to have laughed when my fil told my dh

[biddysmama]

that he should stop me from breastfeeding now as dd is too old? (shes 2,ds is 1 and im pg)

do people do what their husbands tell them to? ive got a mind of my own thanks very much

oh crap

whats up kellykettle?!

hmmm, well IMO it sounds like very hard work and it is not necessary to feed your dd anymore. Better to stop it now, beofre the new baby arrives rather than suddenly find you can't manage to feed 3 children and have to stop her rather suddenly, which would be unkind IMO. Have you tried 'don't offer, don't refuse' or a bit of gentle distraction?

But is non of your FILs business.

Oh just my dodgy bolding and starring. I only meant statement to be bold. I can't get used to this only-two-*-needed thing...

Surely it is the OPs decision about whether it is too much hard work qwepoi?

Besides, with two breasts and 3 children the older child will probably have to wait at some point. The baby's needs will come first I imagine and I guess this is all part of the journey.

And generally, toddlers don't feed that often. The newborn will be the more time consuming to feed.

well said kellykettle!

Was lurking with interest and thought I'd add my penny's worth. Personally each to their own, I bf till 8 months and would have continued but DD self weaned. What I find interesting is I mentioned this thread to DH and he made a face at the thought of a 2 year old (and older) still bfing.

I asked why he made a face and he said that while he wouldn't use words like sick and perverted, he didn't think it was quite right to bf a 2 yr old. I said, what about a 1 yr old. That's fine, says DH. 18 months? I query. That's fine too. But somewhere between 18 months and 2 years, DH thinks it's wrong. I asked him why again. He couldn't give me a reason! We ended up having a long discussion about it and he said if I had continued to bf DD till she was 2 and older he might have had a problem with it, but could not explain why. He agrees that it's a societal viewpoint, and has no scientific evidence to back it up. He did say that after the age of 2/3 your memories become clearer and he for one would not like to have a memory of sucking on his mother's breast!

I just found it interesting that people have such narrow minded ideas because of social acceptance. FWIW, I would have happily continued bfing DD until 2 and wouldn't have a problem with anyone bfing beyond that.

Anyway, just an interesting slant on the matter. In response to OP, it's nowt to do with your FIL or indeed your DH! Your boobs, your choice.

SayCoolNowSayWhip see that wouldn't bother me, I think admiting somethign is hard for you (but also realizing it's just because you know itsn't the norm in society) shouldn't be frowned upon. What winds me up is when people say "you shouldn't do something because its perverse" or try and back it up with pseudoscience.

rofl at saycool I would hate to have a memory of my mothers nipple in my mouth (it never happened but still). I have a friend who does remember being bf (I think she was until age 5 though) and she says it is more of a feeling than a clear memory. She says its a nice feeling, like comfort but she doesn't remember the actual act itself.

I can understand your DHs comments. I remember discussing BF past 6 months with my DH and he said he assumed we'd just move to formula but we'd just about got over the tricky bit of bf and I didn't want to have to start getting to grips with mixing formula so we carried on.

I did have a wobble at about a year because DD was obviously not a baby anymore - she could walk and liked to do gymnastics on my knee when she fed and I was worried about what people would think but I was training to be a bfc by then and so decided to get over it for the sake of normalising bf.

A few months later I remember saying to DH "I think DD might be feeding for quite a while" and he asked how long that meant. I said "2" and he pulled a face, saying it was odd. But we got to 2yo one day at a time and so it wasn't weird afterall.

My 2yo nephew was never bf and so to imagine him being bf at now would be weird to me too.

It looks like I am on for tandem feeding in a few weeks which was something I thought I'd never do but...well, I'm learning that when it comes to parenting, never say never

hairfullofsnakes

SouthernFriedTofu i heart wanksock

WandersOffStrokingHerBeardTiggaxx

You'll need another paper to support your claim that there is little difference between breastmilk and formula past 4-6 months I'm afraid. This paper didn't attempt to do that and was discredited (BMJ faced a lot of criticism for publishing I recall

Interestingly it also noted explicitly that Formula was bad news, it's solid food that they believed made the difference - so the point about industry influence, if true, clearly backfired!

Btw the WHO advice for 4-6 months is not that different (for the West again), afaics the big thing that caused the hoo-ha with the BMJ study was the prospective linking of exclusive 4-6 Month BF to increased food allergies (both have risen in the last 15 years in the West).

