Magazine Cover Bf Mom

I breastfed my daughter till she was 2 and 1/2 almost. Before that I never planned on breastfeeding that long.

Sometimes it's odd until it becomes you and you realize how normal it is.

Time could care less about the social graces of bf. All they want are sales and page views.

Seriously? I would start bf my 6 year old if I knew it would make me look like that.

A friend of mine once told me that she kept beast feeding because it "felt great" I can't help but wondering if women who don't wean are addicted to this feeling.

SO MANY issues here!

1. The cover: The photographer and editor should be ashamed. I will tell you that the average breastfeeding mother that I have met does not look like a supermodel, does not stand up looking arguably alluring staring at you with a "Make something of it!" stance while their toddler stands on a chair nursing and also looking at you like you caught him doing something naughty. I mean, really evaluate the picture they posed. Shameful. I am very, very disappointed in Time Magazine.

2. The caption: "Are you Mom enough?" PLEASE!!!!! Way to be divisive on an issue that should be bonding us mothers together. "Well, I breastfed my children until they were four!" "Well, once my son turned 2, it weirded me out, so I stopped and don't understand how anyone breastfeeds past that age." "I stopped breastfeeding in public when people started giving me odd looks." STOP IT! Everyone just stop! Breastfeeding is a PERSONAL choice. Why you do it, why you don't, how long you do it, what position you use, what clothes you wear, what affect it has on your body.... Anyone laying down any blanket statements about "It's OK, but ....." NO! No but! Breastfeeding is a choice. There are already so many factors influencing, lets not let bigotry and ignorance from OTHER MOTHERS provide a more hostile environment for us. I think we have enough on our hearts and minds, we don't need to bash each other. Solidarity, women!

Shame on Time Magazine.

I personally think it's abnormal. Animals even know when to wean their young b/c they are able at some point to eat on their own. Breastmilk is NOT beneficial to older kids b/c they require more than what bm gives after a certain point. And the kid in the pic? Good Lord! Poor thing! I can only imagine how picked-on he might become!
AND, to say, "Are you Mom enough??" Really? I breastfed for a year and I consider myself a champ!
No need to make already self-concious moms more confused!
Ok, I'll stop ranting now and go to bed like I should have an hour ago!!

What gets under my skin more than seeing a child standing on a chair breast feeding is the title. " Are you mom enough?"

That bothers me alot! I was able to breast feed for 3-4 months with my boys. With my daughter a month. That was even with Lactation Consultant helping me with all of them.

For me what the magazine cover is saying is that if you aren't breast feeding your child and/ or breast feeding for years that you aren't being a good enough mom and need to step it up.

Not flaming here but ridiculous is spelled with an I not an E. Pronounced ri dic u las NOT re dic u las.

My daughter was diagnosed with Celiac disease at age 24, about a year ago. Her doctor asked her if she was breastfed, she told yes for about 2 years. He then explained that she has always had Celiacs but since she was breast fed for so long it took that long before the symtoms really started bothering her. She has always had a sensitive stomache but has gotten worse over the years.

I find these debates so interesting. We as women fight for the right to do with our bodies as we choose when it comes to abortion and birth control but when it comes to issues such as breast feeding many feel that their opinion is the only opinion. HHHHMMMMM

Personally, I think Time is hurting for readership, so it's resorting to sensationalism and fanning the flames of the "mommy wars."

And yes, calling someone "rediculous" (sic) is bashing. Would you say that to someone in real life?

ETA: But now that I read the other responses, I realize that that's the least of the bashing going on here. Breastfeeding is healthy and normal, and it's healthy and normal (according to the American Pediatrics Association) to continue until mother and child are ready to stop. If it's not your boob, and not your kid, it's not your problem.

ETA: Yep, you're still bashing.

In cultures where child led weaning is the norm it is not unheard of for a child to breastfeed up to the age of 7. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends until AT LEAST 2 years old, longer if mutually desired by mother and child. The American Academy of Pediactrics (AAP) is behind the times and just wrong in only recommending 1 year. But they do also say or longer if mutually desired.
Breast milk does not loose any nutrition just because a child is older. It changes and adapts to the child's needs at any age. It continues to provide all the antibodies and protection to illness.
There are animals that breast feed longer then the average American.
I breastfed my first until he was 3 years old, through my pregnancy with my second and for 2 months I nursed both. I nursed my second until he was a few months shy of 5 years. My third is about to turn 3 and she's still nursing. I am doing what is natural to the human race. It is culture that has made it into the "taboo" that it is. It is culture that makes you have the attitude that you do and others. Culture is wrong and it is hurting our children. It is such a shame that this is happening.
I love the picture of Time Magazine! I find it beautiful and amazing. I am in awe that my body can provide such an amazing food for my child.

really?
how is saying it's 'rediculous' and 'too much' not bashing?
just adding 'more power to you' doesn't make this a non-judgemental question.
if that's how *some* moms choose to comfort their children, it's no skin off your nose, right?
khairete
S.

