Breastfeeding beyond 12 months, debate but not a fight!

[Demented]

I am truely interested to hear different opinions about this after the matter was raised on another thread.

I am still feeding my DS2 who is 14 months and have no fixed time to finish so obviously you can see which side of the fence I am on but I am genuinely interested in hearing why some feel it is not appropriate after 12 months. BTW I still feed in public and don't see that ending until DS2 is down to one feed a day.

I think this is a fascinating, and seems to have far more to do with our cultural expectations and definitions of ourselves than about nutrition. I think there was something in the paper this week about research into medieaval Britain where they had discovered that children were b/f until at least 4. This protected them from poor nutrition and bad water. I guess the same applies now in areas of Africa where b/f is the norm until about 4 or 5. A well cared for child here and now is hardly at risk from these factors, so 'need' doesn't have the same role, but I still felt, when breastfeeding ds at 18 mths morning and night, that I needed some 'scientific' nutritional/antibodies reason to quote! In fact, after a very bad transition from breast to daytime bottle when I returned to work, I was adamant that I would cause ds no further stress in weaning, and would leave the timing to him. In the end, he broke the habit without seeming to notice, at about 19 months. And that is my definition and belief in children growing up, learning and developing in their own time...not matching their development to shoe size! Good luck, Demented!

Demented -

Ds just turned 4 last month and still insists on a feed last thing at night and first thing in the morning. I am sure that will horrify some of you! Apparently it can take around 7 years for one's immune system to fully operate so indeed benefits will still be felt by a child after babyhood. However in our society generally it is not necessary at this age. My ds just does it for comfort and I would like to stop but don't know how!

Still feeding dd a lot at 16 months (periods not yet returned) and fed ds right the way through my pregnancy with her. I wrote masses of stuff on this on another thread a year or so ago but not sure if its still around, probably archived now.

I think around 18 months probably a child should understand that to do it in public isn't acceptable but what you do behind your own doors is your own business! I would say b/feeding for 2 years is good as it helps going through all the colds and teething etc.

message withdrawn

Still feeding ds (1 in 9 days!) with one feed "in public" and two morning and evening. He has eight teeth and is not that far off walking, so is beginning to "look" like a toddler.
If I was planing to breastfeed ds till he was at school I could see the concern, however at (virtually) one year old, he is still a baby.

He wears nappies, sits in a high chair and sleeps in a cot. I am not weaning him off any of these in the near future either. He requires milk as part of his diet and breastmilk is the best there is for him.

A friend's baby started to walk at 7 months, is that when breastfeeding should stop? Is walking the acceptable cut off point?

DS walked at 9 months, DD at 10 months. Presumably, RobinW, I should have flouted the World Health Guidelines and started giving them Fake Human Milk, or better yet, Bovine milk since they were "running around". Have you seen the size of a cow's brain? In proportion to its body it'd be like you or me having a brain the size of a pea. That's what cow milk grows -- animals with brains the size of peas. No THANKS.

Funny enough, I was thinking last night that maybe cosleeping would promote a close bond between me & DD, in a way that would help smooth adolescence. Sounds very nice to me.

Z (Proud Breastfeeding Nazi)

I think the walking/talking thing is a bit of a red herring. After all, we don't all expect 1yr olds to give up their dummies or their comfort objects (although some of you may, I don't know!). As I've said below, I can see that for DS, BF has been a comfort thing as well as a source of nourishment, and past 1 year the balance probably tips much more to comfort. Weaning (where it doesn't happen spontaneously) is about putting mum's desires first, continuing to BF (and "child-led" weaning) puts the child's desires first. To answer robinw, BF a child who is "running about" is definitely about the child's needs - if they didn't want to do it, they would stop! You can't force a child to BF.

Florenceuk - "You can't force a child to BF. "
In a nutshell - thank you!

I?ve been here before ... in fact I think I may look out the old thread and link to it here because I had a very long and sometimes heated discussion about extended breastfeeding. Basically it doesn?t do any harm to anyone so I don?t understand why people get so worked up about it.

Robinw - Why should your friend have had problems promoting independence? I?ve heard this myth about breastfeeding time and time again but no one seems able to show me how this works. In fact the opposite is probably true in many cases ? maintaining the bond between mother and child means that the child feels secure and if you feel secure then you will be confident.

