Quantcast

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

Living 2012/05/10 22:00:00
You!
Add Photos & Videos
If you're interested in these sorts of things, you've probably heard of "attachment parenting," in which mothers breastfeed for longer than the recommended six months to one year, partake in "co-sleeping" with their children and wear the kids in BabyBjorns. Well, Time magazine chose to take a look at the philosophy for their May 21 cover story, which they illustrate by featuring a mother breastfeeding her nearly 4-year-old son on the cover.



While some are calling the image overly sensational, it does illustrate the parenting method espoused by Dr. Bill Sears. Time takes a look at how Sears came to his philosophy, and interviews moms who believe in his theories, like "cover mom" Jamie Lynne Grumet. Of course, the mom they chose for the cover is 26, blonde, slim and attractive (we're just sayin'...). Do you think the cover goes too far?
Add a comment above

Top Opinion

  • Beat Magnum True Hero 2012/05/10 22:07:26 (edited)
    Yes
    Beat Magnum True Hero
    +23
    Breast feeding a 4 year old? If your kid is big enough to stand and ask you for food, he's big enough to use a fork.

    Also, where are the fathers in all of this? I can't imagine there are very many men on board with this, and if they are, they're lying.

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • DebraJM... mjays 2012/05/12 00:39:43
    DebraJMSmith
    +2
    And one more thing:

    One does not have to be PERFECT to know that letting a four year old boy suck on your booby is wrong!
  • LMaree DebraJM... 2012/05/12 07:54:59
    LMaree
    So what exactly were breasts designed for? They produce milk to feed children.
  • DebraJM... LMaree 2012/05/12 07:59:53
    DebraJMSmith
    +2
    They are not for letting little boys suck on them, that's for sure!
  • john n LMaree 2012/05/12 09:48:45
    john n
    +1
    Children, not preteens!
  • LMaree john n 2012/05/12 20:58:54
    LMaree
    3 is not preteen! It's a toddler.
  • john n LMaree 2012/05/14 07:21:57
    john n
    Potato, potato...
  • LMaree DebraJM... 2012/05/12 07:53:04
    LMaree
    Mothers who do that are thinking of their child 100%. Maybe you should do some research into breastfeeding and find out why! Your comments are demeaning and uneducated.
  • DebraJM... LMaree 2012/05/12 08:00:55
    DebraJMSmith
    +2
    That child is four years old. He is NOT breastfeeding. He is sucking on his mommy's boob. And that is sick!
  • LMaree DebraJM... 2012/05/12 20:59:32
    LMaree
    Really because how else would you breastfeed?
  • DebraJM... LMaree 2012/05/13 06:59:30
    DebraJMSmith
    +1
    I would not breastfeed a four year old.
  • Wally-M... mjays 2012/05/11 20:30:28
    Wally-Molon Labe!
    +2
    Good reply mjays.
  • Naked mjays 2012/05/11 21:36:36
    Naked
    +1
    very well written. Sounds like you are doing a wonderful job raising your child.
  • mjays Monstro... 2012/05/11 18:22:13
    mjays
    +1
    Oops, I agree that "this" poor child on the cover will be teased, yes. My bad. In my opinion, this cover was done in poor taste. It sensationalizes the topic and this mother made a poor choice in 'exploiting' her son this way. He will be teased for sure, now that the entire country knows.
  • Naked Monstro... 2012/05/11 20:42:44
    Naked
    yup.. ALL the 3 year olds in my neighborhood read time magazine.
  • Live Fr... Naked 2012/05/12 15:46:16
    Live Free Or Die
    Far be it for me to tell someone when they should stop nursing, but this picture (even if it was a private family one) could get out. But let's just say that it doesn't, it does not mean that he will not have any personal negative feelings of shame or embarrassment over it. The caption on the cover, "Are you mom enough" seems a little degrading to women to me. There are mothers who never breast feed a day in their life and their children are very well adjusted.
  • Naked Live Fr... 2012/05/12 16:32:11
    Naked
    I agree the entire cover was a slap in the face to ANY woman. Including a breast feeding one. It's rediculous and offensive to all mothers, no matter what "type". It's pushing mothers to judge another and goes against any type of support mothers should have for each other.

