Coming out of my Lactivist Closet and finding my Purpose

5/11/2012

I had another epiphany tonight after posting about 5 breastfeeding related posts on Facebook (while nursing Gerry and typing one-handed). I've never really thought of myself as much of a "lactivist". I mean I love breastfeeding and it clearly works for me and my babies (going on 6 years straight come July 2!), but I've kind of been (relatively) quiet about it. There are lots of posts on Facebook that I just don't care to re-post and there is a huge movement trying to get them to not censor nursing pictures. I'm not sure why I'm not more "into" it. I guess I've been more drawn to birth and now peaceful parenting and unschooling. Breastfeeding was part of the package for sure, but not something I needed to get loud about.

Until TIME went and did an article on Attachment parenting (I guess - I haven't read the article) with a cover on it of a mom breastfeeding her 3 year-old standing up. One thing is pretty clear - people on "both sides" are riled up about this article. The title itself was very inflammatory, "Are you mom enough?" Moms who *do* live by attachment parenting principles are left looking "extreme" and "judgmental", moms who don't are left feeling "judged" and "not good enough". So who won? (answer: TIME magazine)

Anyways, back to my rambly thoughts. Although I'm not a hard-core lactivist I have noted an interesting trend in myself lately. Namely, I seem to tell everyone I meet that Gerry "still" nurses. I don't feel comfortable nursing him in public or in front of too many people, but for some reason I find myself telling neighbors, other moms at dance class, and anyone else who will listen. I guess it's my way of spreading the word, "Look, I at least appear somewhat normal... well, at least *nice*, and I nurse my running, tooth-a-liscious, talking son". This is what I wish would change - that it would be normal enough for moms to choose and do what is right for them and their children. That mothers would not have to feel uncomfortable feeding and nurturing their children anywhere, anytime if they need it.

A friend made a statement and followed with a question on my FB wall:

However, this whole "attachment parenting thing" seems to be more about the mother's personal issues and not about what it can do for the child. Given your interest in parenting and child rearing, have you come across any clinical, medical, psychological, or sociological critiques of Attachment Parenting? FYI: I could care less about the feminist critique, my main concern is long term effect on the child.

This is my attempt to respond in an intelligent, mature manner. First of all, I'm not exactly sure what is meant by attachment parenting being about a "mother's personal issues". I have heard comments to the effect that people believe mothers nurse their children past a deemed "acceptable" age for their own needs and not the child. I'm going to assume that may be what my friend is referring to. I guess the same might be said for co-sleeping - the mother needs the child for something (comfort, company?) and is using the child to meet that need (who needs a husband for that, right?).

I'm going to answer from my own personal experience and from other moms that I know in real life and through the internet. First of all the use of the words "personal issues" seems to me to have a very negative connotation. But because I know my friend somewhat, and that he doesn't have children, and that I believe he wasn't *trying* to offend me, I am not taking it to heart. (Trying to walk the walk, you know purple spots and all.)

So I will just answer short and sweet and directly - no, attachment parenting is not about "the mother's" personal issues. Yes, is is about what it can do for the child... and the parent. (Read here for an account of why this mom feels AP makes *her* a better mom)

Most people choose to parent in this way because it is the way that feels best overall for their whole family. Sometimes they didn't "plan" to do things the way they are, but guess what, BABIES HAVE OPINIONS TOO!

As for clinical, medical, psychological or sociological critiques, I am going to keep it fairly simple too. Parenting has led me *away* from "experts" and back to finding my own inner truth. (It takes a lot of time and effort. It can be challenging finding our true "instincts" versus the "voices" that have been programmed into us due to our social/cultural environment.) All of those perspectives boil down to "research". I like research - I was a science teacher. But more and more I find I don't really care about or need research. I only need to look at my own kids and listen to them and my own inner wisdom. I don't need research to see my kids learning and growing every day. I don't need research to hear their laughter or see the happiness shining in their eyes. I don't need research to tell me that they are healthy and thriving and whole and turning into exactly who they are meant to be.

But some people like research to back them up. I get that. I recently read an awesome book, "The Old Way," by Elizabeth Marshal Thomas (who I am going to be interviewing soon - I'm so excited!) If one needs a sociological or evolutionary perspective on what we humans would look like "in the wild" before all of this Western civilization stuff, then I highly recommend it. Here is a quote that I found on the internet from the book that led me to seek it out and read the whole thing:

The Ju/wasi were unfailingly good to their children. An infant would be nursed on demand and stay close to its mother, safe in the pouch of her cape, warm in cold weather, shaded in hot weather, compete with a wad of soft grass for a diaper. Ju/wa children very rarely cried, probably because they had little to cry about. No child was ever yelled at or slapped or physically punished, and few were even scolded. Most never heard a discouraging word until they were approaching adolescence, and even then teh reprimand, if it really was a reprimand, was delivered in a soft voice. At least the tone was soft, even if the words weren’t always.