Yeah, I'm "mom enough" to know better than to breastfeed a child at four years of age. I'm "mom enough" to know that my kids need to learn and feel independence in order to become their own functioning and individual selves. Lots of affection and a nurturing environment are key, but kids don't need to be latched on in pre-k. I think people who do that are suffering from deep emotional issues and using their children to fulfill some need of their own. No four year old needs to breastfeed and I think it's incredibly weird and quite gross to be honest.

If you're breastfeeding a four year old, WHY? Seriously -WHY? There's no nutritional or medical reason for it. If a 4 or 5 year old cannot get to sleep without breastfeeding, that's a BIG problem. It's important for children to know how to self-soothe. Exactly when does your friend plan to stop breastfeeding him to sleep -6? 8? Middle School? I would never go up to anyone and go off on them, but I would certainly think to myself -WEIRDO! And that's exactly what I thought when looking at the Time cover.

Seriously? You JUST said that breastfeeding past 2 is ridiculous and then the next statement is that you are not bashing it. You are. It's fine if it's ridiculous for YOU, but you get to butt out of everyone else's decision to breastfeed as ling ad they see fit.
Added- Nicole, my daughter could say "boob" when she was 6 months old. It was her first word! She was walking around at 11 months. She is climbing all over the place now at 16 months and can say lots of words, chew steak, and ask to nurse. We are weaning, but she still nurses every morning and I will not take that away just because she can talk.
As for your addition Jacey - you are basing it when you say that something is ridiculous. Maybe you worded it wrong, I don't know.

I'm with those who found the caption offensive. I think breastfeeding is great (I did it) and it's a personal choice as to whether you breastfeed or for how long you do it, but to suggest you aren't "mom enough?" I admit I haven't read the actual article so maybe I'm missing the point, but I found the caption offensive. What about people who can't breastfeed for medical reasons or because their baby is adopted? They aren't "mom enough?" My brother and his wife are desperately trying to adopt. If they succeed I know she will be one of the best moms ever. To suggest she might not be "mom enough" because she can't breastfeed--now that is "ridiculous."

The cover is to sell magazine, not educate about breastfeeding. I actually find the picture really tactless. If they REALLY wanted it to be about attachment parenting and extended breastfeeding, they would show how a toddler really breastfeeds. Which...I'm guessing...is not a mom in full make-up staring with a defiant look, and a kid standing on a chair latching on. And, congrats to the mom. Her son will forever be the Time Magazine boob kid. I'm sure he'll appreciate that growing up.

For MYSELF, I couldn't breastfeed a child, that can make himself a sandwich. So, yes...that's strange. If someone else wants to, whatever. If they start breastfeeding their 4 year old next to me, I'd just get up and leave. Just because I don't want to be around it, does not mean I'm saying that mother should stop.

I'm on the same page as Katrina A. The world average is 4 years old. Americans fall far below that average. Read Mothering Magazine instead of Parenting magazine to get a point of view not put out by mass media and the AAP.

I nursed my 3 kids 5years, 3 years and 5 years respectively. They all overlapped so at times I was nursing 2 at once for a total of ten years straight. Because I nursed so long my menstrual cycle didn't start up until 2 years after each child was born, which in turn can help prevent some female medical issues.
My kids are very well balanced and did eat solid foods at the same time. They still have fond memories of "NaNas". They are not abnormal and were never picked on by their peers.

It is our culture that has given breastfeeding past infancy a bad rap. That is what needs to change. Not how long children breastfeed.

Obviously the time magazine cover was meant to stir people up and make sales, I really don't think they have a passionate stance on promoting extended breatfeeding. My opinion is that the boy does look ridiculous standing on the chair with his mom's boob in his mouth.
I also think a lot of women continue to breastfeed because it comforts them more than it comforts their children. I'm not saying the child doesn't become attached to it, but I think some moms are the ones who can't 'wean' themselves. I know not all of them, so please no one go nuts because I said that. I don't bash it, but personally wouldn't breastfeed past the age of one, if I could even make it that far.
Don't get me wrong I like knowing that I'm providing antibodies, vitamins and all to my baby, but I just don't like feeling like a cow and having crusted, bruised up nipples. I also think it's cute and all when a baby is small and you can cradle them in your arms, but when they're older and can actually come up to you and lift your shirt or say boobies or whatever, that kind of creeps me out. Sorry not hating, that's just my personal feeling on it. Eventually I like my body back to myself.