Anyway show me an ?independent? 1 year old or 2 year old ? many of them still have dummies which are just nipple substitutes and may have comforters such as blankets/dolls. These artefacts are seen as OK but maintaining a bond with a human being is strange or wrong??? Something very odd here? I don?t want my children to remain as babies ? this argument is tautological ? if you think only babies should breastfeed then obviously it would seem babyish to feed a toddler but if you think feeding a toddler is ok then you are just doing that, not trying to make them into babies.

Also I don?t particulalry like breastfeeding my 4 year old and I certainly am not doing it for myself. I would like to stop but he is autistic and resists change. I put up with it for the few minutes it takes each day, much like I or anyone else puts up with the demands a child has. Some may say I am spoiling him by letting him do what he wants. Well I?d rather spoil him with this than sweets or toys. As for him being independent or otherwise ? well he?s just finished a year of attending playgroup 3 times a week and starts nursery on Monday . He also co-slept with me till around age 3 but we had no problem getting him into his own bed and in fact often asks to go to bed.

As for dd ? she is extremely outgoing ? will talk to anyone and rushes off at mums and toddlers and I can leave her with anyone. She knows that breastfeeding is our special time ? we have plenty of time in the day for her to do that .... mums who don?t breastfeed may cuddle their children instead ... its no different. Babies/toddlers are dependent on you for a long time whether you breastfeed or not, breastfeeding isn?t going to change the fact that they need their bum, nose wiped etc etc,

You say ?There may or may not be benefits to the immune system but there may also be problems in promoting too strong an emotional link?

Well there either are benefits or there aren?t ? breastmilk doesn?t stop being good for a baby at a certain age. Obviously as immunity builds up they need it less but older babies feed less to match this. What problems arise from too strong an emotional link? Surely it is good to have a strong emotional link with your child?

Good on you Eulalia!
(Very well argued, too if I may say so)

The first point that I would like to make is that I have absolute no problem with breast-feeding for extended periods of time. I also fully understand why you are still b/f your 4 year old Eulalia, and if I was in your position I would probably do it too.

THe only dissenting point that I would make is that soft toys and dummies are seen as 'bridging' aids for children. They allow the child to become more distant from the parent, and help to remind the child about the love and support they get from their parents when the parents are absent. And because of this they help the child to make the transition from wholly dependent to more independent individuals. Wonderful as breast-feeding is, it cannot do this. What it can do is help to make the child feel loved and secure, but it cannot help to bridge the separation as mum will always be attached.

I have used the phrase myself sarcastically but feel increasingly uncomfortable with the phrase 'breastfeeding nazis'. If you think about what breastfeeding is, and what fascism was, then it just seems totally inappropriate and, indeed, tasteless.
Anyway, I found weaning ds off the breast amazingly, surprisingly easy at around 14months. Luckily for me he was a late walker!! I would have felt embarassed feeding an older child, but that's my problem, not anyone else's. My friend breastfeeds her two year old at night, but I'm one of the few who knows.

Just ducking in because I saw the word "sarcastically" in the one line tease from a post by aloha. And posting because I'm feeling a little uncomfortable also with the phrase. Not that it doesn't convey exactly what people feel it's very good language in that sense it's just that, well, I feel uncomfortable with it.

For me (and this is just for me) the absolute time to stop breastfeeding would be when I started teaching my sons about what is private on their body. I never reached that stage with either of my two (23 months with the elder, 18 with the younger -- frankly, by that point I was just sick of it.)

Judge at whim.

Some really interesting comments here. I have to say the feeding in public has reduced for us but I can still think of a couple of occasions when we have fed in public since starting this thread. DS2 seems to have dropped a feed and only feeds once or twice a day now. He is still not walking (he can walk across the room if he wants to but for the main part he still crawls) so I still don't know if shoes are going to change anything.

I still find the association between b/feeding and walking strange and feel that no one would question a nine month old's need for a bottle of milk even if they were walking so why not a breastfeed. I just wonder how common it is for a baby/toddler over a year to have an afternoon drink of milk (breast or bottle/cup) and how other Mums cope when a couple of blocks of Lindt chocolate and a drink of water in Costa don't suffice . Anyway I am rambling now (as ever).

