to share with you all a revelation regarding 'feeding on demand'?

[EccentricaGallumbits]

I have ed my self with what I think may be an unusual and radical kind of idea.

I feed myself on demand!

When I am hungry I eat something!

When I am thirsty I have a drink!

Sometimes I need a bit of comfort in the form of choclate or cake and it makes me feel good.

Some days I am hungrier and thirtsier than others and then I eat and drink a bit more, more often.

Sometimes I fancy a snack.

Why on earth would anyone expect a baby to be any different

Who thought it would be a good idea to make babies feed at certain times of the day, even if they needed a little something at other times?

Why is the thought of babies acting like other humans so horrific?

"why is it out of order to say that you feel following a routine such as GF is not natural and therefor not the best thing for a young baby"

Why is it out of order to say that ignoring older children in preference to a newborn is not natural and therefore not the best thing for a young family?

Leaving a newborn to cry for a minute while you wipe a 4 year old's bottom isn't going to do them any lasting damage.

Or is it the case that judgements about what is and is not "natural" in terms of looking after babies tend to be personal prejudice dressed up as anthropology?

If it feels right to you to offer the boob at the first cry and never before that, then do it. But it's not cruel of me to offer earlier and less frequently. That's what feels right to me.

Entirely different to my experience of GF,mine were crying for food/attention pre GF not during it.If GF is done properly that simply doesn't happen.

I am not a GF mum, but I do agree a lot with MrsHeffley. Even children with severe disablities like autism sometimes have to be allowed to cry. Otherwise its completely and utterly unfair on the other children in the family. Having a crying baby while you are attending to an older child is tough.

I did feed my children more or less on demand, but I tried my best to look after both a seven year old and newborn. My children are now nearly 3 years old and ten. I am a Dr Sears fan and much to my horror my children devised their own routine that was not too far appart from GF. Admitally my children liked their night feeds.

I think the early days are really hard and you need to breastfeed on demand to establish a milk supply. I was blessed in having lovely inlaws who helped with the seven year old during the early weeks. However there is a world of difference between being flexible about breastfeeding times and being a human dummy.

Unfortunately, whilst a certain amount of snacking is a good thing, constant grazing in adults - and especially if the food choices are energy-rich - makes it very easy to become overweight. I don't think how adults eat is particularly comparable with feeding a baby.

"Human Dummy"

My DC didn't like them much and I completely understood that because human nipples were actually invented BEFORE dummies.

I think a lot of people are missing the point here and talking about extreme examples one way or another, feeding on demand should not mean constantly having a baby on your breast at the first sign of a grizzle and feeding on routine should not leave children screaming for food for hours.

There are some people that use breast as a comforter (I personally cannot agree with this) so they bascially sit there feeding their baby all day (and I mean ALL day)- I have a friend who did this who's 5 year old was neglected in a way, as everything revolved around the baby, the 5 year old did not even get a bedtime story anymore because the baby was never left to cry in any circumstances, the 5 year olds behaviour ended up out of control.

There are also the other extreme of people that won't sway from a routine meaning they cannot get on with normal things that do not fit in with the 3/4 hourly feeds and will not adapt to adhoc situations.

At the end of the day it is every mums choice and we all have a preference but certainly have no right to judge other peoples methods if it works for them!

I fed DS when (I thought he was) hungry and doing the same with DD. I try and respond to both of their cues as quickly as I can although if DD is screaming in the car I can't.

Same for naps - put them down when tired although I moved to a routine for DS when older as it seemed to work better. I'll do the same with DD too.

I don't think using the boob as a comforter means you feed all day - that would imply that the baby needed constant comfort. However I carry DD (same with DS) in a sling when newborns so they get constant comfort from me. DD doesn't actually feed that much for comfort - e.g. when she has her jabs, she wants cuddles, not nipples.

I try and feed myself on demand but as I am so accustomed to eating at certain times, I do get hungry at those times anyway. I suspect the same happens with babies in a routine. It's getting them into the routine that can be hard unless you let them do it themselves.

I found dummies really useful with both my DDs when they were tiny.

They each had a time of the day when they would get into a cycle of feeding frantically, sore tummy caused by feeding, sucking for comfort leading to more milk in full sore tummy, hysterical crying, more feeding.

Giving them a soother so they could suck without getting any milk and drop off to sleep was a godsend. Neither used a dummy once they got old enough to suck their thumb.

Before they had my nipples to suck on, they had their own thumbs, but once outside the womb they couldn't keep them in their mouths.

"DC didn't like them much and I completely understood that because human nipples were actually invented BEFORE dummies."

However human thumbs are surprisingly effective.

I agree with Lou that some people are taking extremes. Using the breast as comforter in moderation is fine, but is shit for the older child if the mother revolves around the baby 100% of the time. I think the five year old in Lou's post must have felt very unloved and it must have fueled sibling rivalary.

I think maybe some people are just better at multi tasking than others. I certainly didn't find BF easy in the early days/weeks, but managed it and managed to give my older DC plenty of attention and still walk the dogs etc too, whilst feeding on demand. You only have to look at all the women in developing and third world countries who have to return to work very quickly after the birth and have their babies in a sling, feeding on demand (every 15 minutes roughly usually) all day from one side to see it can be done while life carries on as normal.

