.

The first thing she asks when I pick her up from nursery is if she can have milk when we get home - hardly me cajoling her into it.

I think 7 is really pushing it age wise, but pre-school I don't see any real issue with it. I prefer having a child who wants to nurse every now and then than a child with a pacifier stuck in their mouth all day, or a child who cannot be separated from their lovey. Much healthier IMO to be attached to your parents than to an inanimate object.

 

[mrs taylor]

I don't object to what the cover represents. I do object to extended breast feeding past 3-4 years of age. The idea of continuing past milk teeth is silly. Horses lose their last milk teeth when they are 7-10 years old. Their mothers kick them off the boob when they are 6-10 months of age. You don't see year old cats walking around still nursing, or 8 month old dogs doing it. All mammals have a stage where their parents teach them to eat properly and stop nursing. I believe there is an age for children too and they shouldn't get to say when. Horses would continue to nurse throughout life if their mothers let them. Cows do... b/c cows are stupid (no offense meant... they are stupid creatures though). I do believe breast feeding is beneficial, and believe in it, and I have no problem with public breast feeding. I think it is natural, and we should do what is natural to us.

ummmm, those mammals are basically born walking. human babies are naturally far more dependent and as a result nurse much longer as the brain needs more time to develop. Plus, if you control for how dogs and cats age in contrast to humans, they probably do nurse until the equivalent of a few years! they say the first year of a dog's life is equivalent to what, 11 years? and then 7 years after that? They probably are practicing extended breastfeeding!

 

[iLander]

I don't understand what ever happened to "mind your own business"?

I don't care if someone wants to breastfeed a kid until he's 16 and can drive a car. I don't care if a mother chooses never to breastfeed.

Who cares?

It's not my business and it's not my place to judge.

P.S. not directed toward any poster, just wondering why everyone is so het up.

 

[Pandora II]

Horses and cows are not exactly a good comparision, but comparisons with other primates are very interesting:

Studies of nonhuman primates offer a number of different means of estimating the natural time for human weaning. First, large-bodied primates wean their offspring some months after the young have quadrupled their birth weight. In modern humans, this weight milestone is passed at about two and a half to three years of age. Second, like many other mammals, primate offspring tend to be weaned when they have attained about one third of their adult weight; humans reach this level between four and seven years of age. Third, in all species studied so far, primates also wean their offspring at the time the first permanent molars erupt; this occurs at five and a half to six years in modern humans. Fourth, in chimpanzees and gorillas, breast-feeding usually lasts about six times the duration of gestation. On this basis, a human breast-feeding would be projected to continue for four and a half years.

Taken together, these and other projections suggest that somewhat more than two and a half years is the natural minimum age of weaning for humans and seven years the maximum age, well into childhood. The high end of this range, six to seven years, closely matches both the completion of human brain growth and the maturation of the child's immune system.

 

[ksinger]

I don't understand what ever happened to "mind your own business"?

I don't care if someone wants to breastfeed a kid until he's 16 and can drive a car. I don't care if a mother chooses never to breastfeed.

Who cares?

It's not my business and it's not my place to judge.

P.S. not directed toward any poster, just wondering why everyone is so het up.

Really? You tell me, that given all you know, you don't judge the visibly pregnant women who is having a mixed drink in a restaurant? Maybe not to the point of getting up and walking over and confronting her, but I bet you are not unaffected by the sight, nor, protests notwithstanding, do I believe would you be so nonchalant at the sight of a 16 year-old nursing in a restaurant. Most of us would be whipping out the speed-dial for DHS.

In any case, people are all het up, because underneath the surface this issue is not just about the activity of breastfeeding, it is about "GOOD MOTHERHOOD", the changing concepts of which have been central to culture and the structure of society and have been just dripping with moral baggage since humans could write about it.

 

[Ella]

Please be polite everyone if you want to continue this discussion.

 

[HollyS]

Karen, I have no idea at what point you became my idol, but here we are. How weird is this?

You, as always, have your head firmly attached to your shoulders; and can see the forest for the trees without being sidetracked by sentimentality or group-think. Never afraid to state your case, and always with the goods to back it up.

Wanna be besties?

 

[Meezermom]

I have absolutely no objection to breast feeding a baby, nor breast feeding a baby in public. I do, however feel that breast feeding a three year old is just plain wrong. In my opinion, when a child is able to drink from a zippy cup by her/himself, that's the time to wean from the breast feeding. What does he do when he's hungry - tell his mom it's time for lunch? The cover was offensive.

