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 ?

IMO YANBU.

Purely because of the breast feeding and how easy it can be to mess up the feeding.

You would have to express so much milk, he would have to know how to store it safely and when and how to feed it - does the milk need warming for example.

Can't believe that some posters think that this is a good idea....

At 4 weeks old, both mine were glued to my boob. I don't wish to sound insulting but those people saying oh, express a bottle or give formula, like it's all so easy, have clearly never breastfed!

FWIW, I am currently working away from my normal place of work and had to miss bf my youngest early this morning - my boobs are killing me now. And he's 15 months old...

Letting your 4 week old stay apart from you overnight or for extended periods will probably ruin breastfeeding for you.

There is no reason why your XH cannot see his daughter during the day or could he not come and stay overnight at yours one night a week if he wants to share in the joys of looking after a newborn. He's being a prat.

Feeding does not seem to be op's concern though.

But if he's such a good father surely he knows that a BF baby can't be away from its mother for 48 hours?
Being a good parent includes putting the child ahead of yourself...he might want to keep the baby oernight but its not what is best for the baby, clearly. If he's so wonderful he should know that and not think of asking to keep the baby for 48 hours.

TBH though there is no way I would let my 4 week old go anywhere for anything approaching that long, bf or not, and my kids father wouldn't expect me to.

"fathers have rights too. And in my book, they are equal to mine as a mother"

Not when it's a breastfed baby.

i don't think there's any way feeding could not be an issue though.

4 week old typically feeds every 2 hours. So 48 hours = 24 feeds or thereabouts.

So you need to express 24 separate feed packagaes.

But then if the baby snuffles and whinges and you think it wanst feeding and then doesn't you will have wasted one of those, so OP will need to do extra packages for those types of things.

Plus how much does a BF baby even take in a feed at 4 weeks? it must vary from baby to baby i guess - how much to express?

Then you'll have to be pumping and dumping day and night to maintain supply - is anyone really going to set their alarm to go off during the night so they can pump? How much to pump each time?

The whole thing sounds really really impractical to me. The most practical and easy solution would be for the OP to sit in the car aoutside to feed when needed - as she suggested. But the OP was joking about that and it is clearly ridiculous.

I think it sounds like a hell of a thing.

Can't the dad just have baby for a few hours with maybe one expressed feed?

I don't think I'd have let my 4 week old out of my sight for more than hour or two.

The BF is the biggest issue in this. 4 weeks is still early days in bfing. At 4 weeks old my husband would phone me regularly from work during the day and we always laughed because I was always feeding. Young bf babies take a lot of feeding - it's not like ffing when you can have a 4hour routine in place.

I know this is thinking drastically, but no court would enforce a 4 week old bf baby to be apart from it's mother overnight.

My four week old baby was happy to take the odd bottle of formula, I expressed milk from the first week and their was never any issue of 'messing up the feeding'. I know some people have quite a delicate time with breastfeeding, but some don't, and lots of babies will happily have a little formula and zip back to the breast as soon as it is offered again before you can utter the phrase 'nipple confusion'....

Would it be too contraversial to suggest that you go too and stay over? With a four week old baby to share, it is not the time to be iffy or funny about all being together, and it would seem like the obvious compromise. The reality is, you are going to have to do a lot of compromising and juggling and civlised arranging.

Did you discuss this situation during the pregnancy?

this isn't about rights, it's about practicality, you shouldn't have to be expressing just to apease your ex, it is more important at this stage for your dd to be able to feed on demand.your older dc will appreciate time with their dad without a demanding new born.He is not thinking about his dd in this instance.what on earth can he do with her anyway, I personally would only let him have access at your home for now.

My Cousins DD stayed overnight with her Grandparents at 2 weeks old to give Mum and Dad a rest. My Cousins Wife expressed milk for the night feeds and was able to be there in the mornign to pick her up. It sure wasn't a problem and she was able to carry on breastfeeding.

The only problem here is the feeding issue not that the baby will be away from its Mother for a night.

My goodness me. I would have loved someone to take DD away from me for a night when she was 4 weeks old. I love and need my sleep.

At four weeks your baby is far too young to be taken away from his primary carer, especially as it could mess up the breastfeeding. If your ex wants to spend time, he could come over and sleep on the sofa, but you are under no obligation to stay in the car outside his house like a milk bank!
When my baby was that young, I was still very sensitive, hormonal and a bit tearful - the last thing on my mind was to be away from him!
Ofcourse dads have equal rights, but the newborn's rights to a stable routine, to his mum's breast if breastfeeding, trump mum's and dad's. So, in your baby's interest, she needs to stay at home.

Good grief, why should a tiny baby be penalised for the breakup of her parents' relationship? To be taken away from the comfort of suckling from the mother (and let's face it that's all they seem to take comfort from at that age) who has been her main caregiver upto now just so that the father is happy and has equal rights to the mother? The dad should come and stay overnight IMO, that will be best for all concerned. Or if he doesn't want to do that leave the overnight stays for much later after a gradual build-up of time with him.

Just say no.The baby is breast fed and it is not appropriate for her to be away from you except in an emergency.If he loved the baby he wouldnt even ask imho so thats another reason to say no.

I know of a dad who used to throw away the expressed milk given on his contact times as it was 'his choice when he had his baby what to feed her with!!!' Not saying that this is the case here but how far should equal rights go? Some men are not bothered about a baby being breastfed or are against it.

This is completely ridiculous - of COURSE the father should have access to his newborn, and if he wants 48 hours, let him have 48 hours.

but why, apart from to consult HIS convenience, does it need to be 48 consecutive hours? Why can't he see the baby for 4 x 6 hour slots?~

There's absolutely no good reason why he needs to have this baby for 48 hours straight and one very good and very massive reason why he shouldn't - this is a BREASTFED baby and 48 hours bottlefeeding at that age will have a severe impact on the baby and on the mother's supply.

Most bf experts do not recommend any expressing at all before 6 weeks and there are good reasons for that.

'fathers have rights too. And in my book, they are equal to mine as a mother.'

I agree but happen to think babies, on the whole, need the mother more (especially of breastfeeding) while a tiny baby. When they are older, totally agree both parents are equally important.

I think the baby's needs should come first here not the fathers.