HELP ME- Visitation Laws Keeping Single Mommies from Nursing

[BellaRose0212]

So, this is not my issue but it is one I have seen over and over again. I want to do something about it. I need someone to write a bill... a lobbyist right? And a representative to sponsor it and several more to co-sponsor it. Can any Lactavists hold my hand on this one?

I was alerted to this by a mom on another site who said (I'm paraphrasing) that the courts required her to send her daughter 3.5 hours away to stay with her father for weekends. Keep in mind, the father is the one who chose to leave. According to the woman, the court told her she had to pump in order to keep breastfeeding and she found pumping very painful.

[ghannit]

I just want to say:

This is a huge problem. I stuns me that the courts are so callous in this matter. It's an issue in Canada as well.

Good luck, as this is an important cause. No matter how great the father, the natural feeding of a baby should NEVER be interfered with. If dad cares, then yes, he comes to baby.

[2lilsweetfoxes]

Originally Posted by ghannit

I just want to say:

This is a huge problem. I stuns me that the courts are so callous in this matter. It's an issue in Canada as well.

Good luck, as this is an important cause. No matter how great the father, the natural feeding of a baby should NEVER be interfered with. If dad cares, then yes, he comes to baby.

I agree. As long as breastfeeding is seen as a lifestyle choice and that formula/bottle feeding is equivalent, then there is not much to stand on.

[IceyTheBatmom]

Perhaps getting some wording in there stating that formula is "known to be substandard," and bring up that some women simply cannot pump, and some babies will not take a bottle (BTDT), and inferring that if either of these are true the court is forcing the mother to put herself and her child through undue stress, and subject the child to substandard care.

Of course, I'd be careful with the substandard care thing, don't want to mess things up for those who truly need formula.

[KimberlyD0]

you have to be so carefull with this though, because you can't just cut the father out of their lives, nor should anyone. Unless the dad a extreamly bad news of course.

The courts are trying to be fair to BOTH parents.

Its a rock and a hard place for any judge. No one has the right to tell a mom she can't BF, but no one has the right to tell a father who wants to be involved that they can't.

[BellaRose0212]

Believe me, my goal is not to cut off any fathers from their children. My brother, now deceased, fought an unending, ridiculous battle with a crazy (and I suspect evil) woman to be able to be a part of his son's life and in the end it killed him. I just don't want any mother's to have to give their babies up to overnight care because Daddy decided to skip out and now suddenly wants to act on his rights. As an attachment mommy who never leaves her baby, this would kill me. Some women might not be able to breastfeed at all because their bfing relationship was undermined.

[ghannit]

Originally Posted by BellaRose0212

Believe me, my goal is not to cut off any fathers from their children. My brother, now deceased, fought an unending, ridiculous battle with a crazy (and I suspect evil) woman to be able to be a part of his son's life and in the end it killed him. I just don't want any mother's to have to give their babies up to overnight care because Daddy decided to skip out and now suddenly wants to act on his rights. As an attachment mommy who never leaves her baby, this would kill me. Some women might not be able to breastfeed at all because their bfing relationship was undermined.

So sorry about your brother.


I think that any father who truly loved his baby would be fine with going to the baby as opposed to forcing the mother to separate and potentially undermine her breastfeeding success. Unless his motives were more about controlling the mother than caring for the baby.

There needs to be so much more education about the supply/demand of breastfeeding particularly in the early days/weeks/months.

And it would have (still would) kill me now to have my DD taken from me for even a day. I can't imagine.

I think it's so important for mothers in this dilemma to let the courts know (and even let the father know if possible) that she wants him to be a part of baby's life, and that she'll do anything short of harming her supply to facilitate that relationship.

New mothers should not have to deal with such stress and worry.

[2lilsweetfoxes]

Originally Posted by BellaRose0212

Believe me, my goal is not to cut off any fathers from their children. My brother, now deceased, fought an unending, ridiculous battle with a crazy (and I suspect evil) woman to be able to be a part of his son's life and in the end it killed him. I just don't want any mother's to have to give their babies up to overnight care because Daddy decided to skip out and now suddenly wants to act on his rights. As an attachment mommy who never leaves her baby, this would kill me. Some women might not be able to breastfeed at all because their bfing relationship was undermined.

