I don't understand why mothers continue to breastfeed older children! don't get me wrong here, I am all for breastfeeding, it is the most natural and the best thing you can do for your BABY or young child. That is why women have breasts to nurture babies, however when i hear of older children being breastfead it does not sit well with me. Its just not right really! I will probably get lambasted for this but this is my view, we are all entitled to our opinions.

Where do you draw the line! I have read on these forums that babies will naturally wean themselves off, however what if they are still not ready and are still wanting to feed when they are say 9-10 years. You would not have an older child who is not toilet trained, or still using a dummy of feeding from a bottle would you! Why is breastfeeding an older child different, surely there is a natural progression where the parents have to say no, enough is enough!

i think it could be neediness in the mother, an inability to let go. ewes, mares, cows will all kick their young off after a certain time whether they are pregnant again or not as they feed through neccessity rather than emotional attachment.

milk producing cows are mechanically forced on.

my girl weaned herself off me quite suddenly over a few days at around a year and although i was a little sad about it, and more than a little uncomfortable (i was still producing milk that she didn't want) but i was glad that it had drawn to a mutual, natural conclusion.

if i had have breast feeded, i would have stopped when the baby got teeth!

at what age did you both stop at

my last child was over 2 when he stopped breastfeeding.

when they have teeth and bite (ouch) you push there heads into the breast and they let go.

dont they lose that suck method as they get older so they cant get at the milk anyway.

http://news.independent.co.uk/health/article3155364.ece

LOL CM - I was just going to link to that article!

There are a whole variety of reasons why a mother nurses her child until that child outgrows the need - that article puts it better than I ever could.

I think as well, it's worth reminding ourselves of the number of three and four year olds that still have dummies or the 'nighttime bottle' - the need for comfort and sucking is still there even in a child who isn't being breastfed.

Studies of the physiology of a child have also shown that they will outgrow the need naturally somewhere between the ages of 3 and 7 years - looking at their jaw development..

In cultures where bottle feeding is not the norm, no one would bat an eyelid at a 4 year old nursing.

HTH!

All well and good CM, but what if the child wants to bf into older childhood. On an extended bf programm this child was 7/8 and still feeding with no sign of stopping, this is just wrong! One has to wonder why the mother is still carrying this on, bitty bitty comes to mind there. Surely the child should be encouraged to move on! You would not have a child of this age drinking from a bottle now would you!

Posts:

I don't know of any 9 or 10 year olds who nurse though.. The oldest I do know of is an 8 year old.. Does anyone know different?

I finished when my kid was 4.

I think some older nurslings have other high needs though.

It sounds like it! I just do not agree that children need to bf, babies yes but not older children.

Oh yes, and technically breastfeeding until a child self-weans is not actually "extended breastfeeding" but "natural term". "Extended" means "beyond the (biological) norm" so it would only be extended if it was a child of say 9 or 10 or 11 still nursing. In reality most Western babies are weaned prematurely.

When my eldest was about to start school this year I discussed weaning with my HV, she reassured me that there were several children who would be in her class, some of whom were essentially a year older than her (she's an August baby, so started school within weeks of turning 4) who still had dummies and bottles of milk at bedtime, that it wa sperfectly normal and not to worry about it.

Neither of mine have ever bitten me.

If i were able to bf i think that i would have continued to 1-2 years (depending on baby), that is what WHO recommend the length of time to bf. I would not go over, i hope to do away with the dummies and bottles by the time Katie is 1 year (hopefully) this is my first child so i don't know how ambitious that is.

Hi Piglet,

there is nothing wrong with a bedtime bottle or dummy, even in a 2 or 3 yr old, small childrenstill have an instinctive need to suck and to deny them is a little unfair. As long as they are not walking around with a dummy in their mouth or a bottle filled with juice etc then there is no reason to stop these things all together. They are still babies for quite some time really!

Thanks CM, no i would never give my baby or young child juice or artificial drinks. I cannot stand it when i see babies or young children with a fizzy drink or juice in their bottle or sweets in their hands. I do use a dummy to help her to sleep as me rocking does not always help. when i withdraw it she does cry but try not to use dummy too often.

