baby suckling on another boob

Retro, breastmilk gives many benefits past 6 months old that no other food in the world can offer. Besides the basic benefits of basic nutrition, nursing an eating baby guarantees that even when more solids are on her shirt than in her tummy, she's still fed. If she's sick and not keeping anything down, she is still hydrated. Breastmilk contains immunities to bacteria and other yuckies in baby's environment that she can't yet make herself. And unlike formula, the entire make of the breastmilk changes to fit the need of the baby nursing.

And then there is the emotional side of nursing an older baby. When baby is sick, comfort and hydration come from one source. When baby is over-stimulated, she can nurse to calm down and gather herself. And for a busy mom chasing after an active baby, it offers a chance to sit down and relax, possibly nap too, and most importantly, enjoy the times when her baby is just that...a baby...

Bottles are NOT necessary if you breastfeed. And you should only formula-feed if it's a life or death situation, where mom has passed, extremely ill, or cannot physically produce breastmilk.

 

I was just going to say the exact thing hippyfreek said.
Almost anyone who knows anything about babies knows that it is recomended to feed breastmilk until AT LEAST one year of age, and if possible, much longer after that. They still need it, their digestive systems are not mature enough so soley have sold foods, and their immune systems are benifiting a great deal from it. Even formula is said to be fed until the first birthday, dispite the fact that it's not even changing with the baby, as breastmilk does, which just prooves that there is nothing that is going to give them more benifits than that.
And it goes beyond food, as freek said. It's extremily important for bonding.
A breastfeeding mom shouldn't even own bottles, unless the breastfeeding relationship is well established and the mom has to work.

 

Wanna go into a Lactation Consultant Service with me? We are both so into it now, and all...Maggie's taught us alot...We should share the knowledge...

 

LOL, no kidding, that's not a bad idea. It's a little ironic, too....we're the ones who had so much trouble here, yet jump on anything to do with breastfeeding

 

i find it interesting that people are creeped out by it. there was no pacifier around (and i doubt this mama is the pacifier type), and she had two other kids to deal with. i was holding this small little child on my lap, and he had just been fed. he wanted boob. he wasn't sucking like he was trying to get milk (or at least i don't think so), i think it was more of a pacifing thing. comforting to him. didn't bother me. he didn't suck hard enough to draw blood, so any disease i might have did not transfer to him. i trust that his little 5 month old germs will not give me any diseases.
whatever. we're all entitled to our opinions. when she asked me to give him my boob, i was surprised. but that's what he wanted - why not try new things?

 

Kayte

the thing is in the world we live in today, it is not common to share a child as the mama you met shares her children. This mama opened your eyes and changed you. Odds are you will remember this for your whole life and the feelings you felt and the sensations it is a far out cosmic experince that you had, and you shared it with the world on the internet. Oh well enjoy your cosmic connection with the little guy, you have something that most folks do not have. My sister nurse each others babys all of the time and no one runns around flipping out. I think it is great you met such a down to earth hip mama, and think you should find the time to hang out with her and her family and learn as much fro them as you can. It is all about the experinces and living the life you love and that is what your doing! keep it real sister

 

As long as YOU are comfortable with it, I don't see the problem....it's not really wierd at all, IMO...

 

how sad that there where as many posts as there where about how "creepy" and "nasty" it is. I think i read somwhere that tribes in Africa have babies nursing on many mamas, the whole it takes a tribe to raise a child. I have nursed my s-i-l kids and she has nursed mine. i personally wouldn't let a stranger nurse my baby, but i wouls never call it creepy. to each her own.

 

Although I did raise some safety and liabilty concerns, I need to make it clear that I do not think there is ANYTHING "creepy" about this at all. If it is someone you trust and that person trust you, then, I see no problem.

Freek and Kirsten, you would be surprised how many Lactation Consultants and LLL leaders have had terrible problems nursing thier first babies or were not able to nurse then at all. At least 3 of the 7 founders of LLL were forced to bottle feed their first children, due to unsolvable problems. I had awful problems nursing my first, Sunshine, and I KNOW she would have not nursed as long as she did if I had not gotten help. I was lucky, though, that our difficulty was something solvable. But, it make me determined, and then wanted to help other mamas, because I KNOW how hard it can be.

Too many people (not you ladies, I know that) think LLL leaders and LCs had it "easy" when they had their own kids. Usually not true, though. The better LCs I know faced personal strife while learning to breastfeed as well.

