S/O: How early is it CLW? - Page 2

[majormajor]

i still don't get it. what's the difference if a babe weans himself from the breast to a bottle of formula vs. to a sippy of cow's milk and a sandwich? no doubt, a 6 month old can't be physiologically ready to give up milk... is that what you mean? but if they do anyway, then what do you call it?

[artgoddess]

Originally Posted by readytobedone

i think it's possible that the child would choose to wean in the second half of the second year, but probably not before that. there are always exceptions, i guess. and even 19-24 mo. is probably on the young side of what's possible.

I agree. I always get confused when a person says their baby self weaned before a year. I think to myself, "How is that possible? What were they eating or drinking if they weren't nursing?" What I mean is a baby who does not nurse at say 9 or 10 months has to be getting it's nutrition somewhere right? Solids and water? Formula? What? But all of that, and enough of those alternatives at such a young age will deter from nursing, so I don't really see it as CLW, I see it as a mother who gave alternatives instead. Which I'm not judging, many moms have to do so because of work schedules and inability to pump etc... But still, I wouldn't call it CLW.

[alegna]

Originally Posted by majormajor

i still don't get it. what's the difference if a babe weans himself from the breast to a bottle of formula vs. to a sippy of cow's milk and a sandwich? no doubt, a 6 month old can't be physiologically ready to give up milk... is that what you mean? but if they do anyway, then what do you call it?

Mom is initiating weaning by offering that bottle and formula.

I call it a nursing strike.

-Angela

[Ruthla]

Originally Posted by majormajor

i still don't get it. what's the difference if a babe weans himself from the breast to a bottle of formula vs. to a sippy of cow's milk and a sandwich? no doubt, a 6 month old can't be physiologically ready to give up milk... is that what you mean? but if they do anyway, then what do you call it?

CLW isn't about "weaning to" anything. It's about nursing until the child outgrows the need to suck.

My son was eating a lot of foods, and drinking from regular cups, long before he weaned. He probably didn't get more than a few ounces of my milk a day the last few months he was nursing- by that time nursing was much more about the emotional connection and much less about the milk. He wasn't using bottles or sippy cups or anything else he needed to suck on.

[alegna]

Originally Posted by Ruthla

CLW isn't about "weaning to" anything. It's about nursing until the child outgrows the need to suck.

:

That too. Good point.

-Angela

[sunnysideup]

Originally Posted by majormajor

i still don't get it. what's the difference if a babe weans himself from the breast to a bottle of formula vs. to a sippy of cow's milk and a sandwich? no doubt, a 6 month old can't be physiologically ready to give up milk... is that what you mean? but if they do anyway, then what do you call it?

True child led weaning means nursing until the child outgrows the need. When a child stops nursing before they have outgrown the need, there is always a reason--pacifiers, bottles, drop in supply due to pregnancy, overfeeding of solids and/or other milk, etc. If there is a reason for the weaning it is not true child led weaning--the weaning was not initiated by the child.

Sometimes people interpret these conversations as being about blaming the mother--that's not my intention (CLW is not for everyone, and that's ok). When misinformation about breastfeeding is spread it can effect other breastfeeding relationships. If a mom has heard that 6mo babies sometimes wean on their own, that mom might dismiss a nursing strike as CLW, and end the nursing relationship before her baby is ready.

[forestrymom]

So, do true CLW'ers never set limits?

And, I am not asking this relative to my own situation, because dd is still sucking a pacifier, but she has stopped nursing as a result of colostrum, so indeeds its not true CLW. But, my question is...if a mother is pregnant and the child chooses not to nurse, and has not sucking substitutes, then why is it not CLW? I mean, if they needed to suck, wouldn't they suck even though mom is dry (and only 20% of mothers actually "dry up", according to ADVENTURES IN TANDEM NURSING)? I mean, dd sucks a pacifier, and nothing comes out of it, right? So, imo, at least until you all convince me otherwise , weaning in pregnancy as a result of decreased milk, with no other sucking subs, is still CLW.

Also, I am ita that a child under 2 will not generally self-wean. I just don't know of any less than 2 yos who don't still need to suck.

