# Dr. Sears Attachment Parenting featured on Time Magazine



## htovjm (Nov 9, 2011)

link

thoughts??


----------



## BroodyWoodsgal (Jan 30, 2008)

I absolutely cannot stand the picture they used, I don't like Dr. Sears being painted as a "guru" for AP parents and just didn't like the piece.

I mean, I'm glad to see a picture in front of everyones faces of an older toddler nursing...but why did it have to be in a way that is all "YEah, I'm nursing, so what get over it!" - with a kid dressed to look as "old" as possible??

Why couldn't it have been a lovely picture of a sleepy little boy nursing on a smiling mamas breast in a cozy bed? Or a Dad reading a book with Mama next to him and a little girl almost asleep at the breast.

Or even a laughing mama, tickling the belly of a silly toddler who is nursing for fun or whatever.

I just don't feel like that was a very accurate depiction of what extended nursing really looks like. There is this whole idea out there that somehow nursing mamas are these militant, "femme-booby-nazis" which flies in the face of what *I* know to be the truth....which is that extended breastfeeding is a natural, gentle and easy choice for very many women that does not look anything like the Time picture portrayed it. /rant


----------



## BroodyWoodsgal (Jan 30, 2008)

I mean, come ON...."ARE YOU MOM ENOUGH" there already exists this weird "mama-war" type thing between women who don't prefer to breastfeed and think extended breastfeeders are insane hippies and women who believe firmly that it is the best way....and lost all in the middle of that, are women who WANT to breastfeed but don't have proper support or feel shame as their children get bigger and are pressured to wean because it's "weird"...not to mention women who are struggling SO HARD to keep their nursing relationship alive despite illness, discomfort or any other number of issues getting in the way...who have the OPPOSITE problem, they have weird, militant ladies around who are pushing this "Are You Mom Enough" concept and all that does it put more pressure on women who are already struggling.

But all of that is just my reaction to the cover and the fact that they had a WHOLE BUNCH of pictures which would have been SOOO much better and been a more fair and accurate depiction of extended nursing.

As for the actual story, I'm trying to get my hands on more of it, I can't read the whole thing because I'm not a time member...but again, I don't understand why Dr. Sears is being painted as the founder of the AP "movement"....I don't parent the way I parent because of a book or a guru..I parent this way because I live as unhindered as possible and this is the way I parent when I'm not held back by other peoples ideas.


----------



## Blessed_Mom (Aug 15, 2009)

Broodywoodsgal said most all that I wanted to write about the subject!

I think that picture gives the opposite message and somehow is more sensationalist than it should have been.

AND - to make it worse - why choose one of the biggest 4 year olds I have seen AND make him stand on a stool to make him look even older?

He almost looks like a 8 year old...


----------



## fruitfulmomma (Jun 8, 2002)

I have no interest in reading the article because I pretty much don't care what mainstream media has to say about my parenting. And I don't read or follow Dr. Sears, it just happens that much of what he/ap promotes is what we've been doing and what has worked for us these past 12 years.

I am with Broody on the cover, the title is offensive and the picture seems to have been staged to make it as provocative as possible. Everyday nursing sessions with a three year old do not look like that.


----------



## IsaFrench (Mar 22, 2008)

am wondering too if this is a model with a model child or if it's actually the mom of the child on the photo ... does it say so in the body of the article ?


----------



## Rrrrrachel (Jan 13, 2012)

It is an actual mom. They put out a call for actual moms, dr momma was talking about it. Also, a lady on another board was saying it was her friend. Don't know if te the mom in the article, though.


----------



## Rrrrrachel (Jan 13, 2012)

And I course the picture was staged to make it provocative. They're trying to sell magazines! Still a positive thing to have that image in front of people, IMO.


----------



## htovjm (Nov 9, 2011)

I'm not a die-hard follower of Dr. Sears, but I really dislike the tone of the articles and photos. Pretty much what *BroodyWoodsgal* said. They make it sound like attachment parenting is new, as if mothers haven't been caring for their babies in a compassionate and sensitive way for thousands of years. I also don't have the whole article to read, but I'm interested in knowing what the rest of it says.


----------



## BroodyWoodsgal (Jan 30, 2008)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rrrrrachel*
> 
> And I course the picture was staged to make it provocative. They're trying to sell magazines! Still a positive thing to have that image in front of people, IMO.


You know, I agree with the image being in front of people as a positive....but it's putting it in front of them in a way which propagates the general misconceptions which currently exist in our culture.

I think it would have been just as provocative to use an image that CHALLENGED the current public opinion about extended breastfeeding.


----------



## ursaminor (Mar 28, 2009)

I am pretty sure I read that she is a 26 year old lactation consultant located in LA.

I am not really sure how I feel about the cover. I think it is important to remember that the cover photo is probably no more than a caricature of the real thing. Just look at how air-brushed it is.