Actually, the American Academy of Pedicatrics recommends a minimum of 12 months of breastfeeding and then "as long as mother and child desire to continue." The WHO (World Health Organization) recommends TWENTY FOUR MONTHS minimum. There are nutrients and antibodies in human milk, even for toddlers, which cannot be found anywhere else.

 

Dudettes, I'm not attacking you, and I respect your point of veiws, but as with most medical things, there is contention over the issue of the duration of breast feeding, but this isnt really what the thread is about, the thread is about giving a baby another womans breast to suck on, which I personally find a little strange. My point is, I belive that their are other, more hygenic and suitable ways to pacify a child than a foreign breast is all.

 

Wow, that was a dumb comment.

 

You are truly misinformed about breastfeeding and nutrition.

Contention? Yes there is a debate between:

PATRIACHIAL THINKING TRYING TO CONTROL THE WORLD. THE COLD HEARTLESS ANALYTICAL MACHINE...BOUND BY LAWS, RULES, AND HEARTLESS AUTHORITY...DISECT SPIRITUALITY MAIM THE SACRED... A MASCULINE WESTERN MIND THAT IS CONSTANTLY TRYING TO UNDERMINE NATURE AND THE GODDESS, the DIVINITY OF MOTHERHOOD AND MAKE A DOLLAR.SAYING LOVE IS JUST CHEMICALS ANYWAY.....

VS

MILLIONS OF YEARS OF EVOLUTION. FROM WHALES, to CATS... MOTHERLY LOVE, DEEP BONDING, CONNECTING ON LEVELS UNSEEN WITH A BABY. FOLLOWING YOUR INNER SENSES, not a man in a whiny british voice "it is best if you wean at 6-7 months, because I know..." BEYOND SPACE TIME. ON A CELLULAR AND SOULULAR LEVEL. GIVE YOUR LIFE ESSENCE TO ANOTHER... LOOk AT PRIMITVE CULTURES ALL OVER THE WORLD. BREASTS ARE ON OUR HEART CHAKRAS FOR A REASON. DOING IT CAUSE IT FEELS RIGHT INSIDE NOT A STRANGERS ADVICE.


Why would you wean a baby so young and start giving them cows milk? Are they calves? Do you still drink cows milk?

BM, helps them to digest, gives them LIVE immune protection. Its a raw and nutritious food. Liquid gold.
I did it for two years with my girl. It personally would not wean under a year, and then start giving them dead milk from a animal I never met.
Now thats creeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeepy.


I aplogize for the many posts....I was responding to them as I scrolled down. For some reason Firefox will not let me cut and paste...

 

My mother breastfed me for two years. When she took me back to Tunisia, her sister was also nursing my cousin. She said that I would go over and nurse with my little cousin. It was a quite beautiful, and there was truly nothing wrong. She was my aunt, my mothers sister. A beautiful bonding experience for everyone.


YOUR SIG IS MIND BLOWING!! BTW

 

Got a chip on your shoulder honey? Certainly sounds like it. I'm not misinformed about breast feeding. I just have a different opinion to yours which has nothing to do with anything you've mentioned. I dont have this opinion because I am a patriachal woman hater. jesus!

Anyhoo, I wasnt even suggesting feeding a baby cows milk. No babies arent calves, neither are adults. I dont think a baby should be given cows milk. Cows milk is for cows. Plus cows milk isn't good for kids. I wasnt even suggesting formula. There is the option of feeding a child breast milk in a bottle you know.

As for the aqntibodies and nutirents, sure there are, but your childs immune system at that age has strenghthened itself enough with what a mother has already given it at that stage to survive without breast feeding.

I dont think breast feeding is nasty. I think breast feeding a baby with another woman''s breast is. freaking hell people. I am entitled to my own opinion.

 

I'd also like to add that sex is also a 'natural' practice too, and lots of people die from sex related illness. you gotta take precautions when it comes to fluids

 

I have an opinion too, and I think your opinions are foolish.

Perhaps your mind has been hijacked by the western patriarchial viewpoint?

I also don't think I have a "chip" on my shoulder. I think that I'm just not in the mood these days to pet your ego, and be socially polite.

Back to the point.....

Why would you just switch to the bottle if you are still breastfeeding? Do you think there is something gross about breastfeeding?
What would be the point of spending all that time pumping, warming milk, and cleaning bottles when you can just give it to them fresh and hot straight from your breast??? I understand that many mothers have to work, but it doesnt make sense to make a switch just because.