[sunnysideup]

Originally Posted by forestrymom

So, do true CLW'ers never set limits?

I don't think there's anything wrong with setting limits, within reason.

Originally Posted by forestrymom

So, imo, at least until you all convince me otherwise , weaning in pregnancy as a result of decreased milk, with no other sucking subs, is still CLW.

It is my understanding that when weaning is initiated by a drop in supply due to pregnancy, it is not true CLW. True CLW is initiated by the child.

Of course, that doesn't make it "wrong." Child led weaning doesn't work out for everyone.

[forestrymom]

Originally Posted by sunnysideup

I don't think there's anything wrong with setting limits, within reason. It is my understanding that when weaning is initiated by a drop in supply due to pregnancy, it is not true CLW. True CLW is initiated by the child.

Of course, that doesn't make it "wrong." Child led weaning doesn't work out for everyone.

Yeah, but...(and I'm arguing for the sake of arguing), it is initiated by the child, if mom is still allowing for nursing. The child is choosing not to nurse because there is no milk. Pacifiers don't produce milk, but they interfere with nursing. As I said, just philosophising (is that even a word?).

[noah's mom]

I would tend to agree that kids under 2 are unlikely to CLW, I do see it as a physiological need before that point.

It's certainly still a need for my DS, who is almost 27 mos now - I got pg about 3 mos before his 2nd bday and he has continued to nurse at the same rate (sometimes more frequently!) since, including during the past 2 mos. of this pregnancy when I have not been able to hand-express a single drop of milk. I imagine it's b/c he doesn't get his sucking needs met by any other source (even as an infant, he never took an interest in a paci, and stopped even taking ebf in a bottle by the time he was 11 mos old - the "peer pressure" of all the older kiddos drinking from sippy cups at daycare was just too much for him! ).

DS has plenty of limits set on him as well - he's at daycare f/t so obviously no nursing during weekdays (and that's been in place since he was 6mos old), I nightweaned him right around his 2nd b/day due to the pg (tried several months earlier but it didn't "stick"), and occasionally refuse him entirely if he's been asking to nurse frequently but my boobs are just too sore to take any more! And the kid has always eaten solid foods like they're going out of style. So I really think it must be the need to suck that affects duration of nursing, not whether or not there are limits (or in this case, even whether or not there is milk!)

ETA: My feeling about setting limits is that although the limits are parent-led, the actual duration of nursing is still child-led.

[sunnysideup]

Originally Posted by forestrymom

Yeah, but...(and I'm arguing for the sake of arguing), it is initiated by the child, if mom is still allowing for nursing. The child is choosing not to nurse because there is no milk. Pacifiers don't produce milk, but they interfere with nursing. As I said, just philosophising (is that even a word?).

For the sake of argument, lets use an example of a 10 month-old who weans because of a drop in supply due to pregnancy. It is not true child led weaning because the weaning did not start because he outgrew the need to nurse--it started because there was a drop in supply due to pregnancy. KWIM?

[majormajor]

Originally Posted by sunnysideup

True child led weaning means nursing until the child outgrows the need. When a child stops nursing before they have outgrown the need, there is always a reason--pacifiers, bottles, drop in supply due to pregnancy, overfeeding of solids and/or other milk, etc. If there is a reason for the weaning it is not true child led weaning--the weaning was not initiated by the child.

Sometimes people interpret these conversations as being about blaming the mother--that's not my intention (CLW is not for everyone, and that's ok). When misinformation about breastfeeding is spread it can effect other breastfeeding relationships. If a mom has heard that 6mo babies sometimes wean on their own, that mom might dismiss a nursing strike as CLW, and end the nursing relationship before her baby is ready.

(i totally see that this conversation isn't blaming the mother. i'm also not trying to be argumentative, just trying to nail down my understanding of child-led weaning)

but, supposing the mother isn't doing anything to encourage weaning, and the child gives it up on his own? even if he's so young that he still physically needs the milk. if you automatically call that a nursing strike based on age, then aren't you setting up a definition of child-led weaning that includes an age minimum?