I completely agree with Rebecca B. The title bothered me much more than the picture. I was horribly offended by the title.

*The women in my family aren't able to produce milk. It's a genetic problem. I had "friends" and strangers make ugly comments because I didn't breastfeed my boys. I don't need a magazine cover insinuating that now I'm an inferior mother because I didn't breastfeed them. It's insulting. I am pro-breastfeeding, but it should be a woman's choice, and shouldn't be shoved down our throats.

Once a kid can chew their own food, run up to you and ask for the boob. It's time to put the boob away.

BITTY!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmD2Y6WxpIw

/EDIT - Don't get me wrong. I'm not out to make any laws saying you must stop breast feeding once your kid is old enough to eat solids and ask for the boob. I'm saying that in my house, had I been able to breast feed, I would have stopped around that time because that's what feels right to ME.

Aren't we lucky no one is making laws stating we must all BF for x years or making laws banning formula? Or laws prohibiting breast feeding in public? It would be really terrible if america fell that deep down the rabbit hole of intolerance. ;)

I think the cover is pretty disturbing. A toddler standing on a chair with his mother's breast in his mouth and staring at a camera - but Time got what they wanted, people talking.

Attachment parenting is the real issue here. I guess I do it to a degree. I breastfed my kids on demand until they were done: 16 months for my oldest, 10 months for my second, and 10 months for my last. That is when THEY were done.

I also kept my babies in bed with me whenever I or they wanted. I see no problem with it and enjoyed the one-on-one time with them.

My issue comes in when they say parents need to be there 24-7 for the kids or the kids won't know they are loved. I work full-time, go to school full-time, but hardly ever miss an event for any of my kids. If I do miss one, it's because I can't be in two places at once.

I don't need to be on top of my children for them to know I am and will always be there for them. They already know this.

I'm just surprised at how many women here are so judgemental on extended bfeeding. The posts speak for themselves. It's no wonder I felt gawked at and glared at when I chose to feed any of my kids by breast in the mall, a restaurant, or any other public place. And this was any time, from birth up to age whatever. Mine were all breastfed b/t 15 mos and 2.5 yrs.
For the pro-breastfeeders here, you can't bash formula feeders and then turn around and bash a breastfeeder because now they didn't conform to "your acceptable standards". Its a double-standard, is what it is.

I have always felt like moms need to do what is best for their child. Not what the mom needs, but what the child needs.

When a child can go to the fridge and get their own food and drink, I think they are way past breast feeding.

Our daughter in day care was pouring her own milk with a pitcher at 3.

My neighbor would allow her children to breast feed as long as they wanted. Yes, at 4 they would walk up to her and lift her top and feed.

I thought it was ridiculous. The same child had just climbed and slid down the tallest slide at the park unassisted, but the mom was busy, with her 2 other children and missed it, I assumed this child just wanted some attention and knew bf was a way for her to GET the attention.

I think it is good to have these discussions about different parenting styles.
Each child needs something different. We will never all totally agree about what we each choose, but to learn different techniques and styles is always good information.

The whole cover photo/article is designed to poke a stick at a hornets nest to see what comes flying out.
Sort of a 'made you look' mentality.
Who is the editor these days, Peewee Herman?
There are 7 billion people on the planet and many places breast feed longer than we do.
But there are a lot of places where the food/water supply is rather questionable and it might just be the only way they can keep their infant/toddler mortality rate down.
At a certain point, at least in the USA, when a child is old enough, breast feeding is not for nutritional supplementation anymore but for comfort, and there are a lot of ways to give comfort only one of which involves a child sucking on your teat.
No one can decide when 'old enough' is, and it will still vary between every child.
I just don't care how long (or short) other women breast feed their kids.
I did what worked for me, and everyone else can do what ever works for them.

I think the whole extended breast feeding issue is annoying. I think it's a personal choice and my opinion of the actual act doesn't matter. So I like to ignore the hubbub and photos and discussion just hoping it will go away (the topic in public forums-not people nursing however long they want BEHIND CLOSED DOORS). And yes, calling a decision ridiculous can be considered bashing. What if I say people who are fat are ridiculous for eating too much? Isn't that more than a bit bashy? It's certainly not nice. Statements that start with, "personally I think x is ridiculous but more power to people" are not supportive or tolerant sounding. It's really none of our business how long people nurse their kids, so stating a negative opinion at all is asking to get into a fight.