I can well believe lots of people shouted it down, but there is a certain inevitability to all that. What I'd do is wait for the release of the linkage data to see what it says.

As to my view on EBF, based on the evidence I could see - IMO its pretty much Do What You Will, there isn't provably very much in it either way. Seems to me that EBF requires the mum to bond and stimulate, as it requires all that the time to be spent with the baby, whereas with ongoing FF its more optional - but if you do spend the same amount of time you'll probably get much the same results.

I agree that your FIL should have no input whatsoever on your feeding regime. But I disagree with people that say that your dh should have no input. I think that as a parenting decision both parents should have a say. (Obviously, I want your boobs back isn't a valid argument - although the parents relationship affects the child so maybe it could be a partial consideration)

Whatmeworry - thank you for that; you've really helped me to understand the current state of scientific thinking. It seems to me that it is very important to bf for 6 months and then beneficial but less important to carry on until 12 months when hopefully child will be eating good range of solid foods. B/f after 12 months is good if it suits your lifestyle but less about the medical benefits.

IHaveAFeatureWallAndILikeIt what if the dh were totally against bf full stop? Would he then deserve a say? I'm not sure, I think after a certain point when the health benefits were not as obvious maybe, but before hand I'd probably tell him to sod off!

whatmeworry infant feeding industry covers solids & formula. Jars of pureed food etc. Do you think formula companies stop at milk?

I guess thats where we're never going to agree - you're looking at medical benefits. I see the whole package.

I see still no one has challenged the antibody thing. Very positive medical benefit if you ask me but it's the nature of these things, people will place more emphasis on something that supports their view and less on things that don't.

That applies to all including me - not getting at you personally.

Southernfried - don't let amazingly stupid and ignorant remarks wind you up, they have no basis or bearing so why let them bother you? I laughed at that bf is perverse remark because it just showed up the person who said it to be incredibly silly and insecure

(Need to be careful with my words as some poor didums has reported some of my posts to the tower although you can imagine that Stronger words than silly as insecure can also be used!)

Mumwithdragobtattoo - for me, bf after twelve months IS still about the health benefits! There is an amazing benefit to bf after twelve months and I see this all the time with my dc.

I never really breastfed due to the health benefits to be honest. I still try to make healthy choices for my child of course, and in the same way as I'd choose water over squash for him, I choose human milk over animal milk. But breastfeeding just felt like the natural and normal way to feed my baby so that's what I did - I had no reason not to.

The comfort, convenience and his happiness tends to be what drives me to allow him to continue, rather than considering the statistical risks of stopping. When a certain course of action has more benefits than drawbacks it would be silly not to continue.

well put ritamorgan - I like the fact there are amazing health benefits but the main reason I still bf my 23mth old dd is because she makes it clear she wants to! I do wonder when she will want to stop...

cheeky old bastard your FIL isnt he!

ps the age world wide for self weaning is four years old so nothing unusual about what you are doing..just this weird freaky obsession we have in the west for having tiny babies be as self sufficient in every way inc emotionally as possible.

Very strange why some mothers are just so insistent that other mothers should give up bf at a certain age. SO insistent - it makes me wonder why they are so interested?

I often had (unwanted) advice on topping up with formula, and how to stop bf.

I see still no one has challenged the antibody thing. Very positive medical benefit if you ask me but it's the nature of these things, people will place more emphasis on something that supports their view and less on things that don't

Saw lots in the US report about No BF vs BF, and 3,4 vs 6 months BF but little in terms of 6 months+ and 12 months+ antibody benefits. There was one thing about cardiovascular disease risk getting worse. The others studies I looked at by and large showed EBF had a big impact in developing countries but less so in developed ones for the child. I saw studies showing the ovarian and breast cancer in the mother could be reduced, one showing it was harder to get the children to eat solids, and one saying they were more prone to putting on too much weight once they stopped EBF. Go figure.....

Speaking of emphasis, if you look at the WHO and most other research/national policy though, after 6 months the focus is elsewhere - solid foods, next steps in baby development etc. I think if BF benefits were still a major factor you'd hear a lot more about it (I found it interesting that there is so much verifiable publically available data up to 6 months and so little after).

There was one other thing I saw, which was that EBF mothers/children may be somewhat self selecting, ie those that had had no problems with babies in the first 6 months of BF would tend to carry on going, those that did - didn't.

4 years isn't an average for world wide weaning - it's the average age at which children self-wean if allowed to, and was arrived at from quite a small sample.