I hate those milking machines, my daughter was prem and was fed through a tube. They allowed me to take home an archaic milking machine. Getting up in the middle of the night to clamp those horrid things to your nipples straight out of the chilly sterilizing solution was no fun at all.
I hated breastfeeding, my son was allergic to any other kind of milk, but I will tell you this right here right now, if breastfeeding him led to any sexual feeling I would have flung the wee sicht right across the room - ne'er the twain shall meet and all that:eek:
I hate those milking machines, my daughter was prem and was fed through a tube. They allowed me to take home an archaic milking machine. Getting up in the middle of the night to clamp those horrid things to your nipples straight out of the chilly sterilizing solution was no fun at all.
I used to be attached to the machine for half an hour, produce about 8mls of milk (if I was lucky!), then pour it down a tube into their noses. they had to take it in turn as there wasn't enough to go around.
I did all the expressing at home to keep my milk up business - it was bloody awful! I doubt if they ever got more than half a pint each in total of my milk, before I gave up on it!
I loved breast feeding and found it easy. I fed them all till they were 18 months, and carried on with the bedtime/night time feeds till they were two and a half.
I loved breast feeding and found it easy. I fed them all till they were 18 months, and carried on with the bedtime/night time feeds till they were two and a half.
But then with respect at that age they can progress onto normal foods. There was a load of stories on various TV and radio shows about this a few months ago and one of the opinions seemed to be that breast feeding well into the tot-years is done for satisfaction of the mother and provides no necessary benefit for the child at all.
How would you respond to the suggestion that breast feeding well into a child's toddler-hood, is done to placate the ego of the mother.
I loved breast feeding and found it easy. I fed them all till they were 18 months, and carried on with the bedtime/night time feeds till they were two and a half.
Thank you
One of my twins would actually fall asleep at my breast - as I say he would latch on, but couldn't suck, but it used to comfort him. That was comforting to both of us. Twin 2 seemed to know that the milk should be there, but it wasn't working , so he just got annoyed. He is the happier, calmer of the 2 now though
But then with respect at that age they can progress onto normal foods. There was a load of stories on various TV and radio shows about this a few months ago and one of the opinions seemed to be that breast feeding well into the tot-years is done for satisfaction of the mother and provides no necessary benefit for the child at all.
How would you respond to the suggestion that breast feeding well into a child's toddler-hood, is done to placate the ego of the mother.
Ego?
I fed them so long at night because it was easier to settle them.
It may not have benefited them nutritionally but it did emotionally, and certainly did them no harm.
But then with respect at that age they can progress onto normal foods. There was a load of stories on various TV and radio shows about this a few months ago and one of the opinions seemed to be that breast feeding well into the tot-years is done for satisfaction of the mother and provides no necessary benefit for the child at all.
How would you respond to the suggestion that breast feeding well into a child's toddler-hood, is done to placate the ego of the mother.
The WHO states that children should be breastfed until they are 2 to 2 and a half. I've seen kids that were 5 still drinking bottles. At least you can't put fizzy pop in a breast and ruin a child's teeth.
But then with respect at that age they can progress onto normal foods. There was a load of stories on various TV and radio shows about this a few months ago and one of the opinions seemed to be that breast feeding well into the tot-years is done for satisfaction of the mother and provides no necessary benefit for the child at all.
How would you respond to the suggestion that breast feeding well into a child's toddler-hood, is done to placate the ego of the mother.
I would say it is nonsense - the mother's milk is still better for baby than anything we can produce artificially. As long as the child is being weaned onto more permanent foods, then complimenting with breast milk can only be a good thing. (obviously I don't advocate breast feeding until they're in school or anything like that!:D)
The WHO states that children should be breastfed until they are 2 to 2 and a half.
Thank you - I was just about to post that. K_P your children did continue to get health benefits - as well as the wonderful emotional benefits - from BFing until that age.
Aaron - "normal foods"?? There is nothing more normal and natural than a mother's milk.
I fed them so long at night because it was easier to settle them.
It may not have benefited them nutritionally but it did emotionally, and certainly did them no harm.
You say it did them no harm and physically it didn't. But you did first of all stated that you "loved" breast feeding and doing so until the child is two and a half is unusual. Do you think that you were more doing it for your own benefit than for theirs?
A child being in nappies until they're 4 happens although one would hope they'd become potty trained before then. Keeping them in huggies won't do any physical harm but if a parent states that they "enjoy changing nappies" (for whatever reason) and then states that their child stayed in nappies until much later than normally expected, would not a fair question be whether or not that child was kept in their Huggies for more than necessary out of choice of the mother and not through any need and in some cases against the grain of necessary child development in that particular area.
