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.
Breastfeeding was the most empowering and womanly activity I ever did, aside from carrying the child in my own body. From the first time he latched until after he stopped, my breasts were specifically for baby only and had no sexual connotation to me or to DH. I did not feel like a cow and I was not being milked. I was nourishing my child.
That's cool... ...Dave...
Quote:
Originally Posted by ADVentive
I'm referring to comfort sucking. Breastfed babies nurse for both nutrition and for comfort. Bottle-fed babies comfort suck with a pacifier when the bottle runs out of nutrition. The bottle is much more focused on the meal than the breast is.
Which is probably best. You shouldn't be giving your baby food solely to comfort them, anyway...
Which is probably best. You shouldn't be giving your baby food solely to comfort them, anyway...
When a baby is nursing for comfort they aren't always taking in milk. They aren't being comforted by the food. They are being comforted by the sucking, the closeness to Mom and the skin to skin contact. Babies and toddlers have a strong need to suck. It's the reason why some breastfeed longer then society is comfortable with. It's the reason why toddlers don't want to let go of their pacifier. It's the reason why kids suck their thumbs.
When a baby is nursing for comfort they aren't always taking in milk. They aren't being comforted by the food. They are being comforted by the sucking, the closeness to Mom and the skin to skin contact. Babies and toddlers have a strong need to suck. It's the reason why some breastfeed longer then society is comfortable with. It's the reason why toddlers don't want to let go of their pacifier. It's the reason why kids suck their thumbs.
I know that. Let me change my statement to:
You shouldn't be offering your baby food solely to comfort them (as in offering the breast or bottle).
Comfort and food as concepts should remain separate as possible. Meaning even breastfeeding mothers should offer a pacifier for comfort in lieu of the breast, and of course use other methods from time to time as well. And by the time they're about 2 years old, I don't think any child needs to suckle on ANYTHING. Fine if you're still doing it that way, I suppose. But I don't think it's needed.
You shouldn't be offering your baby food solely to comfort them (as in offering the breast or bottle).
Comfort and food as concepts should remain separate as possible. Meaning even breastfeeding mothers should offer a pacifier for comfort in lieu of the breast, and of course use other methods from time to time as well. And by the time they're about 2 years old, I don't think any child needs to suckle on ANYTHING. Fine if you're still doing it that way, I suppose. But I don't think it's needed.
I disagree. There is nothing wrong with comforting a baby or toddler by nursing them. I feel that you are insinuating that children who are comforted through nursing will associate food with comfort as they grow older and will be more at risk for obesity. Research regarding breastfeeding and obesity shows that children who were breastfed are less likely to grow up to become obese adults. I do agree though that other methods of comfort such as hugs, holding, etc. are good to use in addition to nursing. I think most mothers intuitively do this though so it's not something I'd be concerned about.
You shouldn't be offering your baby food solely to comfort them (as in offering the breast or bottle).
Comfort and food as concepts should remain separate as possible. Meaning even breastfeeding mothers should offer a pacifier for comfort in lieu of the breast, and of course use other methods from time to time as well. And by the time they're about 2 years old, I don't think any child needs to suckle on ANYTHING. Fine if you're still doing it that way, I suppose. But I don't think it's needed.
You are not a mother and do not understand the difference between the way a child acts when being given a real breast vs an artificial one (ie pacifier). Also early on, a pacifier can be detrimental to a child learning to properly nurse, then later they dont want it. I tried to give my son a pacifier but he wanted nothing to do with it, and none of the breastfed babies I know wanted a pacifier. I nursed on demand, whenever he wanted. He nursed for comfort and for food. When he was sick with a stomach virus and couldnt even keep a teaspoon of pedialite down, he wanted to just latch to my breast for comfort. He wasnt eating, he couldnt, but he NEEDED to be comforted. A bottle or pacifier would not have done that. With children under the age of 1, there is no difference between food and comfort. There just isnt. Babies are completely helpless and the act of feeding them reinforces to them that you are attentive to them and care for them. Food should not be a comfort in your life, but with babies, there is no difference. Perhaps a child does not NEED to suckle after the age of 2, but a child that continues to nurse after the age of 2, in a CLW, still needs the closeness, comfort, love that is offered during nursing. The bond created between a mother and child while nursing is not something that can be replaced with a binky and a hug. It just doesnt work.
And as redundant as the argument is, there are a lot of things children (and adults) dont NEED, but we have them anyway.
You shouldn't be offering your baby food solely to comfort them (as in offering the breast or bottle).
Comfort and food as concepts should remain separate as possible. Meaning even breastfeeding mothers should offer a pacifier for comfort in lieu of the breast, and of course use other methods from time to time as well. And by the time they're about 2 years old, I don't think any child needs to suckle on ANYTHING. Fine if you're still doing it that way, I suppose. But I don't think it's needed.
That makes no sense whatsoever. There is absolutely nothing wrong with sucking on a breast for comfort.
Why not? If it is cold out, I am comforted by a hot bowl of soup. I don't see the problem with that. If one OVER eats out of obsession or addiction, clearly that is not a good thing. But that does not mean that one cannot or should not ever take comfort in food!
Why not? If it is cold out, I am comforted by a hot bowl of soup. I don't see the problem with that. If one OVER eats out of obsession or addiction, clearly that is not a good thing. But that does not mean that one cannot or should not ever take comfort in food!
Im not talking about comfort food, im talking about being comforted by food, as opposed to learning appropriate ways to deal with stress. If its cold or im sick, i want comfort food. If im stressed or bored or angry, I shouldnt be eating. Eating when not hungry as to overeat unnecessarily is where comforting yourself with food is a problem.
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.
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.
