U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Parenting > Adoption
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 03-25-2013, 09:08 PM
 
1,879 posts, read 1,864,566 times
Reputation: 1462

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaded View Post
Susankate, I was only addressing your comment about all humans having mammary glands. Men don't usually produce milk unless there is a medical problem. This is generally understood by medical science. The one-off stories you may find are just that, one-offs.

Infertility came into the discussion because women who induce lactation usually fall into two categories: they are not pregnant due to infertility; or, they're milk has dried up from a previous pregnancy and they wish to breastfeed again with an adopted child.
The point of my comment was to show that I wasn't discriminating between bio and adoptive parents - thus my comment that if lactation comes easy to all parties, then I have no problem with them doing it - thus I was actually saying "I am not discriminating against non-induced bio/adoptive/male lactation".

If one (in general) actually reads what I was trying to say, one would see that my concern was how far should one go re the breastfeeding experience - whether one is nursing a bio child or an adoptive child. I had a friend who had trouble breastfeeding and they were reduced to tears by a nurse who chastised them for not being able to breastfeed and that is where my "controversy" with breastfeeding in general is - i.e. are people (in general) so worried about not bonding properly if they don't breastfeed that they force themselves beyond their limits.

Quote:
Elucidate what? Thought my statement was pretty clear. If you read through all of the posts here, you can decipher what smokescreens are being used.
I see no smokescreens being used. There may well be misinterprations of people's motives. Thus, if one points out the "smokescreens", perhaps the offending parties may be able to explain the actual motive behind what they have said.

Quote:
Nothing wrong with discussing medication with lactation. What TiffJoy and I are saying is that to use it as a reason against induced lactation or adoptive breastfeeding falls flat and doesn't really work, as biological mothers have used medication for years.
[/quote]

As Artful Dodger points out, there are concerns about certain medications. Just because a drug is used for years doesn't mean that there isn't long term harm.

Last edited by susankate; 03-25-2013 at 09:17 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-25-2013, 09:20 PM
 
Location: California
167 posts, read 153,459 times
Reputation: 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaded View Post
In all fairness to you I should elaborate on my comment.



In reality, any adoption requires that parental rights be terminated. In legal terms, this means that what the birth mother wishes are just that, her wishes. She is choosing not to parent. If she has an open adoption and the adoptive parents want to continue considering what she wishes for the life of the child, that is between them. Nothing wrong with it. These are personal choices and have no bearing on whether or not adoptive breastfeeding is right or wrong. It is a parental choice. Just like biological moms, some breastfeed, some do not. There should be no judgement against an adoptive mother who chooses to breastfeed or chooses not to.

FWIW, in your view, all adoptive parents would fail because no one can predict how they are going to parent for life. Situations happen, life happens, decisions need to be made at a moments notice and even in open adoptions, adoptive parents cannot always obtain approvals or inquire with the birth mother/parents as to how they feel about a certain decision or ask what they would do. This is very unrealistic and quite unfair. If a birthmother is that concerned about what prospective adoptive parents will do, then honestly she should just parent her child.



Considering that it is impossible to replace a "surrendering mother" as you've put it, I doubt that's what any adoptive mother is trying to do. But, if a birthmother feels this, then it is she who isn't comfortable in her own skin, not the other way around. She can always choose to parent (unless her rights are involuntarily terminated). Again, it comes down to a personal discomfort.

Question: The "strangers" - your words, not mine - who became your adoptive parents, if your amother did breastfeed you, would that change your opinion of her as you've described above? Would it mean that they didn't do everything "right" in your eyes? Would she have tarnished "their moral code" in your mind because she breastfed you?
Curious as to why you chose to put quotation marks around the words, surrendering mother. Please clarify.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-25-2013, 09:52 PM
 
Location: California
167 posts, read 153,459 times
Reputation: 177
I agree with those who say amom-breastfeeding wouldn't be good for the baby if the mother had recently taken infertility RX.

