TestifyToLove
New member
Here's my take on it.
I'm not a bottlefeeder. I breastfeed all of the biological kiddos, and I extended breastfeed, which means I nurse until they are ready to give it up.
AAP recommends babies be breastfed for at least 1 year, and as long thereafter as mutually agreed upon by mother and child. There is no upper limit to when its still good for the child.
AAFP and WHO go a step beyond the AAP. They both recommend breastfeeding for at least 2 years, and again for as long thereafter as mutually agreed by mother and child. Again, no upper limit of when to stop breastfeeding.
Now, obviously, a bottle is different than breastfeeding for some very specific reasons. First, formula isn't a living biological food source, so it lacks a lot of the immune qualities, and the unique composition of breastmilk. BUT, breastfeeding is not merely recommended because of the breastmilk, but also for the development, the emotional needs and the bonding aspects which breastfeeding provides.
So, at its heart, bottle feeding is a breastfeeding substitute. And, when done properly where the parent is holding the bottle and the baby, its a viable substitute.
If bottle feeding is meant to replace the nutritional aspects that breastfeeding provides, does it not also provide the emotional and bonding needs that are met via breastfeeding?
Human infants are born with an innate and extremely strong NEED to suck. If that need is not met, it can be catastrophic for a human infant and their development. If the only sucking a human infant is permitted is that which is for nutritional purposes, they will be developmentally stunted and stuck trying to meet that need far longer than they are biologically programed to do so.
But, the need for a human to suck is SOO strong that the AAP recommends using a pacifier until age THREE. Why is a pacifier okay and a bottle somehow is not?
For one simple reason, cavities. Doctors are so worried about the cavities that bottle feeding can cause, which breastfeeding traditionally does not, that they cut off a baby's bottle usage as soon as that baby can biologically obtain their nutrition elsewhere.
Well, I'm sorry. But, that is NOT how we were biologically put together. We were NOT made to seperate our sucking need from our nutritional attainment. In the natural and biological paradigm, the 2 are not seperable. Its my opinion in the modern substitution, they should not be seperable either.
Its my opinion that babies should be allowed to keep their bottles if they need them and want them, even when they pass the age of 1, for as long as those same children would naturally have breastfeed they continue to have a need to nurse from a bottle. And, since its biologically acceptable for them to be nursing to well beyond that point, then its understandable for them to have a bottle as well. In CF kiddos who have a tremendous need for increased nutrition, its probably desirable to encourage that need to get more calories into them.
Long story short, I'm of the personal opinion that a baby should be allow to hold onto their bottle for as long as my babies were permitted to breastfeed...and that was a really LONG time.
The only issue is that once the teeth show up, you really need to practice good oral hygeine and clean the stuff off their teeth. You should not bottle prop. And, you should not permit them to carry their bottles around with them, as they are then NOT getting that emotional connection to the parent met.
We adopt older boys. And, I actually seek out drinking cups that simulate that sucking technique for them when they come home. I don't want to insult them by giving them a bottle. But, I do want to meet that instinctual need to suck, to feel calmed and connected through their sucking and to keep them hydrated and/or nutrition levels up in the case of our CFer.
M absolutely sucks on his drink. He gets his 'milk' every morning from a sports bottle that requires the sucking mechanism to fully get the milk out. Its not a nipple, but it uses the same muscles, and yes it DOES cause him to get more in by tapping into that need. He gets his Gatorade all day by the same mechanism. Again, not an acutal nipple but uses the same muscles and motion. And, I'm not going to apologize for that. I'm meeting his emotional need to suck that was cut short for him. And, I'm doing what I can to encourage him to put more nutrition and hydration in him. And nope, I don't feel the least bit that there is a problem with letting the poor child have the sucking needs met that every child so desperately needs. If in meeting that I can get extra calories in him, all the better and less I have to sneak in by other methods.
I'm not a bottlefeeder. I breastfeed all of the biological kiddos, and I extended breastfeed, which means I nurse until they are ready to give it up.
AAP recommends babies be breastfed for at least 1 year, and as long thereafter as mutually agreed upon by mother and child. There is no upper limit to when its still good for the child.
AAFP and WHO go a step beyond the AAP. They both recommend breastfeeding for at least 2 years, and again for as long thereafter as mutually agreed by mother and child. Again, no upper limit of when to stop breastfeeding.
Now, obviously, a bottle is different than breastfeeding for some very specific reasons. First, formula isn't a living biological food source, so it lacks a lot of the immune qualities, and the unique composition of breastmilk. BUT, breastfeeding is not merely recommended because of the breastmilk, but also for the development, the emotional needs and the bonding aspects which breastfeeding provides.
So, at its heart, bottle feeding is a breastfeeding substitute. And, when done properly where the parent is holding the bottle and the baby, its a viable substitute.
If bottle feeding is meant to replace the nutritional aspects that breastfeeding provides, does it not also provide the emotional and bonding needs that are met via breastfeeding?
Human infants are born with an innate and extremely strong NEED to suck. If that need is not met, it can be catastrophic for a human infant and their development. If the only sucking a human infant is permitted is that which is for nutritional purposes, they will be developmentally stunted and stuck trying to meet that need far longer than they are biologically programed to do so.
But, the need for a human to suck is SOO strong that the AAP recommends using a pacifier until age THREE. Why is a pacifier okay and a bottle somehow is not?
For one simple reason, cavities. Doctors are so worried about the cavities that bottle feeding can cause, which breastfeeding traditionally does not, that they cut off a baby's bottle usage as soon as that baby can biologically obtain their nutrition elsewhere.
Well, I'm sorry. But, that is NOT how we were biologically put together. We were NOT made to seperate our sucking need from our nutritional attainment. In the natural and biological paradigm, the 2 are not seperable. Its my opinion in the modern substitution, they should not be seperable either.
Its my opinion that babies should be allowed to keep their bottles if they need them and want them, even when they pass the age of 1, for as long as those same children would naturally have breastfeed they continue to have a need to nurse from a bottle. And, since its biologically acceptable for them to be nursing to well beyond that point, then its understandable for them to have a bottle as well. In CF kiddos who have a tremendous need for increased nutrition, its probably desirable to encourage that need to get more calories into them.
Long story short, I'm of the personal opinion that a baby should be allow to hold onto their bottle for as long as my babies were permitted to breastfeed...and that was a really LONG time.
The only issue is that once the teeth show up, you really need to practice good oral hygeine and clean the stuff off their teeth. You should not bottle prop. And, you should not permit them to carry their bottles around with them, as they are then NOT getting that emotional connection to the parent met.
We adopt older boys. And, I actually seek out drinking cups that simulate that sucking technique for them when they come home. I don't want to insult them by giving them a bottle. But, I do want to meet that instinctual need to suck, to feel calmed and connected through their sucking and to keep them hydrated and/or nutrition levels up in the case of our CFer.
M absolutely sucks on his drink. He gets his 'milk' every morning from a sports bottle that requires the sucking mechanism to fully get the milk out. Its not a nipple, but it uses the same muscles, and yes it DOES cause him to get more in by tapping into that need. He gets his Gatorade all day by the same mechanism. Again, not an acutal nipple but uses the same muscles and motion. And, I'm not going to apologize for that. I'm meeting his emotional need to suck that was cut short for him. And, I'm doing what I can to encourage him to put more nutrition and hydration in him. And nope, I don't feel the least bit that there is a problem with letting the poor child have the sucking needs met that every child so desperately needs. If in meeting that I can get extra calories in him, all the better and less I have to sneak in by other methods.