at what age did your child stop breastfeeding?

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Thanks staci!

 

[SPAM]

im a big fan of breastfeeding your child if you can vs. bottle feeding.
but at age 6 is gross.

 

[beattyfamily]

How do you disagree with factual information?

The strongest opinions tend to come from those who did not bf at all or only a very short time. Here in the US bfing is thought of as 'icky' at pretty much every age! The only people whose opinions matter on the subject are the mother and child involved. Bfing is not harmful or sexual.

I'd love a website or something to read about these 'facts' you talk of.

I already posted my answer to the OP that I BF'd my older DD 4 months and my younger DD for 1 year.

I do not think BFing is 'icky' from birth to about 3 years old, although I chose to stop at age 1. After age, 3, I'd think it was kind of a strange sight to see but not abuse...after age 4, I'd wonder why it was still going on (privately, to myself) and after age 6, I'd think it was borderline abuse. That's my opinion.

After age 10, I'd say all bets are off and it certainly could be harmful or sexual. IMHO.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Here's an excerpt from something on cnn:

: You know what. No one knows exactly how common it is because no one's done a study. [Tuesday], I spoke with an anthropologist who is studying women who do, or is looking at women who do extended breast-feeding. It's not a scientific study. It's just a survey that she's done.

She's found about 1,300 women who are breast-feeding their children who are beyond the age of 3. She said she has two 10-year-olds in this study, but that most of the kids are sort of in the 3- or 4- or 3- to 5-year-old range.

http://archives.cnn.com/2002/HEALTH/parenting/07/10/breast.fed.controversy.otsc/

FYI--the article is on a Chicago mom who BFs her 8yo--however her and all others mentioned in the story BF privately in their own home.

 

[MoniqueU]

Here is a partial explaination of why a mother may continue to bf past 12 months but not ff (I did get this from the laleche league). Also, what I have read encourages weaning from the bottle BEGINNING at 12 months, and being done definitely by 18 months.



A mother and her baby should breastfeed for as long as they wish to breastfeed. The American Academy of Pediatrics currently (2005) recommends: "Pediatricians and parents should be aware that exclusive breastfeeding is sufficient to support optimal growth and development for approximately the first 6 months of life and provides continuing protection against diarrhea and respiratory tract infection. Breastfeeding should be continued for at least the first year of life and beyond for as long as mutually desired by mother and child." * As solids are introduced, usually around the middle of the first year, your baby will shift his primary source of nutrition from your milk to other foods.

All the benefits of human milk--including nutritional and health--continue for as long as your baby receives your milk. In fact, as your baby takes less human milk, these advantages are condensed into what milk is produced. Many of the health benefits of human milk are dose related, that is, the longer the baby receives human milk, the greater are the benefits.

*See http://aappolicy.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/pediatrics;115/2/496

Just for any of you who think anything past the 12 month 1 day point is unnecessary and wrong.

Well the le leche league uses the term your baby not your child.

 

[staci]

Bottles are a supplemental nursing device used to enable a baby to consume nourishment when they aren't otherwise able. It was never meant as a long term device. Nursed babies still learn how to use a cup or sippy on schedule like their bottle fed counterparts. Formula isn't breastmilk and once you opt that route--you've chosen a whole different timetable on food introduction and such. ETA: Nursed babies can wait up to 10 months to a year before ever having their first solid (as an example).

It is very much developmental (as well as dental/orthodontic reasons) of why the use is discontinued. You may not see a difference--but the AAP does.


Bottles can be out of site--mom's bottles..unless you are suggesting a mastectomy--can't just disappear. Though as with anything--weaning isn't often as hard as it has to be.

QUOTE]

Thank you for this! You said it very well. I was having a very hard time wording it right, as I have read much on the subject when ds was small and I made the decision to nurse, but I was having a hard time putting it into words without sounding negative about formula, which I didnt want to do.

