Posted: 10/7/2012 11:24:40 AM
QUOTE Originally Posted by ragingstorm:
Look at the picture in the middle on the right. I think this is flat out wrong. I dont agree wti breastfeeding any child over2 and im not so sure I even like 2 year olds breastfeeding but so be it. A nine year old should NOT be breastfeeding.
There is typically no conscious long-term memory before 18 months so a two-year old could remember being breastfed although it is unlikely.
I would say a two to three year old could start questioning what a breast is which could lead to some uncomfortable moments in pre-K when the child doesn't understand why the children he/she associates with doesn't still breastfeed. Otherwise, I think 2 is around the maximum cutoff IMO.
That being said, what are the costs and benefits of breastfeeding a 9 year old? If you are truly poor, it makes sense: provide nourishment to your child in the best way possible.
If you are not living in poverty, I can't see why one would continue to do it. Children are learning about their sexuality at that age, are extremely curious and will start to wonder why their face is being put into a mother's bosom continually, which the child would understand is a sexual organ by that time (or at least a private one).
That doesn't begin to address the plethora of menu options, all of which could be extremely healthy by choice, one could provide to a child at a fair cost.
The odd thing about breastfeeding to age 6,7,8,9 is this: women must do this continually in 2 to 4 hour segments every day to ensure the body continues to produce milk. Therefore the mother on the cover of that magazine is not only breastfeeding her child once a day, but several times a day FOR NINE YEARS!!!
What's a better option to remove the uncomfortable sexuality aspect? Get a good breast pump and give your kid a glass of milk!!!
The kid gets the same milk he would had he not latched onto the breast!
Another question that needs to be answered: Why is it typically only boys who are being breastfed to these ages? If mothers truly cared about the health and well-being of the child, gender wouldn't matter and we could just as easily see a girl on the cover of that magazine. Is there some kind of Oedipus complex here for the sons and mothers (driven by the mothers?). I think that is the disturbing element the OP and others are inherently questioning and that is fair.