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"?

much longer than year 2

I mean Year 3 - the mean is about 2.5. As societies advance and calory intake increases, this age reduces.

On a completely unrelated note....whatme do you work for a formula company?

On a completely unrelated note....whatme do you work for a formula company?

No. Do you work for a BF PR website?

No.

I feel better for getting that in the open though...

The thing is that the people on here saying live and let live....well I can't see what's in it for them. They, by and large, aren't Bfing older children, and obviously don't stand to gain anything by others Bfing older children, (unless you count the reduced draw on NHS resources).

I feel they are generally just expressing the view that the world would be a better place if we didn't judge people and let them get on with activities that have not been proven to harm. Which seems reasonable to me.

But the people saying it shouldn't be done...well I really wonder what is in it for them. What is the advantage to them personally to demonstrate that Bfing beyond age X is weird and hence should be frowned upon?

So given I now know you don't work for or make money from formula, what exactly is your problem with persons unrelated to you BFing their older children?

They can do what they like, I don't give a monkeys.

But when they try and justify it as more natural, or better for the child etc etc that I feel the need to point out the error of their ways. Because that is both false and causes a lot of pain and anxiety for a lot of other mothers.

All anyone in the West needs to know is that it really doesn't matter how you feed your child, the outcomes are indistinguishable. All the research actually proves in any conclusive way is that parents who care for their children have - on average - better outcomes than those who don't.

And I reckon if new mothere were told that, rather than dogma, there would be a lot less worry and stres etc etc

DS (until he was 2ys 5 months)
DD (3!!! - she would still be feeding now if I let her, still asks aged 4.5!!!!!).

I could have written a good argument for doing it, but I wouldn't never have dared do it in public at that age. I think I started hiding around corners with the breastfeeding when they were about 18 months. Knew someone who still let fed they 6 year old. Before I had kids I watched an extended breastfeeding doc and thought it looked weird seeing 18 month olds breastfeeding. I've found it's a bit like a secret club when they get older. My DD (over 2) was going crazy for a BF when I had a new friend over. Was embarrassed but had no choice to 'confess' - they then admitted that her 3 year old still has a bit of a feed every once in a while.
One persons weird is another's normal I suppose. It didn't seem weird to me, but I knew it would to most other people, unless they had done it themselves.

hmmm well that's not exactly what the research says is it?

I don't recall anyone on this thread saying anyone should BF their child past toddlerhood. Just that mum/child combos that wanted to should be left in peace. Everyone has said BOTH the mum and child have to be happy.

So we aren't exactly campaigning to make mums feel bad for stopping when those conditions cease to be met.

"more natural" has never been a valid argument for anything. One day formula will be safer and more nutritional than BM, and from that day I, for one, will be asking mums to consider not BFing for the good of their children. But that day is not this day. Not by a long shot.

You may not be able to tell the difference between individual FF and BF children in the playground but you most definitely can tell the difference between average FF and BF children in the playground.

hmmm well that's not exactly what the research says is it?

Actually it is. But then I bothered to read a lot of it.

You may not be able to tell the difference between individual FF and BF children in the playground but you most definitely can tell the difference between average FF and BF children in the playground.

Crap.

So the nice guidelines and cochrane have it wrong do they?

Oh and the sids papers...

and the nhs are spending all this money because they have it to burn...

Plenty of papers have shown a statistically significant difference between large cohorts of BF and FF children. That means you can tell the difference between average BF and average FF children.

Ive read a lot of anti-vaccination info too...doesnt mean I am daft enough to believe it....

I don't know anyone who feels pain and anxiety about not bf their child into the toddler years. And I don't think any new mums are advised to do this, beyond the WHO guidelines, which aren't particularly told to new parents.

Far more common is mums who bf beyond the baby years to be made to feel uncomfortable by people who think it's wierd. Many of us have said we wouldn't feed in public beyond a certain age. And that's wrong that we should be made to feel like this. And no, it's not because we secretly know its wrong or anything like that. It's because most people do not like being stared at or whispered about, when we're caring for our children. Some of the comments I've read on other sites about the Time photograph made my blood boil and I had to stop reading them. But why should we made to feel this way?

i couldn't give a monkey's chuff what anyone does with their kids unless they are neglecting them, the only thing i would say, given how there is quite a few people in society who think its weird i wouldn't want to breast feed an older child in public, purely because i wouln't want my child sat their feeding while people around where thinking me and ds where weird. i wouldnt want him exposed to that.

Oooh and homeopathy for that matter...I could send you a paper a day for a year, all showing that homeopathy works...and it still wouldnt make it true.

What distinguishes them from one another? I bf my DS and I see no obvious difference between him and my friends children who were ff.

I think it's a lowest common denominator argument...some women can't BF, so no women should be supported to do so. Anyone Bfing is just rubbing it in etc.

Of course you could apply the same to anything and make buying nice clothes, toys, books, organic baby food socially unacceptable on the basis that it's just rubbing it in for mum's who can't afford it etc.

Imbetter you can tell the difference on average. IF you took a thousand BF children and a thousand FF children (who are the same in all other ways) you would find statistically significant differences in a whole bunch of things. However the differences are not something you could ever notice on a individual level.

entrophy don't answer if you don't want to, but do you work within the NCT.

I am not anti-NCT btw and was a member for some years so please don't worry that I will jump on you for it.

erm nope...I may have paid the NCT occasionally but they have never paid me!

I'm a physicist...hence my nickname.

I genuinely don't see that is it right to stop/bully people into stopping an activity that does no harm on the basis that other people are upset that they can't/didn't do it themselves.

We have a fucking weird situation with BF at the moment with half the people in denial that it makes a difference at all and the other half (or often the very same people) somehow unhappy that they couldn't do it themselves.

I only ask because everything you are saying, even the way you are wording it, reminds me of a lady I used to know (she was nice lol)

I genuinely don't see that is it right to stop/bully people into stopping an activity that does no harm on the basis that other people are upset that they can't/didn't do it themselves

You are right on this point, really right. But other people do have the right to question the effects of very long term breastfeeding in general, not in a nasty way, but in a situation of healthy debate and discussion, like they are here. It is not necessarily the case that they are angry because they cannot or did not breastfeed, nor is it always the case that they think women should stop at a specific age.

Please don't feel that you or longer term breast feeding mothers are being attacked. Society SHOULD be more accepting of breastfeeding in general and of longer term BF mothers as part of that group, but they aren't and therein lies the problem.

Part of the reason why I would probably not breastfeed a new child past say 2.5 years is that I wouldn't want my older dd to have to deal with the stigma attached. I have my own niggles opinions about separation anxiety etc, but they are simply my opinions and I don't have any studies to hand to back them up, only my own observations.

It would not be appropriate to advise any mother that she is wrong to carry on BF if both she and her dc are happy with it. It is a very personal and case specific choice as are most things where our children are concerned.

hmm tbh I missed all the BF aspect of my NCT classes...so I don't know what the party line is....I avoided the whole thing because I have a phobia of both knitted breasts and, as previously mentioned, any suggestion that things are better because they are "natural".

Anyway I think whatme has a point about the NHS campaign being a bit of a problem. It doesn't seem to be working in my part of the world and it does rather seem to cause more guilt than anything else....

All Norway had to do was make maternity better paid and ban all formula advertising....maybe we should try that

you know that lemon curd business outed me....at least one RL person on here recognised me entirely on the basis of my lemon related debating tactics!

Right I have totally had it with this thread...it is going nowhere and tbh all the sensible people already reached the consensus that live and let live works and that all children are different and individuals.