or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Breastfeeding › trying to decide how long to breast feed
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

trying to decide how long to breast feed - Page 6

post #101 of 111
In regard to the question posed by the original poster, I was this way as well when my Sara was first born. We had so many problems that I just gave myself a goal of 6 weeks, which would put her at her due date. When 6 weeks hit, I told myself I needed to keep going to another 6 weeks. And then I gave myself 6 months and then she didn't eat ANY solids at all(her choice, we offered) until 10 months and then she wouldn't even any meal until 12months. So I said I would stop at a year. She's now 14months and there's really NO way I could imagine not breastfeeding her. She nurses about 5 times a day and 3 times a night at least, combined with 2-3meals a day and a snack or two. She is pretty picky but what she DOES eat, she enjoys thoroughly. I haven't researched the question about who is first in line for nutrition but from personal experience, baby comes first no matter what. I say this because I am battling the weight issues. I cannot keep weight on while nursing to save my life. This is my second bf baby and I'm 5feet 5inches and down to 110lbs. I look good at 130lbs. I recently had surgery that didn't allow me to eat for a week and I lost 10lbs. My milk supply dropped a bit for a few days when i was dehydrated but quickly came back up and my Sara is getting everything she needs. She was a 34week preemie who weighed in at 5lbs 3oz and lost down to 4lbs 10oz. She's 14months old and weighs 21lbs. I've lost 40lbs in the last year and my body still struggles to keep weight on and she's flourishing and gaining weight well and meeting her milestones. I do understand your logic behind your reasoning why mama should come first nutritionally. Nature should provide for mama first and baby second to ensure that mama lives to take care of baby but in my experience, that does not seem to be accurate. I am a planner just like you but I think that we really need to just sit back and evaluate the situation once we reach our goals. I really thought I'd be compeltely done after her first birthday and want nothing to do with nursing. But that goal seemed completley arbitrary when it rolled around and I found myself looking towards 18months of nursing. Who knows? We may make it there and end up saying 2 years sounds like a good round number. I think you should enjoy that year and once you hit that goal, you should sit back and reevaluate and see where things stand. If you want to continue, DO SO! If you don't, start thinking about weaning and getting pregnant. I got AF back at 10months postpartum when Sara started eating solids. We are still nursing quite a bit but I do have AF. So you never know!

Meg
post #102 of 111
Tanya, you didn't upset me one single bit, just trying to clear things up here.

Reading Weston Price's book and the information of the non profit WAPF changed my life and my family's life and my view of how crucial nutrients are as the raw building material of our children's bodies.

For example the thread in "Nutrition and Good Eating" I've been posting to about the crucial nature of vitamin A and its effect on development of birth defects.

One of the reasons for the recommendation to space children 3 years apart is to rebuild the mother's stores of vitamin A. Native people did this as a rule and it's one reason given for ebf to allow for larger spacing of children. Many societies would not allow marriage until both male and female were put on certain period of feeding with high vitamin A foods (natural preformed vitamin A found only in animal foods such as liver).

I'd hate to have anyone dismiss WAPF as a source of important and unique information based on lack of knowledge or hearsay.
post #103 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by JaneS
I'd hate to have anyone dismiss WAPF as a source of important and unique information based on lack of knowledge or hearsay.
Please don't assume that those who do not agree with Price are relying on "hearsay." It could also be due to doing their own research and coming to their own conclusion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JaneS


One of the reasons for the recommendation to space children 3 years apart is to rebuild the mother's stores of vitamin A. Native people did this as a rule and it's one reason given for ebf to allow for larger spacing of children. Many societies would not allow marriage until both male and female were put on certain period of feeding with high vitamin A foods (natural preformed vitamin A found only in animal foods such as liver).
Yikes! That's an awfully big generalization/stereotype there. "Native people"? Who? Native to where? "As a rule?" Doubt it.
post #104 of 111
Except I didn't hear research or well referenced arguments.

I have no problem with disagreement with Price or myself. Especially if they happen to be well thought out and researched so I can learn from them too.

The native people studied by Price included Swiss, Gaelic, Eskimos. Melanesians, Polynesians and Pacific Islanders (about a dozen different). Torres Strait Islanders, New Zealand Maori, Australian Aborigines, Peruvian Indians, North American/Canadian Indians (many different tribes), African tribes (15 different tribes). He studied both people totally isolated from modern world (in 1930s) following their native diets as well as modern people of the same ancestry to show that departing from the native diet was responsible for degenerative diseases.
post #105 of 111
True as that is... Isn't or couldn't it also be true that part of the reason for the child spacing was because the women of childbearing age didn't get a period every month? My understanding isn't just that they breastfed for more than 1 year or 2, but because of diet the women didn't menstruate every cycle- thereby decreasing the chances of being fertile or pregnancy.
post #106 of 111
From G. T. Baden's book, "Among the Ibos of Nigeria":
Quote:
It is not only a matter of disgrace but an actual abomination, for an Ibo woman to bear children at shorter intervals than about three years... The belief prevails strongly that it is necessary for this interval to elapse in order to ensure the mother be able to recuperate her strength completely, and thus be in a thoroughly fit condition to bear another child. Should a second child be born within the prescribed period the theory is held that it must inevitably be weak and sickly, and its chances jeopardized.
post #107 of 111
Fascinating article updating Price's work and tying diet directly to connective tissue disorders (cleft palate, etc). This makes the crucial nature of diet very very real.

