At what age does breastfeeding become weird?

[TransatlanticCityGirl]

My MIL made a comment today about a mother who breastfed her child until she was 5 years old - as in, 'can you believe it???? that's just not right!'

Which got me wondering, where do most people draw the line in terms of how old is too "weird"?

To me, it would become weird when either the Mother or child no longer wanted to continue BF and it was carried on anyway, whatever the age, but I've never known that happen. Certainly I can't 'make' my DD have a BF if she doesn't want one and that has been the case forever, since birth.

I find it very sad that as a society we see drinking milk from another species completely normal, but drinking human milk odd. No mammals are designed to drink milk at all past weaning, which is why as the infant gets older and stops nursing our milk dries up, but we choose to drink cows milk.

I also find it sad that our society has an obsession with making babies and children be 'independent'. Obviously we want them to be independent eventually, but why are we obsessed with making that journey start at birth? They must not be held all the time, they must learn to sleep on their own, to sleep all night, be sleep trained etc etc. Children naturally become independent. If we cuddle them and are there for them as much as they need, they all reach an age where they naturally no longer want us as much, why should it be any different for breastfeeding? ALL children eventually decide to wean themselves, when they are ready.

I had no idea I've been being weird for years.

I was pg at 19 with ds1, and had him when I was 20. I was very naive about breastfeeding. I just assumed because my mum had fed me I would feed my baby. I had no idea that some women have problems establishing breastfeeding and no idea there was a time limit on how long you breastfed them for.

So I fed him til he was nearly 2 and never worried about what anyone thought about that.

I'm currently feeding dc4, 18 months old. He'll feed until he doesn't want to.

Just as I assume if I had ff my dc i would still give them a bottle at bedtime if that's what they wanted for comfort and as part of their bedtime routine.

For me breastfeeding once a baby is weaned is a really easy way to deal with an ill child, a teething child, a tired child, an upset over a fall or a bump.

This method is what has worked for me over the past 15 years, during which I have probably spent 8 years breastfeeding. Me, my dc and my DP have all been happy with this and I'm struggling to see any way in which this is shocking. I have fed my dc the milk that my body is designed to make for them for as long as they have wanted it.

There is a big gap between what current UK norms say is 'weird' and what would be biologically 'weird'. So, most people go with the cultural norm because they don't see a need to continue/whatever other reasons they have. Some people decide to go with the biological norm and either wean their child later or allow their child to wean themselves because they can see value in later weaning; their reasons are as varied as the reasons women have for weaning at 1.

DD1 nursed until just before her 5th birthday, DD2 nurses once a day at 3, DD3 is ebf and 5mths. My main reason for allowing them to self wean is the very strong history of IBS, colitis and colon cancer in DP's family. Less incidence of these is one of the proven benefits of breast feeding and the more breast milk children get, the lower the incidence.

I think a lot of people were just responding to other questions/comments that came up. Threads on here tend to evolve that way.

But in answer to the OP- pre-DD2 I would have probably said past age 2-3 is getting into lentil-weavery territory. DD1 was only BF to 5 months and I very much associated BF with tiny babies.

Now that DD2 is here and still a very enthusiastic BFer at almost 2, I would have to say BFing my own child will only become 'weird' when she doesn't want it anymore. I never thought I would BF a 3yo, but if DD2 doesn't stop, I expect I will! And it won't seem weird because she is still the same child I BFed as a tiny baby. Same goes for if she carries on to age 4 or 5.

It is what it is, and I can understand why people who have not fed an older child would find it weird. But I think that's just due to lack of exposure to extended BF in society generally.

Noone suddenly decides to start BFing an older child. It happens because they are your baby, and if you don't have a reason to stop it just carries on and before you know it there they are, and you too have become a lentil-weaver

There are cases of children breastfeeding past 7 or 8 and with adult teeth. Although admittedly very unusual. And no, I didn't read that in the DM or similar sensationalised bollocks. The child was 9 and yes I did find it 'weird'.

My point is, that at some point it does become 'weird' (as well as physically impossible) and this varies between individuals.

It would be weird for my 4 years 2 month old to bf now as he self-weaned nearly a year ago. If he hadn't self-weaned it wouldn't be weird to be still bfing him now.

