Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

To suggest that ff babies are generally more content than breastfed babies?

931 replies

mrsb26 · 08/12/2015 20:16

...because they are fuller for longer?

Following on from an article I read recently regarding a study that suggested that of its recipients, the ff babies were generally deemed to be more calm, easy to settle to sleep etc than breastfed babies.

I know this is bound to be a taboo subject, but I must say, as a breastfeeding mother myself to a 4 month old dd, I have considered whether she'd be more satisfied on formula. She's not the easiest of babies and, to me, seems fussier and more demanding than her formula fed peers.

For example, she is really hard to settle to sleep for naps. She will sometimes feed to sleep, but not always (I know this is a debate on itself). I have never been to the shops or out for a walk for half an hour without her fussing (even if it's just for a little bit). She will sit on my knee or go to someone else for five minutes tops before fussing and starting to cry.

I'm not doubting the benefits of the quality of breastmilk, obviously. I guess I just feel like I'm filling up a tank that's emptying as quick as it's filling^^ and that she's never fully satisfied. I know breastmilk is digested quicker, but still.

She has no issues re: reflux, tongue tie or anything either.

Of course there are behavioural differences amongst all babies, but as a general rule, what is your opinion? Interested to hear from anyone who has perhaps breastfed one baby and formula fed another.

OP posts:
Furiosa · 08/12/2015 20:58

Or even thanks

HackerFucker22 · 08/12/2015 21:00

FF baby from 8 weeks onwards was a dream in every way. BF baby - 10 months - is a nightmare (doesn't sleep, doesn't self settle, only sleeps if she is in with me, is clingy, doesn't nap, won't take expressed milk in a bottle so I can't leave her for .ore than a few hours)

Jw35 · 08/12/2015 21:01

I ff my 11 month old, I bf for the first 3 weeks. She slept through from 8 weeks and is fairly predictable and 'easy' with regard to sleeping and eating. However she has good and bad days and when she was under 6 months would sometimes have bottles 2 hours apart or less (possibly because she didn't have a dummy).

I think in a way bf babies are more 'demanding' as in they will feed more often and wake more often (according to what I've heard from others) but since bf is natural I'm assuming the sleep through early formula feeders are probably missing out on a bit of extra comfort. Not that is matters. None of it does. Babies thrive well with loving parents, bf is a bonus, bf is always more ideal imo but that's not what you asked. Are bf babies more demanding? On average I expect so but its bound to differ

SarahSavesTheDay · 08/12/2015 21:02

Neither of mine had even a drop of formula and were deeply content

Iguessyourestuckwithme · 08/12/2015 21:02

I look after a breast fed 5 month old and he is so content (apart from when he's hungry - generally 3.5 hours between feeds) and happy/smiley. He self settles at nap and bedtime without a feed and we are very impressed.

Iguessyourestuckwithme · 08/12/2015 21:03

Oh and obviously mum can leave dc with me for 3.5 hour periods so can go to the shop/work etc

PeppasNanna · 08/12/2015 21:04

As a parent of 6dc. 4 ff from birth & 2 EBF, i would say YABU. Its the individual baby rgst determines if a baby is 'easier'. Dc4 was ff from birth was a nightmare!

FunnysInLaJardin · 08/12/2015 21:07

hmm, really don't know. DS's were both BF for about 4 weeks and then on to formula for the sake of my mental health.

DS1 was lovely and chilled and is still in his own world a lot of the time. He is 10.

DS2 was far fussier and more intense and now aged 5 he is far more plugged into the world around him.

Not sure whether I noticed any difference with them before or after BF. The one thing I did notice was that I stopped sliding into PND both times.

Oh and both have always slept really well

Cotto · 08/12/2015 21:09

Totally agree with Snossauge

BF is different to FF.
BF Babies are designed to feed little and often and at night when they also benefit from the most nutrient rich milk.

We are now expecting babies to be "good" Hmm and sleep through .

trilbydoll · 08/12/2015 21:12

Both mine were/are bf. The biggest difference is dd1 was always happy to sit in a pushchair watching the world go by whereas dd2 gets bored a lot quicker. I think that's the key to a content baby, how quickly they get bored!

HalfStar · 08/12/2015 21:12

I was convinced this was true until quite recently as both of mine were fussy EBF babies. In the last year or so though I have encountered quite a few really bloody content and easy breastfed babies who are/were just a dream for their parents. sigh

hiccupgirl · 08/12/2015 21:12

Based on my experience YABU.

My DS was FF and was and still is a very fussy eater who took ages to feed and ate hardly anything. He was also a terrible sleeper from birth and very fussy and moany from 4 months on. Most of my friends who BF had more content and better sleeping babies than him. And the same children are all more laid back and easy going than him at 5 and 6.

So I would say it's much more down to the baby's personality than anything else.

EnthusiasmDisturbed · 08/12/2015 21:12

ds was certainly far more content after a ff

but I didn't produce much milk, not enough for him

but ds was like no other baby

ElfontheShelfIsWATCHINGYOUTOO · 08/12/2015 21:14

mrs i have two and done both each way, one BF pure no formula, the other had mostly F.

They are both so different I couldnt possibly compare in terms of the child had I done both the same I think both would have reacted different.

