to think a 4 wk old is too young to stay overnight

[Nowtheres4]

.. at xh's? i had my new dd a couple of weeks ago and xh thinsk that in 2 weeks time when he will be having the older children (12,7 and 3) he has to have dd too?
shes b/f and i have no problem with him having her all day and i cna give expressed milk in a bottle and meet for a feed break but over 48 hours is far too long ?

Let him be a constant in her life then. He is her father and always will be.

more - your husband got up in the night but you were there in the house - he didn't pack you off somewhere else. That's the difference.

As for the idea that someone can just swan off with a four week old b/f baby for 48 hours without it affecting b/f... good grief. The mind boggles.

Well yes but not 48 hours away from her mother when she's four weeks old and b/f, for heaven's sake!

Agree with Edam.

Ex husband and baby needs aside, I wouldn't be able to hand over my 4 week old to anyone overnight TBH. I'd be a panicky, blubbering, hormonal mess at just the thought of it!

It's not only just the baby though. I think it's cruel to seperate a mother and baby at that stage (unless she's alright with it obviously), at 4 weeks postpartum I was still a vulnerable, emotional mess - I would have sunk into deep depression if I was pressured into giving up my newborn for that length of time. I don't think men go through anything close to that.

YANBU - Far far too young to be apart from you unless absolutely unavoidable due to dire curcumstances. He is being completely unreasonable and not at all putting tlo's needs first. Actually i think it is unreasonable for quite some time yet.

Great minds TPP .

and there's a pretty darn good reason for those feelings, Phantom. The human race would have died out long ago if mothers were generally able to skip away merrily from their newborn babies for a whole 48 hours without a backward glance.

In the long run, both parents are important, but in those early days, biology rules.

indeed megapixels!

(Obviously Dads are important in the early days too, but not to the point where they can just take over for 48 hours with no contact with the mother at all.)

8 weeks - possibly yes (im not an expert on this!)
4 weeks - no

Why is it only the mother that has rights here. You honestly don't think the father has any rights. Do you really think he is not missing her, feeling devastated about missing out, that it is not breaking his heart not to be near her and see her every day? one night, he is asking for one night, not a full week, not a weekend, just one night.

No one is saying the Dad has no rights, but the Baby should come before his needs.

Okay so why does baby not have a right to see her father then?

Stupid idea.

Baby and mum need each other, esp a bf one.

Friends going through divorce have involved a child counsellor who doesn't believe the youngest should stay overnight at father's place until he's able to vocalise a choice!

She can she her Father as the OP has said, but not overnight. It's not in the best interest of the mother or the baby.

At 4 weeks it's more than a matter of expressing a couple of bottles and heading off though. They want feeding every couple of hours, your supply is still establising, you get engorged very easily, it's all a bit tricky. I spend half my time feeding when they're that age.

Obviously if you are in an unavoidable situation like in hospital then needs must and you do what you can.

But in the normal run of things this is nuts, it's just not practical while exclusively BF, even aside from the mummy/baby thing (which is a different issue).

OP never talked about her rights, did she? The baby's rights trump everyones. You can be a good dad during the day, surely! Expressing enough for that length of time? I was lucky to ever get enough for a few hours out in the evening. What if baby comes back not interested in bf any more? No court would make you do this, OP. YANBU

more no one is saying that the father has no rights that i can see. He can see his baby, just not exclusviely without the mother. This is about the babies needs first, mum and dad second. Baby needs mum phyiscally and emotionally, completely natrual and normal and ludicrous to try and say otherwise.

And even more so when breastfeeding. During the night babies of this age often bfeed for long periods and build up mummys supply. Speak from direct experience.

More i actually think you are being a tad unreasoable and over zealous.

SQ - you worded it so much better

and I think you are being slightly over dramatic.

I have a 12wo so the full-on feeding thing is still very fresh in my memory!

FWIW if the baby was not BF then I'm not sure what my stance would be - I'm pretty good at handing my babies over to other people so i can have a rest so i suppose it would depend on the relationships, trust, how the mother felt etc etc.

But exclusively BF baby away from mum for 48 hours at 4 weeks, when it's not an emergency, is just silly.

I don't think you can if breast feeding. I could never manage to express, and they wouldn't take bottles. The baby's needs come first.