Dr. Isis's fellow ScienceBlogger ScienceWoman has a post up right now that has hit the domestic and laboratory goddess square in the middle of the chest. ScienceWoman is dealing with being away from her daughter, Minnow, for the first time as she stops breastfeeding. Reading her words made me emotional as my time nursing the Isis babies is something I have valued tremendously. After having Little Isis and returning to work, I used to retreat from the lab every two hours to pump to a room our department had allocated for this purpose (I refused to pump in the bathroom or lab and worked in a very supportive department) in order to maintain the flow of nutrition. It was exhausting, but the best part was going home at night and snuggling up while Little Isis ate. Having to pump so frequently during the day was exhausting and inconvenient, but I treasured these little moments so much that the inconvenience was worth it quite a while.
Figure 1: A artist's rendition of a day in the life of Dr. Isis, except that Dr. Isis is much, much hotter and Little Isis is much, much cuter.
But, as happens with any mother, I eventually reached a time where nursing was no longer appropriate for my little one and me. The demands of the pumping in combination with the fact that Little Isis was losing interest in it except at night led me to stop. It was no longer about nutrition, but bonding and more than a year of the constant pumping schedule began to take its toll. It was very difficult for me to stop nursing Little Isis when I did, but I realized that we were both at a point physically and emotionally that it needed to happen. Still, it was so, so hard. So hard. I valued that special thing that we shared that only I could provide for him. So much of his other care was/is provided by someone else but this was something that we could share in a way that was completely special and different. I wondered if there was a chance I was somehow damaging him developmentally by choosing to stop. I kid you not that, being a scientist, I had read the studies about intelligence in breastfed children and I actually thought to myself that, perhaps, if I had nursed one more day it might make the difference between Little Isis winning the Nobel or never progressing beyond "If you're happy and you know it." I cried the last time I nursed him...big, splashy, inconsolable tears. I was so afraid that by breaking this last thing that bonded us exclusively that we would lose our special relationship.
Sometimes I still miss it, but the connection between us has remained. It did not become damaged when the nursing stopped. If anything, it has grown and evolved for which I am incredibly thankful. He still nuzzles up and occasionally trys to nurse, but then he is satisfied to simply snuggle and there are times when no one but Mommy will do. And, before he was two, my little boy counted to twenty and sang his ABCs -- hope that my decision to stop nursing did not hinder his intellectual development. Looking back I feel so blessed for the time I had to share this with him and for the way it has bonded us in a way that being a way from him for a few days does not change. It is a time I can look back on warmly knowing that I made the best choices I could along the way -- choices that have left him and us no worse for the wear.
Education & Careers
Comments
I was very lucky that with my daughter, weaning happened gradually and naturally. We were on vacation and with all the running around and family, she was nursing less, and even when we returned home, it just...happened. I couldn't even tell you when the last time she nursed was. I just woke up one day and realized it was over!
I'm very glad that I didn't have to make a decision about when, because I would have dithered for a long time :)
Posted by: Mara | December 18, 2008 10:43 AM
Very nice post, Dr. Isis.
Posted by: Comrade PhysioProf | December 18, 2008 11:00 AM
I enjoyed your breast nursing blog so much. It made me recall my breast nursing days with my daughter. I had never planned to stop at any set date until one day waiting for the N. Miami Public Library to open we were sitting on a bench with another mother and her 5 year old son. He grabbed and she allowed. She told me she would continue breast feeding him as long as he wanted to. That day I started to gradually end that form of nourishment for my 18 month old going directly to the plastic glass - no bottle.
Posted by: La Mama de La Interno | December 18, 2008 11:41 AM
What a nice post Dr. Isis. I went through the same -- mental anguish, no? At about 18 months, my little one was still nursing every 3 hours or so at night. The lack of sleep on my part was bad enough that I began to have migraines, and that is when we weaned. It was difficult -- husband would get up with him at night and hold him while he cried -- as a result, little one formed a strong bond with him and our bond lessened. He is twice that age now, and very into his hot mama. However, he is convinced that the 'brain milk' came from my arm. And that he can feed the cat this way.
Posted by: gnuma | December 18, 2008 12:43 PM
Dr Isis, I am so glad you blogged about your breast feeding experience. There are many misconceptions about lactation and about why it is difficult for some mothers to do it. The reason they have difficulties is because of their low NO status. That Dr Isis had no great difficulties is a sign of her high NO status. The difficulties are due to physiology, not psychology.