----------



## kblackstone444 (Jun 17, 2007)

The cover photo looks... wrong... to me. That's not nursing, that's not about the child, that's about the Mother. And put up in a way that's begging for controversy. Perhaps the article has the right intentions at heart, but the picture kills all credibility.


----------



## 4evermom (Feb 3, 2005)

I like the photo. It reminds me of my ds who'd do that sort of thing.


----------



## Luckiestgirl (Nov 10, 2004)

I'm tired of people (in general) saying, "It's about the mother, not the child." Breastfeeding is always about the child and the mother. If it were miserable for the mother, the human race would be in trouble.


----------



## 4evermom (Feb 3, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Luckiestgirl*
> 
> I'm tired of people (in general) saying, "It's about the mother, not the child." Breastfeeding is always about the child and the mother. If it were miserable for the mother, the human race would be in trouble.


Besides, who could make a child nurse who didn't want to??? Honestly, trying to get ds to nurse was the surest way to get him to NOT nurse when he was 4!


----------



## Blessed_Mom (Aug 15, 2009)

My DD is 3 ...very recently had to be forced into weaning (am pregnant) ..I could have nursed her more in other circumstances....

AND I find the pic disturbing.

It doesn't convey 'extended breastfeeding' to me. Extended BF is so gentle and natural and sacred and personal.

This pic is so in-your-face and provocative and stirring-the-pot.

I want to ask - how many of extended BFers here actually encourage this - I don't know ...a type of grab and go playful suckling mockery and think of this as EBF versus taking our toddlers with us to bed , cuddle with them, tell them stories, play with their hair - while they nurse?


----------



## iris777888 (Apr 3, 2007)

Saw the pic, I wasn't able to read the article. Nothing like fueling the flames ofthe mom wars in time for Mother's Day and making attachment parenting look extreme.  I wish media didn't believe that their job is to sell via controversy and divisiveness. EVERYTHING is taken to extremes.


----------



## girlspn (Apr 14, 2011)

That picture does a great disservice to all breastfeeding mothers. It boggles my mind that an act as natural as nursing a baby should become such a controversy.


----------



## 4evermom (Feb 3, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blessed_Mom*
> 
> My DD is 3 ...very recently had to be forced into weaning (am pregnant) ..I could have nursed her more in other circumstances....
> 
> ...


Are you saying there is no place for silliness or goofiness in the mother child nursing relationship? It all has to be sacred, gentle, and done in bed? Kids have different personalities that they bring to the table in the relationship. I find it strange you think other ways are a mockery of yours.

ETA, just think of all the controversy and shouts of incest if this picture were taken in bed. Showing a nursing couple in a private place like bed on the front cover of a national magazine would be more inappropriate, imo.


----------



## crunchy_mommy (Mar 29, 2009)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Luckiestgirl*
> 
> I'm tired of people (in general) saying, "It's about the mother, not the child." Breastfeeding is always about the child and the mother. If it were miserable for the mother, the human race would be in trouble.


Well not always... I pretty much hated breastfeeding DS but kept up with it for his sake... But maybe there is something wrong with me!

I think the picture is a little weird, mostly because the mom looks all posed & model-y and defiant. I did read an article about the photo shoot for this cover and it sounds like there were good intentions behind having the kid standing like that, but I don't like the execution of it. DS has nursed standing like that before but it just doesn't have that same look/feel. It's too showy or something I guess. But I do love that there is a 3yo nursing on a national, mainstream magazine cover. I hate the headline. Also, I have never read Dr. Sears book(s) or anything, so yeah it bugs me a bit that it's framed like we are some cult following of him. But I don't have a subscription to Time so I didn't read the whole article...


----------



## 4evermom (Feb 3, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *crunchy_mommy*
> 
> Well not always... I pretty much hated breastfeeding DS but kept up with it for his sake... But maybe there is something wrong with me!
> I think the picture is a little weird, mostly because the mom looks all posed & model-y and defiant. I did read an article about the photo shoot for this cover and it sounds like there were good intentions behind having the kid standing like that, but I don't like the execution of it. DS has nursed standing like that before but it just doesn't have that same look/feel. It's too showy or something I guess. But I do love that there is a 3yo nursing on a national, mainstream magazine cover. I hate the headline. Also, I have never read Dr. Sears book(s) or anything, so yeah it bugs me a bit that it's framed like we are some cult following of him. But I don't have a subscription to Time so I didn't read the whole article...


Since it's a posed photo and the child is just a child and the mother isn't even a model, it probably would look slightly off or awkward no matter how it was done...

Anyway, I was happy to see a photo of an older nursling because there have been so many situations where families have been torn apart because they innocently took a photo to be developed. There are mothers who are afraid to comfort their older nurslings when they desperately need it because they are afraid someone in the hospital will call CPS. There are mothers who can't feel comfortable nursing their kids in public because they are afraid some random stranger is going to spew all sorts of nasty filth at her in front of her child or call the police. Having a photo on the cover of a public magazine offers some small measure of protection. People won't automatically assume they should call CPS because they saw it on the cover of a magazine.


