Time Magazine Cover Shows Mom Breastfeeding 4-Year-Old Son: Did They Go Too Far?

Although there is no set limit for breast feeding, I feel the magazine went too far and suggests that all women who breast feed should, or do, continue feeding until the child is, or should be, weaned. In areas where clean water or milk is not readily available I can see this as a necessity. However, this picture can only inflame many who are already opposed to this very natural process. I breast fed mine and when they were ready they gave it up themselves, the first one at 9 months. Although I was disappointed, I never forced her to continue and was ready to take a cup.

I wonder what goes through the mind of those who produce such articles for their magazines. Sigh, will this species ever grow up? Or will they continue to 'breast feed" a population that thrives on extremism or sensationalism?

Let's see her in 5 years. The kid will be sitting.

It's all too much but also not all that bad if u have an open mind. If mothers want to breast feed era heir kids longer than recommended ok, but maybe it was too soon to have a pic like this publish, nd I don't think this promotes pedophilia. Pedos will be Pedos and theres not much to be done there so u shouldnt critizice a mother bc she only wants to care for her kid

if you kid is four he should at least be drinking out of sippy cup or something not your tite

Breastfeeding should not be allowed from 2 years old until 18 years old.

The kid is a little to old to be doing that

In my state she would be arrested for child molestation.

In general if your "child" is big enough to dance with eye to eye then he's probably too old to breast feed. And would that be considered a "gateway" drug? Would for me. lol

Thats HOT : I LOL JK TOO FAR

The boy has a look in his eyes like mom forced him to be a part of this picture knowing he is eventually going to get his a$$ kicked on the playground for it.

I'm sorry but it's a four year old kid, and not to mention I really wouldn't want to pick up a Times magazine with that picture on it.

Meanwhile, next door at Sports Illustrated



Which one is more Obscene?

I'm just going to say neither is obscene, but the Sports Illustrated is closer. ONLY the sports illustrated cover is openly selling sex. If you are shocked by the Times cover, that's fine. Because the idea being explored is ALSO shocking. Whether you are for or against attachment parenting, this cover inspires precisely the response it is supposed to. Does this push the bounds of appropriateness, dealing with issues that times shouldn't be exploring on its cover because it is too upsetting?


So much for that theory.

America thinks breast feeding is obscene but thinks porn, war and violence are awesome.

Wonder if I could convince her I'm four?

because america has NEVER gotten over their puritan beginnings where anything natural is disgusting etc etc etc!they can't handle the truth!

It is NOT natural to breastfeed a child of four. It smacks of pedophilia. Completely unnecessary and grotesque!!

wow! you have a dirty mind don't you?

No, but the lady breastfeeding a 4 year old does.

i seriously doubt it. it never occurred to you it may be for the health of the child did it?

If it had been for health reasons the story and the mom (she was on tv) would have said so.
That kid has not missed any meals. He eats and drinks normally like the majority of kids.

did i say there was something wrong with the child? no! i said health,perhaps she feels its healthier than cow's milk.

The she could pump her breast milk and give it to him. There is NO reason for a four year old to be sucking his mothers breast.

you just want to impose your puritanism on others.

LOL yeah that's it. Fool!

If you can look at that picture and call it normal you are a freak!

i think the fool is you for judging others based on your narrow minded ideals. if its sick to you perhaps the sickness is within you.

Yeah because being a pervert is so 2012! Give it a rest! The majority agree with ME....you apparently are the one who's brain is not firing on all cylinders.

wrong. you and the ones who agree with you are backward and afraid of reality.

Yeah we are backwards....we should embrace 3rd world habits...I mean being civilized is so 30 years ago.
Be gone Twit!

To irish! You go (boy or girl) give 'em hell! My younger son informed me several years ago, about four now, that boys weren't allowed to join the Roman army if they hadn't been breast fed until the age of 7! But, of course, they didn't have childhood vaccines then either. Breast Is Best!

Sick; the kid looks like he's almost old enough for driving lessons...

No, but he's more than capable of eating adult foods and does need to breast feed, not to mention the picture. That's just plain unfair to the kid. He's not old enough to give consent :(

Even though I joked about it, that picture is by far one of the most disturbing I have ever seen, but you are right; I should have been focused on the nasty mother instead of the child...

I agree, it's sick.

Too far.

There's nothing wrong it. We already have enough kids showing reactive attachment disorder symptoms, the more the parents love and touch the children the better. We don't need another John Wayne Gacy, Ted Bundy, Richard Ramirez, or Jeffrey Dahmer being produced every week.

Oh please, you can NOT be serious!

Yep, saw plenty of examples in abnormal psych courses. Also if you look at the other places I answered, I brought up the most compelling reason:
"It isn't any of my damn business or anyone else's."

I guess it's nobody's business if people abuse their children in your view then, because breastfeeding a child of 4 could be considered just that, it has NOTHING to do with nurture.

Love your children, touch your children yes, without question....fulfill their every desire, and allow them to breastfeed until they are "ready" to stop....HELL NO!

In your opinion, from your aculturation. Let's look in the comprehensive annotated DSM IV (Mental). I have severe ADHD and dyslexia, and here I am, codes 314.9 & 315.0 with auditory component. Children who aren't touched enough: 313.89, Warning: Unaddressed, almost always leads to a total inability to empathize of to form any social bonding leading to complete sociopathy. Now late breast feeding. Nothing about it as a component in: usually first diagnosed in infancy, childhood, or adolescence; delirium, dementia, and amnestic and other cognitive disorders; mental disorders due to a general medical condition not elsewhere classified; I think substance-related disorders can be skipped since drugs aren't involved; schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders; mood disorders; anxiety disorders; somatoform disorders; factitious disorders; dissociative disorders; sexual and gender identity disorders (in revision); eating disorders; sleep disorders; impulse-control disorders NEC (not elsewhere classified); adjustment disorders; personality disorders (Axis II); let's read the "Additional codes", nope it's not classified as child abuse or neglect. Maybe the diagnostic cross reference? Here it is. Not considered abnormal as some cultures practice breast feeding through age 10.
Oh, okay. It can lead to problems in a few of the aforementioned categories when other people don't mind their own f**king business and intrude on the families private affairs and practices.

I think you are as nutty as the mother in this story.
Billions of children are not breast fed, and they are perfectly normal.
YES IMO it's child abuse, there is NO reason to breastfeed a child this long.
This is AMERICA, not a third world country.
YOU could take your own advice....mind your own fk'n business.