The reason breast feeding is so exhausting is because it is a metabolically demanding activity. There are 4 major components in breast milk; fat, lactose, protein and water. The major osmolyte is lactose, which must be made de novo in the breast at the time of milk production. That lactose is made from blood glucose, which is generated in the liver either by gluconeogenesis or by release of stored glycogen. Glucose can only be made from 3-carbon precursors. Fat is broken down into 2-carbon bits by acetyl-coenzyme A and then these are oxidized in the citrate cycle. There is no way for even carbon number fatty acids (which most are) to be converted into 3-carbon bits which can be used for glucogenesis. A woman�s depot fat status is completely irrelevant to her ability to make lactose for milk, as is her breast size. What is important is her liver�s ability to do gluconeogenesis. The importance of liver glucogenesis capacity for lactation success is not well appreciated by lactation specialists. If she does not consume sufficient carbohydrate, then glucose can only be made from protein, either dietary protein or protein from muscle. That is what cachexia is, the production of glucose from skeletal muscle.
The capacity of the liver to do glucogenesis is regulated by physiology (as are all physiological parameters), but the mechanisms by which this happens are not well understood. Presumably there is a feedback signal from tissues consuming glucose that signal the liver to increase its glucogenesis capacity. I suspect that these feedback mechanisms involve nitric oxide because one of the major requirements is for increased liver mitochondria biogenesis (which is known to be regulated by NO).
Maternal bonding is known to be mediated by NO; ewes that have their nitric oxide synthase inhibited don�t bond to their lambs. My hypothesis is that maternal bonding in mammals has to be coupled to energy status because lactation is so energy intensive. If the mother has insufficient metabolic resources to support lactation and support her infant until weaning, the evolutionary �best� choice is to not bond to the infant and abandon it, conserving metabolic resources until times become better and perhaps an infant can be successfully weaned.
My hypothesis is that postpartum depression is due to insufficient NO and a decline in whole organism energy status. If that goes too far it transitions into postpartum psychosis and even infanticide. I have blogged about the physiology behind this, but there are some quite disturbing aspects to it.
http://daedalus2u.blogspot.com/2007/08/low-nitric-oxide-acute-psychosis.html
I think that postpartum depression can be successfully treated by increasing NO status, and that this will prevent the transition into postpartum psychosis. The best time to do this is prior to conception. I think the nausea of the first trimester is due to high NO levels which increase liver gluconeogenesis capacity.
The archetypal response to stress, including metabolic stress, is to lower NO levels. My hypothesis is that the coupling of maternal bonding to energy status is mediated through NO. That is why stress makes it more difficult to lactate. As the archetypal social behavior in mammals, the dependence of maternal bonding on NO, explains how other social behaviors including communication also have NO dependence.
Posted by: daedalus2u | December 18, 2008 1:09 PM
It is fantastic to hear women like Sciencewoman and yourself talking so openly about nursing. When my wife and I had our first little one (ok, she had him. I was just along for the ride), we experienced firsthand the huge backlash that was taking place against nursing mothers. But she persevered and we have never regretted it one bit. One of the most treasured memories of that time was that of my exhausted wifey in her rocker, in the middle of the night nursing our little one while I fed her dinner, rubbed her shoulders, and generally made a nuisance of my self with my unsolicited nursing advice ;-)
Posted by: CyberLizard | December 18, 2008 1:15 PM
I still miss nursing. I had to give it up once I started back in the lab. I physically could not keep up the demands of producing milk and working. I lost way to much weight. it was the most difficult decision I had to make and was happy that I nursed just past 1 year. Nursing is much more accepted up north, and I hope it becomes so down south as well.
Posted by: ScientistMother | December 18, 2008 2:29 PM
I'll probably find myself on the receiving end of a few lectures for this, but what the hell.
Again, I remind everyone that I do not have kids yet. That said, I have done a lot of thinking and talking about it.
I do not have the intention of breastfeeding. My plan is to pump and then bottle feed so that I don't have more of a bond to my children than their father. This partially comes from my mother, who only breastfed for the first month or so, then switched us all to formula. (I know, god forbid) But we're all fine, all 3 of us.
I don't intend to use formula, but I do think it's important that both parents take part in nourishing their children and to make fathers feel more included in those early days. I know that I'll be missing out on what all of you have described as such a wonderful bonding experience, but I feel like it's only fair.