----------



## Cathlin (Apr 4, 2012)

Husband just told me about the article, so I haven't gotten my hands on a copy yet. I'm optimistic that even what seems to be negative publicity will have a positive outcome.

I never knew about AP, we just determined to do what felt most right for Baby Girl - I found out later there was a name for it! As Christians, we respond to negativity about AP by reminding ourselves that when Eve was in the garden she must've just done what her mama instincts told her!

I think it's terribly sad that the Western ideas of parenting seem so rooted in selfishness - that it's somehow gross and wrong for a mother to give, give, give to her children. Sad that they're missing out on that two-way giving street of selflessness, the best parts of my day are those extreme mama moments.

Husband said part of the piece/response to the piece is that AP is for rich women who can afford not to work. I think that's a really snide attack on families that sacrifice income in order to be a stay at home mother.

The idea that any rigid framework for parenting is applicable to all children is crazy to me, maybe that's why the core of AP makes so much sense: it's about responding to your child's frame, not constructing a frame to squeeze them into.


----------



## Blessed_Mom (Aug 15, 2009)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *4evermom*
> 
> *Are you saying there is no place for silliness or goofiness in the mother child nursing relationship? It all has to be sacred, gentle, and done in bed?* Kids have different personalities that they bring to the table in the relationship. I find it strange you think other ways are a mockery of yours.
> 
> ETA, just think of all the controversy and shouts of incest if this picture were taken in bed. Showing a nursing couple in a private place like bed on the front cover of a national magazine would be more inappropriate, imo.


No... I am saying - this 'grab and go' mockery isn't the 'true' representation of EBF for me and I also asked other EBFers what they thought?

For me - this pic seem to want to display the 'extreme' rather than the norm....

...and going by the other responses it doesn't seem like I am the only one!

To illustrate: There was this video of a lady I saw who so completely believed in the benefits of BF that she is still BFing her 9?12? year old daughter, son and EVEN her DH!

Now not all of us EBFers nurse our DH even though pretty much all of us believe in the benefits of BFing. If that lady's pic/video were to be shown as advocating the benefits of BFing- wouldn't that be a disservice to all and clearly sensationalist ? Sure you can question me if I thought BFing a 12 year inappropriate and whether my cut-off was the cut-off for all....

....but try and understand that that is not what I am saying!


----------



## Cathlin (Apr 4, 2012)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blessed_Mom*
> 
> No... I am saying - this 'grab and go' mockery isn't the 'true' representation of EBF for me and I also asked other EBFers what they thought?
> 
> ...


I know that I'm dreading the call from my [anti-BF] mother when she sees this cover. It is only going to confirm her negative ideas.

Make no mistake, this is a PR war, and we all know that decontextualized snapshots like that cover are meant to rattle, not rally.


----------



## BroodyWoodsgal (Jan 30, 2008)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *4evermom*
> 
> Are you saying there is no place for silliness or goofiness in the mother child nursing relationship? It all has to be sacred, gentle, and done in bed? Kids have different personalities that they bring to the table in the relationship. I find it strange you think other ways are a mockery of yours.
> 
> ETA, just think of all the controversy and shouts of incest if this picture were taken in bed. *Showing a nursing couple in a private place like bed on the front cover of a national magazine would be more inappropriate, imo.*


But it's NOT inappropriate. That's the point...and there are ALREADY shouts of "incest" at the picture the way it is.

OF COURSE there is room for silliness and playfulness in the nursing relationship...and a picture of a mother and baby laughing and tickling and poking each other while the kid nurses would have been JUST as good, IMO, as a picture of a kid and mom in bed nursing...both of those images would have been more accurate illustrations of what nursing an older toddler ACTUALLY looks like. A boy standing on a stool nursing while his mother stands with her hands on her hips is NOT an accurate illustration.

The way this mother is posed, makes it look like "I'm breastfeeding to prove a point, so screw you".

Who here among you nursed your child so you could prove a point to someone else about how "Crunchy" you are or to prove that you are, in fact, "MOM ENOUGH"?? Not me. Not for a second. My DD was a pleasure to nurse but my very HN son was KILLING me by the time we hit two years in to our nursing relationship. I didn't stand there on a stool letting him nurse so I could stare down passers by like "yeah, see, try and stop me!" - I nursed him curled up with him on the couch, under a tree or in bed...so that I could hold him, touch him, sing to him, CONNECT with him.

Of all the lousy sentiments that I've ever been subjected to when NIP, the looks of "you freak" and "that's sexual and it's incest" don't even phase me as much as the idea people have in their heads that if you are nursing a child past the point when they are walking, you are somehow doing it to try and BE something or PROVE something...that you are some militant booby nazi. That irks me.....and this magazine cover just scooped that already present misconception and went ahead and plastered it all over the place, once again.

The cover takes the "I'm queer, I'm here, get over it" tone...and I don't appreciate that. That works in a gay rights parade. But I don't nurse with that attitude when I'm in public because it's not helpful.


----------



## BroodyWoodsgal (Jan 30, 2008)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cathlin*
> 
> I know that I'm dreading the call from my [anti-BF] mother when she sees this cover. It is only going to confirm her negative ideas.
> 
> *Make no mistake, this is a PR war, and we all know that decontextualized snapshots like that cover are meant to rattle, not rally. *


EXACTLY. It's not about the article, it's not about "Who is Dr. Sears"...it's about what 90% of people will see...the cover. Period. We all know the age we live in, we're not idiots...it's about the opinion formed in the ten seconds that we stare at this in the checkout line...followed by the cementing of those opinions around the water cooler the next day ("yeah, I saw it, can we say FREAKS!" - hahahah "Yeah you know, I here Dan in accounting, you know him? Yeah I heard his wife nursed their FIVE year old at the company picnic last year. It's sick.") - a conversation that is a lot easier to have when the face on the mom on the cover of Time is making a "say something about it, I DARE you" face.

I don't want to fight people with my nursing...I want to allow them a peek into how lovely a super bonded relationship with an older toddler can be. I don't stare them down...I stare happily into my childs eyes and coo at them and sing little silly songs. Let them look. They won't see an angry, militant "aggro-mom" trying to prove a point. They will see a healthy, bonded relationship. What they do with that image, how they twist it, or don't, in their mind...that's up to them. But you won't EVER catch THIS mama letting anyone see her nursing with the intent to shove my lifestyle into anyone elses eyes/space. It just is what it is and it's fucking lovely.

And I'm now OFFICIALLY DYING to meet my new nursling so I can be nursing somebody again...this whole thing is only making me love nursing even more. I feel so blessed to come from a long line of proud breastfeeders and have a immediate and extended family who all honor me and have full love and respect for me as a nursing mom.


----------



## Luckiestgirl (Nov 10, 2004)

I have no doubt that TIME's motive was to sell magazines (and revive their mag) by creating controversy. And I dislike the "mommy wars" and "extreme" slant of the copy. However, I kind of like the defiance of the cover model. Some of my memories of nursing are all warm and fuzzy and some are more like the cover image ("Screw you, I'm this kid's mother and I know what I'm doing!").

I live in a region where maybe fifteen percent of mothers attempt nursing at all. When my second child was born, I had a nurse tell me I was killing my daughter by not giving her formula until my milk came in. Seriously. When my third child was nearly two, he became very, very ill with the worst stomach virus I have ever seen. He lost ten percent of his body weight in a few days and was hospitalized for over a week. It was very scary. I am convinced my breast milk helped my child to recover; however, I was treated horribly by the nursing staff, told that "milk was the worst thing you can give a child with diarrhea," and constantly afraid CPS was going to show up at the hospital. I could see the shock and disgust on the nurses' faces that I was nursing my sick little boy, even though he was keeping the breastmilk down far better than the pedialyte and other crap they kept trying. No one should have to go through that.

I guess I'm not convinced that "cozy" depictions of extended breastfeeding would be received any differently. People are very hateful about this stuff, at least where I live.


----------



## Blessed_Mom (Aug 15, 2009)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroodyWoodsgal*
> 
> EXACTLY. It's not about the article, it's not about "Who is Dr. Sears"...it's about what 90% of people will see...the cover. Period. We all know the age we live in, we're not idiots...it's about the opinion formed in the ten seconds that we stare at this in the checkout line...followed by the cementing of those opinions around the water cooler the next day ("yeah, I saw it, can we say FREAKS!" - hahahah "Yeah you know, I here Dan in accounting, you know him? Yeah I heard his wife nursed their FIVE year old at the company picnic last year. It's sick.") - a conversation that is a lot easier to have when the face on the mom on the cover of Time is making a "say something about it, I DARE you" face.
> 
> ...


Agree with every word of all your posts but wanted to bold a line.

I cannot wait either. Although my immediate family's cut-off seems to be two years old







Well.. not like they can dictate terms to me.

To answer Luckiestgirl - maybe cozy depictions wouldn't have been fruitful either but common sense dictates that if you want to convince an opposing party about something then the way to go would be to present the 'essence' of the movement/feeling/stance rather than the 'extreme' stance.

Better to convince than up their ante - better to cajole than confront.

Sure - we can all say 'screw you' to all non-BFers because we needn't care for their approval but at the same time - it would benefit so many newborn babies if we can try and educate the non-BFers rather than shock them.

So for the sake of the babies at least I wish the pic were gentler and less confrontational.


----------



## One_Girl (Feb 8, 2008)

I heard of the cover from a co-worker who was horrified. She already has a hard time accepting breastfeeding past a year as acceptable and this picture definitely did nothing but spur a lot of anti-breastfeeding talk at work. I wish they had chosen a different title and different pictures because from what I have seen so far this is only something that preaches to the choir and pushes other people to feel disgust for mother's who choose to practice child led weaning.


----------



## ursaminor (Mar 28, 2009)

I looked at the other pics from the article. My complaint is that they could have chosen some AP mamas of color or represented some sense of diversity in the AP community.


----------



## Alphaghetti (May 26, 2005)

We were EBF'ers here, and I don't remember a single person giving me a weird look or any kind of grief over it. I guess I am lucky.

The thing that freaks me out the most about this article is the reactions. I know I shouldn't have bothered, but I read a string of reactions via twitter, and the comments were appalling. More "disturbing" than the cover photo is how incredibly violently people reacted to it... What I mean is, I can understand that it's not for everybody, but why on earth do people care how long my son and I chose to keep our nursing relationship going? What on earth could we be doing that it affects complete strangers. I am pretty sure that most older toddlers and preschoolers aren't constantly at the breast in public, so it's not like it is even prominently on display.

I guess what I am trying to say is that it never ceases to amaze me how involved people seem to want to be in how we choose to raise our confident, healthy children.


----------



## rubidoux (Aug 22, 2003)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rrrrrachel*
> 
> And I course the picture was staged to make it provocative. They're trying to sell magazines! Still a positive thing to have that image in front of people, IMO.


I hope I'm wrong, but I don't think it's positive. I think it will be very polarizing -- making moms who aren't nursing (or aren't nursing "long enough") feel guilty and causing a backlash against moms who do nurse for a long time, with people saying its disgusting and worse. The cover and article were the topic today on World Have Your Say and I found the whole discussion really depressing.

I also really wish that the cover pic was of a more representative mom. I know the mom in the pic is a real person and that there are plenty of young beautiful extended nursing moms out there. But probably most of us don't look like models and we don't get all dressed up and look perfect when we're nursing out little ones. There are very few moms who are going to measure up -- either you're not nursing long enough or you're not looking good enough while you do it. 
And, omg, that child is about twice the size of my three year old.









eta: there are some beautiful pics of nursing moms and babes/toddlers in the video at the bottom of this article: http://healthland.time.com/2012/05/10/q-a-with-jamie-lynne-grumet/ , which I would have felt great about having on the cover of Time, also, at the link that Crunchy Mommy posted on page one of this thread, you can see the other pics from this photo shoot and I think I like them all better than the cover. I am curious, though about the choice to have all of the moms pulling their shirts down instead of up. Ime (totally unscientific) it seems like the vast majority of nursing moms pull their shirts up to nurse rather than down and pulling the shirt down seems much more revealing to me (which, btw, I think is completely fine). There is one pic there where a toddler might be nursing with shirt pulled up, but its hard to even tell that he's nursing, which is probably more often the case than the pulling the shirt down obvious from a mile away nursing.


----------



## Blessed_Mom (Aug 15, 2009)

http://shine.yahoo.com/parenting/jamie-lynne-grumet-defends-her-time-magazine-breastfeeding-180300346.html

Here are some of the pictured mom's own comments!

She comments " "This isn't how we breastfeed at home. It's more of a cradling, nurturing situation."

Really? Then why the provocation? Why worsen an already marred perception in most of the populace minds?

Just - why?


----------



## Rrrrrachel (Jan 13, 2012)

I like the picture.


----------



## rubidoux (Aug 22, 2003)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rrrrrachel*
> 
> I like the picture.


In a way, I think it's a nice picture, too. I just wish it were not THE picture on the cover.


----------



## Contrariety (Jul 16, 2007)

There is a response to this article posted on my local news site. the comments are pretty discouraging. man, people can really get rabid about this stuff!


----------



## Luckiestgirl (Nov 10, 2004)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Alphaghetti*
> 
> We were EBF'ers here, and I don't remember a single person giving me a weird look or any kind of grief over it. I guess I am lucky.


Yes, you are. One of my favorite things about visiting big cities was how many other moms were publicly breastfeeding toddlers and young children. It's quite accepted in some places, and met with outrage in others.

As far as the cover photo attracting the "wrong" kind of attention, I sympathize, but now that it's done we can use the discussions to challenge public ignorance. Challenge your friends' Facebook posts on the issue. Speak up at the water cooler. Sometimes, just knowing that one reasonable person endorses a controversial practices can open people's minds.


----------



## 4evermom (Feb 3, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Luckiestgirl*
> 
> Yes, you are. One of my favorite things about visiting big cities was how many other moms were publicly breastfeeding toddlers and young children. It's quite accepted in some places, and met with outrage in others.


I got enough nasty comments about pushing a 3 yo in a stroller. I can only imagine if I'd been nursing him in public. And I know I nursed ds while standing with my hand on my hip. I don't understand why people think it's such a provocative position.


----------



## zinemama (Feb 2, 2002)

Lisa Belkin is not mom enough. A good response to the Time article.
Quote:


> I am not Mom enough to take the bait. To accept TIME's deliberate provocation and either get mad at this woman for what I think I know about her from this photo, or to feel inferior, or superior, or defensive, or guilty -- or anything at all, if it means I am comparing myself to other mothers.


----------



## iris777888 (Apr 3, 2007)

Holistic Moms had a good response too - http://holisticmomsnational.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/motherhood-under-attack.html


----------



## chipper26 (Sep 4, 2008)

The article is written with a slant against the "extremes" of attachment parenting, in my opinion. It seems like it is written from a smug point of view. Yes, she gives info from the attachment parenting side, but then adds information that, in my opinion, is only part of the story, about co-sleeping and cry-it-out. To be fair, she should have interviewed several attachment parenting families to ask why we chose our particular path and what influenced our decisions. I don't need to see what the average pediatrician thinks as an argument. My sister-in-law's pediatrician is still telling patients to nurse for 10 minutes on one side and then switch to the other for 10 minutes. Not incredibly knowledgeable, if you ask me.


----------



## maydaymom10 (Oct 11, 2009)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *makaleka87*
> 
> I'm not a die-hard follower of Dr. Sears, but I really dislike the tone of the articles and photos. Pretty much what *BroodyWoodsgal* said.
> 
> ...


----------



## llwr (Feb 24, 2009)

I was really upset about this. I couldn't read the article itself, but everything else I read didn't give an accurate representation of AP. The comments about the article were awful. Everyone was defensive. The APers are upset that they're been misrepresented; the non-APers are upset because they've just been told they're not "mom enough".

I thought the cover photo was in bad taste. That's not what extended nursing looks like. People already think it's creepy, all the cover did was solidify that opinion for them. I know TIME doesn't actually care about AP or breastfeeding, but *I* think that wasn't what the mother on the cover or Dr. Sears or the AP community really wanted to get across.

I believe so much in breasfeeding, responding to your baby, respecting your baby..... I wish I knew how to help others believe in it too. TIMES definately didn't do that.


----------



## purplerose (Dec 27, 2010)

the comments from my area are things like, "it's child abuse to breastfeed a child with teeth" and that moms who breastfeed do it for themselves. oddly, the few supporters for extended breastfeeding were male(and they weren't being naughty); one even said something sarcastic about how babies should drink from big hairy dirty cows, instead. breastfeeding is so rare here. of all the moms i have met since becoming a mother, the only ones who breastfed longer than the first few days have been moms in my crunchy homeschool group. i do feel the magazine used this picture to stir things up. i do not think it helps the cause at all.


----------



## iris777888 (Apr 3, 2007)

Thats what I'm seeing here too- lots of comments from people that legitimately believe it's child abuse and/or porn and many suggesting that CPS should be involved.  And it doesn't seem to be spawning any good conversations, but how could it given that reaction? Local media is not even mentioning Dr. Sears or AP.


----------



## queenamy13 (May 14, 2012)

Just read this article at my mom's today and it really depressed me. The title and cover pic bothered me at first but then i thought it might not be so bad if it got people to read an article about the amazing benefits of ap and helped things like ebf, co-sleeping, and baby wearing become more mainstream. Unfortunately the article portrays ap as a cult of extremists. It subtley undercuts the philosophies of ap in negative tones and was just plain awful to read. My sister refused to read past the first column. I never for a second thought meeting the needs of my child through ap meant i had to quit my job, never leave my son with someone else or hold him 24/7. I've never felt our parenting style extreme, just natural although not mainstream. I already feel isolated in ebf my 2yr 2mo ds, co-sleeping, and baby wearing because none of my friends do. Now i feel even more isolated. Thank goodness for my supportive dh and message boards like this so i know i'm not alone!

like women aren't pitted against each other enough in incessant competition through plays on our insecurities! This one really hits below the belt!


----------



## rubidoux (Aug 22, 2003)

I really don't like the "are you mom enough?" headline because because of the whole "mommy wars" thing and pitting women against each other and having some people feel inadequate because they aren't "enough" something. But I think it gets under my skin because I think (pretty whole-heartedly but, of course, I haven't done things *the other way* so I don't know for sure that this is true, just seems this way to me) that the way I parent -- especially thinking about nursing till several years old and co-sleeping even longer -- makes my life so much easier.

