Breast feeding (please don't enter if you cannot act like a grown up)

Cobra said:
Its neither more or less acceptable to consume milk from one species or another.
(Human or Bovidae etc)

No one is trying to deny a 4/ 6 year old a glass of milk,
but from a breast seems a little out of the ordinary TBH.

Its generally accepted that the mother gets just as much "comfort" from protracted breast feeding as the infant.
So for one reason or another, protracted breast feeding could also be classed, at worst a selfish act, at best a symbiotic act,
of comfort, rather like a child that carries around a blanket / comforter well into school age.
Click to expand...

Have you tried expressing enough for a glass of milk? Hard going - and impractical in many situations. Human milk is made for humans. Bovine milk is for bovines. Yes, humans drink it, but it's not made specifically for them. The same with wet-nursing - yes, human milk for a human child, but it's not made specifically for that child. Mother's milk changes to suit a child's requirements.

Imagine the senario,

a 2 year old is in a new environment and is scared. Starts crying. Wants comfort. The child wants a dummy. What do you do?
Now imagine that the child wants nursing. Said hypothetical child has never used a dummy. What's the issue?

I'm quite saddened that random people feel that they have an opinion on how random children should be raised.
 
I'm saddened that firstly lots of people have failed to understand that this thread isn't about the actually act of breast feeding and it's rights or wrongs...secondly that some people it seems from this thread seem to think that only certain people should be allowed an opinion on this subject...and I guess thirdly how the equality act ironically doesn't actually promote freedom and equality on the front of breast feeding
 
MagicMynx said:
They are all covered under the equality act 2010. The rest is simply your opinion. A business owner has a duty to ensure that a breastfeeding woman isn't treat unfavourably - that includes being harrassed by other customers. I can assure you, if you were to harass me for feeding my child in public, I would ensure that the business owner was aware of the law and their duties. With regards to discreetly, do you eat discreetly? I should hope I never see such a sight...
With regards to when a child should stop nursing, I assume none of you consume dairy?
Click to expand...

Did I say that I would harass you ? I would vote with my feet and leave the restaurant, and not go back, so surely that is me losing out not the mother and baby.
I really don't care if someone wants to breastfeed their child throughout it's life, all I am saying is it is not something I want to be subjected to having to watch whilst
I am having lunch.
I suppose they could have separate areas as they used to when smoking was allowed, but you'd probably object to that too.

An adult drinking milk from a glass or eating a cheese sandwich has nothing to do with this thread, it's about breastfeeding as far as I am aware
 
Cobra said:
Its neither more or less acceptable to consume milk from one species or another.
(Human or Bovidae etc)

No one is trying to deny a 4/ 6 year old a glass of milk,
but from a breast seems a little out of the ordinary TBH.

Its generally accepted that the mother gets just as much "comfort" from protracted breast feeding as the infant.
So for one reason or another, protracted breast feeding could also be classed, at worst a selfish act, at best a symbiotic act,
of comfort, rather like a child that carries around a blanket / comforter well into school age.
Click to expand...

Human milk has benefits specific to humans, mothers milk changes for requirements, including vitamins, antibodies and so forth. It's not always practical for a woman to express and you don't bond/become comforted by a glass of milk. The average expressing session (expressing from both breasts) is between 0.5oz and 2oz (Kellymom). It takes an awful long time to get enough for a glass - a child extracts the milk far more efficiently. Hormones play a large part in letdown too, - if a woman doesn't ever nurse, the oxytonin levels deplete and she stops lactating - this can be weeks after birth. Oxytonin is also known as the love drug. Watching, touching, smelling etc your child when nursing stimulates the production.

Women have enough challenges to face with breastfeeding anyway - tongue tie, mastitis, blocked ducts, frequent feeding, leaking, uneven breasts, tiredness, engorgement - the list goes on. Not feeding effectively causes many issues like mastitis. A woman also gets a letdown reflex for other things, like hearing a child in distress, meaning if she doesn't feed her child, she may well end up with embarrassing wet patches on her top. People don't need the added pressure of fear of offending someone by taking care of their child. What offends me most is that random people believe that their desires trump a child's human rights. I sincerely hate feeding in public, hate it with a passion, but I know that my child's needs are more important than my comfort and desires. With regards to discreetly nursing - other than the obvious that it's not always possible, isn't that where the issue stems from? Not seeing nursing in public leads to people being scared to see it.

