Judge tells mother to wean or pump...

[PhotoJournMama]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl...tory/National/

Hopefully no one else has posted this yet - if so feel free to remove, mods

Quite an interesting case! It is so unfortunate that the Judge actually thinks that the mother should have a time-line for weaning her child. As we [at MDC] all know, children will wean when they are ready and without force. And although I really do feel for the father, I can't imagine letting my breastfed toddler be away from me for more than a few hours! Anyone who thinks that pumping four days worth of milk is not big deal has never breastfed!

[vivvysue]

there just isnt enough information in the article to say one way or the other whether it is a fair ruling or not. at 29 months, the little girl doesnt need to nurse as much for nutrition as for comfort, (which is totally important in the grand scheme of things)
sadly i couldnt see any information given anywhere in the article that shows what the mother has done to facilitate the relationship between the father and daughter.
i do know that under canadian law, she is obligated to encourage and facilitate their relationship and being in ontario i would hope she is very very careful with what her motives are, as mothers have lost their rights and have even gone to jail for interference in the parenting rights of their children's fathers.

i am completely pro-ebf but i am not pro using the breast to interfere with the absent parent's time or relationship with his baby at all. unfortunately i have seen it done and experienced it's use in trying to restrict access to loving capable and wanting to be involved parents it's a hard one for sure.

v

[G8P4]

It is so unfortunate that the Judge actually thinks that the mother should have a time-line for weaning her child. As we [at MDC] all know, children will wean when they are ready and without force. And although I really do feel for the father, I can't imagine letting my breastfed toddler be away from me for more than a few hours! Anyone who thinks that pumping four days worth of milk is not big deal has never breastfed!

:

[tuffykenwell]

Originally Posted by vivvysue

i am completely pro-ebf but i am not pro using the breast to interfere with the absent parent's time or relationship with his baby at all. unfortunately i have seen it done and experienced it's use in trying to restrict access to loving capable and wanting to be involved parents it's a hard one for sure.v

I agree that this isn't as cut and dried as it seems. If it was a younger child it would be more black and white (at least to me) but I think that a father has a right to be an active participant in his child's life and that shouldn't be put on hold indefinitely in the interest of ebf.

I would like to see a schedule which perhaps allowed for opposite days or something similar so that the mother wouldn't have such a huge block of time without her child but I don't think the father is being unreasonable in asking for a greater role in his 2.5 year olds life at this point. I think he has been pretty patient from what I read.

Steph

[G8P4]

I would like to see a schedule which perhaps allowed for opposite days or something similar so that the mother wouldn't have such a huge block of time without her child but I don't think the father is being unreasonable in asking for a greater role in his 2.5 year olds life at this point. I think he has been pretty patient from what I read.

I respectfully disagree.

It is sad that children are in the middle in these situations. Often it is sad that parents don't live together, and for whatever reason have to be seperated. I don't think most children would chose to be live apart from either of their loving parents....ideally, they want to be surrounded by those who love them all the time. But to me, not all parents are created equal in the baby stage. Mothers who are breastfeeding have a physical need for their babies and babies have a physical need for them. It's how they were designed, IMO. I am not saying the father shouldn't have greater role in his daughters life or that they shouldn't be working to a 50 50 split in the future.

I breastfed and child led weaned, and both of us would have been devastated if we'd been forced to be apart overnight like this judge ordered. It's a hard road for everyone concerned.

[thismama]

IMO overnights should NOT be forced at this age. Young toddlers, especially nursing toddlers, need to be with mama at night for the first several years. Dad can be with the child during the day. Yes it's inconvenient, but hey that's parenting. Or do we think that is just mothering?

[proudmomof4]

I am really taken aback by the headline "mom is milking her parental rights ( with breastfeeding defence".
Is that the new version of the tune "Oh, she is only breastfeeding because ..." (she likes flashing her boobs - is a hippie - wants to enlarge her bust size - doesn't have her parental act together - ...)?

[thismama]

Originally Posted by proudmomof4

I am really taken aback by the headline "mom is milking her parental rights ( with breastfeeding defence".
Is that the new version of the tune "Oh, she is only breastfeeding because ..." (she likes flashing her boobs - is a hippie - wants to enlarge her bust size - doesn't have her parental act together - ...)?

Yes it seems it is the new version of that crap.

Put this in single parenting and you would get a more supportive response. I hope.

It is not okay to take a toddler, especially a nursing toddler, away from her mother half the week. Imagine that in your own lives for a second, would you? Some toddlers would cope fine, others would be devastated. My own 5 year old would have been deeply traumatized, had she been removed from me for extended periods at that age.

When are we going to wake up and realize that mothers and fathers are not equal when children are young? They need their mothers, and they need not to be weaned at ridiculously young ages so fathers can have 50%. This verdict is clearly punitive toward the mother, and will be traumatic for the child. This is a lactivist issue, and it is also a feminist issue.

[Gentle~Mommy :)]

Divorces and separations can be bitter, ex husbands and wives can try to hurt each other in many ways. There is a slight possibility that the wife is just trying to get back at her husband, or he is just trying to get back at her by forcing the issue. It's a shame they just couldn't work something out privately to the best interest of their child instead of their own interests.