"As for the antibodies and nutirents, sure there are, but your childs immune system at that age has strenghthened itself enough with what a mother has already given it at that stage to survive without breast."


Immune are not fully developed that young.

Where are you getting your information???? ??????
The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends breastfeeding up to one year, and continuing as long as its mutually beneficial. The World Health Organization recommends breastfeeding a minimum of two years. Of course you could stop giving baby BM and Formula but it is not recommended. Even WIC offices stop giving you formula after a year...6 or 7 months is too early. On top of that they even sell toddler formula now.
To be honest I think you are giving out dangerous information. If you stop breastfeeding that early then it would be good to give your child formula. Most mothers find it difficult to always provide healthy meals, and the baby would be missing out on all those healthy fats, minerals, and vitamins.

With my child I could of probably given her sugar water in a bottle, and she might have survived. But I gave her breast milk so she could thrive on all levels.

 

Yeah and alot of people are born from sex....ALOT.

Of course you need to take precautions with fluids, but when it comes to breast feeding between a mother and child....get real. You wouldnt be here if breastfeeding was considered lethal to the human race. Dont try to compare STD's with Breastfeeding.

 

Retrogroove Girl wasn't attacking you for crying out loud. Lay up on her...she's allowed to have her opinion.

I happen to agree with a lot of what Retro says...and I don't think it's fair that you are attacking her...

 

i don't even have milk in my boobs.

 

Ladies, let's try to chill, OK. One cannot have an "Opinion" about a fact, fact is fact, and fact is not something you can "decide on." But, there is no reason to call names. Combat lack of knowlege with actual knowlege, not name calling. "Kay?

I DO need to address something with fact, NOT opinion.

OK, you said you are not "misinformed" about breastfeeding. I am not so sure. (And I am not saying this with any vehemence, just from what you say, and what is WELL KNOWN about the facts about human milk feeding are TWO differnt things entirely)

You expect a womyn to PUMP her milk,(assuming she has the proper pump,teh money to buy a good pump, the time to pump it, the place to store it, and the knowlege to use it) anywhere from 8 to 20 times a DAY and put it into a plastic object, rewarm it, then feed it to the baby? WHY? Why waste all that time, waste a good deal of nutrients and subject the baby to nipple confusion AND a lack of his mother's breast? (all the while the milk is losing nutrients and antibodies, AND the FACT that there are antibodies which can ONLY be obtained while the baby is attached to the actual breast.) Her breasts are RIGHT THERE! I have NEVER fed my milk in a bottle, after my first baby got SEVERE nipple confusion. Do you know what that is? (Some actual education about breastfeeding and you would know.) Babies can often FORGET how to breastfeed, or learn to suck in a nonfunctional manner from a SINGLE bottle. After we cured the nipple confusion with my first baby ALL those bottles went into the trash and were never bought a single bottle, nor bottle fed an infant in my house again. Nipple confusion is the SINGLE most common reason breastfeeding fails. Did you know that? If you were "edcated" on breastfeeding you would. You DON'T know about breastfeeding, admit it. It isn't the end of the world, but PLEASE do not tell BREASTFEEING MOTHERS the untrue things you beleive are "fact" but are in reality, nothing but old doctor's tales and simple mistruths or "opinions." One cannot substitute opinion for fact, especially in a place like this, where the mamas really know their breastfeeding stuff.

Again, IF you did know about breastfeeding AND the human infant, you would know that the infant immune system is not "strengthened" enough, or even anywhere near done developing until around SIX or SEVEN years of age. That is NOT an opinion. It is fact. "Survive?" Yeah. In this day and age, maybe. "Thrive to the best that that child would have otherwise, if given human milk for the duration that a human primate was intended to?" NO. Also, I think nearly all mama's aspirations for their babies extend BEYOND simply "surviving" infancy. Hell, there is a chance your kid could survive fed on Kool Aid, with a little salt thrown in, but I certain wouldn't advise it, and I think the majority of mothers have enough brain power to not do something that simply gives a "chance" of survival. Most of us want our babies to do as well as they are genetically progarmmed to do, and do whatever that takes to reach that goal. Simply "surviving" is not the only goal. And, science has shown that a minimum of 12 months or more is going a long way to attaining that goal.

