Breastfeeding an older baby at WDW

[AnaheimGirl]

I am not asking you not to nurse your child in public. It's impossible to speak to BFing mom's about our opinions. Nurse all you like. All I asked is that you do it discreetly. Is that so much to ask? I'm not trying to take away your ability to do so. Just don't whip our your breast and have a child attach itself to it (and I'm not talking babies). I've been places where woman do not use discretion and think nothing of having their breast out there for all to see. That's all I'm asking is that you cover up a bit. When some of you talk about breastfeeding a 4 yo, I don't know how that can be made discreet at all, and yes it makes me uncomfortable. Yes I know my children will be exposed to alot of things in life, but I as a mother I should have the choice as to when I want them exposed to certain things. Enough said on this subject for me because no matter how I ask for BFing in public mom's to be discreet, they are going to take my opinion as being against them (which for all of you reading, I am not).

I completely understand that you are not against bf or bf'ing moms. I completely agree with you that it should be done discreetly. I'm now going to paraphrase from a prior post of mine:

What bothers me though, is this expectation that a nursing mom is going to "whip out her breast", and that people feel the need to tell her not to, before they even know if she does it or not. Most nursing moms are discreet in public. It is the exception, rather than the rule, to see an exposed breast.

So, why are all bf'ing moms painted with that broad brush? To me, that is as offensive as projecting any other stereotype onto a group of people. If a bride-to-be noted on this board that she was going to be honeymooning at Disney, would anyone respond to her "just please don't play tonsil-hockey with your hubby in front of my kids. This couple in front of us in line for Peter Pan was totally going at it right in front of us, it was disgusting and I didn't know how to explain it to my kids"?? No, we all know it's wrong to take the behavior of a small portion of a group of people and project it onto the rest of the group. But this is done over and over on boards all over the internet with bf'ing moms. Why is it OK? Why don't some people realize how insulting it is to have people assume the worst in you, when you've given them no reason to do so?

Going back and looking at the OP, she clearly stated that she was going to be discreet:

I expect that I won't need to breastfeed her more than once or twice a day while we are at the parks and I'll probably do the majority of the feedings at the Baby Care Centers

so why did some posters feel the need to bring up stories of the exposed breasts they've seen and 6yo's bf'ing and all that? All of it is irrelevent to the OP's question, and reeks of nasty stereotypes.

 

[GEM]

I think being intolerant goes both ways as this thread clearly illustrates. I see nothing wrong with all people, whatever their beliefs, being as comfortable as possible.

Yes, that's easy to say, but I think we're actually just sort of at an impass here. There are some things I will not be tolerant of, that I don't think we SHOULD be tolerant of.

And, for me, people who think it's strange or gross or disgusting for me to feed my child fall into that category. I will not be tolerant of that particular viewpoint - just like I won't be tolerant of my uncles's racist attitude towards blacks, or my crazy neighbor who thinks it's a sin for women to work outside the home. There are just some things that shouldn't be tolerated - and the idea that breastfeeding moms (no matter where they are or how old their little one is) are doing anything wrong is definately one of them, at least for me.

There are people on this thread who would not wish to tolerate me sitting on a park bench next to them nursing a baby or toddler in what I consider a discreet way - and I will not stop doing that just because it makes them uncomfortable - so that has to leave us just agreeing to disagree. Happily, the law is my side.

 

[Tink123]

I think we need to all back away from the keyboard and take a breath.
Now, we all have an opinion and we need to agree to disagree.

Let's ban together and not look at this or respond to this thread again!

 

[AnaheimGirl]

Lulu, I'll try to answer your questions, too...

are there any places where you wouldn't breastfeed?

Hmm, a smoky bar? but I wouldn't bring a baby to a smoky bar in the first place, nor a fancy restaurant. Really, I can't think of a single place that I would bring a baby to, where I wouldn't breastfeed. I've breastfed in malls, parks, amusement park, hockey games, movie theaters, restaurants, festivals, gosh, I can't remember, but anywhere I'd take the baby.

