breastfeeding

Desh, I understand the maternal instinct as much as a man can (LOL maybe 10%) and I don't fault the mother for that. But it's part of motherhood to let go a little bit at a time creating a little adult along the way and replacing the infancy in the child. It's a mother's job to help her child grow. It's the opposite of her job to keep the child infantile.
 
Research reports on the psychological aspects of nursing are scarce. One study that dealt specifically with babies nursed longer than a year showed a significant link between the duration of nursing and mothers' and teachers' ratings of social adjustment in six- to eight-year-old children (Ferguson et al, 1987). In the words of the researchers, 'There are statistically significant tendencies for conduct disorder scores to decline with increasing duration of breastfeeding.'"
 
What part of any of my previous statements said you should wean the child before 2?

Now you are being deliberately obtuse.

It certainly doesn't say you shouldn't stop before 6...

You take the abnormal and try to defend it with the normal.

It is normal for many women to breast feed until 2, it is not normal to continue 4 more years after they reach that age, and such continuance shows no continued health benefit for the child.

It is my assertion that the benefit then is for the adult.
 
Here is the deal guys, I breast fed until my son was almost two and then he self weaned.

There is NO evidence of harm in extended breast feeding.

There are benifits.

It is your own image of it being wrong that is making you hammer this woman.

Get a grip and hand me some documented facts that Proove harm.
 
Desh said:
Here is the deal guys, I breast fed until my son was almost two and then he self weaned.

There is NO evidence of harm in extended breast feeding.

There are benifits.

It is your own image of it being wrong that is making you hammer this woman.

Get a grip and hand me some documented facts that Proove harm.
Click to expand...
What part of 2 is cool 6 is not is difficult for you, Desh? What part of any of my previous statements suggested any such thing?

And again, if a woman who was not my mother had me sucking her breast when I was 6 years old, would it be sexual abuse? It is for the parent as well. We already have enough documentation that sexual abuse harms children.
 
Please go get me a case where the child was harmed emotionally from breast feeding too long.

Sorry, but run-of-the-mill emotional problems are not national news, so citing a high profile case that can be linked to breastfeeding is an unreasonable request.

Can you provide a case where verbal abuse, which we all agree is wrong, was responsible for some emotional problems? I know they exist. But I doubt you find an example to cite.
 
Desh said:
http://www.kellymom.com/bf/bfextended/ebf-benefits.html


The American Academy of Family Physicians notes that children weaned before two years of age are at increased risk of illness (AAFP 2001).
Nursing toddlers between the ages of 16 and 30 months have been found to have fewer illnesses and illnesses of shorter duration than their non-nursing peers (Gulick 1986).
"Antibodies are abundant in human milk throughout lactation" (Nutrition During Lactation 1991; p. 134). In fact, some of the immune factors in breastmilk increase in concentration during the second year and also during the weaning process. (Goldman 1983, Goldman & Goldblum 1983, Institute of Medicine 1991).
Per the World Health Organization, "a modest increase in breastfeeding rates could prevent up to 10% of all deaths of children under five: Breastfeeding plays an essential and sometimes underestimated role in the treatment and prevention of childhood illness." [emphasis added]
References
Click to expand...

Yes.... exactly what we're saying. 2 to 3 is a normal range. 6 years old is not.

What age would be abnormal, desh?
 
Damocles said:
What part of 2 is cool 6 is not is difficult for you, Desh? What part of any of my previous statements suggested any such thing?

And again, if a woman who was not my mother had me sucking her breast when I was 6 years old, would it be sexual abuse? It is for the parent as well. We already have enough documentation that sexual abuse harms children.
Click to expand...


I contend this parent is a better judge of what her own child needs than you two are.

You contend it is sexual and therefore you must classify it as molestation.

Are you ready to have the authorities step in?
 
Desh said:
I contend this parent is a better judge of what her own child needs than you two are.

You contend it is sexual and therefore you must classify it as molestation.

Are you ready to have the authorities step in?
Click to expand...
I contend that you are making inane suggestions and that if such were true then society could make no determinations such as physical abuse, because "the parent is the better at determining" than you are.

I contend you read accusation when there was none. You didn't breast feed a kid into the ages we spoke of, yet you try to defend your actions. Which is preposterous.

That's like saying, "Drinking pop is bad." and you argue, "Well I drink water all the time! You meanies!" They are both drinking but they are not the same thing.

And yes, I would be ready to have the authorities step in if a mother pushed "breastfeeding" to the levels I spoke of here.
 
Desh said:
I contend this parent is a better judge of what her own child needs than you two are.

You contend it is sexual and therefore you must classify it as molestation.

Are you ready to have the authorities step in?
Click to expand...


Desh, it's entirely possible that a woman who seeks out publicity like this has some emotional issues. Her judgement is in question here. She clearly derives an emotional benefit from this so she may be biased to a point that she would not recognize emotional damage she's inflicting on the child.

Desh, is it important for a child to be emotionally fit enough to deal with peers when the child becomes school-aged?
 
if a parent encouraged a child to be dependant on a blanket for emotional security at age 6, would you consider this abusive?
 
Damocles said:
I contend that you are making inane suggestions and that if such were true then society could make no determinations such as physical abuse, because "the parent is the better at determining" than you are.

I contend you read accusation when there was none. You didn't breast feed a kid into the ages we spoke of, yet you try to defend your actions. Which is preposterous.