There's also the medical benefits of breastfeeding - for both mother and child.
 
One truly can't rationalise with such extreme views, and to attempt to do so is a pointless exercise.
The most I can do is pity the children involved.
 
What is extreme, please?
My view is if it's not harming you, it's not your business, on pretty much everything to be fair.
You don't have to agree with people's decisions.

Sincerely, I doubt any breastfed child needs your pity or anyone else's, for being breastfed.
 
The defense rests.
 
MWHCVT said:
I'm saddened that firstly lots of people have failed to understand that this thread isn't about the actually act of breast feeding and it's rights or wrongs...secondly that some people it seems from this thread seem to think that only certain people should be allowed an opinion on this subject...and I guess thirdly how the equality act ironically doesn't actually promote freedom and equality on the front of breast feeding
Click to expand...
http://www.maternityaction.org.uk/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/breastfeedingpublicplace.pdf

And on that note, since I'm going around in circles and getting personal attacks, I'm off. I think I've wasted enough of my evening.
 
MWHCVT said:
Personal attacks, I've had them all thread...I've not seen a single personal attack on you, please don't be so melodramatic :)
Click to expand...

Awww Matt have a
hug002.gif
 
MagicMynx said:
Have you tried expressing enough for a glass of milk? Hard going - and impractical in many situations. Human milk is made for humans. Bovine milk is for bovines. Yes, humans drink it, but it's not made specifically for them. The same with wet-nursing - yes, human milk for a human child, but it's not made specifically for that child. Mother's milk changes to suit a child's requirements.
Click to expand...
No one is suggesting you even try, you asked me if I drank milk,
And I answered "rarely" but out of a glass when I do.

MagicMynx said:
Imagine the senario,

a 2 year old is in a new environment and is scared. Starts crying. Wants comfort. The child wants a dummy. What do you do?
Now imagine that the child wants nursing. Said hypothetical child has never used a dummy. What's the issue?
Click to expand...
None at all, I think my youngest was weaned at around that age,
However you were talking far in excess of 2years old.

MagicMynx said:
I'm quite saddened that random people feel that they have an opinion on how random children should be raised.
Click to expand...
I thought we were talking hypothetical here, if you or your child feels the need to (be) breast fed (feed) up to /5/6/7+ years old then you carry on :)
As I've always said right through this thread freedom of choice.

But as I said I thought this was a hypothetical discussion of feeding well into pre-school / school years.
And at that point don't you think that said child would be ridiculed by their peers?
 
My understanding of the Equality Act 2010 is that a breast feeding mother is only protected under the act until the baby is 6 months old.

So all this talk about breast feeding a baby much older than 6 months is a red herring as you would have no protection under the Equality Act 2010
 
Keith W said:
My understanding of the Equality Act 2010 is that a breast feeding mother is only protected under the act until the baby is 6 months old.

So all this talk about breast feeding a baby much older than 6 months is a red herring as you would have no protection under the Equality Act 2010
Click to expand...

That's not actually correct, there is no age limit according to this government information document...https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...hment_data/file/85008/business-quickstart.pdf at least that's how it reads to me...frankly if a woman wants to breast feed even when the child is at school that's up to her...I'd dread to think as mentioned above how the child's peers would react to that, cannot help but think it could lead to some attachment issues in later life :eek: but hey I'm an under educated Neanderthal so what would I know :lol:
 
MWHCVT said:
That's not actually correct
Click to expand...

Yes it is correct

That leaflet just gives the basics and not the specifics of the act

As I said though it is just my understanding of it and it is covered in this Guardian newspaper article:

...... the equality bill contains an important proviso, another fudge (and really, what else should we expect from Whitehall bureaucrats?). This vital legal protection only lasts for six months after a mother gives birth.
Click to expand...
 
dinners said:
I'll remember that.

She is my mum honest officer ;)
Click to expand...

Bitty

Keith W said:
Yes it is correct

That leaflet just gives the basics and not the specifics of the act

As I said though it is just my understanding of it and it is covered in this Guardian newspaper article:
Click to expand...

