How old is too old?

[aliss]

Where I am from, extended BF is normal.

Now, there, that generally means just a before bed nursing. Most 2-4 year olds don't drink much milk anyways, human or cow or whatever.

I think those who are so against extended BF seem to think that these women are feeding all day long, like a baby whose main source is milk. Not so. At least not where I am from, it's just an occasional thing - a nice snuggle and feed before bed or every few days. I don't get why that's wrong.

 

[CatandKitten]

First off, let me say I read her book and really like it, it is more about her parenting experience than an advice book.

Personally I dont have a problem with extended breast feeding. I know I plan to nurse for at least a year and after that see how it goes. I dont understand why cows milk is fine after then but not mommies.

The key for me so far has been to be flexible to her needs. When I was pregnant I never thought I would cosleep, but now I think it is fantastic. We are doing a combo of partially in bed, partially in her cosleeper, but when she outgrows that I would love to have a king size bed on the floor.

 

[Lauki]

So would it be okay to express breastmilk and feed that to children in a cup?

Is it just the act of nursing that's 'weird' / not needed?

 

[aliss]

Extended BF is not reserved to poor cultures with no other nutrition source. It was common where I was from, which is the west coast of Canada. Same as in rural Hungary where my mother is from (hence why I was BF until 3ish), goat + cow's milk was plentiful but why waste that product when the mother can provide it herself?

 

[Neko]

It's also comfort. And yes there's many ways in which to comfort your child, but we're talking about 3/4/5 year olds here, they are not old and independent.

I don't get the reasoning that human milk is nutrition but isn't food?

Comfort is holding them, reading to them, talking to them. Children aren't going to breastfeed for the rest of their life. I certainly wouldn't let a preschooler have a bottle and pacifier, why would I BF them to sleep?


As far as it not being food. There will be a point where BM is not nutritionally necessary. That definitely varies from child to child and most of them not at 12 months but somewhere between 18 months and 2.

 

[Lownthwaite]

So would it be okay to express breastmilk and feed that to children in a cup?

Is it just the act of nursing that's 'weird' / not needed?

Good question

 

[Lownthwaite]

It's also comfort. And yes there's many ways in which to comfort your child, but we're talking about 3/4/5 year olds here, they are not old and independent.

I don't get the reasoning that human milk is nutrition but isn't food?

Comfort is holding them, reading to them, talking to them. Children aren't going to breastfeed for the rest of their life. I certainly wouldn't let a preschooler have a bottle and pacifier, why would I BF them to sleep?


As far as it not being food. There will be a point where BM is not nutritionally necessary. That definitely varies from child to child and most of them not at 12 months but somewhere between 18 months and 2.

Nutritionally necessary - no, but nutritionally beneficial - always.

 

[feedindy]

I just wanted to say that people who are not comfortable with extended BF don't always feel that it has to do with sexualization of breasts. I am not comfortable with extended BF, and the reason is that I believe after the age of 1 that we can move on to many other nutritional options that are available to us. My child will not be any less healthy than one that is extended BF. She will be healthy and happy. I think BF is a beautiful and natural thing as well, but sexualization of breasts has nothing to do with me not agreeing with extended BF.

Also I want to say that a lot of people say "breasts are for babies and not sexual", but I think realistically, breasts are both in today's world, and I don't see anything wrong with that to be honest.

 

[xemmax]

I am yet to meet someone who has stuck to their "I'll feed until X age" decision. I'm sure there are some who have, but I mainly see people saying these things hypothetically as they either didn't breastfeed or have very young children. In reality it really isn't about age, it's about how you feel.

Nobody goes to bed on the eve before their child turns 2 and happily breastfeeds, only to wake in the morning to a child who now seems 'too old'. If the time comes where you feel you should stop it is much more gradual. I have no doubt some people stop because they think their child is too 'old' but it's more to do with development than age.

 

[aliss]

No one ingredient is really nutritionally necessary (hence everything from a vegan to Paleo diet available), just cheap/tasty/convenient and hopefully nutritious too.