It's different for every Mum and child, what's so hard to understand about that?

Flightty, you're pg? Congratulations, that's just brilliant.

I had a glass of cows milk about half an hour ago. That's actually very weird in essence. But not considered weird as it's something the majority does and has done for a long time.

I bf dd until she self weaned at 3.4. This is utterly normal and a good thing imho but considered weird as it's a minority act and isn't often seen in public.

Hey ho.

DD is 2 years 3 months and still nursing.

I've waded through umpteen threads on here where FFers bang on about 'militant' BFers and how they're made to feel guilty for not BF, BF is more socially acceptable yada, yada.

Bullshit.

THIS thread shows that it is people like me - extended breastfeeders who are given the hardest time of all when it comes to infant feeding.

I would draw the line at about 2 years old I think. By then they should be developed enough to be able to eat a balanced diet so nutritionally don't need it anymore. They should be able to get themselves off to sleep from about 6 month's old so don't need BF for that anymore either (or bottles/dummies etc).What's left is BF for comfort and in my eyes there is a REAL danger of turning your child into a comfort eater later on in life if any discomforts/upsets are being 'treated' by any kind of food,be it BF,a chocolate biscuit or any other forms of food.

Showy thankyou

TheWashFairy, I don't want to C&P your entire post but where to start!

First of all, why and how should all babies be able to get themselves to sleep at 6 months old? Is that just a figure you plucked from the air or is there some basis behind it in fact?

Secondly I really do take issue with your closing statement:

'What's left is BF for comfort and in my eyes there is a REAL danger of turning your child into a comfort eater later on in life if any discomforts/upsets are being 'treated' by any kind of food,be it BF,a chocolate biscuit or any other forms of food.'

Aside from the nutritional and health benefits mentioned earlier, I would think the exact opposite: Breastfeeding is representative, it is a hugely significant demonstration of being there to meet your child's needs.

I would have thought that to deny it (and they will not suck if not hungry - just latch) when a child asks for it after an upset, or for comfort etc etc is FAR far more likely to lead to confort eating later in life.

We seek out what we were denied, because it becomes terrifying to consider it not being available as necessary.

5 year old that still bfs from time time to time= biologically normal, though unusual in Western societies.

5 year old that walks down the street with a dummy permanently plugged in= biologically not at all normal, though pretty common in our society.

To me the second situation is the weirder.

Other cultures would find our society's attitude towards breastfeeding very sad and strange indeed: www.drmomma.org/2009/07/breastfeeding-in-land-of-genghis-khan.html This is a beautiful article about how natual and healthy bfing is.

I still feed my 14 month old DS and see no end in sight yet. There seems to be a trend in our society to view tending to the needs of a baby and infant as a real inconvenience that needs to be done with as little interruption to the mother's (or bothparents) independence and pre-baby routine as possible, and many people are negative and judgemental and sneery about women who don't feel this way, most of all about breastfeeding. People seem to forget that if it works for you, it is the most wonderful, happy, bonding experience, and it feels so good to be able to make your child so content, so soothed, so full up with perfect nutrition. Taking time out to cuddle and breastfeed, whilst you stare into each others' eyes, chat, giggle, tickle and adore one another is such a gift between mother and child and it is such a welcome break amidst the usual bedlam of looking after a child, especially a toddler!

Human females evolved to breastfeed each child for at least 2 years and to hear people peddling nonsense like saying babies who have weaned don't need breastmilk, is not only sad but dangerous. It, or formula, should be every child's primary source of nutrition until they are a year old and breast milk goes on bestowing health benefits for at least another year. Seems like cavewoman were more intelligent about the subject than modern (wo)man!

We are the only species on earth that consume the milk of another creature and yet drinking cow's milk (or sheep or goat's, etc.) is seen as normal whilst BFing over 6months/1 yr/18 months/2yrs/delete according to level of narrow-mindedness is seen as 'weird'. Something very twisted about that.

And TangerinePuppet, I hear ya. Some FFers seem determined to take the very act of Bfing as some sort of implicit insult to them, calling women militant and so on. Even Bfing at this stage, I've had other women saying I'm doing it to make some sort of point, like I'm condemning FFers, or that I'm infantilising my, erm, infant, or even implying that I get some sort of sexual kick out of it. Erm, no.