That's like saying, "Drinking pop is bad." and you argue, "Well I drink water all the time! You meanies!" They are both drinking but they are not the same thing.

And yes, I would be ready to have the authorities step in if a mother pushed "breastfeeding" to the levels I spoke of here.
Click to expand...


Wow you do think its child abuse and the authorities should step in?

At what age is the cut off age where its a healthy normal function of being a human being and then on a certain birthday it becomes child abuse?
 
Desh said:
Wow you do think its child abuse and the authorities should step in?

At what age is the cut off age where its a healthy normal function of being a human being and then on a certain birthday it becomes child abuse?
Click to expand...
Yes, past a certain age it would be child abuse. (Again, I want to stress that nobody here suggested your action to be any other than normal.)

And yes, just like at a certain birthday you are able to consent to some things.

While the arbitrary line is, by definition arbitrary, one would necessarily be set if society chose to make such a law rather than just apply already existing laws.
 
Dr. Katherine A. Dettwyler, PhD, associate professor of anthropology and nutrition at Texas A&M University, has spent a career studying breastfeeding. As coeditor of Breastfeeding: Biocultural Perspectives, and researcher on milk composition and weaning, Dettwyler has concluded one thing for sure: Most children in America are weaned from the breast too early. Way too early.

In Breastfeeding: Biocultural Perspectives, Dettwyler wrote about the natural age of weaning for humans, meaning the length of time humans would likely nurse if cultural expectations did not interfere.

In comparing humans to other primates, research showed that humans' natural age of weaning is a minimum of two and a half years and a maximum of between six and seven years. Researchers compared things such as the age of sexual maturity; the age of the eruption of permanent molars; the time when children quadrupled their birthweight; and the length of gestation.(4) In every other primate, nursing continues for years, not just months.

According to Dettwyler, "The very word infant in zoological terms refers to the time between birth and the eruption of the first permanent molars. " Dettwyler further emphasizes, "The research looking at weaning time in primates and dental eruption shows that breastfeeding ends when infancy ends, when the first permanent molars are erupting. In humans, that happens between 5.5 and 6.5 years."
 
Desh said:
Dr. Katherine A. Dettwyler, PhD, associate professor of anthropology and nutrition at Texas A&M University, has spent a career studying breastfeeding. As coeditor of Breastfeeding: Biocultural Perspectives, and researcher on milk composition and weaning, Dettwyler has concluded one thing for sure: Most children in America are weaned from the breast too early. Way too early.

In Breastfeeding: Biocultural Perspectives, Dettwyler wrote about the natural age of weaning for humans, meaning the length of time humans would likely nurse if cultural expectations did not interfere.

In comparing humans to other primates, research showed that humans' natural age of weaning is a minimum of two and a half years and a maximum of between six and seven years. Researchers compared things such as the age of sexual maturity; the age of the eruption of permanent molars; the time when children quadrupled their birthweight; and the length of gestation.(4) In every other primate, nursing continues for years, not just months.

According to Dettwyler, "The very word infant in zoological terms refers to the time between birth and the eruption of the first permanent molars. " Dettwyler further emphasizes, "The research looking at weaning time in primates and dental eruption shows that breastfeeding ends when infancy ends, when the first permanent molars are erupting. In humans, that happens between 5.5 and 6.5 years."
Click to expand...

Wow, let's devovle. Animals do it, so should we.

LOL
 
Desh said:
Dr. Katherine A. Dettwyler, PhD, associate professor of anthropology and nutrition at Texas A&M University, has spent a career studying breastfeeding. As coeditor of Breastfeeding: Biocultural Perspectives, and researcher on milk composition and weaning, Dettwyler has concluded one thing for sure: Most children in America are weaned from the breast too early. Way too early.

In Breastfeeding: Biocultural Perspectives, Dettwyler wrote about the natural age of weaning for humans, meaning the length of time humans would likely nurse if cultural expectations did not interfere.

In comparing humans to other primates, research showed that humans' natural age of weaning is a minimum of two and a half years and a maximum of between six and seven years. Researchers compared things such as the age of sexual maturity; the age of the eruption of permanent molars; the time when children quadrupled their birthweight; and the length of gestation.(4) In every other primate, nursing continues for years, not just months.

According to Dettwyler, "The very word infant in zoological terms refers to the time between birth and the eruption of the first permanent molars. " Dettwyler further emphasizes, "The research looking at weaning time in primates and dental eruption shows that breastfeeding ends when infancy ends, when the first permanent molars are erupting. In humans, that happens between 5.5 and 6.5 years."
Click to expand...
I distrust people who make their money off of something running studies on it and expecting me to take the results as the real deal.

It's like cigarette companies running studies on the effects of smoking. They ignore other detrimental effects, such as social effects, towards their own benefit.
 
any way you slice it desh, it's abnormal in our country. That's the reality. The child is going to be less able to self comfort. He's going to be less able to deal with social situations where he finds himself isloated or marginalized, which we all undoubtedly feel at one time or another. Some children cry for their mommy. Will this child cry for boobies? So far in his life it's the only mechanism for stress relieve the child has been taught. How would he know that it's expected for him to pull his own pants up? I feel sorry for the kid. Classic momma's boy. If you want to believe there are only positives from this, that's your right, but common sense tells us this kid's gonna be messed up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top