    However there should Not be a stigma or negative affects for the child for breast feeding, He's 3 years old. NO ONE should even question the parenting, its her child. As his mother she has that right.
  • Live Fr... Naked 2012/05/12 21:30:38
    Live Free Or Die
    +1
    I don't think there should be a law in place denoting some arbitrary age at which one should stop nursing. However, I do think people are entitled to their opinions on it after such time as it's only being done as a means of bonding and not nutritional value. Culturally, it's just not something most do in this country, although there are some who do and maybe the point of the cover? I don't know. I do think it's wrong in any event under those circumstances personally to put your child on a controversial cover. I will not condemn anyone nursing an almost 4 year old child, but I do think it's unnecessary and might (depending on the individual) call it into question. The cover is degrading though to me, as I do not see breast feeding being something that makes one "mother enough" or good enough parent.
  • Naked Live Fr... 2012/05/12 23:59:20
    Naked
    I greatly agree with you.
  • diarslade 2012/05/11 17:41:25 (edited)
    No
    diarslade
    +4
    A year and a half ago I might have said yes, but then you actually do some digging and stuff is figured out. For example that milk can be produced by a woman's body for a lot longer than six months. The benefits of breastfeeding don't ever stop, and that in times past it was perfectly acceptable (and encouraged) to continue breast feeding a child up until they were seven years of age. Let me repeat that Seven years of age.



    I do not find that cutting children off at six months, a year, or a year and a half at most, to be more civilized. I find that they are simply more sensitive to such matters, more squeamishness if you ask me. It's part of an entirely different host of problems that people have developed where everything "natural" is seen as unworthy, disgusting, barbaric, something that should be done away with.



    When you really stop and think, and I mean really stop and think. You find that the arguments against breast feeding at older ages having nothing to do with it being bad for a child. Even though many think that the children might suffer physiological problems. Which was actually found to be untrue. A child, if given access to breast milk, eventually they will get off of it themselves. It's only when mothers actually encourage breastfeeding past the child's point of w...
    A year and a half ago I might have said yes, but then you actually do some digging and stuff is figured out. For example that milk can be produced by a woman's body for a lot longer than six months. The benefits of breastfeeding don't ever stop, and that in times past it was perfectly acceptable (and encouraged) to continue breast feeding a child up until they were seven years of age. Let me repeat that Seven years of age.



    I do not find that cutting children off at six months, a year, or a year and a half at most, to be more civilized. I find that they are simply more sensitive to such matters, more squeamishness if you ask me. It's part of an entirely different host of problems that people have developed where everything "natural" is seen as unworthy, disgusting, barbaric, something that should be done away with.



