channel 4 breastfeeding programme

[lazycow]

Just thought people might be interested if you don't already know.

Channel 4 on Weds 1 Feb. A programme called Extraordinary Breastfeeding is on. The write up in the magazine I'm looking at says:

"You'll be texting your friends about this as soon as it starts. It's about the phenomenon of mothers who breastfeed their kiddies well beyond the age considered 'normal' in this country. Seeing a feisty mum breastfeed her two-year-old twin isn't that disturbing, but the sequence of another lady suckling her 7 year old dughter isn't one we will forget in a hurry. "

I'm looking forward to seeing the tone it takes.

because people are used to miscarriage (like so much else) being medicalised
got much the same reaction talking about homebirth which is an irony given the shocking stories ont hat other thread

wonky

Absolutely meanoldmummy

What an awful thing to do . We all deal with our losses differently and for anyone to be appalled at a way of coping with a miscarriage is terrible

I had negative reactions to my home births too harpsi. It was implied I was selfish for putting the baby at risk.

Unbelievable.

It's also darn selfish to leave a young woman in labour WITHOUT mw support for over an hour at home. This is a friend of mine who chose to have her baby at home and was left without supervision for more than an hour at a very very critical point because they were "short of staff". Luckily she is very strong lass and pig-headed to the nth degree and had a very healthy baby delivered at home, eventually when the mw arrived !! Still BF-ing her 18 month old too !!

Ir seems you just can't win with the health care system we have in the UK. You are selfish if you chose to give birth at home because you don't want to be treated badly and traumatised in a hospital, oh FGS !

I had my son in a birth centre (see very long post on other thread) and it was a lovely experience, except for one very silly MW. If a birth centre was no where to be found, I would have had him on the kitchen floor rather than go to a London hospital.

I was thinking about the original issue (anyone remember that? ) again today, and wondered: for those who have big problems with a 7 year old feeding, at what point should we say "No, you are too old," and what effect will that have on them? I think we are mostly agreed that most children if left to their own devices, will self-wean between the ages of 2 and 4. So what about the few who need longer? Some children are more immature in their development, some have special needs, some have had difficult or traumatic experiences, some just have more needy natures.

What happens if we deny them the chance to have as much nurturing as they want? It's that old thing about needs that are unmet - they don't go away. Do we take a favourite teddy away from a 7 year old because it is too babyish and there's no need for it? It would seem cruel to me if the child still wants it. IMO if the child still wants to breastfeed age 7 and we say "no" because we have a problem with breasts being sexual, then we are doing the child a disservice.

Franny - that's assuming it IS to do with breasts being sexual though. I don't think that that is the only reason that breastfeeding an older child is counter-intuitive for many of us. A teddy is OK at 7 - but would the same serious dependence on it be appropriate at 20? I kow lots of us have teddies (I do!!) but I don't really NEED it the way a child does. And I did encourage DS1 to give up his dummies when I decided he was old enough, despite his initial reluctance to accept that the time had come. I didn't force him, it was a gradual process of persuasion followed by a reward. I don't like seeing 3 and 4 year olds wandering around with dummies, personally. I think that many of the trappings of babyhood/childhood are difficult for the child to let go of at first, and it's the job of a responsible parent to decide where to draw the line and then direct the child in a loving, patient but firm way towards independence. In my view once breast milk ceases to be of primary importance nutritionally, the time has come to start gently and lovingly helping that child to relinquish it.

I see what you mean, meanoldmummy, but I don't entirely agree. Breastmilk is about so much more than nutrition, and I feel encouraging to wean as soon as the child can do without it, is just another part of this drive to make children grow up more quickly, by pushing them to be independent before they are truly ready. It feels to me like childrens' needs are very inconvenient for us in this society, and we seem to want to train them out of needing anything in case it makes someone feel uncomfortable.

And can't you please get another name, meanoldmummy, because it's horrid having to call you that when you are clearly not, and I can't think of anything to shorten it to except "mean", or "meanold", or "MOM", none of which are nice at all!

I have some sympathy with that view too. My opinions on this issue aren't as fixed as some of my opinions, actually - it's one of those issues wheer you have to follow your gut instinct and jump one way or the other, but you're not totally sure you'd do the same thing next time IYKWIM!!. I think it is important to give vast amounts of love and nurturing, long cuddles, stroking, baths together, plenty of one-to-one play and listening - stuff that isn't done or valued enough in our frenetic and rather cold society - but I think I would still discontinue the actual feeding once the child didn't need it nutritionally any more. I think it's very delicate - and very interesting - where people draw their lines on this issue.

And you're a fine one to talk about names, Mrs Millet

Meanie, I just spent ages composing an excellent message to you via CAT and then found you don't accept CATs - grr. If you wouldn't mind getting an email from me, would you mind terribly sending me a CAT message? That way neither of us have to post our emails on here.

(It's not hate mail honest )

Yes I am sick of this name now, must change back when I can be arsed.

I'll have a go - I've never done a CAT before!

Oh lord, you know what, you'll have to pay a fiver to do it. Would you consider changing your preferences on the CAT thing so I can send one to you? You can always change it back again if you are scared of a deluge of hatemail from childminders, heh heh

Have sent you a CAT - was intending to pay the fiver anyway

Suppose your 7 year old also wanted to be fed at the table? Or to sleep in a cot? Or wear a nappy? Or to use a dummy? I think most parents would think they were best persuaded out of these things. NOT because they are sexual but because they are inappropriate.

Ooh, thank you kindly

Sometimes the CATs take longer to get through than others, but I will be in touch soon as....

But there would be no advantage to the child in any of those things you mention, Aloha. They are inapproprate because they are outgrown trappings of babyhood, and it would be bizarre and pointless for the child to want them. Breastfeeding gives huge emotional comfort to a child; there are very few of us feeding our 2 and 3 year olds who are doing it for nutrition purposes.

A seven year old might well get emotional comfort from a dummy. Would you be happy with it then?

I wouldn't feel it was any of my business to be honest. I think most children of 7 do have their own private little comfort habits, whether a teddy, thumb, blanket, etc. Personally I haven't used dummies because I don't like the look of them (my own kneejerk reaction) and I think they can interfere with breastfeeding when a child is young. I don't care if other people want to let their children have them. My child sucks his thumb - I don't plan to make him stop when he is 7 if he wants to carry on, it would be cruel and pointless IMO.

Just to add to franny's point - while "us" extended breastfeeders don't feed solely for nutritional reasons, the fact remains that breastmilk will give health benefits for the duration of the b/feeding relationship - which can't be said for dummies/nappies/spoon-feeding.

It is a "myth" that breastmilk has a sell-by date. It's only cow's milk from Tesco's that has a sell-by date

I am sure better informed people than me will confirm that breastmilk changes in composition to suit the nutritional and health needs of a child. The breastmilk of, say, a mother of a pre-term abby is very different to the milk I am producing for my 19 month old. Both are equally "nutitional" though. I have read somewhere that "toddler" milk tends to be more fatty and energy rich than milk produced for a baby under 1. This seems totally natural to me as a 1 year old can crawl and walk and therefore needs more fatty, energy giving breastmilk.

Nature wins this argument, hands down