Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Ok, and what is wrong with this. It's not ok to deny parenting time over breastfeeding. Mom can pump, breastfeed and occasionally use a bottle to get baby ready for dad or other caretakers.
One of my kids wouldn’t take a bottle until she was almost 6 months old. We had a lot of motivation and tried 15 bottle types, but she was stubborn. She would have been dangerously dehydrated on this judge’s parenting plan.
According to the article, that's not at all what happened here. Mom is trying to say she can't pump enough, etc. and that ex can visit the baby while she's there to bf. Ex is saying she won't believe the relationship is over and is using bf as an excuse to try to make him spend time with her and not give him alone time with the baby. As another pp mentioned, the baby is old enough for some solids so this all is really a non issue at this point.
Just “some solids” and no liquids for a 48 hour stretch is not healthy for any infant.
Yet millions of babies can do it in the care of others.
^ meaning they can and will learn to accept a bottle, they don’t succumb to dehydration.
And until that happens they are hungry and thirsty and miserable and confused. When we had this at daycare, I had to leave work and go nurse the baby in the daytime. Yes she eventually learned but I wouldn’t leave my child in the care (paid or otherwise) of someone who would leave a baby hungry while they learned to use a bottle rather than calling their mother.
Was your baby 8 months old at the time?
I went back to work at 6M so slightly younger but still too young in both cases to rely on anything but breast milk/formula.
So for 6 months you raced back and forth to the daycare to nurse a baby, until it was 1 year old?
For about three months, yes. That was when they got the right combination of bottle/position/temperature, and honestly some of it was probably physical ability. But I wouldn’t have been willing to leave her in the care of someone who was going to let her go hungry and thirsty until she mastered a particular skill, that’s abusive.
So your case is nothing like this. The judge doesn't care what you feel comfortable with, especially if he think you're using breastfeeding as a weapon to deny visitation. Like this mom is. The vast majority of babies will come around at this age to bottle refusal. The mother is framing it as being "ordered to stop breastfeeding" which it isn't. She's being asked to try her hardest to introduce bottles, or order to facilitate visitation with the baby's father. Instead of trying to do that the mom wants her pediatrician to write notes that say "breast is best" to get around it.
My case is precisely like this. The baby doesn’t take bottles, per the article and the order. A judge has ordered overnights with the father to begin in February— i.e now— so if the father intends to take those overnights it’s on the understanding he’s going to let his infant be hungry and thirsty all to make sure he’s not inconvenienced by carrying out visits in the baby’s home, or pay child support.
Hopefully the mom takes the baby to the pediatrician/ER immediately to document dehydration.