Bloss, I have read your comments and would like to say that I do think about the health benefits that I am receiving now and although it's not the only motivating factor for continuing it does play a part.

Eulalia, I have missed your b/feeding posts and thoroughly enjoyed your comments, all the best with your DS BTW I think it is great that you still feed him although I don't know if I want to continue just as long with my DS2 although I fully appreciate the reasons for your continuing.

message withdrawn

robinw - You say "may fail to promote independence in their child"

Please tell me HOW - I genuinely don't understand - how is my child or anyone else's child here any different????????

As far as I understand, children very rarely begin to play "properly" with other children before the age of 2. They are still dependent on the primary carer (usually the mother) for play and other types of stimulation.

Boys especially require more contact with their mother than girls, simply because of the way their brain is wired. Steve Biddulph (Raising Boys) goes so far as to say it is damaging to a boy's confidence and self esteem to separate them from the mother or family member before the age of 3, in terms of institutionalised child care.

With that in mind, and I realise he is not talking about breastfeeding per se but a more general intimate and emotional attachment to the primary carer, how should I promote independence in my child when at such a young age I am his security and comfort?

Believe me I always look at everyone else's view and I am not a Nazi thank you. I certainly don't think that everyone should breastfeed - it is up to the individual. I just get annoyed when people seem to think I am weird or claim that I am damaging my child.

Has anyone here actually met a child who has been breastfed beyond say a year and noticed anything different about him/her? How can claims be made without evidence?

hmb - got nothing against dummies/soft toys (well actually don't like dummies but not because of comforters but for other reasons - like tooth problems/hygiene etc which doesn't happen with the breast) but sometimes they can be used too early. Can anyone ever say that giving a baby comfort can be wrong? Why are we so afraid of it? Anyway breastfed babies/children like soft toys as well its not all or nothing. My dd at 16 months has just started to like dolls/teddies and I find it hard to belive that she would have had the imagination before this age to transfer human qualities onto a toy.

A friend of mine still breastfed her babies till around 18 months (she worked full time) but would give the baby a feed as soon as she came home - this helped to 'bridge the gap' when she came home - to reconnect with them after a long day away. Do you think waving a teddy in their faces would have had the same effect?

Apologies for the slip into sarcasm there!

When I said 'sarcastically' - I referred to a post I made on another thread when I said I got no help or information about breastfeeding in the first few days in hospital but was simply told I was starving my baby and I had to give him formula. I pointed out there were no 'breastfeeding nazis' in my hospital. IMO, it's a stupid & tasteless comparison though. Ugly and inappropriate. Nazis threw babies into mass graves. Extended breastfeeders (such as Eulalia) love and nourish them.

Cancer link to fall in breast feeding

Sarah Boseley, health editor
Friday July 19, 2002
The Guardian

The cultural shift within the UK and other prosperous countries in modern
times, which has led to women having few children and breastfeeding their
babies for a few months at most, are the main causes of the surge in
breast cancer, according to a new study.
A group of scientists today publish a piece of work in the Lancet medical
journal which concludes that if women in the UK went back to an era when
they bore six children and breastfed each for two years, the numbers of
breast cancer cases would be halved.
The authors, Valerie Beral of Cancer Research UK and colleagues in the
collaborative group on hormonal factors in breast cancer, recognise the
impracticality of turning back the clock.
However, they say, the recognition that breastfeeding protects against
breast cancer may help in the discovery of drugs that can mimic the
effects. "In the meantime, important reductions in breast cancer incidence
could be achieved if women considered breastfeeding each child for longer
than they do now."
Professor Beral said: "Two and a half centuries ago, people knew that
breast cancer was common among nuns in Italy. It's been suspected for a
very long time that breast feeding and the number of children was
important - it was pretty well-known that not using the breasts for the
purpose for which they were designed was a major cause of breast cancer."
But in the 1970s, science became fixated with the age at which women first
had babies as an important factor in breast cancer. Now it seems that many
things are interlinked, but that the most important may be the number of
children and duration of breastfeeding. Professor Beral and colleagues say
in their paper that each birth reduces the risk of breast cancer by 7%,
while every year of breastfeeding cuts it by 4.3% more.
If women in the UK had the same family sizes and breastfeeding habits as
those in the developing world, they say, the cumulative incidence of
breast cancer here would be cut by more than half, from 6.3 to 2.7 per 100
women by the age of 70. Part of the reduction in risk is due to larger
families, but two-thirds of it is due to breastfeeding.
Nobody believes that women would want to increase the size of their
families, but breastfeeding for longer could be a feasible way of cutting
cancer risk. According to the paper, if women in developed countries
continued to have on average 2.5 children, but breastfed each one for six
months longer than now, then around 25,000 cancers would be prevented each
year, which is about 5% of the total. Increasing breastfeeding by 12
months would prevent 50,000 cancers, or 11% of the total today, they say.
In England and Wales in 2000, 71% of mothers started to breastfeed,
according to the Department of Health's Infant Feeding Survey. By six
weeks, only 42% were still breastfeeding and by six months, all but 21%
had given up.
Breastfeeding for the sort of length of time it is done in developing
countries would raise practical, social and cultural difficulties in many
developed countries. The 2000 survey showed that half of all mothers were
working by the time their babies were eight to nine months old, even
though mostly on a part-time basis.