ETA****omg just googled the cover. EEWWWWW!!! What a f********* tactless little piece "journalism" that photo is. I hope the kid sues one day and wins-but they probably bound his parents to every waiver in the book. Yuck can you imagine the shoot-he's obviously not eating or getting comforted..."OK, son, now put it in your mouth again and look this way." CALL THE COPS YUCK@@@@!! gasp...my PC just went right out the window I guess.....Ignore, people, ignore, they want us to get into the controversy......thank god I switched to Newsweek a year ago..

Inappropriate cover photo. Nothing more, nothing less. Don't read more into what I said, it's just that, an inappropriate photo for the cover of a magazine.
My kids were breastfed, I have no issues with the topic. Just the photo.

The thing that bugs me the most is that the cover was created just to be controversial. It has very little to do with the article itself. They just want to stir up buzz and discussion. I actually think the headline "Are you mom enough" is worse than the picture itself. The article is about attachment parenting and Dr. Sears, how he came to be who he is today, etc. While a small part is about extended breastfeeding, that's not really the focus of the article. And I don't think any breastfeeding four year old stands on a stool to do it!

I breastfed my son past age 2 1/2 and yes, I did lie about it to everyone but my parents and husband because of all the jokes and teasing I got past 1 year. After age 2 it was only before bedtime and when he was ill, never in public and I was ok with that. There is nothing wrong with breastfeeding a toddler. The world average is 4 or whatever because most of the world is a third or second world country where there is a lack of adequate nutrition and clean water. Sorry, that is no reason to do extended breastfeeding here in America. I was bothered by the cover. The kid they show might only be 3 but he looks at least 7! What really bothered me is that it looks like he doesn't want to be there or got caught doing something naughty. It borders on pornographic to me. That actually is his real mother but no one would nurse that way. These kinds of images might sell magazines but really, it comes down to a very personal decision that a mother and child make together and hurts how extended breastfeeding is viewed by the general public.

I just wanted to say something to the moms who "commend" those that do extended breastfeeding. It's really nothing to envy, congratulate, or bash. It was natural for us just like it may not be natural to others. It was no commitment. Actually, it made life easier when he was sick and helped him get better. It just felt right.

I read some and not all comments, so I may repeat what others have said. I saw the cover and thought it was in poor taste. My son stopped at 11 months, he just didn't want to nurse anymore, however 13-14 months was my goal. I often wonder why people do it for longer, I'm talking 4,5 etc. I wouldn't give a 4, 5 or higher child a bottle. For me, nursing and bottles are used to feed infants and very young children who would otherwise go hungry. I think that for older children a different form of comfort/soothing should be given. Both of mine sleep with stuff animals, they are 5 and 14 and still do it. Little man used to sleep with my pajama pants for comfort! I guess it's to each his own.

My take is the magazine cover and how the mom and child are portrayed is a little over the top. I think the magazine got what they wanted, something that everyone is talking about. I think the "real" issue here is the importance of breast feeding and/or attachment parenting. Is it better to? For how long?Does it really help the child? Does attachment parenting work? I haven't read the article so I don't know. I can tell you that I breast fed until my son was about 14 months old and would have gone a little longer but I was ill and had to stop. I probably would have gone until about 2 years old. I don't have a problem with mothers deciding to breast feed their children until 5 or so. Not my call to make it.

I don't mean this to sound catty, but maybe it does...I couldn't make enough milk to feed my own kids, and had to use formula so they wouldn't starve. Why can't these moms who are able to make milk forever use the milk for babies that really need it? It just seems like a better and more "green" thing to do right?

I say good going to all the moms who chose to breastfeed longer! It takes a lot of commitment! Personally for me I wouldn't do it but it's not for me to judge anyone for how they raise their child.

A better response to this article than I could ever come up with...
http://parenting.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/10/never-mom-e...

If you don't want to experience the bond of EBF then don't. If you don't want to marry a gay person then don't. If you don't want to worship then don't . Isn't that the greatest part of this country? The choice to raise your family as you see fit. Child led weaning is very hard on the mother and takes great love and patience . If there is only positives and no negatives to EBF why are there so many haters out there?

Im 25 & still BF my almost 2 yr old dtr. I thought I'd BF for a year.. who knew my baby had diff plans for us. I saw the cover & said You go girl!! BF is a special bond between mother & child. I try not to BF in public- But if she wants it & I can't get some where I feed her- Looks like I'm just hugging her. Just waiting for my milk to dry up & trying fir #2.

Everyone has their opinon- Thanks for posting J. B