My son likes boobs, needs boobs, gets boobs. It has fuck-all to do with anyone else and their decisions. I don't think about how other mothers feed their kids, why should anyone poke their nose in my business. If someone feels repulsed or guilty or jealous or whatever, then they need to deal with that themselves, not expect Bfers to stop just to assuage the issues or others.

And to illustrate:

my sister, breastfed for 10 months, given massive amounts of attention from my parents AND two further generations of adults that we lived with:

Socially sound, confident, independant, healthy(ish) weight.

Me: breastfed for ten days as my mother was told 'its's not fair to spend time with the baby when your older child needs your attention', left alone or with very distant great grandmother for bottle feeds, barely close to my mother at all for the first year.

Serious eating disorder that almost killed me, very unconfident, socially useless, still living close to parents.

Which child had what she needed? At the time?

Well my mother says all this, it's what she believes happened, what went wrong...I tend to agree to an extent.

Surely it only becomes weird once the child (at whatever age they are) wants to stop and the mother insists they carry on?

And I agree with SoftSheen I would hoik my judgey pants up at a 5 year old using a dummy regularly but not a 5 year old who still has a bit of bedtime boob

So, what age would you actually consider it weird, OxfordBags?

flighhty.Maybe 'should' was a strong word to use but I don't see any reason why a baby from 6 months of age couldn't be expected to be able to get themselves off to sleep unless they are 'taught' they need a drink/snack/dummy etc.to do so.
There are so many ways to meet your child's needs and ways to demonstrate that you are there to meet those needs. I just think (and that's just my opinion) that giving food as a 'comfort' item is not a very good idea.
You can only create a feeling of being denied something if it is expected.If you don't create the expectation you can also not create the feeling of it being denied.
You say a child won't suck if not hungry,but have you never just eaten a biscuit for the sake of it,not because you were hungry? Most of us will have found ourselves at some point eating a dessert at a restaurant just because we fancied it eventhough our bodies are telling us we are really full enough.
I just think creating the idea that 'food is there to make you feel better or help you out in a difficult/unpleasant situation' is a potential dangerous example to set.

GnocchiNineDoors Sun 13-May-12 11:44:58
And I agree with SoftSheen I would hoik my judgey pants up at a 5 year old using a dummy regularly but not a 5 year old who still has a bit of bedtime boob

why? surely if one is ok. so is the other, as they are both comfort and stopping using both can cause distress.....

Well I've had a look through the thread too and I think you have had a lot of adverse comments from breast feeders who stopped earlier than you. Its not full of formula feeders having a go at you. I mentioned earlier I had a lot of adverse comments and general stick when by DC was younger (for formula feeding), and a friend is getting a lot of adverse comments and raised eyebrows now for feeding at 1.

Its not a competition is it? To do both is equally wrong. There are extreme views and unpleasant people who both formula feed and breastfeed.

And I agree, it really isn't anyone else's business how you feed your child and how long you choose to do so.

I know what you are saying Washfairy. I really do but I think it's a bit more complicated than that.

Yes, to teach someone that food is the answer, well that's not a great idea but I'm not sure that BF as comfort does teach a child that.

Also the problem has to be there to start with; the comfort has to be needed before it is sought in whatever substance/behaviour the person chooses.

I just think that when something is denied, comfort in any form basically, that transposes into something that is sought after. In whatever form.

I thought there were particular health issues with using a dummy. I've never looked at in any great detail because my DCS didn't use one, but I thought it was the health reasons that were the reasons that parents encouraged DCs to stop using them.

I think dummy sucking looks unpleasant on a baby or child of any age, but I recognise that as being my issue, not the parents' of that baby or child.

I wouldn't give a stuff about a 5yo with a dummy...I know two kids who still had one at 7yo - both in the same class at school, one is my own son!

It didn't damage his teeth and he talks like a pro.

I've just looked it up. Dummy sucking can alter the shape of both the teeth and mouth if continued when permanent teeth erupt, as can thumb sucking (which DS did do), so that will give me something else to worry about.

Permanent teeth don't come in until they are about 5/6/7 anyway though?

Most kids will have stopped by then.

Personally over 3 to me is weird. Its the age where baby is now a child and just feels odd to me.