Do you believe that there is an age that is "too old"?

I didn't answer this one before, because I think it was directed more at extended nursers and I only nursed until my dd was about 10 months. I would also be taken aback by the sight of a 6 or 7yo bfing, and I wouldn't do it. In fact, I had to tell my dd no when she was 5 and I was pumping to get ready to try to bf her younger sister (whom we adopted). Since this was before sis was born, I believe it was a real desire to be close to mom, not because of jealousy. Anyway, I wasn't comfortable with it, so I didn't allow it.

It's hard to say where I'd draw the line at what is "too old". I look at my 2.5yo now, and even though she is very much becoming a "kid", there are a lot of babyish things about her, too, like the way she loves to be cuddled when she's tired or hurt, and the way she loves to drink her milk. Had I been sucessful breastfeeding her, and had she still wanted to continue at this age, I'd see nothing wrong with it whatsoever. To me, somewhere around 3 to 4 years gets to be a gray area. In some ways, yes, to me, they do seem "too old", but then, I've never weaned a toddler/preschooler, so I don't know how hard it would be to take something away from the child that he/she loves so much.

Every woman I've talked to who has nursed a 3 or 4yo has said the same things. They aren't nursing so much for nutrition anymore, but for comfort. They mostly just nurse at home, in the morning and at night before bed. When they NIP, it's because something happened that upset the child and that's how he/she is best calmed. It's a quick snuggle, a couple of sips, then they're off playing again. I see nothing wrong with that, although I personally don't see myself doing it, but then again, neither did any of these women I've discussed this with. They didn't intend to nurse for so long, it just happened, and since it wasn't harming the child, they decided to continue until the child wanted to stop, which turned out to be no later than 3.5 - 4yo, if I recall correctly.

Hope that helps answer your questions.

 

[AnaheimGirl]

GEM, you picked a great username. You are a gem. You say everything I'm thinking, but so much more politely and eloquently.

 

[Goobergal99]

Huh? We are? That's new to me. Maybe I should take off my shirt in public tomorrow and run down the street like that. See how long it takes for me to get arrested for indecent exposure. Methinks the cops wouldn't be too pleased.

That being said, I see no problem with breastfeeding in general if woman feels that its best though I do ask that she place a blanket over her chest when she does so. Its not that its disgusting or anything, it just makes me uncomfortable to watch.

I must say though, I've never known any mother who breast fed beyond 9 months. Why continue so long when the child obviously has teeth and no longer needs it? If we needed to breastfeed, we wouldn't develop teeth after a small amount of time.

This is my point exactly, Totalia funny we came a long way in a short time

 

[Goobergal99]

This is a really funny post! No flames, but it is obvious you don't anything about babies and their development into the toddler years. The immunity from the mother wears off at about 6 months of age. Look it up and read the AAP policy on breastfeeding which is linked in an earlier post. Do you know any toddlers who use pacifers or use bottles or a baby with teeth who does( )? Hmmmm. Bfing is food and comfort and mom all in one. Sounds like a good deal to me! What is the right age to cut that off? I think that is up to each bfing pair.

I am a mother, so my knowledge about toddlers is very extensive. I didnt allow my daughter to suck on a pacifier after 6 months old because I didnt want her to be dependent on it. It becomes a protection blanket for some kids and they continue to use it far to long, in my opinion anyway. All you managed to do here was quote the AAP policy on BREASTFEEDING! It is going to be biased because it is supportive of breast feeding. Therefore I really don't care what it states, I learned in Nursing school as well as from DD's pediatrican that a child carries it's mothers immunity up to one year of age.

 

[I_Know_You2!]

This is my point exactly

Ohhhhh! I thought your point was the inaccurate medical information! If you are going to post as a nurse, please get your facts straight first! It makes me fearful to be in the hospital under the care of those you talk before thinking.