Posted by: JLK | December 18, 2008 3:12 PM
JLK, I don't think you'll necessarily miss out on anything important (maybe you will avoid thrush, soreness, and other problems, but not everyone has those anyway). If you hold the baby close with a bottle of your own milk, and are making a lot of skin-to-skin contact, I believe you will get the same idea. For me, it's about having a special time with the baby and knowing that he is getting the best nutrition I can provide. I assume people who need to use formula take care in its selection and preparation and can feel the same way. I have a friend whose baby had trouble with the large amount of her milk flow who decided to pump all her milk. She kept it up for about 3 months (which I believe is the most important time physically). Of course, you seem to be choosing the more difficult path, as it will take time to pump--my friend especially hated getting up in the middle of the night, feeding the baby, then still having to stay awake to pump, when it was her turn (if the dad had done all the feeding then the bonding problem is just reversed the other way). I am sure you will find what is best for your family, but I decided that my husband could bond with the baby in other ways (some fathers let their baby suck on their nipples as a pacifier, but my husband was not interested in that). I wanted him to spend extra time with the baby to account for my having him during the breastfeeding. That didn't completely happen, and I'm not sure it was fair anyway because breastfeeding is typically easier than entertaining a baby. But they have bonded well, and baby LP will ask for dada when he is tired/hurt about as often as he seems to want me, even though he knows I have the boobs (although he STILL won't say mama)! I am not a medical professional, but I think mentally healthy people should eventually (it took me longer than I thought it would!) bond strongly with their baby almost regardless of what happens, but of course that's no reason not to consider all your options and decide what's really best for your family.
Posted by: Tinkering Theorist | December 18, 2008 4:52 PM
JLK - if you can manage to exclusively bottle feed breast milk, my hats off to you. Prior to the monkey being born, I had visions of pumping and giving hubby the bottle to feed on a daily basis. For me, it was too hard. It was way easier to just whip out the boob. I did pump so that I could have a night out and go back to the lab, but to pump and then give monkey a bottle. Not worth the time or hassle, at least for me. Mr.SM's bond with monkey is no less than mine. It is a different bond, but not a lesser bond. Him and monkey have lots of cuddles, diaper changes, took great pleasure in doing bath time etc. I would have to say they had more play time when monkey was younger since I was so tired. I guess I am saying that every one will do what is best for them, but nursing isn't the only way to bond.
Posted by: ScientistMother | December 18, 2008 4:55 PM
gnuma, mine also wakes up constantly to nurse, even though he only nurses once during the day. Did yours sleep through the night once he stopped nursing? I am not sure my husband could take him every night as he has sleep problems, but if I thought it would be a quick transition to sleeping through the night I would wean him soon!
Posted by: Tinkering Theorist | December 18, 2008 4:59 PM
JLK, nice thoughts, but bonding is about far more than breast feeding, and it honestly wont matter too much whether kids get boob or plastic
daedalus2u, nice theory, would be interesting to see how being low in no interacts with known environmental and other causes of ppd
also why are so many mums on this thread beating themselves up because they stop nursing when the children are 1 year old - by any standards that means you did FANTASTICALLY well!
Posted by: perceval | December 18, 2008 5:06 PM
JLK, I do not want to sound harsh, but I think your idea is quite misguided and is not at all in your future child's best interests, or in your best interests. Being a parent is not about what is "fair" to the other parent, it is about what is best for the child (in my opinion).
Bonding between humans is a developmental process. All developmental processes occur over time, are complex (i.e. are mediated by complex genetic, epigenetic and environmental effects), are robust (i.e. have substantial redundancy), and are not at all understood well enough for arbitrary non-physiologic interventions to have predictable consequences.
Many developmental processes occur over a trajectory; that is initial developmental milestones are necessary for later development to proceed optimally. A lack of maternal bonding does cause adverse effects in later life (see H. Harlow's work on motherless monkeys for example).
It may be (I actually consider it quite likely) that a maternal bond is necessary for normal infant development and that bonding to the father may not be an adequate substitute for all children. The normal developmental pathway is sometimes considered to be for the child to first experience being loved by their mother, then the child learns to love themselves, and only then can the child learn to love others. There is very little research in this area because it is completely unethical to deprive infants of maternal bonding, and most mothers will not tolerate not bonding to their infant. Infants do not well tolerate intermittent bonding, or trying to split bonding between two different individuals. It is extremely stressful for them, and they do not do well.
The idea that an infant's ability to "bond" is somehow limited and that bonding to the mother necessarily detracts from bonding to the father is an unrealistic idea not supported by physiology.
I also agree with SM, that it will likely be very difficult for you to produce enough milk via pump. The physiological stimulation of a suckling child is necessary to activate the physiological pathways that result in sufficient metabolic resources to generate enough milk. It will also take twice the time, if milk production is separated from infant feeding (likely more because pumping isn't as efficient as suckling).
I suggest you get a lot more feedback from people other than your mother. She may be more invested in validating her approach than in doing what evidence suggests is what is best. Mother-daughter stress may make lactation more difficult too. A lot of what happens is not predictable in advance and you should give yourself the flexibility to do what you think is right at the time without setting yourself up for the interpretation of failure if things happen differently.
Posted by: daedalus2u | December 18, 2008 5:46 PM
@perceval
I agree that breastfeeding for a year = you did very well indeed.
Good luck to all breastfeeding moms!
