TIME magazine and breast feeding a 4 year old

13567…17

Replies

  • feistyhorsegal
    feistyhorsegal Posts: 109 Member
    I haven't seen the article or the cover. I think breast feeding at that age is a little strange, but if Mum and child are happy with it I don't really see the issue. However once they are that big I think its definitely something that should be done in private and certainly not splashed on the cover of a magazine. I breastfed my 2nd daughter til she was 17 months, sometimes in public, and I can tell you I got some dirty looks. I really didn't care though. But still breastfeeding at 4 years old is not something I'd ever do.
  • MsNewBooty83
    MsNewBooty83 Posts: 985 Member
    The kid is 3, not 4.

    thanks for the correction-even at 3 years old-its disgusting. Not breast feeding itself-just at that age and the cover was just disturbing.

    I agree.

    oh, but its less disgusting to give your kids milk from a cow teet? hmm. intersting. or a toddler mixed formula from some big company that has killed children in 3rd world countries for greed...yup, im talking Nestle.
  • MsBaby117
    MsBaby117 Posts: 201 Member
    I'm against Time Magazine for pitting mothers against each other. And doing it on Mother's Day.


    Agreed!!! :mad:
  • feistyhorsegal
    feistyhorsegal Posts: 109 Member
    eeeewwwww just saw the cover. That is just wrong. It almost sexualises it or something. Bad bad bad Time Magazine!!!!
  • twistofcain
    twistofcain Posts: 190
    I still breast feed with my mom....er.
  • ninerbuff
    ninerbuff Posts: 49,030 Member
    Hell, I still breast feed.............................


    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group FitnessTrainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 28+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
  • ashreynolds09
    ashreynolds09 Posts: 257 Member
    I personally find it disgusting-what are your thoughts?

    In most countries children are breastfed until they wean themselves...usually around ages 3-4. This is not unusual or even discussed in those countries....it is just way of life. In American, breasts are not seen as life-giving, nutrient providers...they are seen as sexual objects. I don't fault you for your opinion. You are just a product of your society.

    This!! 100% this!!!! The whole reason mammals have breasts is to suckle their young. A human child's immune system doesn't even fully develop until around 7, so at ages 3 and 4 the child is still receiving benefits from breast milk. There's absolutely nothing "disgusting" about it - it's one of the most natural things a woman can do.

    This is also my opinion on it all. My co-workers saw the picture of the Time Magazine and went off about how terrible and horrible a woman is for breastfeeding her kids even after 6 months old. Then they asked me my opinion -- my simple answer is that "I breastfed til my kids were each a year old.....even in public." That shut'em up! (until one of their office doors closed...and I know what was said! (: ) I do disagree with the way Time approached this topic and I find it pathetic that our society finds it acceptable to have strippers...but not for a mother to simply feed her child.
  • enyo123
    enyo123 Posts: 172 Member
    I know everyone has their own opinion. . . .But I just think its gross the way she is doing it. Maybe when they get that old . . just pump and poor it in a cup or something if you must. Personally I think its too old to be breast fed

    Have you ever pumped? I exclusively pumped for my 2 year old when he was a newborn. It was a nightmare. Quite simply, pumping sucks. It's time consuming and inconvenient. If I were still giving my toddler breast milk, there's no way that I'd pump. There's no telling what he'd get into during that time. :-P
  • geetabean
    geetabean Posts: 76
    I'm against Time Magazine for pitting mothers against each other. And doing it on Mother's Day.



    ^^^^^^^^this^^^^^^^^^

    i am a mother. and i also have to say, at that age, or after 1yr, has NOTHING to do with the child anymore, this has everything to do about her. research.

    Maybe in your mothering situation with your own children this is true, but it doesn't make your opinion TRUE. I stopped nursing my youngest at 18 months and she was devastated! She still asks to nurse nearly every day. I wish people would stop making this into what's right and what's wrong. It isn't any different than dieting.....what you choose to do might be very different from what I choose to do, but if we're both happy with what we're doing then which one of us is "wrong"? Research always has a bias.
  • HellsBells61
    HellsBells61 Posts: 64
    I personally found the cover pic to be disturbing-what are your thoughts?

    What's "disturbing" you - the fact that the mother is breastfeeding a 3 year old or that she had someone take a photo of her doing it or that its printed on the front cover of a magazine?