We are sometimes told that children who are treated so kindly become spoiled, but this is because those who hold that opinion have no idea how successful such measures can be. Free from frustration or anxiety, sunny and cooperative, and usually without close siblings as competitors, the Ju/wa children were every parent’s dream. No culture could have raised better, more intelligent, more likeable, more confident children.

Sounds pretty good to me!

I read horrible, vitriolic comments on articles often judging the very actions that go on in my everyday life. But I am learning: 1) AGAIN, DON'T READ THE COMMENTS (It's like getting beaten over the head with a stick repeatedly) and 2) When you fail to follow #1, DON'T TAKE IT PERSONALLY (again, PURPLE SPOTS PEOPLE!)

I get why people are uncomfortable with some of Attachment parenting practices. They aren't the "norm" in our times or geographical location. What I don't get is people being so mean. I can honestly say that I do not judge people who choose not to nurse (and I know some can't), sleep with their children, or use punishments (to name a few).

It seems to me that these "Mommy wars" mostly exist on the internet. In real life I don't run into people saying nasty things to me because I am still nursing my son or sleeping with my children. Just like in real life I don't go around telling people that they should be doing things differently - because I don't believe that. In fact I just posted a Mother's Day Tribute to some of the most amazing moms I know, and guess what? They all do things differently than me.

Anyways, back to my epiphany. I realized something really important tonight as I lay next to Gerry, waiting anxiously for him to fall asleep (come on kid, mama's got to WRITE!) . I keep wondering "why" am I writing here, why am I sharing? And tonight a part of the answer came to me. I'm not sharing to try and convince anyone or to change anyone's mind. I actually don't believe it is possible to change another person - the individual must decide they want to change. I'm not even that interested in defending my choices - although when push comes to shove I will if I get fired up - I feel good about what we are doing here. But I do want to shine my truth for others to see who maybe want to try things a little different, or who are interested but aren't sure, or who need to know someone else out there is doing this "crazy" thing and they aren't all that crazy. That is why I'm writing here.

You know what? An amazing thing happened! When I got down here there was a message on my computer from a friend whom I haven't spoken to in ages asking for advice about breastfeeding because, "You are the only person I know who has breastfed for an extended period of time (at least the only person I know who isn't afraid to let it be known). I hope you don't mind me asking questions and looking to you for advice."

Holy Synchronicity AGAIN! Seriously? Life is so unbelievably good sometimes. Um, no I don't mind you coming to me at all. And THANK YOU for affirming to me my purpose here. That's what it's all about people - love. There is so much more I could say on this, but there is always a new day and a new post. And I need to go to bed so I can be a respectable mama tomorrow. Good night to all!

ps I will get to the "feminist" part of this issue someday... maybe. When I'm feeling brave and rested and have oodles of time. (might be a while!)

10 Comments

Matt

5/12/2012 01:31:23 am

Read through your post a couple of times. I feel that you and I are coming from fundamentally different philosophical perspectives on the nature of Truth. For me, I get nervous when I hear people say "inner truth" or "what works for me" because that implies a certain relativism and can lead to overly defensive responses to honest inquiry. It is a strange phenomenon really. In my philosophical studies the relativist seems to be the most open-minded on paper, but in practice tends to be the most close-minded.

I'm certainly not suggesting that YOU are close-minded; defensive, maybe. So, in an effort to clarify and make sure we are on the same page, (because I have more questions), let's clarify our terms.

With respect to "relativism," I believe it is wrong. If parenting were relative, then the North American Man/Boy Love Association would not be perverts, they would just be "different" from you or I. And I do not believe that my curiosity, nor my hesitation to accept or denounce any parenting practice, is motivated by the strangeness of the practice. I have some legitimate concerns that have nothing to do with some perceived bias. As an "absolutist" (for lack of a better word), I just want to get to the truth.

To wit, is this parenting method good for the child? Answering that question can only happen with good, honest intellectual debate. I've read your blog from time to time and I believe you have some great insight. Hence my inquiry. However, with all do respect, I don't believe your post, and the attached articles, answered my question.