Posted by: Lizzie | December 18, 2008 5:54 PM
Tinkering Theorist, my experience was that little critter wanted to nurse constantly to calm down. We're talking every hour or two if I'd let him during the day, every 3 hours at night. Sleeping through the night *still* does not happen except once every week or so -- he's 36 months -- it's easier when they get older -- he'll climb in the bed with us when he wakes up now and go back to sleep. Just a high-impact kinda kid who doesn't like to turn off or self-soothe. Such is life! Good luck.
Posted by: gnuma | December 18, 2008 5:55 PM
Sleeping through the night is fucking myth, probably perpetuated to give us hope. When monkey was ~8 months I was going back into the lab part-time, and decided to stop nursing at night. He slept through the night for awhile then the teething started, then he got sick, then more teething, then more colds, a bad dream. He'll sleep through the night intermittently. Just long enough for me to get used a good nights sleep and then he'll start waking up at 4am. There is no such thing as sleeping through the night until they are way way older.
Posted by: ScientistMother | December 18, 2008 6:27 PM
My mother breast-fed me and my sister for a year apiece, for no other reason than the old-school Korean belief that a year of breast milk makes your children smarter. The last few months were especially hard, she likes to repeatedly tell me, because we bit her with our new teeth. She persevered because she loved us. The bond you establish sustains you, she says.
Everyone around her thought she was crazy for not sticking us on formula as soon as possible. But me and my sister are both really, really, really smart. Especially me. (Really especially me.)
Yeah, I know. Correlation is not causation. I'm just joshing y'all a bit.
Because I am not a mother and never have been, I have nothing much to add, other than my observation that the children of science mommies on this board sound like some lucky tiny tots. And that daedulus2u has taught us more about NO than ever I thought one could possibly learn off a blog in such a short amount of time. :)
Posted by: Juniper Shoemaker | December 18, 2008 6:28 PM
perceval, I think that low NO is the final common pathway by which all of the environmental and other effects cause ppd (yes all, and it is a "feature", not a "bug"). Physiology integrates all those environmental and other factors together by summing their effects on basal NO levels.
Posted by: daedalus2u | December 18, 2008 6:34 PM
Being in the social sciences, I am pretty well-versed in developmental psychology and attachment theory. I am very much aware that breastfeeding is not the only way to bond with an infant, and that infants are more than capable of bonding with others in addition to their mothers.
Sometimes I think I forget that I am visiting science blogs instead of parenting blogs. My views on breastfeeding and parental bonding have largely been shaped by the New Age Mommy Nazi Movement (a term I just coined) who make moms who cannot or do not want to breastfeed feel guilty, who believe that babies are to be with their mothers at all times, etc., etc. There is an entire movement called Attachment Parenting or some shit that has taken John Bowlby and Mary Ainsworth's research and theory about infant attachment and warped it into something that is entirely baseless. Much of what this movement has done is to marginalize the role of the father in infant care while simultaneously adding to the existing pressure placed on new moms by threatening that if mommy isn't at baby's beck and call all the time, with her breast out and ready, that the child will grow up to have developmental problems and relationship issues in adulthood.
I call BULLSHIT on that, and have access to research that will back me up.
This was actually a topic I had planned for a blog of my own - all this guilt being laid on new moms, working moms, and any mom who might (god forbid) want some time to herself every now and again. I see my friends going through this shit, and I intend to rebel when my turn comes around.
I know that my ideal of pumping for bottle feeding exclusively is probably entirely naive as many of you have pointed out. But in my view, being able to let go and let someone else be just as responsible for nourishing a baby is the first step to avoiding the mommy pressure that so many women have been subjected to. I wouldn't breastfeed at ALL if I didn't know that breast milk is healthier, not to mention FREE.
My baby brother was born when I was 13 years old and both of my parents were working full-time. I had a very large role in raising him, and I feel like I have a pretty damn good grasp of what it takes to care for a baby and the stress it brings to a household. Because of that, I feel that the most important thing for me when I have children is to raise them in the least chaotic and stressful environment possible (actual attachment theory research supports this) and the easiest way to make that happen is to share as many of the responsibilities as humanly possible, and that includes feeding.
Naive and idealistic? Most likely. Worth trying when the time comes? I think so.
My question for you, daedalus2u, is are we debating physiology or psychology? Because I definitely cannot hold my own in a physiology debate, but psychology is my own personal brand of hot science.
Posted by: JLK | December 18, 2008 8:31 PM
I am going to put the kibosh on this now. I nursed because I felt like it was the best decision for me and my baby. I am perfectly fine with this becoming a thread in which we discuss how we weighed the choice to breastfeed or not to breastfeed, but let's be careful to not attack each other personally. It is very easy to get defensive when we begin talking about the choices we make with respect to our offspring (or potential offspring). Psychologically neither decision is easy or perfect...