 

[Maria D]

What I find especially problematic is that women in the US who do go back to work (either by choice or by necessity) usually must do so by 3 months, still a somewhat fragile time in the breastfeeding relationship. For those women who would like to continue breastfeeding, they must become a slave to the pump, taking time out of their workday to hook themselves up. Women are simultaneously being told that "breast is best" (and I firmly believe it is!) while at the same time they are not being supported by the power structure to allow them to nurture that relationship. Talk about a schizophrenic, guilt-inducing double message!

Excellent points Kennedy. Very few mothers who choose to breastfeed will do it past two years. Instead of sensationalizing these few, why not focus on the majority of breastfeeding mothers who will have difficulty doing what everyone agrees is ideal, breastfeeding their infants? The picture doesn't shock me, we've seen this in the media before. And only in the media, I might add, I've never seen a woman breast feed an older child in public. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, just that it happens so infrequently most people are not going to stumble across it, so why all the angst?

Does anyone else find it irritating that they only chose attractive women for the pictures? I feel like the implication is not only are you not mom enough unless you are "super-attachment-parenting-mom," you've gotta be hot as well. How about a picture of a bleary-eyed, sleep-deprived, messy haired mom of an 18 week old who had to to back to work 5 weeks ago and has little to no support to feed her child as nature intended, hmm?

I breastfed my only daughter for just under 2 1/2 years. When she was done, she was done -- there was nothing I could have done to make her continue breastfeeding. Not that I wanted to, just making the point that while a mom can allow her child to continue breastfeeding, she can't force it. I didn't have any kind of breastfeeding plan and never in a million years did I think I would be someone who would breastfeed a walking, talking toddler. I'm a staunch feminist, but NOT crunchy granola in any way. But, the whole experience turned out to be very easy and natural for us, from nursing at the beginning to self-weaning at the end.

edited to add: and I never felt I was "super-mom" for doing this!

 

[partgypsy]

The only thing that offends me is that they are trying to sensationalize breastfeeding. (warning partgypsy on tirade) Hello, is this really a burning societal issue, where hordes of women are breastfeeding their children past of the age of 3? I think not. Only in America it seems if you only look at the media women fall into 2 groups, those who only use formula because they are "lazy" or bad moms, or women who breast feed their children until age 7
How about they do an article about how the real world problems of moms trying to continue breast feeding after a 6, 8 or 10 week leave time? That jobs do honor FMLA, but once a women returns to work, there is very little guidance or sensitivitiy on how workplaces accomodate a women pumping in order to continue breast feeding their infant? And I'm not talking a 3 year old, but 2-12 month olds That's a MUCH bigger burning social problem. But apparently not as sexy.

As far as breast milk not being that beneficial, they still don't know everything that breast milk does. A recent article talks about one of the biggest benefits is what the different insoluble sugars in breast milk do (both nourish beneficial bacteria, and flush out bad bacteria (read this month's Discover article). So no, it's a bigger concern that women be allowed to breast feed, rather than focus on the extreme outliers who breastfeed past our societal norm. Because really, it's pretty self-limiting!

 

[Laila619]

I'm just disappointed with Western attitudes towards breastfeeding. In other countries, no one would blink an eye at that cover. Yet in the U.S.A., moms are told they are 'gross' or 'inappropriate' if they heaven forbid nurse past 12 months. Few bfing moms are actually supported, encouraged, or praised.

 

[Pandora II]

It is amazing how much people judge.

I don't care how other people feed their children - FF. BF, whatever - and I don't think one choice or another makes you a good or bad mother.

The vast majority of parents are trying very, very hard to make a success of it.

Maybe I've been lucky, even though I still breastfeed in public I've never even been given an odd look.

Friends occasionally joke that I will be featured in future documentaries, but the only negative comment was from an American woman at a dinner party who told me that it was disgusting to feed a 2 year-old... the 50 year-old man opposite replied that the words digusting and breastfeeding didn't belong in the same sentence, he had been breast-fed till he was 4 and his sisters all breastfed till their children self-weaned around 3.5 - 4. She was really shocked that no-one in the room agreed with her point of view.

Perhaps we are just less sensitive about breasts in general in Europe.

 

[iLander]

I don't understand what ever happened to "mind your own business"?