For starters, the article from "Your Birth Coach" was all about how the mother feels. It does not analyze any long term effects on the child, or the mother for that matter. Indeed, that article could support a position that attachment parenting is all about the mother and not the child. Another article concerned the mother's experience with learning to breast feed her child. It was an informative article, but didn't address my concerns. And frankly, I don't think the Ju/Wasi tribe analysis applies. There are a number of reasons why the tribe, after thousands of years, are only now transitioning to a more aggrarian society. The Western World has embraced a number of cultural practices that paved the way for our way of life. A way of life that I think is good; not perfect, but good...and certainly better than living in the desert.

All of these articles are very informative as --obviously-- I'm not the one who will be doing this! But, like I said, my question really wasn't answered, except with your rejection of experts.

Could you expound on why you reject experts? Specifically, why you reject experts on this issue?

For the record, I am simpathetic to a rejection of experts as too many experts on one thing, think they are experts in other things!

Susan link

5/13/2012 02:05:08 pm

Hi Matt,

"Truth" is definitely a slippery word. It's funny that "inner truth" made you nervous because I was actually trying to avoid the word "instinct" (but it slipped in there anyways) for a similar reason. I will try to give a quick explanation about what I mean, but I think what I really need to do is write a whole post about it. A huge thing for me lately is living mindfully. And by that I mean being really aware - mostly of myself, my thought processes, my feelings, and what influences them. It means really examining and questioning things before coming to any conclusions or making decisions. I really believe many parenting practices today are made on autopilot because "it's what people do". So by this process of examining and being mindful we are able to get more in touch with our instincts and what is really true.

It's funny because I have a post in mind named, "The truth is..." and as an alternative, "It's all relative" - haha. I will agree with you that there are a few things that I am absolutely not willing to compromise on, they are JUST WRONG in my opinion. For me peace is a guide post and as such, hitting (spanking) just is NOT an option. However, I can have compassion and understanding for different backgrounds, experiences, and perspectives that make some people feel like it is the right thing to do. Do I agree with them? No. But I don't believe getting in people's faces is the way to change - especially since I'm supposedly all about Peace ;-)

I also was aware that I didn't really answer your question about studies showing the effects on children. And I need to clarify about what I mean about getting away from experts. There is SO MUCH INFORMATION out there and since becoming a mother I have read and read. So it's not that I'm against researching, actually I really believe knowledge is powerful and important to making the best informed decisions. When I have some free time (haha) I will try to get some resources together that I have found especially useful.

So the short answer about why I don't necessarily trust "experts" just because they're experts, is my experience with Doctors (who are the experts many of us have the most contact with.) Through my personal experience with Doctors - and a long line of them - I've seen how they just don't always know what they're talking about. I'm not trying to diss them or say that all Doctors are bad people - I'm just saying it made me realize *I* need to be the expert when it comes to myself and my family.

As for there being "one truth" in parenting that's a tough one. I really don't think you are going to find it. There is just too much variability in each family and individual. Also, there are things you just won't be able to know until you are actually in the midst of it.

Guinevere

5/12/2012 12:40:30 pm

Great blog post, Susan! And I'd love to read the feminist take on it too, when you do find that free time. :)

Matt, it seems from your question like the experts you've read are against AP? But I don't find that to be the case in my research at all. I do think that most AP techniques are instinctual -- that parents, for instance, often have to silence their conscience to practice cry-it-out methods, methods which have been proven detrimental to infants' psychological development in recent years but which has still been touted by some child-rearing 'experts'. Generally, I think parents just know how to parent, especially their own child.

But, I also think 'the research' backs up attachment parenting as a very valid parenting choice. There's a great article here on AP research that appeared in the Journal of Evolutionary Psychology:
http://www.epjournal.net/wp-content/uploads/ep05102183.pdf

I'm looking forward to practicing attachment parenting because I think it's the most ideal way to raise children. If it were all about the mom, well, I think there are easier ways to parent, at least considering the short term!

5/12/2012 11:00:13 pm

Guin!

Thanks for reading and commenting! Thanks for the link too, I'm going to have to check it out.

You are going to be an amazing mama.

Hope you are feeling well!

Susan

5/13/2012 12:22:04 am

You know, I've actually been having a lot of back pain to deal with, but at least it's giving me a chance to practice my Hypnobabies techniques. Which, I might add, are a lot more effective than Tylenol. :)

5/13/2012 03:04:42 am

To respond to Susan's questions from our facebook discussion:

I do think that the "western culture" (broadly speaking) is superior. And, call me crazy, but I think it is obvious. We have technology, democracy, rule of law, and individualism that allows us to do all sorts of things, including the luxury of having a discussion on what parenting types are good or bad. Aboriginal tribes' parenting techniques are done out of necessity, not out of a sense of "this is the right way to do it." Sad but true.

So, to answer your question about evolution, yes I believe it. Looking at Western Society, our culture evolved a certain way and that includes more than just our values and repository of knowledge, but parenting practices and familial relationships.

With respect to "how" we've been doing it and whether such techniques are better: This will take some time to answer. I start with the premise that the Western World has been predominantly a market driven culture: mercantalism to capitalism. Indeed, capitalism seems to be the reason why we have it so great. So the question becomes how did this happen as compared to the Wasi tribe? I don't have an answer for that other than we've been doing something right.

And I guess this is why I'm so curious about AP. What kind of children will it produce? It seems to me, that becoming a "good capitalist, (i.e. someone driven to succeed, to produce, and be productive), requires teaching self-reliance and focused aggression. Will AP, as Kathleen suggested, create a child without proper boundaries? Will it produce a child more dependent upon the collective?

For the record I reject the notion that "it takes a village to raise a child." Keep your hands off my kids, please. I want a child who has the courage to stand on his/her own two feet without the need to depend on the community. Sure, there are times when people need help, but that is not dependency. Will AP create a child that can't do that? or at least struggle to do that? I don't know.

I think you make a good point that we don't have long term studies following the progress of some of these kids. And, obviously, how a kid turns out is going to depend on more factors than just how long they've been breastfeeding. I am aware of this. I am certainly NOT saying that breast feeding will turn your kids into Jeffrey Dahmer!

There are a number of factors as to what makes a person a good person or a bad person. And I think our society, has come to a point where we have the knowledge to discuss this. To me that is intellectual evolution. How do we raise a good kid? I don't know. There have been some very smart and good people that came from broken homes, and some terrible human beings that came from loving homes.

At this point I am still skeptical of AP. And for the record, I have not read anything else on any other child rearing techniques. So, I am coming at this with "a beginner's mind" as the Zen masters would say...an empty cup, if you will.

Happy Mother's Day!

5/13/2012 02:15:41 pm

Matt,

I also love and embrace certain aspects of our culture - I LOVE technology as does my whole family. I am also so grateful for the times and place that I was born in and the freedoms and just general lifestyle I am lucky enough to have.

BUT there are many things that are wrong with our culture. Parenting is what has made me realize this to a larger degree. There are a lot of values in our culture that I *don't* think should be held in such a place of honor - and a large part of that is capitalism. (I'm getting out of my realm here, and I will readily admit that my family is full of consumers! we love to shop... I'm just saying that some of the values that are inherently promoted by a capitalist structure don't sit well with me - excess, greed, competition etc.)

So the "Old Way" as in the book, did do some things better, in my opinion. I'm not saying that we should go back to being hunter/gatherers or that I would want that, but I am saying is that there are thigns we can learn from them.

As for "focused agression" - I'm not interested in my child developing that characteristic, so you and I may have different goals for our real (and hypothetical) children.

I find it interesting that you reject the "village" notion, because since becoming a mom, especially with my second, I have yearned for my "tribe". As a parent I really believe that expression comes about because parenting is just A LOT OF HARD WORK. And you will never be able to appreciate how much until you do it.

Most people that believe in attachment parenting principles believe that their children will be more independent - when they are ready. I am seeing this in my own kids already and will write more about that.

This is a great conversation! Thanks for taking the time. I look forward to more...

Faith link

6/11/2012 06:05:07 am

Not to get too in-depth into the debate, rather to lend a bit of personal perspective:

While both sides can be argued relatively easy, what it all comes down to is how one person identifies/defines "success" in life...is it "stuff" or is it "happiness"...and what makes us truly happy?

If a person is completely happy and content by the acquirement of "things", then being completely self-sufficient and not relying on the attachments to others would help promote more drive and ambition to acquire things...to be the best they can be at whatever they do so that they're on top.

For others, family, peace, random adventures out to the country to find a cool creek to play in - those are the measures of success...experiences. Through those experiences, the individual can find their own way, their own independence, while still maintaining a strong connection to family and "the village".

Our society has become VERY driven and work/goal-oriented...image-oriented. There are definite benefits, as you've listed - further advancement in technology and a monetarilyt-richer quality of life for some. On the contrast though, look at Italian culture. VERY family-centric, even extending to neighbors. They're supportive of each other, yet keep each other in line as well (discipline). There's a definite fall-back if a person needs it, yet they're brought up to be very strong-minded and individualistic people. Passionate. To me, that is worth more than any physical thing I could have or goal I could achieve for myself. My connections make me who I am and help push me to be more...I want that for my child. An individual is not meant to always be self-sufficient...there are times and instances where it's healthy to ask for help and rely on others - outside perspective helps us grow as individuals.

Call it type-a/type-b personality, nature/vs/nurture, etc. It's quite obvious through experience/example that as a standard, the conditioning and environment/reactions from parents to kids shape who they become. It comes down to: what kind of adult do you want to help shape your kid to become? It's *all* personal and related to the parent's desires and beliefs of what's best. Family should be personal. What works for one might be dysfunctional for another. It's that child's choice and individuality that will choose to carry on the parent's traditions or go their own route.

...and I think I failed my opening line...not so short, sorry. :)

Rebecca

5/14/2012 11:04:11 am

Hi all,

I have been a regular reader of Susan's post and am not usually a responder, but I'm feeling moved by the comments to Susan's post (especially the exchange between Susan and Matt). Before I put my reaction out I have to first say that I am a parent to two boys (age 6 and 4) and I am a psychologist. I am not a parenting expert, though I have taken my fair share of graduate level Child Development classes. Most of what I "know" about parenting comes from my experience, both as a child and as a parent.

I also want to put out there that I am not practicing "attachment parenting" (though I take some offense to not being able to use the term since I think I am an attachment-oriented parent). I see Matt's perspective, I also see Sue's and I have to say, I think you are both right. What I believe is that attachment parenting (or many other types of parenting) is what is best for the child *if* it is what is best for the family. In my family, for instance, I have a husband who works full time while I work part time. I love my job and I can't imagine feeling fully me if I weren't doing it in some capacity. I love my children even more then I love my job, but I genuinely feel like a better parent *because* I work (and Matt, scientific studies support the idea that as a group the "happiest" parents and well adjusted kids have primary caregivers who work part time). That being said I also genuinely believe that this is not what would make all (or most) families happy, and clearly it is not feasible for most families who need a dual income to survive. All that being said, I have seen Susan in action as a mom and I have seen her children in all their glory and they are one of the highest functioning families I know. Attachment parenting works for Susan, but I am pretty sure if I tried to sleep in the bed with my children or nursed on demand for several years (my boys are 16 mo apart and I went back to work when my children were young) I would be a lunatic and a very mean mommy. As it is I think my kids benefit from my selfishness...to a point. Of course their are limits to the idea of "happy mom, happy kids" and kids need most often must come before the needs of the mom or dad. Especially when they are infants (even if I couldn't always do this as a parent, it was always clearly the right thing to do).

I guess my overall feeling, and what all research (not sure if peer-reviewed research counts as "experts") clearly delineates is that GOODNESS OF FIT between parent and child is what leads to good outcomes for the kid. I truly believe my crazy wild wonderful wonder of a first born son would not do well without love *and* boundaries and I also truly believe (and have seen with my own eyes) that Susan's children are thriving while growing up in an attachment parenting household (and for the record I think I can speak for Susan when I say that Attachment Parents are not advocating for the Man/Boy love when they stress open-mindness).

I think what we can all use as parents and as a people, is open-mindedness. Seems to me we are all trying to make our way in the same world and if we could shed our defensiveness that our way is the right way then we could learn a lot from each other.

5/14/2012 02:07:06 pm

Rebecca,

Well, I am quite fried right now and it's almost midnight, but I just wanted to first say THANK YOU for your comment and kind words. You also know that I think the world of you and your kiddos.

As far as you not "being" an attachment parent - I think this is one of the drawbacks of having such labels. But I guess we create them for ease of communication. I know that you and your kids are very attached, regardless of whether you followed the specific guidelines of AP. This is why it is so hard to define and also to measure.

What about personality? I can imagine a scenario where a mom "does" all the AP techniques but is just very reserved - whereas another mother overflows her love onto her children with every interaction, even though she is not "AP". It's not a cut and dry issue.

The thing is, there are no guarantees and there are no re-dos. That's why we all have to do the best we can each moment.

and with that... goodnight. Love to all, sleep well...

Coming out of my Lactivist Closet and finding my Purpose

Leave a Reply.

Susan May

Categories

Archives