Now that you have teeth, you had probably not drink anymore either!

 

[GEM]

Did you say you were a nurse? Do you work for a hospital? Man, if so, I really, really, really hope they have a good lactation consultant on staff . . .

 

[kidshop]

By Totalia: I must say though, I've never known any mother who breast fed beyond 9 months. Why continue so long when the child obviously has teeth and no longer needs it? If we needed to breastfeed, we wouldn't develop teeth after a small amount of time.

This is my point exactly, Totalia funny we came a long way in a short time

Um, anyone ever read the AAP policy on bfing? A baby's major nutrition for the first year is supposed to be breastmilk or if bm is not available, then formula. This would be why: Bm (and formula) contain important fats for brain development. No solid food can compare to the nutrition found in bm. They are not as nutritionally dense and babies have small stomachs. They need concentrated nutrients during the first year as this is the period of the most rapid growth in the human lifespan. Solid food does not replace bm or formula during the first year and this ensures the best health of the baby. Many parents feed less than adequate solid foods to their kids (french fries, spaghettios etc) and do not make sure they eat enough fruits and veggies. Bm and formula are complete nutrition. Again, I encourage you to research this yourselves if you are interested in knowing facts about a baby's development.

 

[Goobergal99]

Ohhhhh! I thought your point was the inaccurate medical information! If you are going to post as a nurse, please get your facts straight first! It makes me fearful to be in the hospital under the care of those you talk before thinking.

Now that you have teeth, you had probably not drink anymore either!

You ppl can be so condescending, now you are insulting me as a professional just because I disagree with your BFeeding Nazism. Give me a break, Oh and BTW, if you were ever a patient of mine following open heart surgery you would be glad to have me

 

[GEM]

Here's some good information, if anyone is interested.

More info.

 

[kidshop]

I am a mother, so my knowledge about toddlers is very extensive. I didnt allow my daughter to suck on a pacifier after 6 months old because I didnt want her to be dependent on it. It becomes a protection blanket for some kids and they continue to use it far to long, in my opinion anyway. All you managed to do here was quote the AAP policy on BREASTFEEDING! It is going to be biased because it is supportive of breast feeding. Therefore I really don't care what it states, I learned in Nursing school as well as from DD's pediatrican that a child carries it's mothers immunity up to one year of age.

Please show me something, anything medically based that says a child who is not bf carries the mother's immunity until one year of age. WHY do you suppose the AAP is supportive of bfing? Who benefits from this? It's sad that you don't care what the AAP states, but blindly believe your ped and school. I guess you pick and choose what to believe....

 

[SueM in MN]

I've opened up a reply window to this thread 3 times already, but I get interrupted and when I come back, it's 2 pages later (so then I have to read the 2 pages and by the time I get ready to post it's another page).
Anyway....
I have the perspective of having nursed a long time ago, when it was not that common, there were no places to nurse and if anyone had complained that I was nursing in public, I would have been breaking the law. At that time, I was also a Public Health Nurse who did prenatal classes, newborn classes in the hospital for new parents (when new parents stayed in the hsopital long enough to get any classes) and home visits to new parents.

I nursed both of my DD's. The oldest one to about 13 months, when I had to quit because of some medication I needed to be on for a prolonged period of time that would pass thru the breast milk and could have harmed her. Weaning her was one of the hardest things I had done in my life because neither one of us wanted to be finished. She was one of those babies that really enjoyed nursing and always took her time to finish each feeding.
My younger DD weaned herself at about 13 months. She was always a "drink it and get it over with" kind of nurser and at that point, she decided she was over it. Stopping nursing her was another one of the hardest things in my life because I was not ready to quit when she was.

