I don't want to express- I don't know if I should feel this way?

[Lancrehotpot]

I have bf my DS since his birth. He's doing well and I feel like I've really got the hang of it. He is going on 5 months and at the age where GPs are wanting to babysit and the expectation is that I will 'just express', but I find myself really not wanting to and not knowing what to say.
Partly it's because I know it's a bit of a faff and I'd have to get DS used to bottles, but in honesty, it's that I can't imagine anyone else feeding my baby (milk). It just feels like such a personal thing to do now.. I would find anyone other than DH bottle-feeding him strange. I'm sure DS probably wouldn't give a monkey's who fed him once he got used to the bottle, so this is very much my issue.
I'm sorry if I'm not explaining this very well.
I posted a thread a while back about my family winding DS up to the point of hysterics, so realise this thread will most likely make me look completely smothering, but ah well
I look at my friends and all of them FF now and I am a little envious that they can leave the baby with their mums and have a full day out. At the same time though, this feels like a completely different experience to my own and I am concerned that there's something wrong with me for feeling like I don't want to leave him yet. There is a lot of pressure for me and DH to have 'alone time', but we get that every evening when DS is asleep.

I am looking forwards to him being older and being able to do all the 'grandparenty' stuff and be spoiled rotten, but at the same time, he will never be this little again and everyone tells me how quickly it goes.
I am thinking about trying to ride it out until he's taking solids, so family can feed him, but want to try extended-breastfeeding too. Is it unrealistic to think I can go on without expressing and if not, what should I say?

sorry, forgot to add, i've started blw and i still dont leave dd with anyone else apart from my dp. i hate this pressure that you HAVE to leave baby with gp's as they are now 5/6 months old. no you dont! its your baby, enjoy the time.

that doesnt mean my dd doesnt see gp's, far from it, we see each of them twice a week. but i'm there. i told my in laws (after months of bugging me) that whilst i was on maternity leave they wouldn't be taking dd out without me for any length of time. i explained that when she's a bit older and i go back to work they can have her for the morning/afternoon etc. that will be their time with her. not now. this is my time with her.

also, i asked them what was i actually supposed to do when they 'took' dd for a couple of hours???? sit on my arse wasting my maternity leave. dont think so!

Just to add - I know other people have said it - my younger two DC never had any bottles and were never fed milk by anyone but me and DC1 had no expressed milk after around 11/12 weeks. This hasn't in anyway inpacted on their bond with either DH or grandparents/greatgrandparents/uncles/aunts/cousins etc. it also doesn't mean I coudn't leave them alone for a couple of hours or so once they were a little older and going longer between feeds.
However, I quite a large extended family and we tend to all get together frequently so it was rare that I needed to leave them. I was always around to ahve them handed back for milk after whoever had had cuddles or played with them.

*I have quite

I'm the same.

I also don't like other people feeding my babies solids except DH. Had to leave the room when our nanny feeds dd (for settling in as go back to work soon).

Their babyhood flies by except the first 12 weeks

I have read somewhere that babies when young should only be fed by parents as it is a bonding experience and helps them identify their primary carer - applies to ff too.

I don't get what the obsession with people needing mums to leave their children with them.

I don't leave DD with anyone, and it suits me fine.
DH has her on a Thursday, and every other time she comes with us.
If it's somewhere we can't take her (where DH & I would be going together), then we just don't go.
It's not a problem. I don't have any desire to go out without her, if I'm also going with DH. If DH is going somewhere on his own, I'll look after DD and if I'm going somewhere on my own, DH will look after her.

We suffer from pushy grandparents here too. MIL has been hassling us to have DD to spend the night with her literally since DD was a few weeks old. Have managed to stall so far and now that DD is 3 her GPs are coming here to spend 24 hours looking after her and DS at the end of October. I would not have been happy to do it at any point before this and I still think she's too young to go to them by herself.