[thismama]

Seriously though, she is trying to get back at him? You can't force a child to nurse. Sure there is a small possibility she is overemphasizing the nursing, but more likely IMO she is just desperate to keep her child with her coz she knows the child needs to be with her. I really relate to this, coz I feel like had my daughters father and I gotten into a full on custody battle a few years ago when we went thru the court system, this coulda been me. And I would have been painted this way, and my child could have been taken 50% of the time. And I KNOW I wasn't just trying to screw him.

And my daughter is 5 now and they have an amazing, close, wonderful relationship. He just needed to wait for her, and he did, which was an incredible gift he gave her. But no father should have the power to take a small child from the mother so much of the time (of course barring abuse etc. but in a situation like this where the child obviously needs the mother).

[the_lissa]

I'm really pregnant, but reading about how that was his gift to her was so moving.

[thismama]

Aww!! Yeah, I mean he and I had a hard time (child support etc), but he has always and only ever been decent and loving to her. And that included putting her first, and respecting the fact that she needed me. Even when he hated me. Props to him, but this should be explained to all of us, this discrepancy in the early years, this need for the mother. It is not so for all kids, they vary widely, and in fact my baby can be with my big daughter's dad for longer periods than she ever could have at this age (11 mos).

I believe wholeheartedly that the reason she is so bonded to him now, at age 5 (seriously I am out of fashion, it is ALL about him these days) is that 1 - he didn't force her away from me longer than she could tolerate, and 2 - he didn't give up/disappear, but continued to build a relationship with her on her own terms. In the early months he used to walk her in the carrier and sing her a song, and soon she would start screaming and he would have to bring her back. But then later that song was so soothing to her, I'm sure she remembered it. There was like, no return for him early early on, but instead of being a whiner/abandoner he kept at it, and now he has return in spades. As well he should, and good for him. And her. Very good for her.

[ramama]

The article said that she was "denying him access" which *implies* that he is not being permitted to see the child at all. BFed or FFed, that is just wrong and damaging to the child. Had the mother been as willing as the father to work out an arrangement, they would most likely be in a better situation right now. She made her bed, and unfortunately her child is going to be laying in it.

Honestly, if she had been more open to visitation earlier, the father may have been satisfied and postponed seeking 50/50 custody. I'd imagine he's pretty fearful that he is not going to ever see his kid, and thought it best to go for 50/50 now.

So, yeah, with the information I have right now, I can't side with the mother on this one!

[thismama]

No, it sounds like from the beginning he was asking for overnights (with a breastfed newborn!) and she said that was not going to work. I did not get the impression that he was being denied access altogether, but rather not on his timetable. Did she not request one night/week and every other weekend, which is the standard access agreement in the courts here? Of course he should have access, but it should be frequent and of short duration wherever possible. In this case they live in the same city so no reason I can see why the judge could not have ordered more reasonable access.

[ramama]

It says nowhere in that article that he sought overnights with a newborn. It states that his current schedule allows the child to be with him 3 days a week. My point was that if she had said, after the newborn stage, that he could have her for a few hours a couple times a week, or one full day a week (no overnight), *perhaps* he would be satisfied with that and willing to wait. It seems that she has no intention of letting him see his daughter.

[the_lissa]

He wanted to take her for a weekend when she was a week old!

Johne says the email was sent in response to Cavannah's requests to take the baby for extended visits, including a weekend when their daughter was a week old.

http://www.parentcentral.ca/parent/article/625375

Every article or news report I have read or watched has said that the father was granted all kinds of access.

She was never accused of denying him access. He just wanted more.

[thismama]

I'd love to see an article that talks about him 'denying' he was trying to take the baby for 'spite' and 'insisting' it is for the benefit of the child. Totally whacked how he is painted a concerned superhero father and the mother is a bf zealout. Lovely.

[Bluegoat]

I think this is a really sad situation, and it's always hard to be clear about people's motives, especially when the media leaves out or even misrepresents facts. But from the article, it is hard for me to tell how much the dad sees the toddler now. If they have a good comfortable relationship, overnights with pumped milk in a sippy cup might be fine. I know my 18 month old dd has one night a week with her grandparents while I have another commitment, and she is quite happy and loves to go there. If they don't know each other well, then perhaps it is time to start increasing the amount of time with the goal to having overnight.

I think we can all say that dads should respect the special BF relationship, and moms should go out of their way to help baby and toddler build a really good relationship with dad. That might include introducing a bottle for BM or formula as the baby gets older, so dad can have longer visits, and also mom can get a break from single parenting. A young baby for overnights is not a good idea, but I think it is something that can be worked toward by about 2 years, though not suddenly. So I guess I am questioning that the mom is really working on this, since she hasn't even offered a plan for what she thinks would work.

[PhotoJournMama]

Originally Posted by the_lissa

He wanted to take her for a weekend when she was a week old!



http://www.parentcentral.ca/parent/article/625375

Every article or news report I have read or watched has said that the father was granted all kinds of access.

She was never accused of denying him access. He just wanted more.

Thanks for posting this link, it really shows her side better I especially love Jack Newman's quote:

Toronto-based breastfeeding specialist Dr. Jack Newman says toddlers taken overnight from the mother before they are weaned off breastfeeding could suffer emotional trauma.

[thismama]

Didn't see that! Go Jack Newman!