English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

33 answers

Good for her and what a lucky child she has! In the US, only about 71% of women EVER breastfeed their babies, and only about 14% of babies are exclusively breastfed to 6 months as recommended by the American Academy of Pediatrics. By 1 year, the # of babies being breastfed is down to 16% (Pediatrics Jan. 2005). The rates are highest for white, middle class, educated, older mothers. The AAP recommends breastfeeding continue until AT LEAST 1 year (many articles in magazines and newspapers seem to interpret this as ONLY 1 year) and continue as long as mutually desired, they're even kind enough to let us know that there's no upper age limit and NO evidence of psychological harm from breastfeeding into the 3rd year or LONGER (emphasis mine). Other health organizations, including the World Health Organization, recommend breastfeeding continue until AT LEAST 2 years. The American Academy of Family Physicians notes the the child weaned before age 2 is at increased risk of illness.

All the replies that think breastfeeding should only continue for a short time, or is "gross" or unnecessary seem to ignore the fact that breastfeeding is the biological norm. Human babies were designed (intelligently or through evolution, take your pick) to be breastfed, not to be fed artificially modified cow's milk or soybeans. It provides complete nutrition for a baby up to about 1 year, and continues to be an excellent source of nutrition indefinitely beyond that time. Breastfeeding allows an infant's gut and immune system to mature properly. It contains living cells that protect a child against life-threatening illness and it's composition is modified as the child ages to more appropriately support the older baby and toddler's continued growth. It affects EVERY system of the body with life-long consequences, and more and more studies are showing that it's dose dependent. In other words, the longer a child receives breastmilk and the more breastmilk a child receives, the stronger these effects. Breastfeeding also affects mom's body, making her body healthier and less at risk for illnesses such as breast cancer.
All this and it's food, too ;-)

Breastfeeding is normal, natural, and healthy. It's the best choice for our babies and continues to be so for our toddlers, and yes, even our preschoolers. Every woman must choose for herself what's best for her and for her children, but we need to respect those women who choose to continue to give their children this precious gift beyond what is considered "normal" in our society. It is not wierd, gross, abnormal, abusive, or inappropriate. Actually, it's admirable and wonderful.

2007-10-22 07:38:29 · answer #1 · answered by cherikonline 3 · 19 1

I think more women would do it if there was unbiased information widely available. The WHO (far more baby-friendly than the AAP) recommends that babies breastfeed for a minimum of two years. They warn about increased health risks for the infant who is weaned before two years.

Some questions to ask yourself: Why do the people around you have a problem with extended nursing? Why do the people around you support extended nursing? What harm might come to a child from early weaning? No harm comes from allowing a child to self wean.

Toddlers make good little nurslings. They can express themselves so well and they do such funny things. My baby likes to get kisses on her hands and feet while she nurses. She likes to play little games and tell little jokes. She told me that my milk tastes like chocolate milk. I occasionally ask her if she's getting too old to nurse and she always says no. When she's ready to nurse at bedtime, she says "Mama, will you please nurse me?" For just a moment every day, my busy toddler transforms back into that tiny baby I used to nurse all day. In an instant, she's running away from me again.

2007-10-22 08:01:47 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 8 0

I think it's up to a woman and her child how long they want to continue breastfeeding. The WHO recommends breastfeeding a child for two years, so there is obviously health benefits for doing so that long. Some people choose not to breastfeed or for a short period of time, while others choose to do so longer. Each mother is doing what she thinks is best for her child in the situation she has. I personally am planning to stop breastfeeding my daughter sometime between 12-18 months.

2007-10-22 07:40:57 · answer #3 · answered by josi 5 · 5 1

I think it is a lucky baby who gets to breastfeed that long. The American Academy of Pediatrics say that a woman should breastfeed at the MINIMUM for a year, and as long after as is mutually satisfying. People who look down on women who breastfeed beyond a year only do so because they are ignorant of the benefits that come from extended breastfeeding.

2007-10-22 07:38:57 · answer #4 · answered by howdesdoit 3 · 15 1

It's fine. I am currently nursing our 14 month old.
She does not pull my shirt when it's time to nurse.
I teach in a poor area for Kindergarten and am exposed to tons of stuff- from Hep B to Whooping cough. Last year I was sick more times than I could count- she never got it. She had pink eye when I got it and that's it. She has never had an ear infection, never a cold, or even the sniffles.

Our son had no teeth until he was 15 months old. Our daughter- who I am currently nursing had teeth at 6 months- that is when I "should have weaned" her??? WRONG!

I think it's important to note that our son was also breastfed and he is rarely sick. When he is, it's lasting a day- where his dad and I are sick for more than a week with a simple cold. So he is still reeping the benefits of having been nursed.

I don't think it is anyone's place to judge. Nursing a baby is more than just feeding- it's comfort too.

So, is it fine? If it is fine with the mommy and the baby, then absolutely.

I have no cut-off in mind. Just by age 2. Family and friends don't understand but they do not need to- it's not their child, or them that is doing it. It's me. With my husband's support of course.

2007-10-22 10:31:59 · answer #5 · answered by NY_Attitude 6 · 2 1

I think that their baby is very lucky to have such a great start in life nutritionally. Obviously women who nurse during the toddler years are doing so in addition to solid foods being given to their babies.

Michael Jordan's mom breastfed him until he was 3. Einstein was nursed until he was 2. And this is the way it's done in most countries of the world. Only some "advanced" countries think it's "weird". But, hey, I think it's weird for women to have fake sacks of saline and silicone implanted into their bodies for LOOKS. That's weird. Definitely more weird then a woman nourishing her child and using her breasts for what they were intended for.

2007-10-22 07:55:37 · answer #6 · answered by Haulie 2 · 9 0

I think its great. I'm planning on giving my daughter the best start in life and breastfeeding till shes around 2. I also think that its only in USA and Canada that people are so offended by something that's completely natural. People think its OK to post half nude pictures of 16year old girls on huge billboards but god forbid someone breastfeed a toddler. I also think though when you breastfeed a toddler there has to be more boundaries for the baby and should be a nice private time for mom and toddler. But if I saw a 18 month old breastfeed in public I'd have nothing bad to say about it. It might be because my sister in law breast feeds her 18 month old still and its such a positive thing for both of them.

2007-10-22 07:38:46 · answer #7 · answered by lovelylady 5 · 12 3

I think they're really good moms who have the best interest of their children at heart. The World Health Organization recommends breastfeeding until babies are 2 years old... so they're actually doing the best thing for their baby. There's nothing wrong with it.

2007-10-22 07:50:11 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 9 0

Franky, I had no idea these sorts of things were issues until I started reading Yahoo! Answers.

What do I THINK of them? Huh? I think they're mothers whose children haven't weaned yet... I'm supposed to be thinking about it?

As for all the "ew" answers here, I submit that those people are "sick" themselves for the inability to get past the "breasts = sex" problem. And woefully ill-educated on breastfeeding and nutrition. These are probably the same idiots who think you need to buy a "follow-up formula"... Stop listening to Nestlé!

2007-10-22 08:22:14 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 9 1

I don't know why...? In my opinion it's not necessary to breastfeed after six months. The child is not getting full with it anymore...they're starting to eat food by this time. Children no longer benefit from this breastfeeding after the first half year.

2007-10-22 14:45:47 · answer #10 · answered by Xena77 3 · 0 4

fedest.com, questions and answers