To think a judge should not be able to stop a mother from breast feeding?

[HolidayArmadillo]

m.wfmz.com/Judge-orders-Northampton-Co-mother-to-stop-breastfeeding/-/15946050/22880612/-/1yrm3wz/-/index.html

If this is true I think this judge has been wholly out of order. What about this child's rights? And any father worth their salt would not demand this.

Yes Elf, you're the only woman on this parenting website with over a million members that has ever fed a baby past a year.

rolls eyes

When it comes to parents ending up in court IME there is no clear thing about it,

Some parents will go to court when its not needed out of spite,
Some will do so to use legally sanctioned abuse methods
Some will do it to have things on there terms
Some because they are drama Lamas
Some because they are dishonest
Some because they disagree with the other parent
Some to impress a new partner
Some to try and make a point
Some because the ex has a new partner
Some to protect a child
Some for many other reasons

Ime very few do when there are no other options and it really does not mean they have been arguing for ages and it often does not mean the entire situation is based on long term bad feeling or obstructiveness.

The most frequent situations I come across is one parent offering a reasonable amount of contact but requesting regular or set times and the other parent saying nope I want to come when ever I feel like it or different times just because you are not going to tell me what to do.

You're assuming he doesn't work, what if he has to work during the day

Then he is going to have problems due to the 2 consecutive days he has obtained

Strumpetron
"At a recent custody hearing, a judge ruled 10-month-old Jasmine must stay with her father overnight for two days"

We can only assume the father was NOT working else why would he want the child for two days? Even if he was, he'd have to do what everyone else does - take a day off! Still not an infringement of his human rights.

For some reason I thought she meant weekdays, ignore me.

Elf I really stated as single parent who ebf and worked and my dd spent time with her father and refused a bottle that I do understand that at 10 months it's not unreasonable or impossible to spend 48 hours away from mum.

Already not really.

You're assuming he doesn't work, what if he has to work during the day

Then he is going to have problems due to the 2 consecutive days he has obtained.
_

Or perhaps he'll just use a childminder like 100s of 1000s of single mothers do all over the world without batting an eyelid........

A relationship with their father is more beneficial to a 10m old child than BF

"A relationship with their father is more beneficial to a 10m old child than BF"

Depends on the father and depends on the health needs of the child.

I always feel a bit about sweeping statements like that.

I think the Father is instinsicly selfish if he is happy to disrupt his baby's BF yes.

Its not something my Dh would insist on at all.

So yes, he can fit round them for more but shorter periods.

saucy

I mean't the judge not being able to know unless he educated himself which he clearly hasnt.

intitgrand the father isn't being denied a relationship with the father

Yanbu

The father doesn't need to have overnight visitation and shouldn't if it is likely to cause distress to a baby due to change of routine/lack of breastfeeding comfort etc. The baby's needs and comfort should be prioritised.

He should just have a few day time visits a week. Then the baby can have food and water, no need for formula.

I think people saying the mother can express are ignoring the fact that babies and toddler can have an emotional attachment to breastfeeding, just as they can have bond to a teddy or dummy. This attachment can be transferred to another object/toy but to do so would require the mother to make an active choice to transition.

RE: work

Not everyone works Monday to Friday 9 to 5

ElfontheShelfIsWATCHINGYOUTOO
"I think the Father is instinsicly selfish if he is happy to disrupt his baby's BF yes.

Its not something my Dh would insist on at all."

Again we know nothing of the situation surrounding this case.

I thought the recommendation for parental contacts with babies was, 'little but often' ?

I hope the mother and father reach a compromise for their baby's sake. After all it is the baby who will reap the results.

I assume its a US judgment.

It sounds like the judge knew little about BF.

I know many people can express - but I never got that much out what ever pump was used and what little I could get out took hours and hours - never great with young DC. I was always assured the babies were getting more by everyone MW, lactation consultant, HV that we came across.

One of my DC wouldn't take a bottle at all - other two did - would scream and refuse and scream more - still bloody stubborn tike.

However it could all be fine depends on baby and mother's supply and ability to pump. It's not ideal - would have expect them to wait few more months when bf would be dropping even more as more food is consumed and night feeding was massively reduced and in mean time have more day time contact.

Or perhaps he'll just use a childminder like 100s of 1000s of single mothers do all over the world without batting an eyelid

If I felt it was so important to go to court for contact and only saw my child for 2 days a week you can sure as shit bet I would not be working those two days just like 100s of 1000s of nrp's who want contact with their kids do.

If this was just about the nutrition of the child and there weren't any other factors, then why would the mother not just express and give to the father for his two days, knowing that it's important for the child to spend quality time with her father as much as it is having breastmilk?

There's clearly a lot more going on here and IMO it doesn't seem like it's the father who's necessarily doing the controlling.

The media have just picked up on one thing here.

"If this was just about the nutrition of the child and there weren't any other factors, then why would the mother not just express and give to the father for his two days, knowing that it's important for the child to spend quality time with her father as much as it is having breastmilk?"

gemma18 How much "quality time" does a baby get with it's father between 7pm-7am?

Its not it's. Blurrdy iPhone makes us all appear like we have no grammatical technique.

Bottle feeding is primarily a method of getting food into a baby.

Breastfeeding is vastly more than this, and for people who continue with it past the first few weeks it tends to become part of how you parent a baby and small child - because you do it to comfort a child, to still them, to get them to sleep, to reconnect with them when you've been apart, all things you don't really do with bottle-feeding.

My personal feeling is that at 10 months breastfeeding is still for some people an absolutely intrinsic and subtle part of the fabric of the relationship between mother and child. It's a really significant part of how they relate to each other.

I feel very strongly that it's uncaring and un-childcentred to disrupt this aspect of a relationship between a mother and a child unless it's absolutely necessary for reasons of health. Not having a baby of this age to stay overnight is absolutely NOT a barrier to bonding for the father.

It really isn't about the milk.

It's about the breastfeeding and the part it plays in the life of the mother and baby.

My 13 month old stopped breastfeeding after only 2 days of separation from me (I went into hospital). I know it happens to other mothers and babies. It's why so many women choose to have little physical contact with their babies while they're trying to wean them from the breast - because they know that putting space between themselves and their baby helps to sever or weaken the bond of the breastfeeding relationship.

I assumed that the '2 consecutive nights' meant that there was some travelling involved.