 

[xemmax]

I just wanted to say that people who are not comfortable with extended BF don't always feel that it has to do with sexualization of breasts. I am not comfortable with extended BF, and the reason is that I believe after the age of 1 that we can move on to many other nutritional options that are available to us. My child will not be any less healthy than one that is extended BF. She will be healthy and happy. I think BF is a beautiful and natural thing as well, but sexualization of breasts has nothing to do with me not agreeing with extended BF.

Also I want to say that a lot of people say "breasts are for babies and not sexual", but I think realistically, breasts are both in today's world, and I don't see anything wrong with that to be honest.

I acknowledge that we can, but do we have to? Is there harm in not doing so?

ETA I would never think that a child is less healthy than one who has been breastfed for an extended period, but I see and don't like the suggestion that extended breastfeeding is unnecessary/for the parent/harmful etc. (Not picking at your post, just talking in general terms)

 

[Neko]

Nutritionally necessary - no, but nutritionally beneficial - always.

How far is always? (which I know is sorta the point of this thread) I don't believe that there is any nutritional benefit for a school aged child or adult to consume breast milk.

There does come a point in life where it's not necessary. For me it's 2. For you go wild... I'm a libertarian and fully believe in the motto "Whatever floats your boat."

 

[Ozzieshunni]

Wanted to share this.

 

[xemmax]

Nutritionally necessary - no, but nutritionally beneficial - always.

How far is always? (which I know is sorta the point of this thread) I don't believe that there is any nutritional benefit for a school aged child or adult to consume breast milk.

There does come a point in life where it's not necessary. For me it's 2. For you go wild... I'm a libertarian and fully believe in the motto "Whatever floats your boat."

Breastmilk is much more beneficial to humans (of any age) than cow's milk as it is tailored for our species, unlike cow's milk, which is obviously tailored for calves.

I'm not saying it makes it essential, but I don't think anything is 'necessary' in that sense (for our survival).

 

[kerrie24]

^ sad but true.

 

[RaspberryK]

Nutritionally necessary - no, but nutritionally beneficial - always.

How far is always? (which I know is sorta the point of this thread) I don't believe that there is any nutritional benefit for a school aged child or adult to consume breast milk.

There does come a point in life where it's not necessary. For me it's 2. For you go wild... I'm a libertarian and fully believe in the motto "Whatever floats your boat."

It has in some cases been reported that cancer patients have had improvements in their blood counts etc when they have consumed human breast milk.

x

 

[Lauki]

But why would it be 'better' for my child to drink cow's milk as opposed to human milk? After all she's a human, not a calve.

ETA: If anyone feels like they want to stop breastfeeding their child at a certain age I'm perfecty okay with that . Just like to try and explain why I'm preferring to keep feeding a lot longer.

 

[Lownthwaite]

Nutritionally necessary - no, but nutritionally beneficial - always.

How far is always? (which I know is sorta the point of this thread) I don't believe that there is any nutritional benefit for a school aged child or adult to consume breast milk.

There does come a point in life where it's not necessary. For me it's 2. For you go wild... I'm a libertarian and fully believe in the motto "Whatever floats your boat."

I believe that so long as both mummy and baby are happy to nurse then there are always benefits from BF. Be it through the ingredients of breastmilk (I won't go into them all - we will be here a long time ) Or be it through comfort and its emotional benefits.

Personally - my LO has self weaned to just one morning feed a day. I think she will have totally self weaned by the time she is 2.5 / 3 years old. I am happy with that.

 

[MrsHedgehog]

Nutritionally necessary - no, but nutritionally beneficial - always.

How far is always? (which I know is sorta the point of this thread) I don't believe that there is any nutritional benefit for a school aged child or adult to consume breast milk.

There does come a point in life where it's not necessary. For me it's 2. For you go wild... I'm a libertarian and fully believe in the motto "Whatever floats your boat."

Out of interest, why 2 years old? What happens to a baby at 2 that means BF is suddenly no longer necessary? I agree with you in that there has to be a point where a child is no longer BF but is it not better to let the child naturally wean themselves?

 

[feedindy]

Why is it necessarily better for a child to wean themselves as a pp said? I see nothing wrong with the parent making decisions on these things. No harm in that.