I heard it in court again today: “But I’m still breastfeeding.” A mother explaining why overnight visits or extended time with dad shouldn’t happen, yet. And then came the judge’s response—brief, blunt, and maybe shocking to some:

“Your child is two. You’re breastfeeding for comfort, not nutrition. Dad will figure it out.”

Was I surprised? Maybe for a moment. But honestly, not really.

To those deeply committed to extended breastfeeding, including many medical professionals and advocates, the judge’s comment might seem dismissive, even cruel. The bond between mother and child, the soothing role of breastfeeding, and the long-standing belief that breastfeeding is a fundamental piece of early parenting are powerful forces. But in the courtroom? That argument rarely holds legal weight.

From the court’s perspective, a two-year-old is no longer an infant dependent on breast milk for survival or development. At that stage, breastfeeding is often seen as a choice, not a necessity. And when that choice begins to interfere with the child’s ability to have meaningful custodial time with their other parent, many judges will not hesitate to prioritize that relationship over the continuation of breastfeeding.

Let’s be clear: this doesn’t mean the court is anti-breastfeeding. It simply means that extended breastfeeding—especially beyond infancy—is not viewed as a sufficient reason to delay or deny the non-breastfeeding parent custodial time, including overnights. The standard guiding every custody decision is not “best bonding method” or “optimal soothing strategy.” It’s best interest of the child—and courts increasingly believe that having strong relationships with both parents is part of that interest.

This doesn’t mean you’re wrong for continuing to breastfeed your toddler. It means the court won’t stop dad from parenting because it complicates that process.

So, what should parents expect?

• Judges expect flexibility. If a child can eat solid food and drink from a cup, the legal system expects both parents to meet those basic needs without dependency on breastfeeding.
• Custody won’t be delayed indefinitely. A two-year-old is not a newborn, and most judges will expect overnight visits to start—or expand—regardless of nursing habits.
• Adaptation is assumed. Courts generally believe that both children and parents will adapt. Missing food might be hard at first, but it’s not harmful in the long run.

In custody litigation, these arguments are rarely about what’s emotionally right—they’re about what the law allows. The law allows both parents the opportunity to build and maintain a meaningful relationship, even when one parent’s attachment to breastfeeding feels like a reason to delay that.

The takeaway: If you’re still breastfeeding your toddler, that’s your choice. But it won’t be a legal reason to limit Dad’s time. The courts will assume he can handle it—and your child can, too.