Hi, I have only posted on mumsnet once before, but now feel incensed enough to do so again. Robinw - you write the longterm bf'ers are just like nazis because they hold on to their opinion no matter what. Well, I think you're failing to grasp the fact there that the bf'ers have a MOUNTAIN of evidence on their side which PROVES that extended bf'ing is beneficial for mother and daughter. See the recommendations by WHO and the research by Katherine Dettwyler to start with, but there's much, much more. The people who say, on the other hand, that extended bf'ing comes in the way of independence have yet to show me a single piece of evidence for this claim!!! My 27 month old daughter is still bf'ed, but in secret, as I can do without the prejudice and the comments. Funnily enough, though, everybody tells me how grown-up, independent, self-confident she is for her age...
One other thing: I'm a German living in England and I just wish that a term like 'Nazi' was not used in the context it is here sometimes, as it's a far too serious matter, IMHO. Sorry, but that's how I feel.

Emkaren ... agree with you on the 'nazi' thing. I just posted on another thread asking for that term not to be used. I am not German but if I find the term offensive I am not surprised that you do ...

I can never understand why in this country we are so desperate to make our children "independent". Nature has decreed that human children have a long need for someone to look after them because they are completely helpless. If we were like other animals & our children could get up and run about on the day they were born it would make more sense.

My elder 3 all bf for 15 months. It wasn't a deliberate decision, but just how it worked out. DD went from 5 feeds one day to not wanting to feed again overnight. (Ow!) The elder 2 DS did the same. They fed first thing in the morning & last thing at night, & it is very convenient when they are scared or hurt & just want comfort from mummy.

What I find odd is the number of toddlers of 3 or 4 in town with a bottle stuck in their mouths; and the common belief that you must "wean" your baby from breast to bottle- why? Too old to bf is too old for bottle. Mine all had water & juice from a cup from 6 months.

My ds is nearly off the breast now at 11 mths - my choice and he has shown no objections. Took it slowly over 3 months and we are all happy. On the other hand my sister has a ds of 19 months who totally refuses to give up the breast. Try as he might he fights to get at them and she still feeds him twice a day. She works full time and he goes to a child minder. He is happy and independant and she feels a little less guilty about working if this is all he needs to make him secure. She has put no pressure on me to continue b/f and I would not dream of imposing my views on her. I personally do not want to b/f any longer but for those who do and their babies want to also then I cannot see what possible harm could be done.

It seems to me that if you want to promote dependence in your toddler, there are a lot easier and more effective ways to do it than extended breastfeeding.

I agree with lots of other people, I find the term Nazi in the context of breastfeeding offensive and inappropriate. On this thread, its use is also wildly illogical- I haven't heard anyone saying "oh I breastfed my child until he/she was 4, the rest of you are unfit mothers not to have done this". On the contrary, mothers who have breastfed long-term are being forced onto the defensive by the offensive stance of people who choose to hind their own squeamishness behind the issues of attachment.
If we have to have a term, try "militant", it's slightly less repulsive.
For what it's worth, I only breastfed mine until 17 months and 23 months respectively. I have never considered it anyone's business other than mine and my childrens', and I can't for the life of me see why there is any need to denigrate the choices of others.