Posted by: Isis the Scientist | December 18, 2008 8:44 PM
JLK, your motives sound wonderful. But "being able to let go and let someone else be just as responsible?" Good luck with that one. You may let go of the baby, only to spend the time pumping, washing and sterilizing bottles and pump parts. It is truly easier to whip out the boob, especially at 2am. And for many mothers who work, free time is so precious. I would much rather spend my time with my kids that doing yet more housework!
My husband and I were given a copy of Dr. Sear's "Attachment Parenting" when we had our first baby. We used to joke how Sears now needs to publish "Detachment Parenting" - it would be a best seller. Yet, despite all the ridiculous pseudoscience in that book, I am all in favor of lots and lots of skin-to-skin contact, nursing on demand, cosleeping ... the works. I'm not sure I would have done any of those things if I hadn't read that book. They are the basis of some of my most precious memories of my kids when they were tiny. (His chapter on working mothers, on the other hand, should be torn out of every copy and burned in a pile).
Posted by: Anonymous | December 18, 2008 8:59 PM
JLK, I don't think that we disagree about much of anything. I decry the one-ups-woman-ship of who is the better mother based on how long a baby is breast fed too. How an infant gets nourishment is much less important than that the infant has a loving caretaker who gives that infant unconditional love. For most infants, that can be any adult who is there and is a consistent, loving caretaker.
In no way, shape or form do I endorse or condone what you (appropriately) call the New Age Mommy Nazi Movement. I see it is a pernicious and harmful method of bullying mothers when they most need to be supported. Attachment parenting is a varient of that. I completely agree with you that is BS. I consider them equivalent to cults.
Physiology is a lot simpler than psychology, but they are coupled and cannot easily be separated. Neither is well understood. There are many things that get blamed on psychology (usually by men, or by others who do not experience them) that are due to physiology. Sometimes even people who do experience something based on physiology will attribute it to psychology as a protective and/or rationalization mechanism or because they have been misinformed.
I think that at least some of the reasons that some women have difficulty producing milk has to do with physiology and has nothing to do with psychology. In most things, physiology trumps psychology. Fatigue is a protective signal. It is your body telling you that you are exceeding your body's physiological capacity to generate ATP. Your body will let you override those fatigue signals. That is where psychology can override physiology. That does not increase your body's physiological capacity to generate ATP. What your body does is temporarily shut down non-life critical systems that are consuming ATP, things like healing. When you need to run from a bear, every process that can be put off until after escape from the bear is achieved frees up what ever ATP that process was consuming to be used to escape from the bear. Your body will let you run yourself to death. Death from exhaustion balances survival by out running the bear. Evolution has configured our physiology to minimize the sum of deaths from being caught by bears and deaths from exhaustion.
Posted by: daedalus2u | December 18, 2008 9:41 PM
Thanks for writing about this Dr. Isis and Sciencewomen! As I read this post, rather when I always read your blog, I was stashed away pumping in the little office my own department has set aside just for that purpose. Honestly, I HATE pumping! I would rather be cuddled up with my little one than having that contraption suctioned to my breasts, sounding out its' pumping rhythms. However, those warm and snuggly moments at the beginning and end of each day make the time and effort entirely worth it. My sister-in-law took the pumping and bottle feeding approach, only because her son was born premature and there were latching problems. She has kept it up for 9 months, with minimal supplementation. But, let me tell you it is twice the work, imagine 15 minutes to dual-pump while trying to console a crying newborn every 1-2 hours, no thanks!
I too am facing the decision of when/how to wean the little one. I am attending a major meeting in a few months and am trying to decide to take the little one along, "pump and dump", or wean entirely. Since, the little one is only 5 1/2 months old I really dislike the last-mentioned options. I would rather that this decision was made by the little one meaning, showing signs of being ready to stop, because I don't think I can bring myself to make that call just yet. Perhaps there is an component of addiction to breast-feeding? Any theories?
Posted by: Bethany | December 18, 2008 9:53 PM
...
@ JLK @ 3:12 PM...
No lecture here, and none earlier that I could see; just people sharing their thoughts ... which comment threads are all about...
As a father times three I can assure you 'daddy' has ample opportunity to bond apart from the feeding moments. I think you will come to see and learn that as you move into the parenting phase.
There is no 'fair' when it comes to being 'mommy' or 'daddy'. It is about loving a child and each adding their own moments to that experience of parenting. And each taking their moments from that experience of being loved by a child.
You have noooo idea . . .I envy you your opportunity to go through that experience for the first time...
...tom...
.
Posted by: ...tom... | December 18, 2008 9:55 PM
For all you young things out there concerned about combining a family with a career in science: Rest assured. It is challenging, but not as bad as running from bears! (Or so I imagine).