    When you really stop and think, and I mean really stop and think. You find that the arguments against breast feeding at older ages having nothing to do with it being bad for a child. Even though many think that the children might suffer physiological problems. Which was actually found to be untrue. A child, if given access to breast milk, eventually they will get off of it themselves. It's only when mothers actually encourage breastfeeding past the child's point of wanting to get off where problems might occur. Which is between two and seven. Every other reason for being against it consists of: Finding it offensive, disgusting, barbaric, they could/should go somewhere else. It's all rather... uncivilized, if you ask me.
    (more)
  • Naked diarslade 2012/05/11 20:30:51
    Naked
    +1
    thank you for having a brain and using it!
  • doryn 2012/05/11 17:41:11
    Yes
    doryn
    from where i come from women like to breastfeed but atleast not for that long, 4yrs! you cd practically call that boy aman at his age am sure in ahouse wt no dad!
  • Psyblade 2012/05/11 17:33:42
    Yes
    Psyblade
    +3
    While there is nothing wrong with breast feeding, the kid is 4 years old. He's too big for that.
  • frank 2012/05/11 17:31:22
    Yes
    frank
    +3
    The thing that is wrong with the pitcher is, He's 4, and my question is at what age will she cut him off?
  • john n frank 2012/05/12 09:52:43
  • Live Fr... john n 2012/05/12 16:12:39
    Live Free Or Die
    +1
    Good grief!
  • Brendakp 2012/05/11 17:17:28
    Yes
    Brendakp
    +4
    Breastfeeding is fine for babies and toddlers, it is beautiful. I'm sorry, but IMHO, this is yellow journalism. With all of the breastfeeding issues that are happening right now, this was in poor taste. This child is way too old to be breastfeeding. I'm afraid the child will suffer from repercussions due to this cover. His peers and friends will more than likely make fun of him, and this could scar him for life. Give the kid a sandwich for crying out loud. Yes, breastfeeding is natural and beautiful, but displaying it like this is disgusting. Time magazine should be ashamed of themselves! What was the mother thinking? Obviously not about her child.
  • Naked Brendakp 2012/05/11 20:32:56
    Naked
    He's 3 years old... Exactly how many of his peers do you think read Time magazine? REALLY?
  • Brendakp Naked 2012/05/15 20:42:59
    Brendakp
    +1
    Yes, really. Just because the kids don't read it or see it, doesn't mean the parents won't. For crying out loud, the whole world is seeing it! They are making a mockery of breastfeeding.
  • Naked Brendakp 2012/05/15 21:45:32
    Naked
    so you're saying that the parents will encourage their own 3 year olds to ridicule their peer?
  • Brendakp Naked 2012/05/16 16:00:49
    Brendakp
    +1
    Your name is a bit of a conflict isn't it? No, quit putting words into my mouth. This is a world-wide magazine, you think their peers won't hear about this? Are you even a mother? Grow up.
  • Naked Brendakp 2012/05/16 19:23:22
    Naked
    I am a mother. And I simply don't share your concern. There is no need for the "grow up" statement. I' don't understand your point, so I asked you a question because thats what I got from what you wrote. If you're incapable of explaining yourself just say so. No need to be rude.
  • MQ-American Values Again (AVA) 2012/05/11 17:12:35
    Yes
    MQ-American Values Again (AVA)
    +11
    The picture is sensationalized and yes, even sexualized ...... to sell magazines... pure and simple!
    IMO to post a full on facial picture of a 4 year old boy with his mouth at his mothers breast on the front of a magazine for the world to see ... is tantamount to child abuse.. he will most likely be laughed at and made fun of by his peers for years to come ... good grief what some people will do for attention!
    ____________
    And don't even think of jumping all over me about the benefits of breastfeeding for an infant ... that is natural, beautiful and healthy ... posting pics like this of a 4 yr old boy standing on a chair at the breast of his mother (is she his mother, or an actress?) while peering into a camera for all the world to see ... is not natural, beautiful or healthy for the child!
  • Brendakp MQ-Amer... 2012/05/11 17:18:38
    Brendakp
    +5
    If I could, I'd rave you 1,000 times!
  • john n MQ-Amer... 2012/05/12 09:54:31
  • Rick 2012/05/11 17:08:08
    Yes
    Rick
    +6
    That's just wrong.
  • **Starz... Rick 2012/05/12 20:27:20
    **StarzAbove**
    +1
    It sure is.
  • Illjwamh 2012/05/11 16:46:17
    Yes
    Illjwamh
    +6
    Forget about the "provocative" nature of the image. It isn't, and people need to grow the hell up. Hell, the mom's kind of hot, even.

    Forget about the idiocy of "attachment parenting". Yes, it's stupid, but Time does stories on crazy new fads all the time.

    No, what is inappropriate here is what they've done to that poor kid. For the rest of his life he's going to be "the kid who was sucking his mom's tit on the cover of Time". At four years old. Jesus Christ, they're not even giving him a chance.
  • Naked Illjwamh 2012/05/11 20:35:13
    Naked
    +1
    attachment parenting is the oldest form of parenting... fad? hardly.
  • Live Fr... Naked 2012/05/12 15:48:40
    Live Free Or Die
    There are people who believe in sharing the family bed, nursing until the child is 7 or 8 and so on....but it is not the norm and there may be reasons for that. Have you ever considered what some of those might be?
  • Naked Live Fr... 2012/05/12 18:20:44
    Naked
    its not the norm IN THIS COUNTRY. I share a family bed, wear my daughter, nurse her, use cloth diapers, AND I live in America. Thats my daily norm. WE ALL PARENT differently. The word is DIFFERENT not "wrong".

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

Living

2014/10/25 03:36:31

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals