Jamie Lynne Grumet, the woman now famous for appearing on the cover of TIME magazine breastfeeding her then-three-year-old son, is once again featured on a magazine cover, and once again, she’s breastfeeding. But instead of looking like a haughty supermodel who just happened to have a toddler attached to her breast, on the new cover of the quarterly Pathways to Family Wellness, Grumet appears with her entire family—sons Aram, now four (who is again shown nursing), Sam, five, and husband Brian.
And while she still looks like a supermodel, the cover shot is a warm family portrait, a far cry from the instantly—and intentionally—controversial TIME cover.
To recap, Grumet is a proponent of “attachment parenting,” which is typified by long-term breastfeeding—until children are up to six years old, co-sleeping, and the wearing of babies in slings or carriers as opposed to strollers. Between the cover and the few quotes from Grumet in the TIME issue, the attachment mom didn’t come off so well; she appeared defiant and entitled, and judgmental of parents who didn’t follow the attachment parenting method.
Read Related: The Benefits of Non-Attachment Parenting
Instead, Pathways to Wellness offers a more complete, and, perhaps, fairer profile of Grumet, who said that of the TIME cover, “The first time I saw it, I just thought, ugh.” She also shares that she regretted the inflammatory TIME headline, “Are You Mom Enough?”
In all, Grumet comes across much more positively in the Pathways piece. But we still don’t understand why she and her family have to be so damned good-looking!
See more at Pathways to Family Wellness.
“Between the cover and the few quotes from Grumet in the TIME issue” – You obviously never read the TIME issue because Jamie was only quoted once saying something totally uncontroversial and unbiased about Dr. Sears. She hated the cover and the quotes were always about doing what is best for her family and this is what works for her, so I don’t know where you got that from. She even said on her TIME Q and A that parents should do what works for them and it is in vain if they are going through the motions without feeling it is right for their family.
Here is a quote directly from Time.com from Jamie Grumet the day the cover came out: “There seems to be a war going on between conventional parenting and attachment parenting, and that’s what I want to avoid. I want everyone to be encouraging. We’re not on opposing teams. We all need to be encouraging to each other, and I don’t think we’re doing a very good job at that.”
So really, I think it was that Time chose a horrible photo (Jamie has already explained in multiple interviews how she and her son that was an outtake) and if anyone did a hint of research they would have seen she was likeable to begin with. Of course, who does that these days?
Also, I’ve been following her blog http://iamnotthebabysitter.com/ and that explains really who she is because it is her in her own words.
Forgot to add- SHE regretted the headline!? She didn’t write the headline! TIME DID and she didn’t see it until it came out: http://www.iamnotthebabysitter.com/time-cover/?doing_wp_cron=1347633104.6129870414733886718750
Wow, this article I thought was going to be fair, but you didn’t do Jamie any favors by writing more lies about her. She hated the headline and the portrayal of toddler breastfeeding, but all of that was Time’s doing, not hers. Finally she gets to tell her story and you seemed to not get that right in this article, either.
Margaret -
I think we agree more than we disagree. TIME chose a horrible photo that was intentionally controversial. I think most readers understand that the cover model doesn’t choose either the photo or the headline that goes along with it. But like it or not, by agreeing to be a part of the TIME feature and potentially on its cover, Ms. Grumet became the “face” of that controversy. She also agreed to became a public figure, and as such, is subject to the scrutiny of the public. So in that sense, this article is partly a news piece about her new magazine cover, and partly an opinion piece. I dispute that I am “writing lies about her.”
As I wrote in this short item, Ms. Grumet comes across much more positively in Pathways than she did in the TIME piece. As a currently-breastfeeding, working mother who responded negatively to the TIME piece (photos + article) and her Q&A, I was relieved to see a much more “real” person in the Pathways piece. That’s what I was trying to convey here. In fact, as I wrote in the article, “Pathways to Wellness offers a more complete, and, perhaps, fairer profile of Grumet.”
Also, to quote from the TIME Q&A, Ms. Grumet said that attachment parenting is “in vain if there’s an emptiness about how they’re living their life” which is not the quote you shared above. At any rate, perhaps her response in the TIME Q&A should have been presented with more context. Another reason to be pleased that she seems much more accessible and down to earth in the “Pathways” piece.
Thank you for reading and commenting.
Someone sent me this article and I am responding because of Elizabeth’s comment about the Q and A which happened to be done over the phone outside of a busy restaurant. I don’t think Kate took when I said out of context, but it is worded so oddly no one seems to understand what I was saying. What I was attempting to articulate (poorly) in that quote was attachment parenting is pointless if it isn’t working for your family. Parenting in any way when it is not working is in vain. It is too bad it was written in a way where no one (including me) could understand it.
oops, forgot to mention- I do agree with Margaret about the regret statement. I didn’t write the headline, there is nothing for me to regret. Also, I never regretted posing for the photos. We knew going into it the response wouldn’t be positive even if we were a small beautiful photo in the article (we posed not knowing one of the shots with the breastfeeding mothers would make the cover). It is just part of the risk associated with using a large outlet like a national magazine to get a message out there. We critically examined the pros and cons prior to the cover, and I still think it ultimately will be beneficial. The tagline more than the photo I think delayed the rational conversation about the issue of breastfeeding past infancy. The dust is settling and I think slowly but surely people will start realizing it isn’t a competition, we are just blessed to be giving multiple healthy ways to raise our children. No stigma should be attached to any of them.
Jamie – I am so pleased that you read and commented on this item. And I imagine you’re pleased that the dust is settling on the TIME cover and you can have an advocacy role that isn’t about “that photo.” As a writer who has been on both sides of the interview table, I understand that context is everything. I’m glad you’ve had outlets to better represent (in my opinion) your philosophy on attachment parenting. Thank you again for taking the time to read and comment here.