I had to wean my firstborn at 13 months when I was leaving for fieldwork. Pumping and dumping was not an option. Neither of us were ready for it and I found it heartbreaking. On the other hand, my secondborn was a biter. I had planned to nurse her for a couple of years, but at 11 months I got very tired of bloody bras -- yes, it was that bad. When I finally realized that I could just stop, it felt very liberating (though still a little sad).
A lactation consultant that I saw claimed that nipples are the one part of the body that can grow back. Can any of you physiologist types confirm or reject this? I always assumed it was hooey.
Posted by: Anonymous | December 18, 2008 10:08 PM
Dearest Bethany, this is a tricky question. I suppose it comes down to whether you think that you and your baby are ready to wean. Would you be satisfied to wean for the ease of conference travel or would one of the other options you suggest be tolerable? None of the ideals are ideal, but I suppose the question I would ask myself is whether I would later find myself regretting the decision to wean early versus tolerating the inconvenience. You are really the only one who can make that decision?
And nipples growing back? I have never heard of such a thing. Then again, I only acknowledge the girl parts in as much as they influence the cardiovascualr system. Nipples don't tend to play much of a role so the only nipples I am really familiar with are my own (which are totally hot).
Posted by: Isis the Scientist | December 18, 2008 10:10 PM
Dr. Isis, I really appreciate that there is a forum like this for women in science, talking about issues around working and having children at the same time (among other hot topics!). If there had been anything like this when I was in my thirties, maybe I would have chosen to be a mother. There were almost zero role models then. So, really, this is a great post and a great service you are providing for everyone.
Posted by: Silver Fox | December 18, 2008 10:58 PM
No mention here yet of women with inverted nipples who jump through various hoops to be able to breastfeed and are not always successful. They can, however, usually pump milk successfully. Without regular latchings on by an actual baby, breastmilk tends to dry up faster. One cannot pump successfully and exclusively for the long term. (correct me if I'm mistaken on this)
As for newborns, I don't think breastfeeding helps bonding (not discussing nutrition here) more than any other skin to skin time for the baby. I think it has more effect on the mother.
With the plethora of adults around, I don't think my granddaughter slept in her crib alone for more than 45 minutes the first two months of her life. Much of that time was spent on my chest, her father's chest, her other grandmother's chest... aunts and uncles from both sides. It's a wonder the child ever learned to sleep in her crib.
Posted by: Donna B. | December 18, 2008 11:13 PM
Little Danimal (Samuel, hey it rhythms) is now 10 years old. But I still remember how it went when Ms. Danimal was trying to ween Little Danimal. It went something like this.
Other then the tit, we never bottle fed. Ms. Danimal usually used the same tit, so one dried out. When she tried to ween, we used a cuppy, not a bottle. It did not work. That was until the Danimal tried the cuppy. The Animal as much as he tried, found he could not suck from it, it was clogged. Using lots of sucking action the Animal was able to unclog it. The Animals' son, never needed a tit again and my (blasphemy) hotter then you (forgive me for saying that, bows to the goddess), Ms. Danimal never needed to have the little Danimal suck from her tits again and he was quite content as long as Little Danimal's cuppy was by his bedside.
Even today Little Danimal does not go to bed without a cup of milk on his nightstand. He leaves all of the titty sucking up to me.
Posted by: Danimal | December 18, 2008 11:44 PM
First and foremost, it take a village to raise a child. Full.Stop. You can never have to many people loving and caring for a little wee one. Second, happy mommy assists in happy baby. Full stop. Breast Feeding is hard. Anyone who says otherwise is lying. This is from a woman who had tons of milk, no problem latching and probably had the easiest time of breast feeding. It was still hard. anyone who can do it for any amount of time is a hero. Anyone who can not is normal. Happy mommy leads to happy baby. Do what is best for you and your family. Whether that is nursing for 2+ years or not at all, cosleeping or crying it out. You know what is best for you and your baby. Screw everyone else.
Posted by: ScientistMother | December 19, 2008 1:20 AM
Sister Scientist Mother has come to preach.
Posted by: Isis the Scientist | December 19, 2008 1:25 AM
Scientist Mother, You ROCK!
Posted by: Donna B. | December 19, 2008 2:20 AM
@JLK: my suggestion is not to have too many preconceived ideas on what you will or will not do. I found out, to my surprise, that after a VERY hard first week (is "hurts more than childbirth" enough, or do you want details?) it went towards "hurts a tiny bit" until "wow... do I have to pay for this?" in the space of a few weeks. I had three baby-led weanings, at 14, 8 and 13 months (and with the twins I skipped the painful part).