The WHO states that children should be breastfed until they are 2 to 2 and a half. I've seen kids that were 5 still drinking bottles. At least you can't put fizzy pop in a breast and ruin a child's teeth.
The WHO can bog off,!! Had I breastfed my first son til he was 2 - 21/2 I think I would be actually tripping over my breasts and also a frazzled wreck, 10 months was fine enough for him and me, I fed him until I was 2 months pregnant with my 2nd child (I had lost another baby in between) that was long enough - I didn't have the stamina.:)
I loved breast feeding........but couldn't go past 3 months....my breasts were a failure and I had to supplement with the bottle.... offered the breast after 1 day on the bottle.....and was rejected
Whoever wrote this article is either trying to evoke a response or is seriously twisted.
Indisputably true.
Breast feeding is definitely the best way because it only occupies one hand so you can read a book with the other. Bottle feeding makes it a nightmare to turn the pages. As far as I am concerned, no other argument matters.
You say it did them no harm and physically it didn't. But you did first of all stated that you "loved" breast feeding and doing so until the child is two and a half is unusual. Do you think that you were more doing it for your own benefit than for theirs?
A child being in nappies until they're 4 happens although one would hope they'd become potty trained before then. Keeping them in huggies won't do any physical harm but if a parent states that they "enjoy changing nappies" (for whatever reason) and then states that their child stayed in nappies until much later than normally expected, would not a fair question be whether or not that child was kept in their Huggies for more than necessary out of choice of the mother and not through any need and in some cases against the grain of necessary child development in that particular area.
BFing until 2-3 years old doesn't go against the "grain of necessary child development". They continue to get nutritional and emotional benefits from breastfeeding.
Your nappy analogy is just nonsense. A child non toilet trained before the age of 4 would be seen as not having met developmental milestones, a child still breastfeeding at 2 or 3 years old is certainly not developmentally delayed.
Whatever motives KP had for breastfeeding is completely irrelevant - the fact remains her chidlren benefitted from it and that is the most important thing here. I enjoy reading to my son - so I do it every night - is that a problem? No because he benefits from it. I do plenty of things with my child because I enjoy them - my motives don't matter because he is gaining from it.
Just because you have some hang up with extended breastfeeding doesn't mean you have any right to questions KP's motives at all.
You say it did them no harm and physically it didn't. But you did first of all stated that you "loved" breast feeding and doing so until the child is two and a half is unusual. Do you think that you were more doing it for your own benefit than for theirs?
Of course I loved it - I was giving my children the best start in life. As a mum, that makes me happy. So if you mean, did doing the very best for my children benefit me, then yes, it did.
The WHO can bog off,!! Had I breastfed my first son til he was 2 - 21/2 I think I would be actually tripping over my breasts and also a frazzled wreck, 10 months was fine enough for him and me, I fed him until I was 2 months pregnant with my 2nd child (I had lost another baby in between) that was long enough - I didn't have the stamina.:)
It's just guideline and isn't actually aimed at 1st world countries. We have clean water and food, and we are protected from nefarious baby-milk companies that claim breastmilk is inferior to their milk, thus forcing women to pay for milk they can't afford and have their babies die or become malnourished due to diluting it wrongly. They are not forcing women to breastfeed 2 year olds. I breastfed for 14 months and stopped because he wanted to stop.
Breast feeding is definitely the best way because it only occupies one hand so you can read a book with the other. Bottle feeding makes it a nightmare to turn the pages. As far as I am concerned, no other argument matters.
I found it easier to drink a cup of tea whilst breastfeeding. I am also too goddamn lazy to bottlefeed!
The WHO can bog off,!! Had I breastfed my first son til he was 2 - 21/2 I think I would be actually tripping over my breasts and also a frazzled wreck, 10 months was fine enough for him and me, I fed him until I was 2 months pregnant with my 2nd child (I had lost another baby in between) that was long enough - I didn't have the stamina.:)
I think you hit the nail on the head there, weeschmoo, it's whatever suits you and your child. Sorry to hear you lost a baby - been there - not very nice.
I would have loved to have breastfed mine for a lot longer, but after realising it wasn't going to work, I felt very pressured by my midwives to continue to try. They should provide support to breastfeed, but they shouldn't be judgemental if it doesn't work out.
You say it did them no harm and physically it didn't. But you did first of all stated that you "loved" breast feeding and doing so until the child is two and a half is unusual. Do you think that you were more doing it for your own benefit than for theirs?
A child being in nappies until they're 4 happens although one would hope they'd become potty trained before then. Keeping them in huggies won't do any physical harm but if a parent states that they "enjoy changing nappies" (for whatever reason) and then states that their child stayed in nappies until much later than normally expected, would not a fair question be whether or not that child was kept in their Huggies for more than necessary out of choice of the mother and not through any need and in some cases against the grain of necessary child development in that particular area.