Connective Tissue Disorders: The Overlaps and Links to Diet

http://www.ctds.info/connective_disorders1.html
post #108 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pynki
True as that is... Isn't or couldn't it also be true that part of the reason for the child spacing was because the women of childbearing age didn't get a period every month? My understanding isn't just that they breastfed for more than 1 year or 2, but because of diet the women didn't menstruate every cycle- thereby decreasing the chances of being fertile or pregnancy.
Australian Aborigines used herbs for contraception to promote child spacing. There are many examples of natives specifically planning it this way for a reason.
post #109 of 111

You know what??

I think it is too soon to be thinking the way you are. I know that as new moms we tend to want to plan and know and be incharge of everything....but honestly those things really take time and learing.

In a years time, you may be better prepared to know and understand your nursing relationship.

Breastfeeding is no guarentee to birthcontrol, and you may end up with a baby sooner than 2 years if you think it is

Why not wait awhile, and see how you and she like it. She herself may decide that a year is long enough, or you may decide that nursing through pregnancy and tandem nursing is the best for your family kwim?

Sarah )
post #110 of 111
there is so much good info available on this thread--thank you!

to the op--it is such a hard decision, isn't it? it took me five years to have these babies, and i want more babies! my original bf goal was a year-ish (i didn't really know how long you were supposed to bf). but i had a lot of problems initially (having twins takes a lot out of you, and my diet was the traditional lowfat, lots of whole grains that was actually robbing me of nutrition). the problems turned out to be somewhat beneficial in that i've learned a lot. i soon updated my goal to two years (as per WHO), and then decided i wanted to clw. and as our nursing relationship developed and nursing became so much easier, i became more and more convinced i couldn't deny my babies my milk. see how it goes for you, but the longer you go, the better for your baby (as everyone has said). and you might just find you don't want to jeopardize that relationship (since milk can dry up in pregnancy--that was really what changed my mind. my girls'd flip if the milk was gone.)

in regards to the other issues that have come up--i used to have fantasies about nursing a third child while still nursing my twins (now 15 months). it seems easy enough. i'm sure i *could* do it, but given my age and what i've done to myself nutritionally (while by anyone's standards i was eating pretty healthily--tho some sugar and transfats), i think it is too risky. breastmilk is gold, but IT'S NOT MAGIC. in my case, i was following lll guidelines and trying to lose weight very slowly (doing less than what lll said). my girls were not on the charts weightwise. so i stopped dieting for awhile. i let them nurse all the time. i mean ALL THE TIME. they slept on my breasts (still do sometimes, tho this is fading). they were not on the charts weightwise. i talked to lc after lc; they all said the same thing--i was doing everything right; milk was coming out of me; the girls were meeting milestones; everything was fine. i felt something wasn't right, and (to make a long story short) i read nutrition and physical degeneration, found nourishing traditions, and the changes in me and my girls are astounding. i have no doubt it is due to a change in my/our diets. they are the substantial healthy breastfed babes i wanted, now that my body is getting enough nutrients for all of us.

i'm writing just to encourage anyone who's having a reaction to this idea that breastmilk isn't magic...Read nutrition and physical degeneration. i was skeptical through half of the book. then i thought the photos must be faked. (the wap website doesn't impress me visually, which made me doubt the info at first--but after reading n&pd, it makes sense.) and no one has anything to gain moneywise from what this guy is saying. it makes so much sense and it has changed my life significantly. i feel like i've joined a cult in terms of how i feel about food now. i respect it, and i respect the power it has over my body and over my children's bodies, and over the children i will try to wait a sensible amount of time to have (i agree with three years) so that they can be the healthiest babies i can make.

(Sorry i don't have time to edit or be more eloquent--but read the book! Fallon didn't write it, and her experiences shouldn't detract from Price's book.)
post #111 of 111
I skimmed through the responses, but I just wanted to share my story.

I knew I wanted to nurse my son for at least a year. All of the research, everything I read... I knew I wanted to give him that gift and would do ALL that I could to do so.

As he neared a year, he was nowhere near ready to wean. He was eating 1-2 solid meals a day, and nursing 5-7 times a day. I didn't want to force wean him, but had never really thought about nursing a toddler. Plus I really wanted to TTC so our kids could be 2 years apart.

I kept nursing, wound up nightweaning DS at 14 mo, and guess what? At 15 mo my AF returned. He was still nursing 5 times a day at that point (we dropped the two night nursings). The first month I let my cycle just settle in. The second month I charted and we started TTC. The third month... same. The fourth month, I was pg. It took me a year of TTCing the first time around.

I wound up not weaning DS - but that is entirely your choice. He tapered off almost immediately after I got pregnant. He didn't like the change in my milk. He would still nurse, but less and less. When I was 6 wks pg, he cut back to three times a day. At 3 mo, he cut back to 1-2. Then at 4 mo pg, when he was 22 mo, he self-weaned. It wasn't hard to nurse and be pg except for the sensitivity the first few weeks. I also found it helped with m/s. However, I didn't drink enough water to compensate!

GL - I would not worry about weaning until after a year, and you can play it by ear then. You absolutely though can nurse and TTC, and then if you want, encourage weaning when you get pg. I know a lot of mamas who did get pg while nursing an older child.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Breastfeeding
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Breastfeeding › trying to decide how long to breast feed