On the other hand, I know mothers who had wanted to breastfeed and couldn't, because it just didn't work, and also some that chose not to. All babies turned out fine children, physically and emotionally.
As a side remark, most babies move back and forth breast-to-bottle with no problems. Some babies don't want the breast once they've tried the bottle, and for some it's the opposite.
Posted by: estraven | December 19, 2008 8:52 AM
I think there's a lot of sense in those statements, estraven. I went into Little Isis's birth (as an example)with a lot of preconceived notions over what I thought it would be like and how I wanted it to be and found myself surprised and disappointed in a number of ways. One thing I have learned is that some of these events have a huge unpredictability factor and the best you can do is to roll wit it.
Posted by: Isis the Scientist | December 19, 2008 9:26 AM
JLK- I would like to add to my earlier comment. As far as bonding goes, my sister-in-law (who has solely pumped and bottle fed) and her husband are just as bonded to their son (no more, no less) than I and my husband our bonded to breast and bottle-fed son. In addition, my sister exclusively forumula-fed her son and she and her husband are just as bonded to their son. Bonding is a gradual process, it's not this sudden magical moment of hocus pocus that happens, it comes through interaction with your baby, and that interaction which has been said comes in many forms. So how you decide to feed your baby is your decision and you will decide what is best for you and the bonding will happen no matter what you decide.
Posted by: Bethany | December 19, 2008 9:27 AM
According to my mother, I bit her once. It so surprised, shocked and hurt her, that she ripped me off and cried out. Apparently her response so surprised, shocked, and upset me, that I never did it again.
Posted by: daedalus2u | December 19, 2008 11:36 AM
Daedalus, were either of your responses NO mediated?
;)
Posted by: Isis the Scientist | December 19, 2008 11:37 AM
I went into Little Isis's birth (as an example)with a lot of preconceived notions over what I thought it would be like and how I wanted it to be and found myself surprised and disappointed in a number of ways. One thing I have learned is that some of these events have a huge unpredictability factor and the best you can do is to roll wit it.
Word UP, Isis, Word the fuck up. The goal is happy, healthy baby, sane mommy and daddy who can manage. Preconceived notions fight against almost all of this. We're scientists dammit- adjust and adapt based on the ongoing empirical results, not based on some monolithic a priori hypothesis!
Posted by: BikeMonkey | December 19, 2008 12:17 PM
Great post Dr.Isis. However,
I would like to question this assertion and submit that normally girl parts or boy parts (including nipples) manage to do a pretty good job of getting the cardiovascular system into hyperdrive every time they're up to no good
Posted by: arvind | December 19, 2008 2:49 PM
Isis, I am not sure. That was before I knew very much about NO (or about much at all). I did not keep any notes, so it would only be an anecdote anyway. I suspect that there is a great deal of involvement in NO. Milk does have xanthine oxidoreductase which is a pretty good nitrate and nitrite reductase (making NO). I suspect that NO is part of what makes infants so sleepy after suckling (sleep being a high NO state).
arvind, you are quite correct. The various girl and boy parts (including nipples) that become activated and erect do so via nitric oxide, so actually they are up to NO good.
Posted by: daedalus2u | December 19, 2008 3:21 PM
Let me ask those of you who are mommies something...
Do you think it's even POSSIBLE to go into parenthood without preconceived notions of what it's going to be like?
Because I don't mind being wrong, and I expect to be. And I love getting all the perspectives and experience from you all.
But here's how I think about it - If a woman doesn't at least take the time to GET preconceived notions about parenthood, how prepared is she really? And I know you can never be really prepared, but isn't it better to have the wrong ideas than no ideas at all?
And @ ScientistMother - right on, sister. That's a major fear I have of breastfeeding. I feel like if I go through the pain of childbirth, I should be able to try and avoid the subsequent pain that comes from merely feeding the child. :)
Posted by: JLK | December 19, 2008 5:21 PM
JLK,
I had thought that I had entered motherhood with very few preconceived notions of what I was going to be like. I was obsessed with (read: terrified of) the birth, and genuinely believed that I hadn't given much thought to what it was going to be like to have an infant (aside from the practicalities, e.g. equipment, childcare etc, for which I had spreadsheets). My daughter is now 16 months old, and what I have learned is that I had insane quantities of preconceived notions, they were just not consciously expressed. It would be fair to say that the things I have found hardest, and the things that have shaken my ability to view myself comfortably as a Mummy/Scientist the most, derive from those preconceived notions. For what it's worth, one of the biggest ones was that I could leave my mummy-self at home when I went to work - and thereby have no one believe that choosing to have a child would diminish my science. I can't. And, for reasons I cannot fully explain it has become very important to me that I don't look like Mama when I'm at work. Very important that I dress as I did before, which for me means beautiful, impractical shoes, skirts, dresses etc. Not particularly sensible when lugging around a 22lb kid, but holding onto the "well dressed" part of me has become tremendously important. I *must* appear to have everything under complete control. I think this probably stems from my need to believe that I can be everything I was before (and that others see me that way too), with my role as mother being an add-on to my previous identity, not something which nibbled away my pre-kid self.