 

[justhat]

Though like I already said, I stopped breastfeeding my daughter at 21 months was was ready to be finished with it by then, I don't think I would say breastfeeding at age 6 is abuse either. Not my choice, but I wouldn't be reporting the mom at any rate. It's really surprising to me to see all the people who are horrified by breastfeeding past the age of 2 or 3. Again, no way would I have gone past age 2, but that was just my personal thing, I don't see a problem with those who do. Tons of 6yos use sippy cups, something we stopped by age 1 and went to straws and regular unlidded cups, but it doesn't bother me when others use sippys either, and those are in no way good for kids teeth or speech development but it doesn't seem to affect as many people as breastfeeding at the same age does. Why is that? Is it just that it's the breast? If that mom were pumping and giving the child her milk in an unlidded cup would that be more acceptable? I think it's sorta weird to nurse in public with the 6yo and I didn't really do it past about 16 months or so, but if the kid is doing it then it must not bother her (or the mom) which is why I don't find it abusive. I had 4yos at my preschool tell their moms they wouldn't give them a kiss goodbye in front of their friends so kids that age will speak up if they don't want to do something (no, I know not all of them will) so my guess is that if it was really bothering the kid she wouldn't ask the mom to nurse in public anymore.

ETA, Staci that was a really informative post. I didn't realize that the benefits of breastmilk were condensed when your nursing decreased.

 

[Caradana]

I'd have purely selfish reasons in the opposite direction. Hypothetically, after all those years of nursing, I think I'd have to tuck my "ladies" into my belt. I mean it. They'd be like metronomes. They could probably swing to music. That's a little bit over the saggage line in my mind.

I think I'm a formula type of gal. I was formula fed, and the brain seems to have turned out OK.

 

[staci]

Well the le leche league uses the term your baby not your child.

Im sorry I meant to quote the post I was answering and I didnt. It was in response to a statement that both bottles and bf should end at the same time: 12 months, and questioning why it would be justified to continue bf beyond 12 months. I was simply showing that there are nutritional advantages to it.

I very much consider a 12-18 month old as more of a 'baby' than a 'child'.

As I have stated earlier, 6 years would be way beyond my comfort zone.

 

[ChrisnSteph]

Here is a partial explaination of why a mother may continue to bf past 12 months but not ff (I did get this from the laleche league). Also, what I have read encourages weaning from the bottle BEGINNING at 12 months, and being done definitely by 18 months.



A mother and her baby should breastfeed for as long as they wish to breastfeed. The American Academy of Pediatrics currently (2005) recommends: "Pediatricians and parents should be aware that exclusive breastfeeding is sufficient to support optimal growth and development for approximately the first 6 months of life and provides continuing protection against diarrhea and respiratory tract infection. Breastfeeding should be continued for at least the first year of life and beyond for as long as mutually desired by mother and child." * As solids are introduced, usually around the middle of the first year, your baby will shift his primary source of nutrition from your milk to other foods.

All the benefits of human milk--including nutritional and health--continue for as long as your baby receives your milk. In fact, as your baby takes less human milk, these advantages are condensed into what milk is produced. Many of the health benefits of human milk are dose related, that is, the longer the baby receives human milk, the greater are the benefits.

*See http://aappolicy.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/pediatrics;115/2/496

Just for any of you who think anything past the 12 month 1 day point is unnecessary and wrong.

I am not arguing that breast milk is best. That's a no brainer. I'm just trying to make a point why some people (including myself) feel that two years olds should be weaned from the breast. Of course there are going to be extenuating circumstances (in the case of the poster whose baby burnt her toes). What I'm trying to get at is that the majority of society (and the AAP) feel that babies should be weaned from the bottle by 12 months, and that might be partly why many people feel the same about those who breast feed. Yeah, we know that breast milk is good for a child, but so are healthy foods which a child should be eating by at age 2. And if a mother feels that she needs to continue feeding her child breast milk for the nutricious apsects, and the child will take a cup by that age, can't the milk be given in a cup as well? Just curious.

 

[Tinijocaro]

DS #1 16 months
DD #1 12 months
DS #2 16 months
DD #2 2 1/2 years

All weaned completely naturally, on their own, in their own time. Haven't read this thread, don't care to. I know what kind of opinions it contains and the thought that there is some magic age that nursing should stop by seems so absurd to me. It ends when it ends- period.