I'm not going to get into a who is right or who is wrong as its a bit of a distraction from the actual point, I'm just going of what I read in the government hand out on the subject, I'm not going to research it too deeply as I don't really have the inclination :thumbs:
 
I was hoping to steer it back on topic by trying to dispel the age related red herring that had crept into the thread

But hey ho its all a storm in a D cup if you ask me

This thread will inevitably go tits up so as good old Duncan would say .."I'm oot!"

P.S I also read that handout as well as the Guardian article which is what made me go and read the acutal act itself, which does indeed make mention of a 26 week limit
 
Last edited:
Keith W said:
I was hoping to steer it back on topic by trying to dispel the age related red herring that had crept into the thread

But hey ho its all a storm in a D cup if you ask me

This thread will inevitably go tits up so as good old Duncan would say .."I'm oot!"

P.S I also read that handout as well as the Guardian article which is what made me go and read the acutal act itself, which does indeed make mention of a 26 week limit
Click to expand...

Quite possibly so, it really has got over heated as to many people have unfortunately proved incapable of concentrating on the point of the protests over the act of feeding which was not really a debatable point
 
I agree with you general point by the way, 2 wrongs certainly don't make a right
 
viv1969 said:
I'm sorry but by seven a dummy is not a nipple substitute, it's nothing more than a precocious child feeding on parental weakness.
Click to expand...

As a mother of a disabled child and friends with many other Mums that have children with a disability sometimes a dummy is needed for these children far past the age that a 'normal' child might stop - mine doesn't but just wanted to let you know that it's not always a straight forward issue.

I have no problems with breast feeding in public but have had very negative reactions to feeding my youngest when he was little as he had an NG (feeding tube) in place and was asked to refrain from feeding him in several places - wish I knew about the law as I would have definitely complained to the management but I'm not the type to join in on a large protest but agree that these establishments need to accept that breast feeding is natural.
 
MagicMynx said:
Have you tried expressing enough for a glass of milk? Hard going - .
Click to expand...

Natt sorry but i have and used to all the time never had a pump either and i also helped the local SCBU with milk..(collected everyday).. and still had loads left over for making up food for my kids. and most women i know where the same. And i guess many mothers that go to work that are breastfeeding manage to do it too.
 
So far all I've learnt is that different people feel the need to argue about breast feeding for different lengths of time. Some stop quite quickly. Some become quite obsessive about it and go on expressing their viewpoints for years.

I presume the pressure to stop isn't that they look ridiculous in public but because they realise they're sore boobs!
 
MagicMynx said:
There are laws to protect breastfeeding mothers in public. If you don't wish to see it, perhaps you should save yourself such uncomfort and avoid going out in public. A baby/child has a human right to be fed. The law is such that if a woman has the legal right to be somewhere, they have the legal right to breastfeed there (Equality Act 2010 http://www.maternityaction.org.uk/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/breastfeedingpublicplace.pdf ) ...and I'm one of those militant mothers who ran a campaign that you speak of.
Click to expand...

While you are right to an extent, vis my post a lot further up, theres a lot of cobblers in that link unfortunately, for example

How long does protection apply for? There is no age restriction, the law protects you for as long as you wish to breastfeed your baby
Click to expand...

is entirely incorrect - the equality act 2010 specifically says that protection from discrimination extends from birth to 26 weeks

when discusing the law its always best to source information from the statue concerned, not from flyers put out by campaign groups, to whit

equality act 2010 sect 17 said:
17Pregnancy and maternity discrimination: non-work casesE+W+S
(1)This section has effect for the purposes of the application to the protected characteristic of pregnancy and maternity of—
(a)Part 3 (services and public functions);
(b)Part 4 (premises);
(c)Part 6 (education);
(d)Part 7 (associations).
(2)A person (A) discriminates against a woman if A treats her unfavourably because of a pregnancy of hers.
(3)A person (A) discriminates against a woman if, in the period of 26 weeks beginning with the day on which she gives birth, A treats her unfavourably because she has given birth.
(4)The reference in subsection (3) to treating a woman unfavourably because she has given birth includes, in particular, a reference to treating her unfavourably because she is breast-feeding.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top