You are talking what you don't know. Firstly, with potty training, it depends on the child as it is one of the most traumatic things they can go through if it is done wrong. My son was in nappies until a couple of months before he turned 4. We left it late, and he never had any accidents or anything like some of his peers that were trained too early.
I too loved breastfeeding and one of the best things about a new baby coming this July is that I get to breastfeed again. My mother breastfed me for a long time--18 months, and I was fine. Went straight from breast to cup. Emotional development is important, and KP's kids may have needed that extra emotional support from nursing. Plus, I am sure they have beautiful smiles from not taking a bottle to bed. (The dentist could tell our son was breastfed, by looking at how straight and white his teeth are. I am NOT saying that bottle babies have grotty teeth!)
My son is 6 and still need to sleep with 4 teddies. Should I snatch them away because it "does nothing for his development?"
My son is 6 and still need to sleep with 4 teddies. Should I snatch them away because it "does nothing for his development?"
Hell no. My OH is 50 and has a sock monkey. I wouldn't dream of snatching it away - he has a very stressful and pressurised job; he needs that sock monkey.
I think you hit the nail on the head there, weeschmoo, it's whatever suits you and your child. Sorry to hear you lost a baby - been there - not very nice.
I would have loved to have breastfed mine for a lot longer, but after realising it wasn't going to work, I felt very pressured by my midwives to continue to try. They should provide support to breastfeed, but they shouldn't be judgemental if it doesn't work out.
I found it to be a natural necessity:) - breastfeeding, and Idid it for as long as I was capable. One of my sons has loads of allergies to this day despite all the breastfeeding it was supposed to have helped all the allegies, doesn't seem to have helped at all. I was advised to do it cause we (my husband and I) had asthma and eczema etc, but eventually had to feed him for 10 months due to the fact that my son was allergic to milk. I found it a bit very tiring - it sapped my energy. I loved the cuddles but found I could have that closeness other ways.:)
I used to be attached to the machine for half an hour, produce about 8mls of milk (if I was lucky!), then pour it down a tube into their noses. they had to take it in turn as there wasn't enough to go around.
I did all the expressing at home to keep my milk up business - it was bloody awful! I doubt if they ever got more than half a pint each in total of my milk, before I gave up on it!
Still, they're worth the hassle
I only ever produced enough milk to supplement her tube feeds , the midwives told me to look at a photo of her as the machine pumped away but it was still too clinical a process for me to produce enough milk and I got really disheartened when the milk dried up all together after a few weeks. I did try taking her out of the incubater when she was well enough but she wouldn't suck hard enough bless her.
I had such a different experience with child no 2 who wasn't prem, he was latched on and feeding within an hour of being born and I was producing more milk than a cow
Comments
I used to be attached to the machine for half an hour, produce about 8mls of milk (if I was lucky!), then pour it down a tube into their noses. they had to take it in turn as there wasn't enough to go around.
I did all the expressing at home to keep my milk up business - it was bloody awful! I doubt if they ever got more than half a pint each in total of my milk, before I gave up on it!
Still, they're worth the hassle
I loved breast feeding and found it easy. I fed them all till they were 18 months, and carried on with the bedtime/night time feeds till they were two and a half.
But then with respect at that age they can progress onto normal foods. There was a load of stories on various TV and radio shows about this a few months ago and one of the opinions seemed to be that breast feeding well into the tot-years is done for satisfaction of the mother and provides no necessary benefit for the child at all.
How would you respond to the suggestion that breast feeding well into a child's toddler-hood, is done to placate the ego of the mother.
Thank you
One of my twins would actually fall asleep at my breast - as I say he would latch on, but couldn't suck, but it used to comfort him. That was comforting to both of us. Twin 2 seemed to know that the milk should be there, but it wasn't working , so he just got annoyed. He is the happier, calmer of the 2 now though
Ego?
I fed them so long at night because it was easier to settle them.
It may not have benefited them nutritionally but it did emotionally, and certainly did them no harm.
The WHO states that children should be breastfed until they are 2 to 2 and a half. I've seen kids that were 5 still drinking bottles. At least you can't put fizzy pop in a breast and ruin a child's teeth.
I would say it is nonsense - the mother's milk is still better for baby than anything we can produce artificially. As long as the child is being weaned onto more permanent foods, then complimenting with breast milk can only be a good thing. (obviously I don't advocate breast feeding until they're in school or anything like that!:D)
Thank you - I was just about to post that. K_P your children did continue to get health benefits - as well as the wonderful emotional benefits - from BFing until that age.
Aaron - "normal foods"?? There is nothing more normal and natural than a mother's milk.