    The first one doesn't bother me at all, the other two I agree. How is that kid going to cope with the abuse he's going to get from his friends? I hope the mother got paid enough to make her feel a bit better about what she's putting him through.
  • all4richie
    all4richie Posts: 1
    Seems a bit much to me, I have heard of children drinking a bottle up until 5 or 6.
  • amanda3588
    amanda3588 Posts: 422 Member
    If the child can walk, talk, and chew, its time to stop breastfeeding.
  • mdundon09
    mdundon09 Posts: 66 Member
    But I have to say that the picture was purposely set up to be 100% creepy. It needlessly makes it look like a disturbingly sexual practice instead of one that is nurturing.
  • va_va_voom
    va_va_voom Posts: 467 Member
    I breastfed all 4 of my kids for various lengths of time. The longest being 1 year. I have friends who breastfed until 2-3 years of age. I think breastfeeding is the most natural thing in the world to do and loved every minute of it. With that being said, I think the cover was done in poor taste. I actually cringed when I saw it. I think they could've photographed a mother breastfeeding her 3 year old son in a much better light. It screams controversy!

    This^^
  • beachlover317
    beachlover317 Posts: 2,848 Member
    Breastfeeding your children - great! Breastfeeding in public - great! Breastfeeding for as long as you both are comfortable - GREAT! Having your child stand on a chair on the cover of a magazine while breastfeeding - exploitation.
  • Contrary03
    Contrary03 Posts: 289 Member
    Pump it and put it in a cup...you wouldn't keep giving a 3-7 year old milk in a bottle


    That folks, is hitting the nail on the head!.. Exactly!:drinker:
  • adam1885282
    adam1885282 Posts: 135 Member
    I'll add it to the list of "things that don't affect my life even a little."

    Great attitude!
  • TheChocolatePrincess
    TheChocolatePrincess Posts: 137 Member
    From what I have seen, it is supplemental. The kids are eating real food and nursing whenever they feel the need which is typically emotionally driven, not hunger driven.

    Mommy becomes a living binkie.

    So you've seen it, and you've watched a bunch of TV specials against it, and you can now say with authority that it's not right for any child?

    The reasons behind my brother's wife doing it were long and complex, and yes additional emotional support was part of that equation. He was born 2 1/2 months premature and just barely survived as it was. So no matter what "age" he was, he was always physically 2 1/2 months younger than that. He also went through an utter living hell with little contact with his mother for the first month or so as they used machines to keep him alive. So, yeah, using Mom as a binkie for a few extra years was probably part of what made up for that hell and helped him grow emotionally into a functioning individual. Or maybe it was bull****, but he grew up OK.

    He's also got a grandmother who is as judgmental about it as you are, and constantly harps on about it, which is interfering with her relationship with him. Her choice, but she's alienating her grandson by not letting it go a decade later. And it's frankly sad.

    Each parent is responsible for determining the needs of their child and filling them to the best of our abilities. Ours breastfed a little longer than some people think is "OK", but she weaned when it felt right.

    There are many ways to raise a child, and your way obviously worked for yours. Stop judging the way others raise theirs - because there is simply no evidence to show that breastfeeding longer does emotional harm other than from the judgment of others and our nation's obsession with sexuality.


    Defensive much? I am not "judging" I am just saying don't come at me with flawed arguments. I have no issue with people deciding to do what they want with their children. If you believe in spanking, spank, if you want to breastfeed until they 40, so be it, if you want to let your child cross dress, way to go. I don't "judge" people, but I am honest about what things are. Children who are spanked tend to exhibit more agressive behavior, children who are breastfed longer tend to be emotionally immature, children who cross dress tend to get picked on. It is what it is. If you know your baby is a premmie and already starting off behind the gate then do what you gotta do to help them catch up.

    Its not a judgement, its an observation.
  • rossi02
    rossi02 Posts: 549 Member

    Most of the world isn't priviledged to the abundance of food resource that the Western World has. In that, if you have a loaf of bread and a few vegetable to last a week, doesn't it make more sense to feed yourself and breastfeed your child from your body than to try and stretch your already stressed resources between two people and not provide either one of you with the calories or nutrition necessary for survival.

    I'm not knocking your decision, your parenting choice is your own. I am just saying that when I hear that reasoning from women who live in the Western World, I find it flawed and misguided.