[bolding mine]

I'm sorry about your brother. As an aside, I wonder how many times that dad decides to act on his rights because he has a new girlfriend who he wants to show off for--and of course he's telling his girlfriend that the baby's mom is psycho and unfit leading the girlfriend to "dream" about "saving" the baby from this woman and pushing the dad to get more visitation or take custody. (A long time ago, I was the girlfriend--ended up marrying someone else, though, with no kids other than the ones we had together after the marriage.)

[KimberlyD0]

I agree that no dead beats should have the right to do this.

However I, nor anyone else, has the rights to tell a dad who wants to be in a childs life, who takes responsibility, pays his child support and all the reast, that he has no rights because mom wants to breastfeed.

Breastfeeding is very important, but so is a relationship with BOTH parents.

Not all dads who want to see their children, and fighting for that right, are trying to hurt the mother, nore are they deadbeats, or abusers, or anything else. They are DADs trying to be a part of their life.

I have seen and heard multiple mothers here (Here as in my city) say "I'll just breastfeed and then he can't see the baby" and while I support breastfeeding 100% I do not support useing it to keep the other parent away.

Thats what I mean by being carefull. No we don't want to distroy or damage a breastfeeding relationship, but we can't sacrifice fathers and there children for it either. The court doesn't do overnights lightly, nor do they do it with the intent of harming a breastfeeding relationship.

Perhaps instead of frameing it in a breastfeeding is the only importent part, it should be framed as a lets find a way to have BOTH.

[Equuskia]

But I don't think anyone is saying for dads to stay away. What they are saying is, instead of leaving baby with dad, separated from mom for hours or even days at a time, to have dad visit the baby at mom's house, or for mom and baby to go as a unit to dad to visit. Because for the first years of a baby's life, especially in the beginning, mom and baby are a unit and should not be separated unnecessarily, whether mom is breastfeeding or not.

[frogautumn]

Originally Posted by Equuskia

Because for the first years of a baby's life, especially in the beginning, mom and baby are a unit and should not be separated unnecessarily, whether mom is breastfeeding or not.

Wow, this statement is KEY and should be applied to lactivist issues as well as maternity care issues...actually, any mother/baby issues. Well said.

[KimberlyD0]

Originally Posted by Equuskia

Because for the first years of a baby's life, especially in the beginning, mom and baby are a unit and should not be separated unnecessarily, whether mom is breastfeeding or not.

It is no more importent then the father child bond. Both need to be respected. Yes moms can bond with breastfeeding and thats important, but that doesn't make it more important, or less valuable then the bond that only a father can provide.

[annettemarie]

I think it would be really helpful, since this thread is in Lactivism and the purpose is to promote breastfeeding, to assume that no one is tying to cut fathers out. Let's keep the focus on how visitation can help promote breastfeeding. Father's rights would be a topic for another forum. Thanks!

[BellaRose0212]

ghannit and 2lilsweetfoxes- thank you, yesterday was actually the anniversary of his death. Very hard, especially for my mother.

Thanks AnnetteMarie, thank you. I think we need to keep the discussion on track.

KimberleyD0- I already said it but I will say it again, my goal here is not to cut off any interested fathers from their children. As I said, I saw first hand how a woman could unfairly control a father who wanted nothing more than to love and be with his child. Perhaps you should read my original post, I sought help here because women who have been abandoned by men are finding it impossible to breastfeed because the courts would like them to send their baby hours away for a whole weekend.

The goal is not a law that prevents fathers of breastfed babies from seeing their kids. The individual courts will obviously decide visitation based on individual circumstance. My goal is to get more information out their, especially in the courts, about how breastfeeding works. About how using a bottle in the early weeks can cause nipple confusion. About how nursing on demand is important in the early months to create a suitable supply/demand relationship. I want to supply a voice for women who may be seen by the courts as just choosing an alternative to formula that does not really matter.

Any help would be appreciated, debate isn't really what I was looking for.

[KimberlyD0]

I'm not saying the idea is a bad one. Just saying that wording is very important. We want to support both the breastfeeding mother and the father in the situations where we can.

Obviously breastfeeding is vital and so is the relationship that a mother and child has with it.

What I am saying though is to perhaps approch it in a different way. I'm having trouble putting it into words. I mean in such a way as to give mother and child the best breastfeeding relationship and support, while finding ways to include a father more.

[AislinCarys]

A similar question was up on an AP forum I frequent in Sweden. A mum whose ex wanted the baby to stay with him for weekends. This mum, breastfeeding, wanted her child to have a good relationship with her father, and herself was trying to get along with her ex, but felt her breastfed baby still needed her overnight.