I suppose they are all individuals with there own needs. Sucking in whatever form is comes is a childs comfort, weather it be at the breast, bottle, dumm, or thumb.
My nephew (bottle fed) had a dummy until he was three, mostly at night for comfort.
My friend is still BF her daughter, almost 2, but usually only first thing in the morning and last thing at night.
My son lost the need for his bottle at 9 months and went straight onto having his milk out of a free flow cup, he was never big on sucking (too much like hard work).
Myself, I was a thumb sucker, and did so until I was about 12. It was my comfort.
I think children just seek out their comfort in whatever form is natural to them.

quote:

Originally posted by pigletmania:
If i were able to bf i think that i would have continued to 1-2 years (depending on baby), that is what WHO recommend the length of time to bf. I would not go over, i hope to do away with the dummies and bottles by the time Katie is 1 year (hopefully) this is my first child so i don't know how ambitious that is.

hiya, i just wanted to say, mine had a dummy and didn't want to give it up, they hung them on the christmas tree for father christmas to exchange for presents, they never asked for them after that

I think it largely depends on the child; most seem to naturally wean themselves by the age of three. Children develop differently, you can't really have hard and fast rules

I do think though that you can perhaps be in danger of 'babying' a child if you carry on too long. There are other ways to make a child feel secure at the age of 7 other than breastfeeding. I think perhaps there can also be an element of the mother not wanting to let go and let the child develop a bit more independence

Hi Barbie, yes i do agree. There may be an element to the mother not wanting to let go especially if the child is say past 3 years old, definitely in the case of the 9 year old child who was still bf on this extended bf programme. There really is no need for that at all!

Yes i understand that the child may still want comfort and to suck something, but it would not be right to give a bottle to an older child, or a dummy so bf is in the same vein really.

I would just like to clarify that I don't mean there should be a distinct cut-off point; I think a four year old or even five year old is not necessarily too old to be breastfed.

I do think though that past 5, and definitely at 7, a child is probably getting too old to be breastfed. Breast milk ceases to be of added value quite a while before this, and as others have said you wouldn't encourage a 5 or 6 year old to continue with a dummy

I guess under 5 would be ok, but anything over, the child should be weaned off the breast. Its like toilet training, you would not have a 5 year old in nappies because they prefer it to going on the potty, you would try and move them on, its a natural progression.

Oh dear god help those poor bottle fed children , who will be more sick, less intelligent than breast fed children. There is no hope for them then!

Re. non-Western cultures: breastfeeding beyond 2 1/2 years is not generally done out of choice, but of necessity: they often have extremely limited access to clean water and food and so breastfeeding as long as possible is essential in order that the child gain any sustenance

In terms of disease and immunity, a child's immune system is fully developed by the age of 5 and thus breastfeeding has no additional benefit in this regard after that point

I have very bad eczema, i have had it since 9monts old, so far Katie is free of it (she is bottle fed, breast for the first week and a half of her life), has not been sick as a result of my not breast feeding, she did have diaorhea because my husband and I both had diorhea and sickness so she was bound to get it being in close contact.

Katie is advanced in her development(she is currently 8.5), holding her head up at 1 month, rolling over at 4 months, crawling at 5 months, standing up at 7 months, and is very alert and vocal. So I don't think that the paragraph about bf children having higher cognitive scores and less sickness can be universally applicable. I think that it is coincidence on this research that this was the case. It all depends on genetics and the home environment in which the child is brought up in.

Pigletmania - you are correct. Upbringing etc really does have a major impact on children and their development. It has nothing to do with bf or ff. If you interact with your child and engage with them on all levels then they are bound to be more advanced or should I say, develop accordingly. Why they believe that some bf children are more intelligent is beyond me!! It is all in the genetics and upbringing.....I should know I was ff and am mega brainy (!!!!)

Oh sure, the assertion that formula fed children are different is obviously just a whimsical notion dreamed up by hippy loons like me who want to chain all women to their babies by the boobs and make those who don't breastfed feel guilty.

Or, it is the result of hundreds of controlled studies covering thousands and thousands of children spanning decades.

*sigh*

Do you dismiss all scientific research and study just because it doesn't suit you?

quote:

Originally posted by barbie86:
Re. non-Western cultures: breastfeeding beyond 2 1/2 years is not generally done out of choice, but of necessity: they often have extremely limited access to clean water and food and so breastfeeding as long as possible is essential in order that the child gain any sustenance

These children are also eating solid foods you knoq, they do not get significant percentages of calories from breastmilk (unless`they are unwell and not eating), mainly immunological support and comfort. Ask a mother in one of these cultures why she hasn't weaned her 2-3 year old and she'd ask you why she should, it's not done because the have no choice, but because it's a good thing to do, and this is true no matter where you live, and the cleanliness of the water supply has nothing to do with it!