Jackie

 

[AnaheimGirl]

This still doesn't answer my earlier question. Why is it one set of rules for bf babies, and another for those who are bottle fed? How is it not comparable? Why is there no recommended age to discontinue bfing, but there is one for bottle fed babies? I'm not talking about babies who go to bed with bottles, or walk around with a bottle all day long - obviously there is a risk of bottle rot with that. What is the difference between feeding a baby with a bottle for a few minutes, and feeding with the breast for a few minutes? I don't want to hear the same old song and dance about what bottles do to a babies mouth. Nipples these days are almost comparable to a breast nipple, so I don't buy the argument that bottle nipples will ruin your child's teeth, bite, yada yada. I guess what I'm trying to get out is that most mothers and society in general will get on their soapbox and give a zillion reasons why Johnny should be "off the bottle already" at 12 months or even earlier, yet most of these same mothers who criticize won't bat an eyelash when it comes to the mom whose child is still on the breast at 2 years old. I see no difference between the two. As for those who say "you don't know how hard it is to wean", or "my baby needs it for comfort", bottle fed babies have the same issues. Just do what most moms say to those who are trying to wean their babies from bottles - cold turkey and throw the bottles - er, put your "bottles" away.

Well, as you said, bottle nipples are "almost comparable", but still not as soft as a real nipple. Sorry if you think it's the same song and dance, and you don't think there's any difference, but as for me, I can sure notice the difference between a stiff, artificial nipple (even the ones that claim to be the most realistic) and my real ones.

The other thing is that human milk is meant for humans. Just because a child doesn't "need" breastmilk anymore, doesn't mean it's better to give him milk from another species once he's over a year old. Breastmilk will still be easier on a child's digestive system and provide him with immunities beyond a year old. If a human baby is getting human milk, the natural delivery method is via the breast. If a human baby is getting cow's milk, there is no natural delivery method. It's bottle or cup. So, weaning a child from bottle to cup is merely a change in the delivery method. Yes, it's hard for them to give up the bottle because it's comforting, but you're only changing one thing there. You're not changing the taste or taking away his blankie at the same time. For a bf baby, weaning changes the whole shebang: the milk itself (taste, temp), delivery method, closeness with mom, etc.

As to the OP: I only bf my first dd for about 10 months (she stopped on her own), and my second dd for only 4 weeks (because we adopted her, and I wasn't able to produce enough milk for her -- those 4 weeks were highly supplemented).

I would not personally be comfortable at all with nursing a 6yo, or even a 4-5yo, but I also don't judge women who do, because I don't know what it's like. You don't just start out nursing a child that old. As someone said, where exactly is the cutoff? Kids don't change that quickly where one day they're "young enough" and then suddenly they're "too old" the next.

I don't think this necessarily has to be about the mom, either. My completely well-adjusted, mature, 8yo with good coping skills, who had forgotten all about bf, was fascinated by it when she saw me trying to relactate for her younger sister. She kept asking (at age 4) if she could try it again. I said no, I was not comfortable with it at all, but ever since then, she is still fascinated by it. I think that, had she continued bf past toddler-age, she'd be the type that didn't want to give it up. I don't think that I'd have let it continue for so long, but I certainly couldn't have continued it without any want/need on her part. Although this mom in the OP may like being needed, and I may disagree with her decision, especially to do it in public, I'm sure the child wants to continue with it as well, and I don't think that makes the child some kind of infantile freak, either.

 

[staci]

I am not arguing that breast milk is best. That's a no brainer. I'm just trying to make a point why some people (including myself) feel that two years olds should be weaned from the breast. Of course there are going to be extenuating circumstances (in the case of the poster whose baby burnt her toes). What I'm trying to get at is that the majority of society (and the AAP) feel that babies should be weaned from the bottle by 12 months, and that might be partly why many people feel the same about those who breast feed. Yeah, we know that breast milk is good for a child, but so are healthy foods which a child should be eating by at age 2. And if a mother feels that she needs to continue feeding her child breast milk for the nutricious apsects, and the child will take a cup by that age, can't the milk be given in a cup as well? Just curious.