I saw my job as a Public Health Nurse to encourage everyone to at least give BF a try and then to give them the tools and support they needed to succeed at whatever their choice was. Some were real enthused about nursing when they started out and then decided it was not for them. Some did NOT want to do, it, but tried and liked it and continued. Some had an easy time, some had problems. I, personally had a lot of problems with my oldest DD - I had read the books and knew a lot of "tricks", unfortunatly, babies don't get the same book and she had a hard time getting the hang of it. If I had not had a lot of information and been extremely determined to succeed, we would not have succeeded.
I did nurse my DDs in public, but I knew people who were not even comfortable nursing in private, so could not nurse in public; like, it's really hard to help a woman latch her baby on if she is totally covered with blankets and won't let you see her "feeding parts" (not sure if the filter will let me type what I want to say).

Anyway, I did BF youngest DD at WDW many times over a 9 day trip when she wass almost a year old. I never was stopped or looked at. Some of our nursing was in rides, some was sitting on benches. She never was wanting to feed when we were near the Baby Center, so we didn't use that. Not only did no one ever say anything or look at us in a bad way, but each time I was feeding her on a bench, someone stopped by with helpful information ("You don't want to hold that sleeping baby, you can take her to one of the cribs at the Baby Care"). I thanked them nicely and said if I moved her, she would wake up (not because I moved her, but because I stopped nursing her, but they didn't need to know that). One time, at a friend's house, her DH came in while I was nursing and said he missed the "feel" of a sleeping baby and wanted to hold her for a while. Even though his wife had BF their child, he could not tell that was what I was doing.

One of the "hints" I gave to moms I worked with was to nurse in front of a mirror and see what would be "on show" if they were worried about nursing in public. Most of the time, it's very little. If I was giving the same advice today, I'd probably suggest taking some digital pictures.
One of the things I found was the clothing that was the most discrete was T shirt or light sweater type clothing that could be pulled up. The least discrete was stuff that had to be pulled down or unbuttoned (and even some of the nursing clothing). So, my other suggestion was to try stuff out and see what you are comfortable with. I always had a small blanket on hand (half of a receiving blanket size) to quickly cover if I needed to, but I seldom needed to. Some of the most "LOOK AT ME, I'm Nursing" things I've seen people do in the name of being discrete are large blankets. You will be noticed if you have a large blanket covering up half of your body (with a squirming lump under the blanket). People who would not glance twice at a woman who just looks like she is holding a baby on a bench, will wonder what you are doing under that blanket.

The last thing that has been debated on this thread is how long to nurse. My answer would be, as long as both parts of the nursing couple decide thing to do so. For some people, the mom may decide that she does not want to do it after a week. When I was working with those moms, I always supported her decision - not my body, not my decision - and praised her for at least trying it. My youngest DD didn't want to continue, so I really had no choice. I also saw women who were still BFing at 2-3 years. As long as they were OK with it, that was what mattered. But, I did work with one mom once who did not want to nurse any more, but her almost 4 yo son did - he would just walk over to her and lift her blouse, where ever they were. We did work on setting boundaries for him, not because he was too "old", but because what he was doing was not acceptable to his mom (he had a lot of other boundary problems that his family was working on too). I could have used the "lemon trick someone mentioned a few pages back -(talking about how the milk would not taste good anymore once the child was getting older, then putting lemon on a paper towel to make the breast taste sour) - great idea.

 

[GEM]

Thanks, Sue, for an insightful post.

Here is another link, specifically about the mother-baby immunity issue -

Immunity

I'll quote it, though, in case you don't want to check it.

"Passive immunity is provided when the body is given antibodies rather than producing them itself.

A newborn baby has passive immunity to several diseases, such as measles, mumps and rubella, from antibodies passed from its mother via the placenta.

Passive immunity only lasts for a few weeks or months. In the case of measles, mumps and rubella it may last up to one year in infants - this is why MMR is given just after a child’s first birthday."



So, as you can see, most immunity from the placenta wears off in weeks or months. Immunity for three specific things (measles, mumps, and rubella) MAY last up to one year.