    See, I look at this completely different than you. Why would breastfeeding be better for women who aren't getting proper nutrition themselves? It seems, that in 3rd world countries it would be better to wean them and give them "real" food versus depleting someone who can't consume enough to sustain themself. Versus draining what little nutrition they have for a child past the age of two. Sounds backwards to me.
  • kimdoes
    kimdoes Posts: 90
    I breastfed mine, but I stopped well before they were enrolled in school. There's something about knowing they are old enough to feed themselves and wipe their own butts that leads me to not want to plop my boob in their mouth anymore. Personally, it disturbs me too. But what someone else chooses to do and how they raise their kids does not affect me.
  • opus649
    opus649 Posts: 633 Member
    I think the point of the cover was to spark just this kind of debate. I think that all of the people who say breastfeeding at 3 or 4 is "weird" or "unnatural" are dead wrong and it's long past the time when the United States needs to move past the sexualization of the breast.

    WHO recommends MINIMUM two years. And both the APA and WHO agree on the same principle: breastfeed as long as it continues to be agreeable to both child and mother. The kid will wean on his or her own. Or the mother will reach a point where she's ready to stop.

    Sorry, this thread really pisses me off. I can't believe that in the year 2012 mothers have to defend themselves for breast feeding for crying out loud. What the hell do you think women have breasts for????
  • Mustlovepugs11
    Mustlovepugs11 Posts: 131
    EEEEWWWWW... After just looking at the cover I am not sure what to say! That just looks wrong. Bad cover choice!
  • kimdoes
    kimdoes Posts: 90
    Pump it and put it in a cup...you wouldn't keep giving a 3-7 year old milk in a bottle


    That folks, is hitting the nail on the head!.. Exactly!:drinker:

    YES!
  • enyo123
    enyo123 Posts: 172 Member
    sometimes us Mom's can never win!!!

    Bingo. Whatever you do, you're raising a future serial killer or the next typhoid Mary.
  • cherrybomb_77
    cherrybomb_77 Posts: 411 Member


    Each parent is responsible for determining the needs of their child and filling them to the best of our abilities. Ours breastfed a little longer than some people think is "OK", but she weaned when it felt right.

    There are many ways to raise a child, and your way obviously worked for yours. Stop judging the way others raise theirs - because there is simply no evidence to show that breastfeeding longer does emotional harm other than from the judgment of others and our nation's obsession with sexuality.

    Well said! The WHO recommends that babies EVERYWHERE, including good ol' USA, be exclusively breastfed (nothing but breastmilk) for 6 months, and then continue to breastfeed (breastmilk in conjunction with solids and other liquids) for a MINIMUM of two years. http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/statements/2011/breastfeeding_20110115/en/index.html I'll take the advice of the world's best doctors over people on the internet any day. That said, I support the right of mothers to make the best decision for themselves and their children, whether that means not breastfeeding at all, or breastfeeding for several years, and everything in between.
  • opus649
    opus649 Posts: 633 Member
    children who are breastfed longer tend to be emotionally immature

    This is based on your years of field research? :huh:
  • Ashley_Panda
    Ashley_Panda Posts: 1,404 Member
    I still breast feed with my mom....er.

    No, now it's from your wife. :P
  • nerdyandilikeit
    nerdyandilikeit Posts: 2,185 Member
    I feel it's perfectly normal to do this inpubic until a certain age, but I don't feel a large child should be sucking on their mother's breast. By that age they are exposed to tv, video games and realize what things are sexualized.

    I'm not a mother, but I would lean towards this. When my cousins were younger and I babysat them, my 3 year old cousin was constantly trying to touch my boobs because they were much larger than his mother's A cups. Unless the kid REALLY has no idea about what's sexualized (which was not the case ever in my family full of horn dogs), I think there should be an age where you use a pump over the actual breast.
  • moozle1
    moozle1 Posts: 1
    I'm a mom of two, and I breastfed each of my girls until 13 months old. I fully support breastfeeding. I wouldn't do it until 3, but I could care less if someone else does.

    Every parent can parent however they want - attachment or not. None of my business.

    That said, I find the picture and ESPECIALLY the title of that article in very poor taste. It's for media sensationalism and nothing more, and if you look at the buzz, they have succeeded as usual. They picked an older child on purpose (attachment parenting doesn't always have to mean bfing until a later age), they have both looking straight into the camera (COMPLETELY unnatural) with "take that, I dare you to say something" looks on their faces, and they put used a judgmental title intended to pit moms against each other.

    The second picture in that article is much more natural of the kid curled up in the mom's lap, but of course they wouldn't use that on the cover. It would never cause the same stir. TIME just wanted people to buy the magazine and talk about it - mission accomplished.
  • LondonEliza
    LondonEliza Posts: 456 Member
    Quite simply, pumping sucks.

    This made me howl with laughter! :)
    Thank you
    xx
This discussion has been closed.

Categories