Dear all:

The state of science at the present moment and historical references all point to the same conclusions.  Premature weaning is before 2 years of age for both psychological and biological reasons. There is even data to support this from studies in the United States.  We also know from anthropological studies and comparative studies with other mammals that the normal RANGE of weaning extends quite a bit beyond 2 years.  So, I see nothing wrong with declaring breastfeeding a four year old well within the normal RANGE of weaning.  I do NOT see that as making any sort of a comment on anyone weaning at an earlier age.

Furthermore, I do believe we need to move beyond talking about "baby-led" or "mother-led".  If you look at "attachment theory" which is not always that same as "attachment parenting".  Beatrice Beebe talks about the mis-attunment where there is a "chase" and "dodge" where the mother intrudes upon the baby when the baby needs time to focus on someone other than the mother. So, theoretically, you could have a mother doing all the "right" things -- wearing her baby, breastfeeding her baby, spending time with her baby who actually is deregulating her baby because she is misreading her baby's cues.  Similarly Harlowe's work shows that the always available cloth monkey mother was not as healthy a mother as the swinging cloth monkey mother. Why?  because the always available mother was passive and didn't interact -- something like a depressed mother.  The swinging monkey mother that made the monkey babies jump to her was healthier because it provided more interaction.  Of course none of these things were as good as a real monkey mother who was psychologically healthy herself.  The other interesting thing about Harlow's work was that having a good peer group was helpful even if you had a damaged mother.  And those monkeys that weren't released to interact with their peers were not as healthy.

I just listened to one of the Gold Conference presentations and need to go back in to figure out how to listen to the discussion portion.  I was actually somewhat dismayed at the return of the discussion about refrigerator mothers and the theory that not breastfeeding caused autism.  I know at least three mothers well who have children along the autistic spectrum -- all of whom bresatfed and all of whom said that they NOTICED something different about the breastfeeding with their autistic children that was different from their children who did not have autism.  They found it harder to maintain the breastfeeding relationship with their autistic children.  And the breastfeeding symptoms occurred well before the autism -- so it seems to me that the take home message is that this could be an early, but very crude, diagnostic indicator.  In this presentation, Bolby was mentioned, but not the scientist who was much more thorough in her research, Ainsworth.  Ainsworth conducted true research.  Bolby was a theorist that dabbled in science, but wasn't nearly as systematic or thorough as Ainsworth.

Really "mother-led" and "baby-led" need to be retired from the vocabulary.  We should all be talking about developing healthy responsive relationships.  In this way, we can move away from criticizing "styles" and move towards the specifics of actions that can enhance the development of the relationship in ways that are adaptive to the personalities of mothers and babies. 

Sincerely, 

Susan E. Burger


  

             ***********************************************

Archives: http://community.lsoft.com/archives/LACTNET.html
To reach list owners: [log in to unmask]
Mail all list management commands to: [log in to unmask]
COMMANDS:
1. To temporarily stop your subscription write in the body of an email: set lactnet nomail
2. To start it again: set lactnet mail
3. To unsubscribe: unsubscribe lactnet
4. To get a comprehensive list of rules and directions: get lactnet welcome