I agree with those who say that the amother should breast feed if she is willing, able and comfortable doing so. However, I don't think it's ethical to breastfeed if the pg. mother to be discussed her uncomfortableness with the paps, and the paps agreed only so that she would pick them to parent. Eww, that would really be crappy if they changed their mind and disregarded her wishes and breast fed after she signed her rights away. Chances are, aparents that would do that would probably stop at nothing and disregarded her wishes in other areas. So beware that there are no guarantees as to what they say they will do.

I am not opposed to the first mother who is willing, able, and comfortable to breastfeed her child. After all, she is the mother, and very well does not owe the paps anything until she signs her rights away. Often it's the very thing a new mother who is contemplating an adoption plan needs to do in order for her to realize that her baby needs her, and that she needs her baby. IOW, there is no rush to relinquish and she should spend all the time she needs before she signs her rights away. Even if she decides to go through with the relinquishment supplying her infant with colostrum, mother's nature, and continued bonding can't be a bad thing for either of them. JMHO, and I speak from experience as a first mother.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-25-2013, 10:41 PM
 
1,851 posts, read 2,988,485 times
Reputation: 2365
Quote:
Originally Posted by Avery_Harper View Post
Curious as to why you chose to put quotation marks around the words, surrendering mother. Please clarify.
I was quoting Artful Dodger who had previously used the term to describe a woman considering an adoption plan.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-26-2013, 06:17 AM
 
1,014 posts, read 987,757 times
Reputation: 834
Quote:
Originally Posted by Avery_Harper View Post
I agree with those who say amom-breastfeeding wouldn't be good for the baby if the mother had recently taken infertility RX.

I agree with those who say that the amother should breast feed if she is willing, able and comfortable doing so. However, I don't think it's ethical to breastfeed if the pg. mother to be discussed her uncomfortableness with the paps, and the paps agreed only so that she would pick them to parent. Eww, that would really be crappy if they changed their mind and disregarded her wishes and breast fed after she signed her rights away. Chances are, aparents that would do that would probably stop at nothing and disregarded her wishes in other areas. So beware that there are no guarantees as to what they say they will do.

I am not opposed to the first mother who is willing, able, and comfortable to breastfeed her child. After all, she is the mother, and very well does not owe the paps anything until she signs her rights away. Often it's the very thing a new mother who is contemplating an adoption plan needs to do in order for her to realize that her baby needs her, and that she needs her baby. IOW, there is no rush to relinquish and she should spend all the time she needs before she signs her rights away. Even if she decides to go through with the relinquishment supplying her infant with colostrum, mother's nature, and continued bonding can't be a bad thing for either of them. JMHO, and I speak from experience as a first mother.
All great points, Avery.

A child's boundaries should also be taken into consideration. Infants & newborns are not the only children people adopt & expect to breastfeed.

If a child rejects breastfeeding, I believe their boundaries should be respected above the mother's desire to nurse & repeated attempts should not be made to get the child to comply. However, I have read about adoptive parents who ignored their child's very obvious boundaries because they were so set on breast-feeding. The lengths some have reported going to have at times been disturbing.

If an older child changes their mind &/or expresses the desire to breastfeed on their own terms (sometimes they do), then of course that is very different. If they never do, the mother can still bottle-feed the child breast milk & support them in whatever other attachment/bonding methods soothes the child best.

Of course if a biological parent somehow found themselves in a similar situation I would feel the same. But we're discussing adoptive breastfeeding so those are the examples I used.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-26-2013, 12:55 PM
 
2,779 posts, read 4,672,399 times
Reputation: 5034
I did not breast feed my kids they were 6mths and 9mths when we adopted them internationally. However, I believe my 6mth old was breast fed, he had terrible acid reflux and hated bottles and immediately tried to latch on to me rather than take the bottle. My guess is a caregiver at the orphanage realized his difficulties with feeding and helped out. I would credit his birthmother but she never had custody.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-26-2013, 02:05 PM
 
1,851 posts, read 2,988,485 times
Reputation: 2365
Quote:
Originally Posted by hml1976 View Post
I did not breast feed my kids they were 6mths and 9mths when we adopted them internationally. However, I believe my 6mth old was breast fed, he had terrible acid reflux and hated bottles and immediately tried to latch on to me rather than take the bottle. My guess is a caregiver at the orphanage realized his difficulties with feeding and helped out. I would credit his birthmother but she never had custody.
Thanks for sharing, this is a very interesting story. You've probably guessed right about his orphanage stay.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-26-2013, 07:59 PM
 
Location: Chapel Hill, N.C.
36,485 posts, read 43,819,649 times
Reputation: 47263
Quote:
Originally Posted by thethreefoldme View Post
All great points, Avery.