I don't care if someone wants to breastfeed a kid until he's 16 and can drive a car. I don't care if a mother chooses never to breastfeed.

Who cares?

It's not my business and it's not my place to judge.

P.S. not directed toward any poster, just wondering why everyone is so het up.

Really? You tell me, that given all you know, you don't judge the visibly pregnant women who is having a mixed drink in a restaurant? Maybe not to the point of getting up and walking over and confronting her, but I bet you are not unaffected by the sight, nor, protests notwithstanding, do I believe would you be so nonchalant at the sight of a 16 year-old nursing in a restaurant. Most of us would be whipping out the speed-dial for DHS.

In any case, people are all het up, because underneath the surface this issue is not just about the activity of breastfeeding, it is about "GOOD MOTHERHOOD", the changing concepts of which have been central to culture and the structure of society and have been just dripping with moral baggage since humans could write about it.

Hmmm . . . thought this was about breastfeeding. I don't see the point of bringing up extraneous situations.

As for society's ideal of motherhood; I am secure in my assessment of myself as a good mother. I don't worry about what other people think.

This is what I tell my kids; Don't worry about what other people think about you. They don't do it for very long.

But this is what I get for poking my head into an emotional, multi-page thread. I won't make that mistake again.

 

[makemepretty]

I saw the Today show interview with her. She's still breastfeeding and her son is almost 4 now. She herself was breastfed until age 6.

I wonder at what age does it switch from nurturing to abuse?

Preschoolers and school age children do not NEED to be breastfed. Mom coming in during snack time?

Actually, I did pretty much all the "attachment" parenting things except breastfeeding. I do think anything to the extreme is harmful.

 

[Maria D]

I saw the Today show interview with her. She's still breastfeeding and her son is almost 4 now. She herself was breastfed until age 6.

I wonder at what age does it switch from nurturing to abuse?

Preschoolers and school age children do not NEED to be breastfed. Mom coming in during snack time?

Actually, I did pretty much all the "attachment" parenting things except breastfeeding. I do think anything to the extreme is harmful.

I'm confused, do you equate "breastfed" with "exclusively breastfed?" Are you saying that these kids wouldn't have the same kind of snack at school as their classmates, that their moms would have to come in to breastfeed them because they won't eat anything else? I find that hard to believe but I haven't read the article or watched the interview.

 

[kennedy]

I saw the Today show interview with her. She's still breastfeeding and her son is almost 4 now. She herself was breastfed until age 6.

I wonder at what age does it switch from nurturing to abuse?

Preschoolers and school age children do not NEED to be breastfed. Mom coming in during snack time?

Actually, I did pretty much all the "attachment" parenting things except breastfeeding. I do think anything to the extreme is harmful.

Exactly what kind of abuse do you mean? I feel like one of the reasons our culture has such a difficult time with the idea of extended breastfeeding is because breasts are seen as sexual objects first and foremost.

Extended breastfeeding is only seen as "extreme" in our society -- keep in mind that the average age of weaning worldwide is 4. That means most of us in North America are "extreme" in how YOUNG our babies are weaned.

For those of you who believe that children should be weaned before they can speak (or whatever arbitrary measure one might use to suggest a child is too old), where is the evidence to support that nursing a toddler is unhealthy? There is a lot of good scientific evidence to support the practice, but I've seen no evidence to the contrary? It's just not enough to say it's weird or gross or abusive.

 

[makemepretty]

I think there's a line between nursing a toddler and nursing a school aged child. There is no medical reason a child needs to nurse till 6 and at that age, I would consider it mental and physical abuse. I see that poll is 50/50 right now. That's mostly women, I know men would probably be even more outraged at that photo. There's a difference between feeding and flaunting...between nurturing and harming.

 

[HollyS]

I saw the Today show interview with her. She's still breastfeeding and her son is almost 4 now. She herself was breastfed until age 6.

I wonder at what age does it switch from nurturing to abuse?

Preschoolers and school age children do not NEED to be breastfed. Mom coming in during snack time?

Actually, I did pretty much all the "attachment" parenting things except breastfeeding. I do think anything to the extreme is harmful.

Exactly what kind of abuse do you mean? I feel like one of the reasons our culture has such a difficult time with the idea of extended breastfeeding is because breasts are seen as sexual objects first and foremost.