I don't think I'd be a good mom if I had to deal with bottles and formula. That would stress me out to no end and there likely would have been a sink full of nasty rotting bottles with an inch of formula in the bottom of them filling up my sink for the first year. If baby woke up in the middle of the night in another room, I'd probably doze back off dreaming of a snooze button for him. I would just suck at that! Seriously, to get up, find a clean bottle, make formula, all the while a baby is crying, sit up and feed it to him. Gah! What a nightmare! I feel like I really took the easy way out. And once they were good at nursing (really once my first one was about three months old, and from the moment my second was born) nursing was no skin off my back at all. Even now, with my nursling being 3 years and 3 mos old, it seems to me like the harder road to take would be to tell him he couldn't nurse. Nursing is easy! It's even pretty nice just about all of the time (there are moments when I'd rather be doing something else, but really not that often). I don't get how one would have to be "mommy enough" to take this road. When I think about bottles and cio and having to get up at all hours of the night, that makes me feel insecure, like maybe I'm not mommy enough for that. If one of my children was unable to nurse for some reason, I am not sure I would have measured up. But I can always find the strength to roll over and offer a breast. I don't get how this is so hard?

But I know that people who haven't done think it's some huge sacrifice and like those of use who nurse till 3 or 4 are like some kind of martyrs. Where did that idea come from? It makes no sense to me at all. But I know that there are people who decide not to nurse because they believe its too hard and demanding and they want to take the easier road and formula feed.


----------



## Cathlin (Apr 4, 2012)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rubidoux*
> 
> I really don't like the "are you mom enough?" headline because because of the whole "mommy wars" thing and pitting women against each other and having some people feel inadequate because they aren't "enough" something. But I think it gets under my skin because I think (pretty whole-heartedly but, of course, I haven't done things *the other way* so I don't know for sure that this is true, just seems this way to me) that the way I parent -- especially thinking about nursing till several years old and co-sleeping even longer -- makes my life so much easier.
> 
> ...


I think it feels easier [to me] b/c it feels natural/comes naturally. Like I'm following my mama instincts and baby's cues, so there's way less stress. (so yeah, I too feel like I'm getting off easy going this route  )

People that talk about it being a huge sacrifice, or like we're martyrs, I think it's very subversive. There's an angle there that sows discontent and can have you apologizing to them for how you parent, and that's wrong. It's like...say you're having a lot of house guests and you're going merrily along but then someone says, "All those guests, so much work, you make me feel guilty - I don't know how you do it!" Next thing you know you're looking around thinking, "This IS a lot of work!" and discontent creeps in.


----------



## Super~Single~Mama (Sep 23, 2008)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cathlin*
> 
> I think it feels easier [to me] b/c it feels natural/comes naturally. Like I'm following my mama instincts and baby's cues, so there's way less stress. (so yeah, I too feel like I'm getting off easy going this route  )
> 
> People that talk about it being a huge sacrifice, or like we're martyrs, I think it's very subversive. There's an angle there that sows discontent and can have you apologizing to them for how you parent, and that's wrong. It's like...say you're having a lot of house guests and you're going merrily along but then someone says, "All those guests, so much work, you make me feel guilty - I don't know how you do it!" Next thing you know you're looking around thinking, "This IS a lot of work!" and discontent creeps in.


I don't know. I think parenting is always hard - no matter which route you take. I thought it was "easier" when my ds was a tiny baby (before he turned 6mo), and then it got SUPER hard, and never let up. He's 3yo now, and I feel like I'm drowning some days because its just.so.hard.all.the.time.


----------



## Cathlin (Apr 4, 2012)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Super~Single~Mama*
> 
> I don't know. I think parenting is always hard - no matter which route you take. I thought it was "easier" when my ds was a tiny baby (before he turned 6mo), and then it got SUPER hard, and never let up. He's 3yo now, and I feel like I'm drowning some days because its just.so.hard.all.the.time.


Yeah, I guess what I'm trying to say - b/c it is hard! - is that when I feel like I'm doing my best, when things feel right, it lifts a burden - even if it's still difficult. Without that burden of stress, worry, the feeling of going against the grain, it's just...better?


----------



## CatsCradle (May 7, 2007)

I don't know. In my old age (almost 49) I've seen these things come and go. People get all hot about a subject and then the hotness subsides and the cultural preferences start to set in. I read a really good article in the New Yorker today about the gay marriage issue. At one point in our history, people got their pant/panties in a bundle about interracial marriage. It was the hot topic of the time and there was even literature and film about it (think: "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner"). Most of the country found the subject of interracial marriage abhorrent. People that married other races were psychologically deficient...weirdos...on the edge...outside the bounds of society and good common sense.

What we're seeing here with AP is the same type of outrage...the same type of condemnation (although I'm not comparing race biases to parenting practices - just comparing the reluctance to adjust thinking). I think it is an exciting time. We need articles like the one in Time to thrust the issue in peoples' faces, even if the Times' article was slant toward the negative (even in the NY Times in the 60's - that publication was biased toward certain established ways of thinking). It is warm and cozy here at MDC but without the public viewing, how are things really going to change? Revolution is hard. It hurts and people go down in flames. But without it, nothing changes. The best things come out of hard times, IMO. History has taught us that good thing come with a lot of adversity and condemnation.