You say it did them no harm and physically it didn't. But you did first of all stated that you "loved" breast feeding and doing so until the child is two and a half is unusual. Do you think that you were more doing it for your own benefit than for theirs?
A child being in nappies until they're 4 happens although one would hope they'd become potty trained before then. Keeping them in huggies won't do any physical harm but if a parent states that they "enjoy changing nappies" (for whatever reason) and then states that their child stayed in nappies until much later than normally expected, would not a fair question be whether or not that child was kept in their Huggies for more than necessary out of choice of the mother and not through any need and in some cases against the grain of necessary child development in that particular area.
Which track is that from? I thought it sounded like a line from My Generation but it's not.
The WHO can bog off,!! Had I breastfed my first son til he was 2 - 21/2 I think I would be actually tripping over my breasts and also a frazzled wreck, 10 months was fine enough for him and me, I fed him until I was 2 months pregnant with my 2nd child (I had lost another baby in between) that was long enough - I didn't have the stamina.:)
Failed and rejected...... not a turn on.....:o
Indisputably true.
Breast feeding is definitely the best way because it only occupies one hand so you can read a book with the other. Bottle feeding makes it a nightmare to turn the pages. As far as I am concerned, no other argument matters.
BFing until 2-3 years old doesn't go against the "grain of necessary child development". They continue to get nutritional and emotional benefits from breastfeeding.
Your nappy analogy is just nonsense. A child non toilet trained before the age of 4 would be seen as not having met developmental milestones, a child still breastfeeding at 2 or 3 years old is certainly not developmentally delayed.
Whatever motives KP had for breastfeeding is completely irrelevant - the fact remains her chidlren benefitted from it and that is the most important thing here. I enjoy reading to my son - so I do it every night - is that a problem? No because he benefits from it. I do plenty of things with my child because I enjoy them - my motives don't matter because he is gaining from it.
Just because you have some hang up with extended breastfeeding doesn't mean you have any right to questions KP's motives at all.
(You've made me a bit cross - can you tell?)
P.S A big thank you to those giving me support.
It's just guideline and isn't actually aimed at 1st world countries. We have clean water and food, and we are protected from nefarious baby-milk companies that claim breastmilk is inferior to their milk, thus forcing women to pay for milk they can't afford and have their babies die or become malnourished due to diluting it wrongly. They are not forcing women to breastfeed 2 year olds. I breastfed for 14 months and stopped because he wanted to stop.
I found it easier to drink a cup of tea whilst breastfeeding. I am also too goddamn lazy to bottlefeed!
I think you hit the nail on the head there, weeschmoo, it's whatever suits you and your child. Sorry to hear you lost a baby - been there - not very nice.
I would have loved to have breastfed mine for a lot longer, but after realising it wasn't going to work, I felt very pressured by my midwives to continue to try. They should provide support to breastfeed, but they shouldn't be judgemental if it doesn't work out.
You are talking what you don't know. Firstly, with potty training, it depends on the child as it is one of the most traumatic things they can go through if it is done wrong. My son was in nappies until a couple of months before he turned 4. We left it late, and he never had any accidents or anything like some of his peers that were trained too early.
I too loved breastfeeding and one of the best things about a new baby coming this July is that I get to breastfeed again. My mother breastfed me for a long time--18 months, and I was fine. Went straight from breast to cup. Emotional development is important, and KP's kids may have needed that extra emotional support from nursing. Plus, I am sure they have beautiful smiles from not taking a bottle to bed. (The dentist could tell our son was breastfed, by looking at how straight and white his teeth are. I am NOT saying that bottle babies have grotty teeth!)
My son is 6 and still need to sleep with 4 teddies. Should I snatch them away because it "does nothing for his development?"
Hell no. My OH is 50 and has a sock monkey. I wouldn't dream of snatching it away - he has a very stressful and pressurised job; he needs that sock monkey.
I found it to be a natural necessity:) - breastfeeding, and Idid it for as long as I was capable. One of my sons has loads of allergies to this day despite all the breastfeeding it was supposed to have helped all the allegies, doesn't seem to have helped at all. I was advised to do it cause we (my husband and I) had asthma and eczema etc, but eventually had to feed him for 10 months due to the fact that my son was allergic to milk. I found it a bit very tiring - it sapped my energy. I loved the cuddles but found I could have that closeness other ways.:)
It's pumps losing a child - I have lost 3:(
I only ever produced enough milk to supplement her tube feeds , the midwives told me to look at a photo of her as the machine pumped away but it was still too clinical a process for me to produce enough milk and I got really disheartened when the milk dried up all together after a few weeks. I did try taking her out of the incubater when she was well enough but she wouldn't suck hard enough bless her.
I had such a different experience with child no 2 who wasn't prem, he was latched on and feeding within an hour of being born and I was producing more milk than a cow