Extended breastfeeding is only seen as "extreme" in our society -- keep in mind that the average age of weaning worldwide is 4. That means most of us in North America are "extreme" in how YOUNG our babies are weaned.

For those of you who believe that children should be weaned before they can speak (or whatever arbitrary measure one might use to suggest a child is too old), where is the evidence to support that nursing a toddler is unhealthy? There is a lot of good scientific evidence to support the practice, but I've seen no evidence to the contrary? It's just not enough to say it's weird or gross or abusive.

Those of us who believe a child should be weaned before they are of school age DID NOT say it was physically unhealthy.

But, no matter what the few "attachment parenting" followers here have to say, the vast majority of the public - - everywhere - - will find the nursing of older children odd at best. At best. Why do you think this TIME article has gotten so much press? Because the practice of settling a 5yr old down for some noshing at your breast is . . . unthinkable and unrelateable for most people.

 

[Maria D]

But, no matter what the few "attachment parenting" followers here have to say, the vast majority of the public - - everywhere - - will find the nursing of older children odd at best. At best. Why do you think this TIME article has gotten so much press? Because the practice of settling a 5yr old down for some noshing at your breast is . . . unthinkable and unrelateable for most people.

It is certainly not something I can relate to because in my own limited experience, my child wanted nothing more to do with it long before that age. And she was what my friend's called The Queen Nurser because she was so much *more* into it than their kids! Long after their own babies had weaned because they were far too distracted by the world around them to cuddle up and nurse, my kid was content to nurse away. My point: I don't think you can just "settle a 5 year old down" to nurse. It has to be something that the child wants and the mother allows. Not only are most women not interested in going that long, neither are most children -- which is why it's so rare.

I guess if I thought for a minute that a child was still breast feeding because his/her parents were forcing the issue, I would feel that it was abusive too. But I don't believe that's what's happening with these outliers. (Not saying it never happens because of course there are abusive parents.) I did finally watch the video that makemepretty mentioned and the mom didn't say anything about having to go to her almost 4 year-old's snack time at pre-school to nurse him, so not sure where that remark came from. She did say that he was just about self-weaned and she was happy about that. She also said that what's right for her family wasn't necessarily right for everyone and that she didn't feel that there was a "right" way. So Kenny --- there you go, she's a People Vary proponent!

 

[kennedy]

I saw the Today show interview with her. She's still breastfeeding and her son is almost 4 now. She herself was breastfed until age 6.

I wonder at what age does it switch from nurturing to abuse?

Preschoolers and school age children do not NEED to be breastfed. Mom coming in during snack time?

Actually, I did pretty much all the "attachment" parenting things except breastfeeding. I do think anything to the extreme is harmful.

Exactly what kind of abuse do you mean? I feel like one of the reasons our culture has such a difficult time with the idea of extended breastfeeding is because breasts are seen as sexual objects first and foremost.

Extended breastfeeding is only seen as "extreme" in our society -- keep in mind that the average age of weaning worldwide is 4. That means most of us in North America are "extreme" in how YOUNG our babies are weaned.

For those of you who believe that children should be weaned before they can speak (or whatever arbitrary measure one might use to suggest a child is too old), where is the evidence to support that nursing a toddler is unhealthy? There is a lot of good scientific evidence to support the practice, but I've seen no evidence to the contrary? It's just not enough to say it's weird or gross or abusive.

Those of us who believe a child should be weaned before they are of school age DID NOT say it was physically unhealthy.

But, no matter what the few "attachment parenting" followers here have to say, the vast majority of the public - - everywhere - - will find the nursing of older children odd at best. At best. Why do you think this TIME article has gotten so much press? Because the practice of settling a 5yr old down for some noshing at your breast is . . . unthinkable and unrelateable for most people.

I never said anything about physical health either. You said it was selfish to nurse a 3 year old and someone else mentioned the word abuse -- I'm asking for some evidence to support the idea that it's physically or psychologically unhealthy to nurse a toddler. Initially you used a 3 year old in your example and now it's a 5 year old -- either way, why is it so harmful? Simply because it's unfamiliar?

Moreover, if the worldwide age of weaning is 4, then it is not true that the vast majority of the public EVERYWHERE will find it odd. True, the vast majority of people in the US might find it odd or distasteful, but how does that make it wrong? There was a time when the vast majority of people thought the world was flat -- that didn't make them right either.

 

[slg47]

someone asked why she was so perky...apparently she is only 26!