Our pediatrician said that anything beyond 12 months is great for them nutritionally but not medically necessary. Our family doctor (mine) was very supportive of my bf and encouraged me to try to stick it out until the 2 year mark next time when he found out we had stopped at 15 months. He said (I dont know where he got this information) that American Academy of Pediatrics use to say 6 months, now says 12 months, and was considering upping their recommendation to that of the world health organization, which recommends until age 2. IDK if the pediatrics will ever up it or not, but if the WHO and others recognize the nutritional benefits beyond 12 months, I dont see why bf moms should feel pressure to quit giving the children those benefits just becuase formula apparently isnt as beneficial after that point (I DONT know this for a fact, just assuming since the doctors seems to say that it is a good stopping point).

 

[AnaheimGirl]

And if a mother feels that she needs to continue feeding her child breast milk for the nutricious apsects, and the child will take a cup by that age, can't the milk be given in a cup as well? Just curious.

It could, but what a PITA! She'd have to pump, transfer it to the cup, then wash all that pumping equipment. Cow's milk goes straight from the fridge to the bottle/cup, no difference.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

I am not arguing that breast milk is best. That's a no brainer. I'm just trying to make a point why some people (including myself) feel that two years olds should be weaned from the breast. Of course there are going to be extenuating circumstances (in the case of the poster whose baby burnt her toes). What I'm trying to get at is that the majority of society (and the AAP) feel that babies should be weaned from the bottle by 12 months, and that might be partly why many people feel the same about those who breast feed. Yeah, we know that breast milk is good for a child, but so are healthy foods which a child should be eating by at age 2. And if a mother feels that she needs to continue feeding her child breast milk for the nutricious apsects, and the child will take a cup by that age, can't the milk be given in a cup as well? Just curious.

I think you are misunderstanding the AAP--there statement is "at least"-not a "cease by this date".

Exclusive breastfeeding is ideal nutrition and sufficient to support optimal growth and development for approximately the first 6 months after birth.100 Infants weaned before 12 months of age should not receive cow's milk feedings but should receive iron-fortified infant formula.101 Gradual introduction of iron-enriched solid foods in the second half of the first year should complement the breast milk diet.102,103 It is recommended that breastfeeding continue for at least 12 months, and thereafter for as long as mutually desired

.

The World Health Organization goes further and recommends 2 years and my doctor had said that AAP was looking into extending that--but it has been so long and he left the practice to do medical work in the mission field, so I can't exactly go follow up on that.




There is nothing developmentally contraindicated to suggest women express into a cup instead of nursing the child.

 

[Caradana]

DS #1 16 months
DD #1 12 months
DS #2 16 months
DD #2 2 1/2 years

All weaned completely naturally, on their own, in their own time. Haven't read this thread, don't care to. I know what kind of opinions it contains and the thought that there is some magic age that nursing should stop by seems so absurd to me. It ends when it ends- period.

Jackie

So when these kiddies decide that 10th grade is the end of school for them, naturally, on their own, in their own time, is that OK? Is there some magic age when school should stop, or does it also "end when it ends?"

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

So when these kiddies decide that 10th grade is the end of school for them, naturally, on their own, in their own time, is that OK? Is there some magic age when school should stop, or does it also "end when it ends?"

Well that isn't very nice.

 

[golfgal]

It is different. Check out the AAP (american academy of pediatrics) policy on bfing...babies should be bfed alone to 6 months, then introduced gradually to solids, continuing at *minimum* to 12 months and as long thereafter as long as *mutually desired*. The bottle senario is not comparable and it is recommended to end bottle use early for several reasons. The don't recommend an end age for breastfeeding b/c there is not one! It's sad we as a society are so uneducated about something as beneficial as bfing. Again this woman described is the EXTREME. She is not the face of long-term bfing. If she has issues, bfing is not the cause or the reason. Plenty of screwed up people never bf at all! The natural age of human weaning is 6-7 years based on anthropological studies. So yes, beyond THAT would be possibly a problem to be looked into. As long as bfing is mutually desired, it is never abuse. A sad number of people think bfing a 1 y/o is too old to bf, so it is not appropriate to have a cut-off age based on society's comfort level!