I don't get it either Nickedaisical but then I've never particularly liked babies (other than my own who I'm fairly fond of ) so not felt this -sense of entitlement-- need to hold/feed other people's babies.

bugger, would let me preview and of course I go my strike out wrong. sense of entitlement

Youbrokemysmoulder I can definitely see where you're coming from (that it's good for a baby to get used to be looked after by other people who love them), but I would say that I think those people have to be a regular part of the baby's life from day one/very young age which a lot of families (ours included) aren't nowadays because of distance. Ideally kind of like Librarians' set-up
I have quite a large extended family and we tend to all get together frequently so it was rare that I needed to leave them
That way it can be be little and often, and in the company of parents too to start with, rather than leaving them for several hours with people who love them to bits, but don't know them very well yet. Less stressful for all as well I imagine.
blushingmare
I'm just so aware that she'll only be little like this once and it goes so quickly -:( I know.
theids I mumble crap about development to get me out of all sorts and it usually seems to do the trick Going to have to use this one.
Gurl It is such a lovely time though, isn't it? [soppy emoticon] Just like the world slows down for a minute and it's you and the LO. Read an article about extended breastfeeding the other day and the lady in it who'd be lactating for 9 years said the shine had worn off somewhat!
feekerry Glad to hear you're doing what you want to do. GPs should remember it will be no time at all until LOs don't want to go home and have to be dragged away.
Seventh Sadly, think this is true. Don't get me started on- 'when can you get him started follow-on milk/baby-porridge etc etc?'
helps them identify their primary carer Hadn't heard that Iggly, thanks.
nickel it's only a few years out of your life after all isn't it?
Sure it will go well Zuleika and at least they will be in a familiar place.
Sorry if any of this seems garbled or peculiar. His sleep routine has gone out of the window of late so am a little befuddled. Agree with the poster who mentioned co-sleeping saving her bacon!

It's ok Librarian, the italics are getting the better of me today

I think that primary carer thing is rubbish frankly iggly. Babies are not ducks, they don't imprint on the first human they see. Of course feeding a little baby is a lovely snugly, hormone releasing thing to do but to say that feeding solids is the same?

Yes I am missing out on bonding if it's not me scraping mushed carrot off the wall and back into the baby or proffering some half chewed bits of broccoli. Has the world gone quite mad?

the primary carer thing isn't rubbish and I wasn't applying it to solids.

No, the shine of BFing never wears off there just comes a time to stop.

Mind you the shine of DDs using you as a bed does wear off.

She's 11 and my legs going numb and I need to cook tea.

For some daft reason she started reading after kiss and lights out, when I thought she was asleep.

So now a quick hug on the sofa has turned into her pinning me here.

Am all sorts of irritable today iggly but will concede if you can quote me the peer-reviewed papers and clarify what 'young' is.

Are you saying for example that babies who have spent a lot of time in picu or are adopted don't bond with their primary careers? It's something I am very touchy about.

Well, sometimes adopted children are not able to bond with their primary carers - it's called attachment disorder. This depends of course on how old they are when adopted and what their experiences were prior to adoption.

Newborns make attachments to their primary caregiver/s, and feeding is part of that. I'm not sure if there is anything conclusive about a window for this attachment to take place in, so can't say specifically about babies in NICU situations, but obviously babies with these kind of starts do go on to attach to their primary caregivers.

I'm talking young - newborns. I can't tell you the research from the top of my head, will check. But it's more about people passing newborns around to be fed by lots of different people which is a no no. I'll see what I can find.

But attachment disorder has only been shown through weeks and weeks of abuse in Romanian orphanages not occasional feeds by a GP. The OP is talking about a five month old. I don't think this sort of thing should even be mentioned in the same conversation tbh.

I wonder how dh ever bonded with dd for example when he didnt feed her until she was a few weeks old and then only occasionally so that she got used to some expressed milk. But he did bond with her just because he was doing everything else. I feel very strongly that more love from more people can only be a good thing.

Yes I think we're going into extremes here. I'm not suggesting that babies shouldn't be fed by anyone else ever. It was more a response to the instinct to want to be the one to feed your baby. Ultimately a baby should be fed by one main person as feeding is a bonding experience. But it's not the only way in which a baby bonds with people. I'm tying myself in knots here and cant quite remember what my train of thought was - I think it was replying to the fact that the OP wants to feed her baby. I recognise those feelings and think its because babies are designed to be fed only by their mums as it is a big part of bonding. It doesn't mean that babies can't bond with other people - they can, they don't need to be fed by other people to bond with them (hence people should back off if mum doesn't want them to feed their child)

I feel very strongly that more love from more people can only be a good thing.
Why does that love have to include feeding? That's the case here, that and having baby without parents around. why can't the GPs (or whoever) accept that the mum/parents want don't want to leave their baby or have it fed by someone else. Can't they just have cuddles and do other stuff with the baby with parents around.