As for 'human dummy'. Um, it's the other way round actually, dummies are 'artificial mummies'. I've always managed perfectly fine without one, simply because I never considered them as an option.

Midori you do talk rubbish.

As an ex teacher I'm queen of bloody multi tasking thanks but no bfing on demand didn't work for us at all.

Soooooooo not my bag.

The way I did it suited my babies,my family and me beautifully.

Who says we have to feed on demand and carry babies round in slings?

Did you read that article about how babies fed on demand have higher IQs than babies fed to a routine?

yet another thing for people to beat themselves/each other up over here

I wonder how they have determined it is feeding on demand and not any one of a hundred other factors.

I tried to feed dd on demand. Didn't work out because she didn't have the sense to demand often enough.

So then I decided I was bloody well going to feed her whether she liked it or not.

Horses for courses, isn't it?

I BF DS2 on demand and I mix-fed/FF DS1 on demand. This has worked for us because DS1 was constantly hungry and because DS2 will feed in a sling rather helpfully.

If DS2 wasn't so obliging I might be thinking about trying to get him into some sort of routine just to be able to manage with 2 children when I am on my own 3 nights a week. I do use a dummy as DS2 has a bad habit of trying to continue feeding well beyond the point when he stops being hungry - if I let him carry on he will flail and cry and come on and off. If I give him a dummy he will stop crying and usually go about 2 to 3 hours quite happily. If he wants to be fed earlier I will feed him, but I see no problem in trying to help him regulate himself a little.

I can't imagine very many people allow their babies to scream hysterically for food in order to impose a strict routine - I would think most people try to simply work with the baby's general feeding pattern.

I'd love to be able to feed myself on demand. Unfortunately I can't eat when I want, I'm a teacher.

I routine fed my babies. Now they are bigger I still don't feed them on demand, they have to wait for mealtimes.

on demand makes me fall asleep

I think its a matter of balance and finding a compromise between everyone's needs. If you have a family with more than one child there are times when the baby is just going to have to wait. It is not fair to always expect the older child's needs to take second place. Sad to say there are times when you have ignore a crying baby.

Wow - so "the baby is just going to have to wait" while you tend to older children? Surely a newborn always comes first - older children and indeed parents should be able to understand that.

I managed to feed on demand and do the whole attachment parenting things with both DDs - really not that difficult, in fact much easier and more natural than clockwatching all the time. And BFing doesn't need to take any longer than FFing! Are you saying your older children cannot manage for 15-20 minutes while you BF?

I fed on demand, it seemed like the easy option to me, I don't remember spending all my time breastfeeding and I saved myself all the stress of trying to distract till the next GF approved feeding time that I saw some friends put themselves and their babies through. Not having a routine seemed less restrictive to me, personally, rather than all that having to map everything round official nap times etc. That said, some people find routines really reassuring and that's fair enough too.

Dummy is short for dummy tit though isn't it? That's what my mum and granny always called a dummy? I never gave my son a dummy because I was happy for him to have the real thing, comfort is a legitimate need after all.

Maybe a four or five year old can wait 20 minutes but that is a big ask for a 18 month or two year old - especially if you were on your way out when the baby demanded a feed.

IMO feeding on demand is very difficult once there if you have a toddler or two and a baby and you are coping without family help of any sort. Feeding to a routine a la Gina ford (although she did not exist at the times) was what kept me sane. I had a VERY difficult toddler who HATED me feeding the baby and would not have coped with endless breasfeeds on demand.

And Libby Purves wrote that article in the Times. Enough said.

And do adults really feed themselves on demand. If so, how do you manage "family meal times" without some sort of routine.

Maybe a four or five year old can wait 20 minutes but that is a big ask for a 18 month or two year old - especially if you were on your way out when the baby demanded a feed.

Would you seriously go out if your baby was hungry and crying and just ignore the cries? I feel stressed just thinking about that...

BTW my DD1 was 19 months when DD2 was born - she survived and thrived through me demand-feeding DD2.

No, I would not go out if my baby had been screaming I would however have planned my outings around feeding times, ie had some sort of routine so the situation would not have arisen. That was my point.

So your babies never cried for food when they were not supposed to?

"Wow - so "the baby is just going to have to wait" while you tend to older children? Surely a newborn always comes first - older children and indeed parents should be able to understand that. "

Sometimes the older child waits and occassionally the baby waits. Occassionally the mother needs comes first and the children wait. For example if an older child has hurt themselves or is in danger then its fair to let the newborn cry for a couple of minutes. It wont kill them, however it might kill the older child to completely neglet them just because the newborn is squealing. Especially if the older child happens to be an active toddler.

When you have more than one child, you have to make compromises. The newborn may well have to wait five minutes while you clean up a bloody knee. The older child wont like having burnt dinner because you did not take the food off the strove.

Most families find their own rhythm ie the baby feeds at 4.30 and plays happily with the older child while mum makes tea. Or Mum feeds the baby at 2.30 before the school run. There is no rigidty, just a family finding a pattern to suit themselves.

Not read it all. Have just remembered, when DD was a newborn, we had to wake her up every 3 hours to feed her (during the day) if we hadn't fed on a schedule she would have happily slept all day (and I guess been awake all night). She was breast fed and it took her about 45 mins to take a feed. Mind you, she later went on a hunger strike and then ended up colicky for a few weeks.

Not sure what I'm saying here actually!!