All of this is to say that my unacknowledged notions of what motherhood would be like (and notions about the supermum I would be) have been the hardest parts of adapting to the role. I now think that ideas about what it (and I) was going to be like were probably inevitable. But, had I been more aware of my preconceived ideas, perhaps I wouldn't have felt like such an enormous failure on each occasion when I have had to "make do" instead of doing the "perfect" thing.
I don't think that you having concrete plans is in any way bad. I do think that your acknowledgement that you're going to have to adapt them to fit the reality of your particular baby, your particular family, your particular everything is wonderful. I have come to believe that being predisposed towards flexibility is a great start for parenting.
Posted by: PostDoc | December 19, 2008 10:24 PM
@post-doc, very well said. I too thought monkey was simply going to add on to my life, but I have slowly come to realize that its not true. I sometimes mourn for the life that I had before. I once clung to the way I dressed "pre-monkey" and felt like not being able to separate Lab and mom = failure. Not getting my list done at the end of the day = failure. Its taken almost 2 years but I've come to realize that flexibility, humor and not being perfect is OK. And I think by the time monkey is 3, I should be able to wear skirts again.
Posted by: ScientistMother | December 20, 2008 12:15 AM
@ScientistMother, thanks. My daughter is the light of my life, and my best experiment, but I am still struggling for acceptance. Still struggling to genuinely believe that I don't have to appear to be doing it all, effortlessly. Not helped by discovering that in a recent faculty meeting, in response to a question about the research I'm doing, someone presenting themselves as my defender said "well, you can't expect her to be as productive as she used to be - she had a baby last year". With friends like that... It would have been nice if someone had bothered to reject the premise, and point out that since giving birth, I wrote a dissertation, won an award for it, graduated with my PhD, published a paper, had sole responsibility for running two labs, and have generated a small mountain of data. This sort of thing only makes me feel more strongly that I have to present a strong, together, utterly competent, never tired, never strung out, always upbeat persona.
My PhD advisor/PostDoc advisor is a 60-something man with a wife who takes care of all the details necessary to the maintenance of life, and no kids. I feel the lack of peers with the same issues (I am the only postdoc in the dept with a child), and even more the lack of more senior women who can at least identify with the struggle.
I tell you this, not to turn this into my personal therapy session, but to illustrate how much I value the community here. With you, with our ever fabulous Isis, and others, I feel less alone, less like I'm the only one holding it together with shear force of will.
Posted by: PostDoc | December 20, 2008 2:52 AM
postdoc, if I may interject a comment about therapy (which I know something about having been on the receiving end of it for a long time). Therapy is about individual change so as to resolve problems usually due to coping mechanisms that once were adaptive but now are maladaptive.
The problems you mention have nothing to do with you, they have to do with the system that you are trying to have your life in; trying to balance the reasonable demands of a child with the unreasonable demands of a scientific career. There is nothing maladaptive about having a child. Any career that makes having a child maladaptive is an unacceptably exploitive career.
Posted by: daedalus2u | December 20, 2008 9:04 AM
Oh, my dearest PostDoc, you use us this thread for therapy all you want. I can identify with feeling as though one has lost their identity and I have certainly been "that one who had a baby last year." This is exactly the type of place the express these ideas...
Posted by: Isis the Scientist | December 20, 2008 10:46 AM
@daedalus2u and Isis, thank-you. Just, thank-you.
Posted by: PostDoc | December 20, 2008 11:43 AM
Dr Isis, I would like to tell you another true story about my breastfeeding days. In 1987 in Port au Prince, Haiti I decided to only breastfeed my infant daughter due to power outages and lack of formula in the stores and poor quality tap drinking water. One day I had to attend a neighbor's funeral that I thought would take me away from home and breastfeeding for a couple of hours. However the funerals in Haiti seemed to last a very long time. I ended up returning 6 hours later expecting a very hungry baby awaiting me. That was not the case due to the fact that my maid and baby sitter who also had a baby the same age as mine, gave my baby her breast when necessary. I recalled when in undergrad school at Michigan State in French lit. 400 something, that Mme Bovary handed her baby girl over to a wet nurse for several months as it was not the custom for the bourgeois ladies to breastfeed their own children. I, on the other hand, was grateful to my maid but was more content to continue breastfeeding myself. Literature is important, but real life rules.
Posted by: Diana | December 30, 2008 4:34 PM