YakTriangle · 08/12/2015 21:18

I had one baby who started sleeping through the night when only a few weeks old.
I had one baby who didn't sleep more than a few hours at a time until over a year old.
Both were formula fed. I think it depends on each child.

Teenagecrisisagain · 08/12/2015 21:21

All four of my dcs were bf. All completely different. Dc1 and 3 the most content. Dc2 an absolute nightmare and dc4 not too bad but fed frequently

I think it's more to do with the individual than a simple case of ff v bf

realitybitescake · 08/12/2015 21:23

My firstborn was constantly wanting to be fed. When I said about it to my doctor he said basically my baby just really liked being on there and was using my nipple like a dummy! Little monkey just liked it. It was very 'draining' though!

Cherryberry1 · 08/12/2015 21:24

Both mine and my younger sister's sons have been/are EBF and both have been quite relaxed, content babies.
Our older sister FF both of her daughters due to medical reasons and the older daughter was quite relaxed and content (like mine and my younger sister's sons) whereas her younger daughter hardly slept and seemed to cry most of the time. They were just two completely different babies with different needs. It's not as simple as "Because this baby is FF then this is why X happens".

Based on my experiences YABU, OP.

Original poster
mrsb26 · 08/12/2015 21:24

Sorry, can't find the actual article but NHS summarised it here - www.nhs.uk/news/2012/01January/Pages/breastfed-babies-cry-more.aspx

What to people have to be rude?! The OP has just asked for opinions as a mother with a young baby. Why can't people just state the facts and not resort to swearing?

Thank you. I was simply curious about others opinions on the matter. I'm not saying the article is accurate. Can anyone post anything on here these days without being sworn at?

OP posts:
abbsismyhero · 08/12/2015 21:25

i think its bull

HTH

HippyPottyMouth · 08/12/2015 21:27

My BF baby was chilled, happy and slept well.

maryann1975 · 08/12/2015 21:32

Yabu. I've got 3dc, all different, just like any other individuals. I've bf all of them, dc1, I used to wake her to be fed. She slept for two 6 hour stretches at 2 weeks old and 12 hours a night by 6 weeks. Very content, rarely cried, happy little thing. She still is. Dc2 fed every two hours for nearly the first year of life. Cried lots, unsettled and generally hard work. Dc 3, she was just a normal baby, fed regularly and woke probably once a night till around her first birthday, when she started sleeping through. Reasonably content with life though.
When I had dc2, at the local toddler group, there were 12 of us having dc within 3 months of each other. Out of all the babies, the one that was the least content and worst sleeper was the one who was not bf at all, straight on to ff. Where does that fit with your theory? I have also seen the mum who swapped to ff to help her baby sleep through the night only for the baby to keep waking up, giving her a more difficult night feeding as she had to bottle feed which was harder work than just latching baby on and going back to sleep.

It's just luck of the draw if you get a sleeper/non sleeper, content/non content baby IMO. Feeding method has very little to do with it.

noeffingidea · 08/12/2015 21:37

I had 3 babies. The first one was breastfed for 3 weeks then onto formula (not because he wouldn't settle). The other 2 were bottle fed from birth.
I found that all 3 of them settled well , slept through quite early and I was able to get them into a routine very quickly. That wasn't just due to the method of feeding though, I had plenty of tricks up my sleeve.
The main difference I found was that my breastfed baby needed cluster feeding especially in the evenings, and that just didn't happen with formula. They would drink their bottle in 10-20 minutes, and feeding would done for 3 hours or so. As I said though, I only breastfed for 3 weeks, and I expect the feeds would have become more spaced out over time if I had carried on.

CoffeeChocolateWine · 08/12/2015 21:37

Both my babies were definitely happier and more content on formula. I only breast fed my DS (now 7) for about 6 weeks as I went down with flu and dried up, but he was also a very hungry baby and my milk really wasn't satisfying him. He settled pretty much as soon as he went onto formula and I have to say that out of my group of mum friends, he was the only fomrula fed one but also the easiest and least fussy baby.

With my DD (now 3.5) I really wanted to breast feed for longer and I did...for 6 months. Those 6 months were a nightmare...she never settled, she didn't sleep, she cried continually and I was at my wits end. At six months I gave up breast feeding and started formula feeding. She was a different baby within 2 days. She was content, happy and she started sleeping well...I wish I hadn't kept going with it so long but I didn't realise that my milk was the problem as I seemed to be producing enough.

Anyway, maybe it's just me that isn't suited to breast feeding...I reckon if I had another child I'd try and breast feed for 6 weeks and then bottle (unless it's going well!)

Mmmmcake123 · 08/12/2015 21:40

I think personality makes a big difference. However, I also think that bf mums need to get as much sleep as possible to reenergise and fill up so that when baby feeds they are getting a decent amount of hind milk. If baby is overly comfort feeding without actually taking much milk it can become a vicious circle of tired mum and cranky baby.
Fresh01's post about stretching times between feeds is useful and anything that may distract baby while you rest.
My DD was very happy after her first feed in the morning as she always had a good feed but as the day went on the feeds were weaker so she struggled to settle overnight. I think I needed more sleep but couldn't switch off during daytime naps