A child's boundaries should also be taken into consideration. Infants & newborns are not the only children people adopt & expect to breastfeed.

If a child rejects breastfeeding, I believe their boundaries should be respected above the mother's desire to nurse & repeated attempts should not be made to get the child to comply. However, I have read about adoptive parents who ignored their child's very obvious boundaries because they were so set on breast-feeding. The lengths some have reported going to have at times been disturbing.

If an older child changes their mind &/or expresses the desire to breastfeed on their own terms (sometimes they do), then of course that is very different. If they never do, the mother can still bottle-feed the child breast milk & support them in whatever other attachment/bonding methods soothes the child best.

Of course if a biological parent somehow found themselves in a similar situation I would feel the same. But we're discussing adoptive breastfeeding so those are the examples I used.
Do you realize how many mothers have trouble breastfeeding their children? It's not easy at all and many women give up because of the frustration of a baby refusing to nurse. That is why lactation consultants are so important.

I had to leave my bio son in the hospital for 10 days and he was bottlefed. When we got him home he wanted nothing to do with me. I knew it would be best for both of us and with the help of an incredibly supportive pediatrician I finally got him to nurse. We nursed for more than 2 years and I have to say it was one of the most satisfying experiences of my life. So yes I did not respect his "boundaries" and I'm so glad I didn't.

Last edited by no kudzu; 03-26-2013 at 08:17 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-26-2013, 08:06 PM
 
Location: Chapel Hill, N.C.
36,485 posts, read 43,819,649 times
Reputation: 47263
I have not read all these pages of discussion but I would like to expand on my previous post.

When my bio son was about a year old a dear friend became terribly ill and had to be hospitalized. She was still nursing her 5 month old child. This was way before milk banks and donors, etc. When I volunteered to nurse her son along with my own and to even keep him in my home while she was sick I thought she and her husband would fall all over themselves thanking us for what we were doing. No way did she feel threatened by my offer and to this day -32 years later- she still thanks me. I was pleased to help a friend in need. I know the boy in question never expressed unhappiness that he was nursed by somebody other than his bio mother. To him it didn't seem to make any difference at all. he took to me right away and we enjoyed our 2 weeks together. Unfortunately his mother was unable to resume nursing after her illness but she took great comfort in knowing her son was nursed(by the two of us ) till he was 6 months old and got the benefits of breast milk as long as he could.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-26-2013, 08:15 PM
 
Location: Chapel Hill, N.C.
36,485 posts, read 43,819,649 times
Reputation: 47263
Our bio son was a bit over 2 when we adopted a 3 month old baby from Korea. DS was still comfort- nursing twice a day so I was happy to try to nurse our daughter. She latched on several times for about the first 2 weeks but there was not much milk there and she had gained very little weight her first 3 months of life so i was uncomfortable pushing her to nurse exclusively. Soon enough she was gaining weight with formula, loved cuddling with me and it just wasn't as important to me.
I was told in Korea wet nurses are available to be foster moms for babies waiting to be adopted. Also that birth mothers are eager to get these women to be foster moms. No worry about another woman nursing their children at all. Frankly I can't imagine why a birth mother planning to place her child for adoption would have a problem with the adoptive mother nursing. If she has decided not to parent she has no right to ask an adoptive mother not to nurse. This would tell me she wasn't really good with her adoption plan and I would reconsider that adoption.

Even with open adoptions, the birth mother has no business telling the adoptive family what to do or how to do it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Parenting > Adoption
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top