[artgoddess]

Originally Posted by majormajor

(i totally see that this conversation isn't blaming the mother. i'm also not trying to be argumentative, just trying to nail down my understanding of child-led weaning)

but, supposing the mother isn't doing anything to encourage weaning, and the child gives it up on his own? even if he's so young that he still physically needs the milk. if you automatically call that a nursing strike based on age, then aren't you setting up a definition of child-led weaning that includes an age minimum?

What is the baby living off of for nutrition if the mother is doing nothing to encourage weaning in your example?

[majormajor]

i don't know. i would have to ask his mom...

ahh, but i see where you're all coming from (i think). i think i'm using "self-weaning" interchangeably with "child-led weaning." now that i think about it, the mother definitely said the baby self-weaned, not that he did child-led weaning.
is this on the right track? self-weaning and child-led weaning are two different things?

(sorry if i'm being a pain, like i said, i'm just trying to nail down the definitions.)

[artgoddess]

Originally Posted by majormajor

i don't know. i would have to ask his mom...

ahh, but i see where you're all coming from (i think). i think i'm using "self-weaning" interchangeably with "child-led weaning." now that i think about it, the mother definitely said the baby self-weaned, not that he did child-led weaning.
is this on the right track? self-weaning and child-led weaning are two different things?

(sorry if i'm being a pain, like i said, i'm just trying to nail down the definitions.)

You are not being a pain at all. For me, if the mother is offering bottles she is encouraging weaning. I don't mean to say that there is anything wrong with that. But to say she did nothing to encourage it, yet gave bottles of formula or pumped milk seems like she is contradicting herself.

[BennyPai]

My older dd "CLWed" at 22 mos. - she was unimpressed by the return of my milk after her sister was born. Almost a full year later, dd decided to return to the breast. Still going at 3yrs. 8mos ...

[forestrymom]

Originally Posted by sunnysideup

For the sake of argument, lets use an example of a 10 month-old who weans because of a drop in supply due to pregnancy. It is not true child led weaning because the weaning did not start because he outgrew the need to nurse--it started because there was a drop in supply due to pregnancy. KWIM?

Right, but isn't it likely that same 10 month old would take sucking from another source? Whereas its more plausible a 20 month woudln't? Again, of course, for the sake of argument .

[AntoninBeGonin]

Originally Posted by 1babysmom

Thanks for this thread!! I've always felt like I was going to go insane when I hear people say their babies weaned on their at 9 months or so (and then act all sad as if they tried everything to prevent it). Glad to hear I'm not nuts! LOL

A really great mom I know had this problem. Her son absolutely hated to breastfeed. She had so much trouble the entire first year that I don't know how she even managed to feed him as much as she did. I don't know every single detail but I know she went through a lot.

[sunnysideup]

Originally Posted by forestrymom

Right, but isn't it likely that same 10 month old would take sucking from another source? Whereas its more plausible a 20 month woudln't? Again, of course, for the sake of argument .

If the question is "is it child led weaning" then the criteria that matters is whether or not the weaning was initiated by the child.

[Justmee]

Thanks everyone for all your answers. I was wondering if it was possible Rivka had a true child led weaning, and I think she did.

She *never* liked to suck, even as a tiny infant. She would nurse for milk, and then push off. If I tried to relatch her she screamed (no pacis / bottles / anything). She was never a baby who was at the breast for hours at a time, multiple tiems a day. Give me my milk and let me get on with my life

She never attmepted to suck her thumb or fingers, she just wasn't a sucky baby at all. She would delatch before going back to sleep, she never nursed to sleep after about 4 weeks old (although she needed to nurse *before* she woudl go back to sleep, she would always delatch herself and go to sleep on her own)

I always offered teh breast first, she didn't really have many solids at all until 15m +

I never nightweaned, and she decreased nursing very gradually (she nursed at night until the end). She always used to nurse first thing AM, and she just sort of wanted to drop that (I woudl offer and she woudl run off). Despite my offering, she totally stopped nursing abotu 22 months. It was really gradual, she cut down, she woudl skip a day, come back, I woudl offer, she would refuse, etc. I wasn't pregnant, no return of AF, I didn't nightwean, nothing really changed. Not that it makes a difference now, but I was just wondering if it was "CLW" and I think it was My twins had pregnancy led wearning, but hey you can't always control life.