If you were to look at history, (or actually were educated on breastfeeding) you would know until about 70 years ago babies who weaned before 12 to 18 months or so simply DIDN'T survive. Look at the Foundling Hosptials in Europe, from the Middle Ages up until the invention of Antibiotics, where single womyn would bring their babies, so they could either get on with their lives or become wet nurses. These places usually could not afford wet nurses, so they fed animal milk or "pap." (what modern formulea is based on.) Most had NINETY NINE PERCENT DEATH RATES. This is not an opinion, it is fact. Babies simply did NOT survive without human milk, ever. Look at Africa or other underdeveloped countries, non breastfed babies, or those who are weaned at....say.......6 months, more than 60% death rates. Fact.

You say you don't think babies should have cow milk. did you KNOW that MOST formulea are made with just that? What do you think they make it out of? Chimpazee milk? (actually, that would be a better alternative, but chimps tend to bite when hooked up to breast pumps and we can't "cattle" them like cows.)

Seeing as soy is a high allergen and not appropriate for many babies (althoiugh some do fine on it, if that is the only choice,) and neither is Cow milk and, in your opinion, neither is continued breastfeeding WHAT is a mother supposed to feed her INFANT, who, in FACT does NOT have a Strengthened Immune System? Human milk, with formula as a choice, only for those in medical need, are the ONLY choices. Many many babies are, IN FACT, not even taking any solid food at 6 or 7 months. That is a normal developmental expectation for the human infant. (In fact, the AAP and other well researched groups, based on actual fact, recommend not even trying to feed a baby any solids before the 6 month mark, and some take many momths after that to actually need and want solids.) So, what are these babies supposed to eat? Bottles may cause nipple confusion, is expensive, and can decrease the antibody load, cow milk is out of the question, chimp milk is not available and solids are certainly NOT recommended alone. What choice is there for the majority of mothers and babies? Hmmn, the choice that was first given. Breastfeeding.

I'm going to tell you something. There are things I reallly don't know a lot about. :H I stay out of the Sex forum, one, because I don't want to be there, TWO, because my knowlege of different choices of sexual acts is not something I am "educated" in. I post very infrequently on the Vegetarian Forum, mainly because my Vege days are long behind me, and my Education on the subject is not applicable, and is very outdated. IN other words, I don't use my OPINIONS as FACT, at all, especially in situations where I may well have NO IDEA what I am talking about. I am not going to go waltzing into a thread on proper vegetarian food, or S&M acts, when I know little more than either outdated information, or things I have heard through less than informed sources.

Really, I think people only get mad when others on this thread, who know nothing about the things they are well aware of, tell them what to do, or use their uneducated opinion as "fact" when those of us who have these things as essensial parts of our lives DO know the facts. If you think it is "Icky" that a womyn nurses an other womyn's baby, that is your opinion, and you are welcome to it.(But if you do say something like this, please realize the hornet's nest which will be stirred up.) When you start telling people what babies NEED, and how long they "need" it, based on faulty information, and you are FAR from the truth, then a line has been crossed. Please, the reason people have responded to you with such vehemence is that your stating your opinions as fact and your less than stellar "knowlege" about breastfeeding is upsetting.

Your concern about transmission of certain disesases was something that I also touched on. But, if Kayte and her freind are comfortable with the arrangement, and Kayte knows that she does run the risk of the chance of an angry mama (which is probably unlikely in this case) or even disrupting her periods due to breast stimulation, or even runs the risk of actually starting to produce a small amount of colostrum, than the other arguments are reallly not imporant.

Retro, I am not calling you on the carpet. But, mothers who KNOW what they are talking about are really upset with some of the cavalier comments about misinformation concerning "what babies need." Where ARE you getting your information? Because, if one looks anywere from The American Acedemy of Pediatrics, to the World Health Organization, to the Centers for Disease Control to the Journal of Human Lactation to journals from Pediatrics to The Journal of Immunology to Developmental Journal ect, with the exception of your concern about the small risk of disease transmission, you "facts" are not supported by any recent or long held to be true data.

Please, no hard feelings, but you are dealing with some VERY sensitive subjects here, and being too casual can not only upset people (and not in a thinking, educating well meaning way) but maybe even give a new mother or someone who is not yet a mother improper information which could actually cause breastfeeding failure. And, to be honest, you really don't have enough knowlege to be giving people breastfeeding advice.