Anyway, turns out the Family Court, which rules this things in Sweden have set recommendations (which are based on the children's needs, not the parents) that a child should live in one place, and spend the same number of nights away from that point as they are old. 0=0 nights (but days), 1=1 night, up until age 7. The reason being that little children need one steady point in life, one home. This means that by age three a child can stay three nights with mum, three with dad. Custody is not influenced by this, so the parents can, and almost always do, have shared custody. And of course, a father could be the permanent parent from the beginning, but this is not going to happen if mum is breastfeeding (unless mum is a unfit parent).

In this scenario there is no problem breastfeeding day and night throughout the first year, and after 1, hopefully it is possible to keep breastfeeding, despite baby spending a night here and there with Dad. With any luck this arrangement could create a healthy attachment between mother and baby as well as father and baby, while still providing the child with the valuable breastfeeding.

The point about mother and baby being a unit, well, I suppose the father and baby can be a unit too, point is that the baby needs to be in a unit with somebody (a primary caregiver, I suppose), not about the parents' individual, equal rights to a relationship with the baby. And if mum is breastfeeding, yes, it is likely to be a mother-baby unit that is most important at the time for the baby.

[BellaRose0212]

KimberlyD0 - What I am saying though is to perhaps approch it in a different way.

What do you suggest?

AislinCarys- That may be a place to start. Maybe women in this situation could present the Swedish course of action to their lawyers to present to the court. I will need to get some actual court documents, but courts like to have models so that seems like a positive step.

Thanks everyone! Please keep up the brainstorming.

[ghannit]

Originally Posted by Equuskia

But I don't think anyone is saying for dads to stay away. What they are saying is, instead of leaving baby with dad, separated from mom for hours or even days at a time, to have dad visit the baby at mom's house, or for mom and baby to go as a unit to dad to visit. Because for the first years of a baby's life, especially in the beginning, mom and baby are a unit and should not be separated unnecessarily, whether mom is breastfeeding or not.

Well put & I couldn't agree more.

Some would insist that the father can and should be as much part of the unit, & that it's better for the baby to be passed back and forth between parents if father does not want to deal with the broken relationship between mother/father.

(If the relationship is so contentious as to be toxic & or abusive on either side, I think a 3rd adult party might be necessary in the visits.)

It's simple and obvious to me that the mother has a different biological bond in those 1st years. Yes, the dad can be SO important, & any father who wants to care for the baby should be allowed to... but not if it means separating the baby from mother against her will.

Particularly when that mother is breastfeeding.

I wish you a lot of luck with this BellaRose0212. I wish I had better ideas to offer. If I think of any I'll post.

[Equuskia]

Originally Posted by KimberlyD0

It is no more importent then the father child bond. Both need to be respected. Yes moms can bond with breastfeeding and thats important, but that doesn't make it more important, or less valuable then the bond that only a father can provide.

I'm afraid you have misunderstood me. This isn't a question of "importance" or "value", it's a question of biology. In the mammalia class, newborns are hardwired to seek their mother, and mothers are hardwired to nurture their offspring. Depending on the species, fathers may or may not play a role in rearing. In this modern world of custody issues, divorces and remarriages, infants have not evolved. They are still stone-age babies with stone-age needs, the need to be breastfed, held and nurtured.

Noone has said that the father-child bond is unimportant or less valuable. But fair does not mean equal. Is it fair to an infant to be taken from its mother to its father's house for a weekend, just so that both parents have "equal access"? I think not. This is not in the best interest of the infant. A father can have plenty of access to the child to bond, without separating the mother-child unit. A father can change diapers, bathe the infant, play silly games and sing to baby, without separating the infant from its mother. In fact, in the breastfeeding forum, these are the activities frequently suggested for fathers and family members that are interested in bonding with baby, but think that it can only be done with a bottle of milk.

[stiss]

Just wondering - if the important thing here is about the breastfeeding relationship, why not propose that the mother accompany the baby to see the father? Or maybe the parents could alternate making the trip, so that one parent isn't stuck with all the added expense? I can understand why a mother wouldn't really want to do this if their ex was a jerk and left in the first place, but if we're really talking about breastfeeding, then I'd think looking for compromise would be the most appropriate and fair solution...no?

I have lots of male friends that have been totally screwed over by their ex-wives. I'm just wondering why they should have to automatically bear the brunt of the expense?