He pacifier use It is not a necessity or an obligation. However, it is widespread and many parents resort to it when they feel it is necessary for the well-being of the baby. However, as I said, despite the customs we have seen in our environment and the advice we receive, not all babies need or accept it. The question is thenthe pacifier is needed?
Babies are born with a intense need for suction, completely appropriate to its nature. Mamar feeds and calms them, the breast as well as a source of milk is there to offer them calm and feeling of peace. Sucking a lot is convenient, especially at the beginning, when it is continuous suction that increases and regulates milk production.
Therefore, apart from the considerations about your emotional well-being, sucking the breast a lot with non-nutritive suction is necessary for the milk production to be regulated.
For that reason the pacifier is discouraged in the nursing babies until production and position are perfectly seated. If the mother feels that her milk is still excessive or insufficient, if she has cracks or discomfort or if the baby does not catch on well, introducing the pacifier can interfere with breastfeeding being properly installed. When in doubt it is better to wait.
Once breastfeeding is working properly, you can use the pacifier, orientatively never before fifteen days and preferably after the first month at least.
A breastfeeding baby may not accept the pacifier, especially if breastfeeding is allowed on demand and, more specifically, free access to the breast for non-nutritive sucking. Actually, that baby doesn't need pacifier Not at all.
However, each child is different and in some cases the parents want to introduce it, since the mother has discomfort in the nipples or is exhausted from having the baby to the breast continuously. If the baby accepts it and also produces a well-being in its use there would be no problem in giving it to him. You need to suck a lot and that need, if it cannot be with the chest, can be offered with the pacifier.
I've also seen cases of nursing babies that have a need for suction big and they reject the chest if they are full but ask to suck something. They can suck their hands, nibble on our finger, but get angry if we insist on giving them the tit. They do not want milk. In those cases, after assessing them carefully, the pacifier can help.
The babies taking a bottle they tend to accept it more regularly and can be given without regard to suction. This is a general orientation, because in babies who have problems taking the bottle or take little weight, it would be necessary to assess whether the energy they use to suck the pacifier can reduce their need to suck when they are fed. Each case, as I said, is special.
To children who do not breastfeed, over time I have observed that the pacifier may be necessary. The bottle is offered as food and as much as we give it in the most loving way to cover the need for physical and emotional contact of the child, the suction time is limited. When the milk is finished the suction is finished.
And for many babies it may not be enough. They need that other facet of breastfeeding, breastfeeding as comfort, and that can not cover the bottle, be given too. Then give them a pacifier, also in arms and stroking it, skin to skin if you can, looking into their eyes and transmitting love with the body, makes them receive that comfort and that calm that would give them the breast.
We should always use it with moderation, not to silence the baby or put it on continuously. The child needs to be able to have his mouth free to experiment with her, to put things in (clean and of adequate size), to make her gorgoritos and they also need to express themselves crying. If the child is happy, he doesn't need to be put on.
However, there are some points to be made regarding the use of the pacifier that are a consequence of the above. As I said the suction produces a calming effect and connects them with the person with whom they have an emotional bond.
He pacifier It is an object that replaces the chest and to offer it should be given as support for physical contact, not as a replacement for it. Just as a bottle should not be given without glances or hugs, a pacifier should be accompanied by the same physical and emotional connection.
The object replaces the nipple, but cannot replace the mother. Even if she is absent she will allow a loving caregiver to offer comfort to the child through arms and caresses accompanied by suction. I am not really convinced that the pacifier is in the stroller or crib without anyone accompanying the child hugging him. A thing is not a person and the child needs comfort from a person.
Curiously I have not been able to find images in which the child is given the pacifier in his arms, and this is what does not convince me, not the use or not of this element. If you go down the street you see babies with the pacifier in their mouth in any circumstance and that, of course, I do not think is an option entirely suitable for their emotional or oral development.
Of course there are exceptions When we go by car it is impossible to take the baby out of his chair to cradle it. If we can't really stop to do it, the pacifier can help calm the anxiety and calm down. There will also be other circumstances in which we cannot take it out of the stroller and take it in its arms when it cries. If it is not the usual resource you can opt for it, but always trying to make it a short-term solution and for real need, not for comfort to stop.
I have an important reflection on the pacifier. Babies and children can keep that need for suction Soothing for many years, as long as the request of the chest would last as comfort if it were not weaned. And I speak of years, neither one nor two. Some children need to suck up to six perfectly. I don't think it's a problem, especially if we've used the pacifier as a complement to personal and physical comfort.
After all, the boy did not decide to use it, we gave it to him. It does not seem fair to deprive them of it if they show interest and need to continue having it. I know this position can be shocking, and the environment or the school pressures to be taken away or even ridiculed for "being a baby." There we are, to defend them and make their personal process respected.
Children who have prolonged breastfeeding and an unintended weaning may occasionally ask for a breast to fall asleep or calm down. Some, even when there is no milk, manifest a certain link with the breast and may breastfeed in a non-nutritive way sometime, for years. Once a day, once a week, once a month, until they stop needing it and asking for it. And it is no problem.
Since the pacifier It fulfills that function of emotional suction, nor should it be a problem is to let them use it and leave it without pressure little by little.
Some people relate the unmet need for suction with annoying or insane customs, ranging from sucking your finger to smoking. I can't assure you that it is, but it doesn't seem like an absurd theory. The needs filled will not need to be filled again. If we gave him all the suction they needed, maybe when they grow up, they don't feel the unconscious need to calm anxiety by sucking a pen, smoking or biting their nails.
In any case, I assure you, that just as children are weaned, one at two and others at seven, the pacifier will no longer be necessary for your child when he, according to his own personal development, rhythms and circumstances, decide.
I encourage you to respect their decision and trust them. And make of pacifier an emotional element with which to support your hugs and pampering if necessary and only when necessary. The pacifier should not replace us.
