When does extended breastfeeding become weird....

Person_one

poet123 wrote: »

Your posts are very judgemental and assumptive towards the adult choices a mother makes. Why confer upon them an angst? Do you speak from experience? Personal or familial? What issues are you speaking about when you say it is "fraught"?

As I said there may be short term gains but the evidence is not there to support the contention of long term benefits.

Debate is all very well but when that debate takes the form of breast is best, formula inferior, breastfeeding means you are a better mother and care more for your child etc, etc, it ceases to to be debate and becomes empty rhetoric. Which is what we have here.

It seems like you're too busy being upset at my posts to actually read them.

poet123

Person_one wrote: »

It seems like you're too busy being upset at my posts to actually read them.

Not at all, your message comes across loud and clear;) Nor am I upset,:D but you will be upsetting many mothers who are currently bottle feeding their babies with your statement (which GR picked up on) that those who do so don't want the best for their babies.

Indeed there was a thread from a new mum the other day which illustrates this point very well. I do hope she isn't reading this thread, or all the good work done by the compassionate mums on that thread will be undone.

skintchick

bylromarha wrote: »

Not true.

My boobs leaked during sex 90% of the time whether OH touched them or not. Was not pleasant for either of us. I had wet breast pads every day for 2 years when I fed my 2 and had 3 replacement sets of lilypadz as they stopped working on me after a month of use.

Leakage doesn't stop for everyone after the first few months as you claim.

Thank you, I've not come across anyone else who has experienced this so it's really useful and interesting to hear your experience.

I agree that lilypadz don;t really stop leaks though, I used to have to pour the milk out of them every time I fed DD! Sometimes that used to be into my cup of tea, if I was at a cafe with nowhere else to put it! :rotfl: They do give a very sleek line under tops, though, no peanut smuggling!

kafkathecat

Ok as I understand it person one just wishes that society had developed differently rather than blaming individual mothers for the choices that they made. In the 1950s and 60s it seems from talking to friends that medical professionals strongly discouraged breastfeeding. So do we blame the mothers for this? No. Now bottlefeeding is seen as some sort of equal choice when it really isn't but noone is supposed to say that because it might upset people who can't breastfeed for whatever reason. This then allows people who just don't want to get up in the night (and yes I have been told that one) to see their decision as valid. It isn't their fault because that is how the choice is presented by society, imho it is a societal problem not an individual one.

Person_one

poet123 wrote: »

Not at all, your message comes across loud and clear;) Nor am I upset,:D but you will be upsetting many mothers who are currently bottle feeding their babies with your statement (which GR picked up on) that those who do so don't want the best for their babies.

Indeed there was a thread from a new mum the other day which illustrates this point very well. I do hope she isn't reading this thread, or all the good work done by the compassionate mums on that thread will be undone.

I read that thread, she tried her best before moving onto formula, why on earth should she be upset by my comments when I'n saying that her situation is exactly the situation formula exists for?

poet123

Person_one wrote: »

I read that thread, she tried her best before moving onto formula, why on earth should she be upset by my comments when I'n saying that her situation is exactly the situation formula exists for?

Your implication is still that it is second best, and will bolster her well articulated fears that because of that her child will be disadvantaged. Your stance is similar to that of the meat eater versus the vegetarian, both are choices, neither is morally superior to the other.

POPPYOSCAR

kafkathecat wrote: »

Ok as I understand it person one just wishes that society had developed differently rather than blaming individual mothers for the choices that they made. In the 1950s and 60s it seems from talking to friends that medical professionals strongly discouraged breastfeeding. So do we blame the mothers for this? No. Now bottlefeeding is seen as some sort of equal choice when it really isn't but noone is supposed to say that because it might upset people who can't breastfeed for whatever reason. This then allows people who just don't want to get up in the night (and yes I have been told that one) to see their decision as valid. It isn't their fault because that is how the choice is presented by society, imho it is a societal problem not an individual one.

Yes, I wonder why that was?

Our mother bottlefed all 4 of us.

POPPYOSCAR

poet123 wrote: »

Your implication is still that it is second best, and will bolster her well articulated fears that because of that her child will be disadvantaged. Your stance is similar to that of the meat eater versus the vegetarian, both are choices, neither is morally superior to the other.

But do not the health professionals themselves say "breast is best"?
(Again not agreeing or disagreeing here).

poet123

kafkathecat wrote: »

Ok as I understand it person one just wishes that society had developed differently rather than blaming individual mothers for the choices that they made. In the 1950s and 60s it seems from talking to friends that medical professionals strongly discouraged breastfeeding. So do we blame the mothers for this? No. Now bottlefeeding is seen as some sort of equal choice when it really isn't but noone is supposed to say that because it might upset people who can't breastfeed for whatever reason. This then allows people who just don't want to get up in the night (and yes I have been told that one) to see their decision as valid. It isn't their fault because that is how the choice is presented by society, imho it is a societal problem not an individual one.

I would agree, except that same poster in her initial post advocates the removal of the ability to buy formula, wants it to be prescription only.

Not in her idealised world-her vision of Utopia;), but now, in the world we currently live in. How can that contribute to more happy mothers and babies?

pinkclouds

POPPYOSCAR wrote: »

I have now looked up the history of formula milk as I wondered just what was used before it was invented and just why it was invented. I found it very interesting reading.

Before formula milk was invented, you would either pay for a wet-nurse (if available) or you would attempt some sort of immediate weaning and/or dry-weaning (straight on to solids). If you couldn't engage a wet-nurse then your child would probably die. Actually, it would die.

Formula milk is a wonderful invention that has saved the lives of thousands. That it is thoroughly overused is a small price to pay. I am very happy that it exists. Very happy.

Can you imagine living in a world where formula milk didn't exist?? Can you picture a long line of tiny coffins? It's like trying to imagine a world without paracetamol or cars or telephones. It wasn't that long ago... and, yet, we all take it entirely for granted. All this angst - why? Do you care whether someone gets to hospital in a car or on a horse? Does it matter if someone finds pain relief from paracetamol or hypnosis? It is perfectly normal and natural to breastfeed to full term and it has happened for as long as humans have existed. And if a mom doesn't breastfeed for any of that time, then there is formula milk and dummies and so on. Why do we get so worked up about how a child is nourished and cared for so long as they are nourished and cared for? Would we really, truly prefer the alternative??

Perhaps we should all just remember we are extremely lucky to be able to debate whether a mom should breastfeed her own child for more than a few months. Not so long ago, there would have been nothing to talk about.