Factual information for like 40,000 years ago. You have to remember that even just a few thousand years ago humans were still basically hunters/gatherers and they couldn't stock pile food to the extent we can. Nursing children was one way to ensure SURVIVAL of their clan/tribe, etc. This is just NOT the case these days when you run out of bread and can go to the grocery store. Also, I don't think that your facts are quite true. Nursing children probably went until 3 years of age or so, but children matured faster in those days as the life span of a human was significantly shorter. Girls would be physically mature enough to have children at age 10 or so and while there are some 10 year olds that menstruate, that isn't the norm these days.

Nursing children in todays society past toddlerhood is not socially acceptable. It also provides no health benefit for a child past a year or two. You have radical groups like the La Leche League telling women that they are incomplete if they don't have a totally natural birth and don't nurse their kids until they are teen agers and some people actually believe that nonsense.

I know plenty of "extended" nursing families and you know what, they aren't normal. You may think everything is fine and dandy, but your kids are getting picked on at school.

 

[Jenn Lynn]

This still doesn't answer my earlier question. Why is it one set of rules for bf babies, and another for those who are bottle fed? How is it not comparable? Why is there no recommended age to discontinue bfing, but there is one for bottle fed babies? I'm not talking about babies who go to bed with bottles, or walk around with a bottle all day long - obviously there is a risk of bottle rot with that. What is the difference between feeding a baby with a bottle for a few minutes, and feeding with the breast for a few minutes? I don't want to hear the same old song and dance about what bottles do to a babies mouth. Nipples these days are almost comparable to a breast nipple, so I don't buy the argument that bottle nipples will ruin your child's teeth, bite, yada yada. I guess what I'm trying to get out is that most mothers and society in general will get on their soapbox and give a zillion reasons why Johnny should be "off the bottle already" at 12 months or even earlier, yet most of these same mothers who criticize won't bat an eyelash when it comes to the mom whose child is still on the breast at 2 years old. I see no difference between the two. As for those who say "you don't know how hard it is to wean", or "my baby needs it for comfort", bottle fed babies have the same issues. Just do what most moms say to those who are trying to wean their babies from bottles - cold turkey and throw the bottles - er, put your "bottles" away.

You cannot just stop nursing one day. I don't nurse for 3 hours and I am FULL. More than that and my breasts would be hard as rocks and VERY uncomfortable and sore. It just does not work that way unless you want a breast infection. A baby CAN and will know the difference between an artificial nipple and the real thing which is why Peds. recommend starting a bottle before 3 weeks (at least mine did if I was going to do it).

It is hard to wean a child from the breast. It took me a month to wean DD. It takes that long for both my tansition (personal comfort and no infections) and her transition. I used Dr. Jay Gordon's method, and he recommends gradual weaning. I don't know anything about bottle weaning because I have never done it.

am not arguing that breast milk is best. That's a no brainer. I'm just trying to make a point why some people (including myself) feel that two years olds should be weaned from the breast. Of course there are going to be extenuating circumstances (in the case of the poster whose baby burnt her toes). What I'm trying to get at is that the majority of society (and the AAP) feel that babies should be weaned from the bottle by 12 months, and that might be partly why many people feel the same about those who breast feed. Yeah, we know that breast milk is good for a child, but so are healthy foods which a child should be eating by at age 2. And if a mother feels that she needs to continue feeding her child breast milk for the nutricious apsects, and the child will take a cup by that age, can't the milk be given in a cup as well? Just curious.

Sure if you pump. I don't pump so no breastmilk in a cup. I will see my Ped. at the end of this month and will ask her your question if you don't get a good answer here. she is very opne minded and easy to talk to.

 

[katerkat]

So when these kiddies decide that 10th grade is the end of school for them, naturally, on their own, in their own time, is that OK? Is there some magic age when school should stop, or does it also "end when it ends?"

All mammals wean naturally at some point - you don't see kittens following around their moms for life. Why would humans be any different? (I'm not saying I know the "magic age", but comparing a natural act to school?)

Oh, and for what it's worth, the damage done to my breasts was done when I was pregnant - nursing hasn't affected them any more or less.