The immuno protection provided by nursing, however, lasts as long as the baby is getting even a small amount of breastmilk.

 

[Goobergal99]

Please show me something, anything medically based that says a child who is not bf carries the mother's immunity until one year of age. WHY do you suppose the AAP is supportive of bfing? Who benefits from this? It's sad that you don't care what the AAP states, but blindly believe your ped and school. I guess you pick and choose what to believe....

I do not blindly believe anything, hence why I am not involved in any religious organization. It's funny how twisted my posts have become, all I said was that it is not necessary for a child to breastfeed in order be healthy. I have no problem with women who breastfeed, I was just wondering why women do it for so long. There is nothing wrong with letting your kid get sick, thats how they develop their own immunities, by being exposed to germs and viruses.

 

[GEM]

IIt's funny how twisted my posts have become, all I said was that it is not necessary for a child to breastfeed in order be healthy.

No, what you said was that a baby carries immunity from it's mother for one year - and that is incorrect.

And, I don't think anyone has said that a formula fed baby can't be healthy. Show me one sentence that has said that. What has been said is that it has been PROVEN that breastfed babies, as a general rule, are healthier. This really isn't debatable. It's a fact. Sure, there are exceptions on both sides - but that doesn't make it any less true. Yes, you can say that your formula fed baby was totally healthy and your sister's breastfed baby was constantly sick - and that's true for those cases - but it doesn't change the overall picture.

 

[pjupton]

thoes who don't have childen that is a person choice.

Unfortunately, many women would LOVE to have a child and breastfeed until that child was 47, but are not able to. I don't think it is always a PERSONAL choice, it is an infertilty choice.

 

[pjupton]

My older daughter at about 9 1/2 months would bite me, see me jump and say "ow" and giggle hysterically. She thought it was a really funny game!

And it finally dawned on me that she was preferring the other foods to me and would bite me to let me know she wanted other foods. D'oh! Way to train her!

She was probably doing it to see you do the song and dance - she probably got a real kick out of it! Any time either of mine tried to bite I quickly broke their latch and put them down. An actively nursing baby actually CAN'T bite, the tongue is covering their teeth. It is when they are done nursing but still latched that biting happens.

When does a child stop being a baby and start being a kid? My daughters definitely were NOT babies by 18 months. They were potty trained, they walked and talked and could express their likes and dislikes, could sing entire songs, and could strip in public in a flash whenever the moment struck. Definitely not babies.

Wow. At 18 months, and even at almost 21 months, my guys are definitely still babies. Guess yours are just super-advanced. Mine aren't potty trained, don't really talk much, definitely can't sing an entire song and can't remove much in the way of clothing except socks. They CAN express what they like and dislike. They tell me they like nursing!

 

[Julia M]

No, what you said was that a baby carries immunity from it's mother for one year - and that is incorrect.

And, I don't think anyone has said that a formula fed baby can't be healthy. Show me one sentence that has said that. What has been said is that it has been PROVEN that breastfed babies, as a general rule, are healthier. This really isn't debatable. It's a fact. Sure, there are exceptions on both sides - but that doesn't make it any less true. Yes, you can say that your formula fed baby was totally healthy and your sister's breastfed baby was constantly sick - and that's true for those cases - but it doesn't change the overall picture.

I've always wondered, if it's the breastfeeding that makes a difference in the children, or is the fact that I think more moms that breastfeed longer (say past the first month) are moms that stay at home. Is it the breastmilk/formula issue, or is it the being at home/daycare issue. Does anyone have any links to the studies that also differentiate with that? Just curious.

My dd resisted the bottle when I returned to work, so my mom would bring her to me at lunch (at first). Then, when she started taking a bottle, she would only take breast milk. We gradually mixed formula and breast milk, so I could reduce my pumping. Youngest ds, on the other hand, took formula, breast milk, nursed......whatever!

Julia