I guess what I'm trying to say is despite our own feelings of outrage about peoples' response and the Time's response to this issue, it has come to the forefront and the public dialog has began. We can feel warm and cozy in our isolated pockets of AP, but that doesn't change things. It may influence people on the local level, but on a societal level, there needs to be huge discussions. In my experience, people don't come around to an issue until it's been worked out, discussed, dissected. I wouldn't take this as a negative. I would take this as a step in the right direction. This has been the course of all things good...from recycling to gay rights issues. There's going to be backlash on all "new" issues. I smile that this is the issue of today and in TIME.

Edited to say that I know that extended breastfeeding is not "new" in a world culture context, or even in an historical context, but it is relatively new in the modern western mind. A lot of things have to change in peoples' minds to accept that this specific issue is not weird or out of the ordinary.


----------



## grahamsmom98 (May 15, 2002)

I wish the child's face hadn't been shown (his head could have been turned the other way).

The child had no say as to his image being placed on the cover of a widely-read magazine and, of course, plastered all over the internet. HIS privacy has been invaded.

I don't care about the mother. Her posture was posed and she accepted those poses during a photoshoot. She got paid for it, her right to choose so. She certainly doesn't look too loving in her physical stance! For those of us that have nursed past what our society figures as the norm (I nursed until ds was 4 1/2 years old), we wouldn't stand like that, with a child on a step stool too low and our nipple at risk for bites if the child loses their balance!!! It's all about shock and attention-getting value. Madison Avenue strikes, again.

But, the child? He'll pay for this shot forever...................


----------



## AbbyGrant (Jan 12, 2012)

*


----------



## 4evermom (Feb 3, 2005)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AbbyGrant*
> 
> I don't think this kid will pay for this forever.


Me neither. He'll just say "Dude, I was three, get a life," if anyone brings it up. That's what my ds would do. IF anyone remembers this long enough to attempt to tease him. For kids in extended breastfeeding circles, this is so normal they would just think anyone that commented on it was completely bizarre.


----------



## lilbsmama (Nov 18, 2008)

I like what another poster said. It does not convey extended nursing, but I don't even like to call it that. I have no guru, and if I did, it wouldn't be Dr. Sears. I like a lot of what he stands for and promotes, but that doesn't mean he is the be all end all of AP. I prefer that I am just parenting. It's not special. It's normal parenting. I'm not nursing my toddler because I can't let him go, or "cut the cord" so to speak. We nurse because it is what we have been doing for the past 27 months and 14 days, not that I'm counting.







I don't like that my style of parenting has been depicted as an all-or-nothing, I'm better than you style. It's insulting. I read the article, and I appreciated what the mom had to say, but if I were her, I would not have agreed to such a pose.


----------



## rubidoux (Aug 22, 2003)

I just looked through the nursing an older child pics on the thread in the breastfeeding forum and I swear it made me teary-eyed, and I would not have thought I'd be so struck by it seeing as I'm in the thick of nursing myself. I didn't think that the Time cover pic was off the map in terms of how toddlers and older children nurse. I don't think it's true at all that every time we nurse it's all sweetness and light. There are certainly times that my almost 3 1/2 year old is doing gymnastics or kicking me in the face or trying to play Angry Birds on daddy's phone. But certainly if your goal was to present it in a good light or to show what is beautiful about it, you would not choose that cover pic.


----------



## Choose2Reuse (Feb 27, 2012)

I agree, the whole article was slightly biased against extended breastfeeding (what's with quoting that random pediatrician saying that it's "not known to cause any harm"?! The WHO recommends it, for pete's sake!). And it made Dr. Sears sound like a complete extremist whacko, which is not the picture I got from his books at all. Yes, he said you should respond to your baby's cries--somehow the author paraphrased that into something like "every little whimper must be attended to RIGHT AWAY or your child will have brain damage". I distinctly remember reading in The Baby Book that while a newborn should be responded to right away, you can delay responding to a 9-month-old, for example. And similarly about staying home with your kid..from Dr. Sears' books I got the impression that he thought it was best to spend as much time as possible with your kid, but you do the best you can---much like the book described the "ideal" of attachment parenting, and then you do what you can, and take breaks when you need to. Really, I thought his books were very sane. The article seemed much more based on some of the AP fanatics I've come across, and it kind of made me mad.


----------



## Mulvah (Aug 12, 2008)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroodyWoodsgal*
> 
> I absolutely cannot stand the picture they used, I don't like Dr. Sears being painted as a "guru" for AP parents and just didn't like the piece.
> 
> ...


I was all set to respond and saw that someone else shared most of my opinion already.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Luckiestgirl*
> 
> I'm tired of people (in general) saying, "It's about the mother, not the child." Breastfeeding is always about the child and the mother. If it were miserable for the mother, the human race would be in trouble.


I find breastfeeding miserable and yet, I still do it.


----------

